[TWI ONLY] The Senate of the Western Isles

[Agadar]

As per Taziristan's request, the Senate will now move to debate the necessity, viability, and place(*) of legislation limiting influxes of puppet nations.

Taziristan, would you care to make an opening statement?

(*) 'Place' as in: should it be a Senate act or amendment, an Executive Order, or a Regional Rule.

[Vancouvia]

Puppet flooding is already against the site's rules

[Taziristan]

Puppet flooding is already against the site's rules

That's what I was looking into before I said anything. Shouldn't Mik just banject all the puppets?

[Agadar]

Puppet flooding is against the site's rules, but only if the flooder is spamming, harassing, or annoying a region. I conclude this from the following direct quote from the One Stop Rules Shop (can be found at viewtopic.php?p=16394954&sid=0e6cdb28ddabec36c2d53cb72bb68180#p16394954 under 'Forbidden Actions'):

Puppet Flooding: Any player or group of players creating large numbers of puppets for the purpose of spamming, harassing, or annoying a region, be they invaders, defenders, or natives, may find all such puppets ... and their main nations ... deleted without warning as Regional Happenings spammers.

Hence, Eutristan flooding the region with puppets for the sole purpose of artificially inflating the number of nations in the region is not against the site's rules.

[Eutriston]

Before any of you go ahead and make decisions based off of emotions of anger, I would like to express my thought on the situation. Any allegation that I broke site rules is extremely false, and a smear on me that is inexcusable. I clearly had no intent to "spam the regional happenings" when I created those nations, as can be seen in my immediate explanation to why I did as such. My intent was to raise the regional population because in all honesty, being on the fourth page of the highest populated regions with the likes of regions with 300 nations is not good for our image. It was a completely innocent act, no laws nor site rules were broken in the process.

On legislation that would move to prohibit nations from creating puppets to increase population, I am totally against as such. I think it would be a knee-jerk reaction by Taziristan to immediately push for restricting legislation. Anger against one person is no reason to ban everyone from participating in activities that person committed. A leading argument against puppet proliferation is that the nations mean nothing. I'd beg to differ. Yes, recruitment is of course the best method to bring in active nations, but puppet proliferation helps as well. I can tell you right now that when I was looking for a new region, and I saw a region with 600 nations and 30 actives or a region with 70 nations and 60 actives, I'd go for the one with 600. Population is power, and that attracts people into the fold.

If we outlaw this activity, we will prohibit an activity that takes place in dozens of other regions, among them the prestigious Pacifics, who are admittedly at an extreme ease when it comes to gaining new nations, the likes of The Communist Bloc, and Europia. All other regions that have higher populations than us are filled with meaningless nations that due little more than join the region and die. To take away or paint the practice of harboring one-off nations in a bad light would put our region at a serious handicap in the race to gain population. I see no benefit to such legislation, yet I see many negatives, and that is why I must stand against such.

[Taziristan]

Now that I am at my computer, I would like to fully address this.

Eutriston's actions are not excusable in any way, shape or form and, while technically not breaking site rules, this could be interpreted as such by the Moderators who are very ban happy. By creating some 20 odd puppets just to inflate our numbers, he has given us undeserved power in WA votes, put us at risk to action by moderators who have been known to ban people rather quickly, and given us an inaccurate look at the health of our region in the numbers. Moreover, his actions have no discernible benefit except to see us as on the first page of an irrelevant listing. Yes, recruiting needs to come up, but our numbers do not affect us so badly that we need to fake them. If this is to protect our image, then I must wonder how people will think of us when they find out that our numbers are false and that we lie for an image. Are we so undesirable a place to be that we have to lie about how many nations are here? No, of course not. If we want to preserve our image, then we need to recruit. However, our population is not that important to our image.

As for what should be done about this, there has been no plan put forward yet, so I don't know where he is getting these specifics. However, I believe that legislation doing the following things should be put forward:

1. Limits how many puppets a member nation should have in the region as there are many puppet storage regions and the Western Isles is not one of those.

2. Bans any puppet flooding of any sort, especially one to artificially inflate our numbers.

3. That any puppet that enters TWI above the limit be ejected immediately.

We cannot just say "Oh we only have 430 nations so we need to inject fake nations to make us look better." It's dumb, it's petty, and it's dishonest in the utmost degree. Recruitment is not about the population of the region, but about the amount of active nations we recruit who want to participate in our roleplay. Just because 430 nations seems low to us does not mean our image is hurt or somehow weakened. What matters is the amount of endorsements we give our delegate and the amount of people roleplaying in our region. These useless nations that just sit here and CTE after 30 days are not something to be proud of.

