Get Ready For The Future...

  • Admin

    So, we're now a foundered region! Rejoice, just rejoice!

    This does, however, lead to a variety of questions about how we go forward as a region. Questions like:

    1. To what extent do we integrate NationStates (henceforth, NS) gameplay (henceforth, GP) with the RP? For instance, if we wanted to create a 'military' force in NS, would that be decided by a separate GP government and legislature, or would we - as is traditional - put the whole thing in RP terms and have the European Council vote on it? On the one hand, we're an RPing region; but on the other hand, what's good for GP might not sit well in the RP. Do we want to risk detracting from our status as an RPing region, or do we want to risk RP ideology getting in the way of GP necessity (or vice versa)?
    2. If we're to have a separate GP government, what form should it take? 
    3. What role should the World Assembly Delegate play? How should they be chosen, and to what extent should the wider community have a say in how they vote?
    4. What are we going to do about the fact that we've currently got two regions going? Should we focus on EU or TEU, or should we maintain both - and if the latter, how do we integrate that with the previous three questions?
    5. While we're at it, should we create some kind of formal governing structure for the management of the community as a whole? Right now this is a bit of a free-for-all, to say the least.
    6. What else can we do to optimise activity and help attract new people to the community, and in particular to the RP?
    7. Any other questions I've forgotten to mention (please do mention any).

    Plenty to discuss, so let's get discussing!

  • Admin

    To add to this, I have discovered through the continued maintenance of stats that we propose another population formula change. Instead of our multiplier being at 1%, reducing it to 0.5% for larger nations (over 400 million NS Pop)

    This would get the gap down between smaller and larger nations, and give us more of a plausible European population. 

    This would give the UK a population around 82,925,000, for example, from its 12.585 billion NS population.

  • First of all, let me be the first to congratulate all of the people who managed to re-found the EU. I'm not completely familiar with the mechanics of NS gameplay and its tactics, but I do understand it has been quite an accomplishment to bring our old region back to life.

     I am very fond of Rping. When I discovered NS, it was the very first time I was able to explore the possibilities of being "in control" of a whole nation. Therefore, while I am open to new roads and options, I wouldn't want there to be a complete separation between Rping and Gping. Ideas have already been proposed on our Discord server, and I would stick with the one  the Duxburian Union proposed. Having two regions does open the door to a Westminster System parliament, where one region is controlled by the majority and the other by the opposition, or where one political spectrum controls TEU and another the EU. But how would we integrate Rp into that? Council, in my opinion, has to remain at the centre of decision making when it comes to our regional laws. The WA is a completely different scene, one that I have never fully understood. So, when it comes to the Rping side of the equation, I'd be happy to submit my noobie views and positions, but perhaps I am not the most indicated to offer a stance on how we should integrate Gping in the sum.

    Concerning the governing of our, hopefully, growing community, I would propose the enlargement of our current Executive power. People are always hungry for important positions, and having only three chairs to fill is just too little. This executive can guide both sides of our region into decision making, whether it be in this forum or in NS, through the World Assembly. Ultimately, I would assume the leaders of each "party" or ideology were to become Delegate, and I think the voting should take place the same way it does with our Europarties, through the forum. The RMB does have its good side, but it doesn't offer the possibilities the forum already has. New members should be asked to pledge allegiance to the party they see fit, thus gaining the right to vote for their leader.

    I don't really know how else I could contribute to this conversation for the moment, so I hope others can express their views too.

  • Admin

    I'm, er, I'm going to bump this a little.

  • Admin

    OK, sod that. I'll propose some things and wait for everyone to complain.

    1. I think @Duxburian-Union and @Inquista were leaning towards integrating gameplay (or GP) things into roleplay (or RP) in this thread, and I think they're right. Part of our USP could be integrating, rather than segregating, RP and GP. The Foreign Affairs Commissioner (or FAC) should stay as an RP position with, in essence, GP responsibilities translated into RP language. At the same time, I don't think it's a wise idea to totally subsume GP into RP, since we could end up with our RP being stunted by having to take GP necessities into consideration. Or, alternatively, we could end up harming ourselves GP-wise because certain GP necessities would be intolerable to our RP governments. Therefore, what I'd like to suggest is having specific GP offices under the authority of the Foreign Affairs Commissioner. These would be, essentially, permanent diplomats, military commanders, and so on. Whether they'd be appointed or elected or some sort of hybrid system, I don't know, but I think that's the best way to deal with these things. In broad terms, GP issues would be the responsibility of the FAC and put into RP terminology, but specifics would be devolved to the diplomats &c. and spoken about in GP terms. This would involve the creation of a GP forum, of course.
    2. As explained above, I think we should retain one common RP government, but with GP officers serving the FAC.
    3. I think we should elect the Delegate (or WAD) and perhaps have a mechanism whereby we can decide whether to bind them to vote a certain way on a certain resolution. This would be on the GP forum and not interfere with the RP. SC resolutions, I think, should be subject to certain restrictions - perhaps it should be more difficult for the region as a whole to bind the WAD, or perhaps FAC/diplomats/commanders should be able to bind them. SC votes, obviously, can be quite serious business and we ought to tread carefully.
    4. Personally I'd be fine with us just moving back to EU, but I'd like to invite @Duxburian-Union to tell us a bit about his government/opposition idea and how it could fit in with the general governance of the community.
    5. The answer to this is 'yes'. Right now I feel like I in particular have to do a lot of the heavy lifting in this regard (case in point: creating and reviving this thread), and have an undue amount of sway. I'd like admin/mod positions to be formalised, elected or appointed for long terms (with a mechanism to cover what happens if someone goes AWOL), and for a formal mechanism to be established for voting on rule changes.
    6. I'd happily support @The-United-Kingdom and his 0.5% population idea. Other than that, I'm sure we can come up with other ideas. We really ought to rewrite our recruitment TG once all this is done.

  • Admin

    B U M P


  • Admin

    I support @The-United-Kingdom's proposed population changes, as well as all the points @Angleter has made. 

    As I already mentioned, I would like to integrate RP and GP as much as possible, but I realise there are reasonable limitations to this, as pointed out by @Duxburian-Union. I'm fine with keeping the FA Commissioner role basically the same; with some GP-relevant roles also created outside of RP as suggested by Angleter. Otherwise, I'm personally inclined to going back to EU (which I have now done), but I'm fine with inhabiting either region. I am excited to hear about this new system DU wants to do with the dual delagacies!

  • Admin

    Greetings All,

    I'd like to sound off on a few of these:

    1) Why not compartmentalize our forum to address this? We can keep RP and GP separate sections of the website, where the RP section organizes storylines and how nations interact with each other traditionally on these forums, whereas our GP section deals with practical coordinating (defending the region or regions, endorsement of any proposed WA Delegate, recruitment, etc.). The GP could also have different settings so only verified EU members can view it and participate in potentially sensitive discussions. 

    2) We may not necessarily need a separate GP government: RP roles could be used for RP purposes within that particularly section, but could carry over to specific GP roles. In crisis scenarios, we could also implement an "all hands on deck" philosophy and immediately onboard trusted EU/TEU members.

    3) Delegates, as far as now, really only have voting power at the WA and take their endorsements with them. Honestly, I don't mind this model. I think that the Security Officer model worked well.

    4) This is something I'd be interested to discuss with a full crowd. Between each region we have about 120 nations (give or take). I'm currently WA Delegate in The European Union and have about 16 endorsements (more than EU), but the EU has more nations. It may make sense to try to relocate all active nations to EU, and keep TEU on lockdown as our tactical retreat region in emergency scenarios.

    5) See above. We could also bring back an old system of governance, the "European Union Security Council." We could elect a handful of nations that have been around the longest to serve (better as an odd number). They can vote simple majority to settle any issues and can also be utilized in RP scenarios for peacekeeping missions and regional governance (sort of a UN model).

  • Admin

    1. I support doing whatever level of integration makes sense.  A lot of GP is OOC, whether by nature or by necessity.  Echoing Angleter's thoughts here, organizing potential offices within the Commission makes the most sense.  Not necessarily just under the Foreign Commissioner - if you see a better match elsewhere, it should go there.  However, everything from diplomats to military commanders to delegates are inherently dealing with foreign affairs, and could all go there.  Appointment vs election can be worked out based on what makes the most sense for each position.  Diplomats are probably best appointed, delegates elected, etc.  We should still probably establish offices formally, using the European Council.  Perhaps mark such GP-related proposals in a way that they need not be IC.  We'd still be debating and voting with councillors, not as players, but said debate could be OOC where necessary.