However, the main threat of this puppet flooding for the sake of numbers is this: How do we know what is an invasion and what is puppet flooding? How can Mik or Van know who is a threat and who is a fake nation if we are invaded, especially in the case that Van CTE's, which the senate has been making steps to prepare for. We wouldn't.

Even if no legislation is put forward, I would encourage Mik or Van to ban all of the puppets brought in by Eutriston simply based on the dishonesty that brings to our region.

[Eutriston]

If having inactive nation is dishonest, the Pacifics are complete liars, along with any region over 30 people. Their is no precedent for this, and no, it is not a lie to have high population yet little activity. As to give "undeserved power" in WA votes, what about every Puppet Storage region with a delegate? Would Taz like to go up to them and tell them all they are liars and don't deserve the work they put into getting the word out? And no, my purpose is not subject to interpretation, I stated my intentions in a literal way, and should they spin my statements, it would only result in my own destruction. If anyone is unneedingly bringing moderators into this, it is Taziristan who is making all this ruckus and fake unrest over it.

[Taziristan]

If having inactive nation is dishonest, the Pacifics are complete liars, along with any region over 30 people. Their is no precedent for this, and no, it is not a lie to have high population yet little activity. As to give "undeserved power" in WA votes, what about every Puppet Storage region with a delegate? Would Taz like to go up to them and tell them all they are liars and don't deserve the work they put into getting the word out? And no, my purpose is not subject to interpretation, I stated my intentions in a literal way, and should they spin my statements, it would only result in my own destruction. If anyone is unneedingly bringing moderators into this, it is Taziristan who is making all this ruckus and fake unrest over it.

What is a lie is to have purposeful injections of fake nations.

Also, your intentions again could be seen as breaking site rules to moderators, which, by the way, I am not bringing into this. I am simply bringing up the possibility of it, especially seeing as how you've been deleted before. They don't like repeat offenders. But I am not contacting them, and we don't know who did contact them the last time you and PPU were deleted either.

[Agadar]

Taziristan, allow me to correct you on the following quote:

By creating some 20 odd puppets just to inflate our numbers, he has given us undeserved power in WA votes, [...]

This is not true, as only WA member nations strengthen the power of the region's WA delegate, and each person may have only one single nation be WA member. Hence, the number of puppets one has, has no impact on the power of the WA delegate.

Eutriston, please refrain from throwing accusations such as the following around:

If anyone is unneedingly bringing moderators into this, it is Taziristan who is making all this ruckus and fake unrest over it.

To both of you, I'd like to say this: considering no site rules nor regional laws were broken by Eutriston with his puppets, plus considering this seems more of a difference of opinion between the two of you than a call for legislation, together with Eutriston's puppet influx being an isolated incident, I'd suggest the two of you try to work this out with the President and Secretary of Interior before we continue (or halt) with this debate in the Senate.

[Taziristan]

Not sure why the Secretary of the Interior would have anything to do with this as it is not a role playing issue.

[Agadar]

Not sure why the Secretary of the Interior would have anything to do with this as it is not a role playing issue.

Because ARTICLE II: EXECUTIVE BRANCH, Section 5: Secretary of the Interior of the Constitution states that one of the duties of the Interior Secretary is, and I quote:

-Working with members in identifying and rectifying any internal conflicts

Which possibly applies to this argument.

[Taziristan]

I always interpreted that as in a roleplaying sense

[Vancouvia]

I always interpreted that as in a roleplaying sense

-Working with members in identifying and rectifying any internal conflicts
-Arbitrating on any OOC role-play conflicts between members

It's two bullet points to show that they go past that point

[Taziristan]

I always interpreted that as in a roleplaying sense

-Working with members in identifying and rectifying any internal conflicts
-Arbitrating on any OOC role-play conflicts between members

It's two bullet points to show that they go past that point

The James Madison of TWI has spoken

[Agadar]

Honorable colleagues, I will be inactive until coming wednesday night / thursday morning. I trust Taziristan and Eutriston will work out their argument in the meantime, and report back to us whether they wish to continue or halt the debate on legislation on puppet influxes. I'll see you then.

[Excelsior Laude]

Hello fellow Senators,

In accordance with the Constitution of The Western Isles, I have been elected to serve as a Senator.

It is an honor and a pleasure to work with you all.

[Polar Svalbard]

Hello my fellow Senators Agadar, Doppler, and Excelsior, glad to work with you all in the Senate, lets us go forward with faith and guidance and deliver greatness to the Isles.

[Doppler]

Hello my fellow Senators Agadar, Doppler, and Excelsior, glad to work with you all in the Senate, lets us go forward with faith and guidance and deliver greatness to the Isles.