    2. I would be a bit hesitant to place GP roles on the RP commissioners themselves.  We currently have no security screening process for new members the way other regions do.  Beyond checking IP to make sure they aren't multiing, and checking that their desired map plot isn't taken...we have almost no formal application and screening process.  Other regions have careful masking with several levels of access and citizenship.  We should at least establish something like this before handing out actual regional control.

    3. I'm of the opinion that the WA delegate should remain non-executive for now.  Executive delegates are juicy raid targets even in foundered regions.  I can always give the delegate a separate RO position with the other powers if we want the delegate to have them (a raider delegate wouldn't automatically get that position, and thus would remain powerless to tag the region).  The delegate could have an "ex-officio" role on the Commission (along with the founder) with observational powers.  Can't vote on executive matters, can't propose legislation, can't set or change policy in any office, but can give advice, liaison between commissioners, help organize elections, and represent the region externally.  Basically, a status-quo backup system for the Commission when it is too inactive to do their job, and the Council is too inactive to impeach them.  All functions of the region should not just grind to a halt when inactivity is high.

    I think we should bind delegate votes to the regional popular vote in the WA, but perhaps run with Belarum's idea and recreate the Security Council for voting on SC proposals.  The EUSC could perform both RP and GP roles, helping defuse internal conflict and guiding votes on external liberations/commendations/condemnations.  We have allies and enemies in the greater NS world, by serving on the SC, more players can learn about our relationships.

    4. The "dual delegacies" idea was to keep both regions and set up a GP parliament where there is a government and an opposition, each with a delegacy.  The government's delegate could vote how its supporters vote, and the opposition's could vote how its supporters vote.  More interestingly, their voting power would depend on how well they campaign/tart for WA endorsements.  Admittedly, this is an ambitious idea for some future where we actually have the amount of politically-involved players this would require, and players who actually care about the WA/SC at that.  For now, it might make the most sense to re-concentrate in European Union and keep The European Union as backup.  We're only allowed to use one of them for recruiting, anyway.

    5. We definitely have a need for overhauling the admin and mod structure.  Most of our mods are inactive and we only have one active game admin.  We need more people who can create masks and forum sections, mask new people on the forum and Discord, etc.  I don't think we need a ton of forum mods, but we definitely need admins.

    6. Full support for going to 0.5% population.  At some point, I'd like to pass on admin of the war system to someone new.  A population change will necessitate war sheet updates, and might as well get someone to overhaul the war system while thinking about that.

  • Admin


  • Admin

    We should move on this soon, as the region isn't looking so good now.  Who else has feedback?

  • Admin

    Here's some ideas:

    New RP/GP offices to be created

    • I.World Assembly Delegate
    • II.Commander of Eurocorps
    • III.European Union Security Council
    • IV.Founder

    The WAD will be elected by the region every four months, in line with Commission/ECoJ elections. There will be no term limits. If the office becomes vacant, a by-election shall be held to fill the rest of the term.

    They will be responsible for casting votes in the WA General Assembly and Security Council, in line with processes to be set out below.

    They will be (nominally) under the authority of the Foreign Affairs Commissioner.

    Whether, in RP terms, the WAD should be a person or a nation is up for discussion.

    The Commander will be responsible for the region’s gameplay military force, Eurocorps.

    Eurocorps’ primary objective is to defend the region and its allies.

    The Commander will be appointed by, and under the authority of, the Foreign Affairs Commissioner. However, their appointment may be vetoed by a majority vote of the European Union Security Council (see below).

    They are appointed for an eight month term, in line with Foreign Affairs Commissioner elections (see below), with no term limits. If the office becomes vacant, an Acting Commander shall be appointed from within existing Eurocorps ranks to fill the rest of the term.

    They may be removed by a majority vote of the European Union Security Council.

    The EUSC will be formed of five members: the founder, the WAD, the Premier Commissioner, the Speaker of the European Council, and one position elected by the region.

    The elected position will be for an 18 month, non-renewable term (election held in the middle of the Speaker’s term). Only players who have been in the region for more than one year may stand for election.

    The two runners-up in this election will become alternates, who will fill any vacancy that may arise from a) the elected EUSC member position becoming vacant, or b) two or more of the ex-officio EUSC offices being held by the same player.

    No player will be allowed to hold all four ex-officio roles at the same time.