Welcome to the team.

[Agadar]

Old and new join the Senate together. Welcome, both of you.

[Excelsior Laude]

Thank you. I cannot wait to begin working on important legislation.

[Agadar]

Taziristan has indicated he no longer wishes to pursue legislation limiting influxes of puppet nations, so unless someone else wishes to pursue it, I'm closing the debate.

[Pacific Peace Union]

Officer Accountability Revision Act

---

“A revision of Officer Accountability, a law to hold officers accountable for their action and inaction."

---

Preamble

Section 1 of 'Officer Accountability' implies that Senators and Justices, being officers of the state, are required to carry out duties assigned to them by the President. This revision seeks to mend that unwarranted breach of the separation of powers by repealing 'Officer Accountability' and replacing it with an updated version.

Repeal

(1) Repeals 'Officer Accountability'.

Officer Accountability (Revised)

(1) Executive officers are required to carry out their duties as outlined in the Constitution, and also must carry out all reasonable duties assigned to them by the President.

(2) As visible representatives of our region, officers must display a high standard of professionalism and tact in all forums and locales.

(3) On or before the first day of each month, executive officers are to present to the region documentation and a summary on what they have accomplished, fulfilled, executed, or otherwise done in the realm of their office over the previous month's time. This information shall be compiled by the Secretary of Information, who shall publish a complete dispatch no later than noon on the first day of each month. This dispatch is recommended to be utilized during elections.

(4) Executive officers who will knowingly be temporarily absent are to proactively forward their summary before the deadline.

(5) Any executive officer who fails to send in their summary, or fails to adequately send in an informative, readable, and quality summary, or fails to display a high standard of professionalism and tact, shall be recommended for dismissal by the President, as provided in Article VI Section 1.

If anyone sees issues with the original law as well which they wish to see changed, this is the time to bring those issues up.

This is a law officers admittedly do not follow as they see at as pointless and useless. The fish rots from the head and since the president says the reports are not needed and knowingly never turns them in other officers follow and feel there will be no consequence. I say either the senators vamp it up to allow for consequences by the Supreme Court or senate itself or repeal it conpletly as it is serving no clear purpose.

[Taziristan]

"The fish rots from the head" I like that.

[Agadar]

As per Pacific Peace Union's request, the Senate will now move to debate the possibility of altering or outright repealing the Officer Accountability Revision Act.

More specifically, PPU argues officers ignore this law because they see at as pointless and useless, and these officers are motivated further to ignore this law by the President, who himself ignores the law and does not reprimand other officers who ignore the law.

PPU suggests to either amend the law to make it so the Supreme Court gains the power to enforce consequences on officers ignoring this law, or to outright repeal it, as it is being ignored anyway.

---

What follows is my own opinion as Senator.

Firstly, to put it bluntly, we could drag half the executive in front of the Supreme Court: after all, they are actively breaking a regional law, and the Supreme Court has the power to dismiss officers. However, I don't think that is what we want. At the very least, it is not what I want: not over a minor law that enforces administrative oversight. I would advice anyone thinking of taking such course of action to rethink what consequences such a move would have on the stability of the region, and to reconsider whether that would be worth it. For the Officer Accountability Revision Act (and its predecessor, the Officer Accountability Act), I definitely think it would not be worth it.

Secondly, as for PPU's suggestions: I am definitely in favor of changing the situation, but I am torn between which road to choose. I believe in the administrative oversight the law provides, but if the reports made by the officers are mostly monthly copy-paste anyway, then what's the real point? But then again: imagine you're not actively part of any branch of the regional government. Then how would you ever learn what each officer has done the past month? Sure, there's job descriptions in the Constitution, and sure, you sometimes read an embassy was constructed or a nation was banned in the regional happenings, but that doesn't really get you a full picture of what an officer has been doing.

I would very much like to invite members of the executive branch but also nations that are not actively part of the regional government to voice their opinions on the matter.

[Ostehaar]

As an ordinary member of the region, I never really felt like the monthly reports contribute anything to me or to the region. Most of the duties of most of the officers are about keeping things steady and working (the president has many supervision duties, the SoI helps people, I'm supposed to keep the region defended and prepared in terms of endorsements, and I'm still not sure what are the VP's duties), not about proactively initiating things. If the SoI or the president wish to let us know about a new initiatives or ideas of theirs - they can and should. They don't have to wait until the end of the month to do so.

The only officer which, in my opinion, has to constantly report, is the SoE. That's because his activity or inactivity directly affects the number of nations all other officers can "work with" to sustain the region.