    The EUSC will steer, and provide consistency within, the region’s gameplay direction. Specific responsibilities are mentioned elsewhere in this document.

    Duxburian Union is the founder of the region.

    The founder shall sit on the EUSC, and have a role in RP governance (see below).

    Duxburian Union is free to appoint a new founder, with the approval of a majority of the EUSC, at any time.

    Should an unplanned vacancy arise, the founder’s role in everything will be removed until they return or until a new founder comes into office.

    Changes to existing institutions

    • I.European Commission
    • II.Constitution

    European Commission offices will be elected separately. Slates and hearings will be abolished.

    The Premier Commissioner and Internal Affairs Commissioner will continue to be elected every four months, while the Foreign Affairs Commissioner will be elected every eight months. Elections will coincide so, essentially, a Foreign Affairs Commissioner is elected for two terms.

    A by-election will be held in the event of a vacancy on the Commission.

    The Internal Affairs Commissioner will gain gameside responsibilities, for dispatches, regional polls, and suchlike.

    If accepted, these changes will be implemented where necessary by Constitutional Amendment in the RP.

    New Practices

    • I.World Assembly
    • II.Citizenship
    • III.Masking
    • IV.RP Rules
    • V.Gameside

    General Assembly votes will be determined by gameside regional polls, which will bind the WAD. Options will include ‘for’, ‘against’, ‘abstain’, and ‘free vote’.

    Security Council votes will be the WAD’s responsibility, unless a majority vote of the EUSC binds them to vote a certain way (or abstain).

    To participate in the RP and in most regional politics, a nation will have to gain citizenship.

    Citizenship will be granted or denied at will by the forum admins (see below).

    The citizenship process will consist of existing territory selection practices, as well as a security component, and accepting the regional constitution. The security component will involve declaring one’s background on NationStates (subject to verification), and an IP check.

    A range of masking groups will be created, with various different permissions on the forums.

    These will be within the remit of the forum admins (see below).

    Masking groups will include:

    • Default (all comers, access to OOC forums only)
    • Member State (citizens, normal access to forums)
    • Eurocorps (members of Eurocorps, normal access plus military-related forums)
    • Diplomat (foreign ambassadors, access to ambassadorial forums and OOC forums)
    • Friend (allied military personnel, access to military-related forums and OOC forums)
    • Commission, ECoJ, and EUSC (members of relevant bodies, normal access plus relevant body forums)

    The 1% aspect of the existing population rule shall change from 1% to 0.5%.

    A formal structure for forum administration/RP governance will be established.

    There shall be two forum admins – Miraco (web admin), with primary responsibility for website management, and Angleter (game admin), with primary responsibility for RP governance – issues like HR, setting and enforcing RP rules, and other roles mentioned elsewhere in this text.

    There will also be a war mod (Duxburian Union), responsible for managing the war system, and an econ mod (United Kingdom), responsible for managing the econ system.

    The forum admins will be free to appoint general mods at will, and may appoint each other or a mod to fill their duties during absences.

    Should an admin vacancy arise, the remaining admin and the founder shall agree on a new admin to fill the vacancy.

    Should a vacancy arise for either war mod or econ mod, a new war or econ mod shall be appointed by the game admin.

    The web admin and game admin will be free to make small changes at will, within their remits. Should a player object to a change within one week of it occurring, then a week-long debate shall be held, followed by a week-long vote in the region where the change must be supported by 75% of the region or be overturned.

    Any admin or mod may propose a major change. This change shall be subject to a week-long debate and then a week-long vote. Major changes require a 75% majority of the region to take effect.

    The community will move back to European Union and retain The European Union as a backup region.

  • Excellent

  • Admin

    OK, since we're 12 days on from me posting the above proposals (and four months on from the start of this thread), I'd like to put them to vote.

    Voting will run until 23:59 GMT on 31st December 2017. 75% majority to pass. Continue to feel free to post any thoughts you might have.

    You'll be unsurprised to know that I vote FOR the proposals.

  • Admin

    Full support.  Various things could use some tweaking, but most of that is minor.  I vote FOR the proposals.

  • You know I vote FOR these as well.

  • Completely FOR.

  • Admin

    Vote passes, 4-0. HNY, everyone. Tomorrow we start work on Making the EU Great Again! #MEUGA

  • Oh,hey,members,sorry for entering here so late