Re: (WARP) World Alliance Royalist Party

Ireland Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:33 am

New Tarajan wrote:It's better, in order to coordinate all our efforts in the Parliament and in the Council.
We have to act as a unity.

It won't happen again.

Ireland Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:48 am

ok well does this party agree or disagree with the proposal. If you disagree I will take it down.

New Tarajan Thu Jan 30, 2014 6:19 am

Atletius wrote:Agreed. What are the parties official Council candidates?

All the members already listed in the caucus list, except for Antanares, who will run for the Council.

About your proposal, Ireland: unfortunately, you've choosen a minefield. A complete nuclear ban is almost impossible: you're talking about the destruction of the entire strategic stability in the region. (think of RL world problems about nuclear ban)

Atletius Thu Jan 30, 2014 6:44 am

Great Empire of Ireland wrote:ok well does this party agree or disagree with the proposal. If you disagree I will take it down.

What proposal?

Ireland Thu Jan 30, 2014 6:48 am

Atletius wrote:
Great Empire of Ireland wrote:ok well does this party agree or disagree with the proposal. If you disagree I will take it down.
What proposal?

Its in Parliament

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:47 pm

Eurussia congratulates our Party for being in the WA Council, and we believe that we are in control of the leadership in the Council and in Parliament. Not to mention that we are the majority in the Council.

However, allow us to express our deepest disappointment and concerns to the blatant disobeyance of some of our member states for not following our rules in support and voting for our own party mates. This is unacceptable in our standards and a threat to party unity.

https://worldalliance.forumotion.co.uk/t391p30-second-wa-parliament#13544

Ireland Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:58 pm

Congratulations to any party members who gained a seat in the Council

Marquette (of Pacific) Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:03 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
Eurussia congratulates our Party for being in the WA Council, and we believe that we are in control of the leadership in the Council and in Parliament. Not to mention that we are the majority in the Council.
However, allow us to express our deepest disappointment and concerns to the blatant disobeyance of some of our member states for not following our rules in support and voting for our own party mates. This is unacceptable in our standards and a threat to party unity.

https://worldalliance.forumotion.co.uk/t391p30-second-wa-parliament#13544

Eurussia, you're not one to talk. You voted for New-Zealand of all people, the leader of the opposition, instead of me. It's your fault we don't have more seats in the Council, but I don't care anyway. The council is just needless bureaucracy that is aimed solely at blocking progress in the region, and I'm not interested in blocking progress.

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:05 pm

Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:Eurussia, you're not one to talk. You voted for New-Zealand of all people, the leader of the opposition, instead of me. It's your fault we don't have more seats in the Council, but I don't care anyway. The council is just needless bureaucracy that is aimed solely at blocking progress in the region, and I'm not interested in blocking progress.

Eurussia only reciprocates. Isn't it obvious?

Ireland Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:06 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:Eurussia, you're not one to talk. You voted for New-Zealand of all people, the leader of the opposition, instead of me. It's your fault we don't have more seats in the Council, but I don't care anyway. The council is just needless bureaucracy that is aimed solely at blocking progress in the region, and I'm not interested in blocking progress.

Eurussia only reciprocates. Isn't it obvious?

Why are you speaking in third person about yourself.

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:19 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:Eurussia, you're not one to talk. You voted for New-Zealand of all people, the leader of the opposition, instead of me. It's your fault we don't have more seats in the Council, but I don't care anyway. The council is just needless bureaucracy that is aimed solely at blocking progress in the region, and I'm not interested in blocking progress.

Eurussia only reciprocates. Isn't it obvious?

Eurussia also wonders why Marquette didn't even bother to fill up his last vote whom he withheld until the end instead of voting for Eurussia? Worst even prioritized to give his votes to other parties. Just wondering.

Ireland Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:21 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
Great Eurussia wrote:
Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:Eurussia, you're not one to talk. You voted for New-Zealand of all people, the leader of the opposition, instead of me. It's your fault we don't have more seats in the Council, but I don't care anyway. The council is just needless bureaucracy that is aimed solely at blocking progress in the region, and I'm not interested in blocking progress.

Eurussia only reciprocates. Isn't it obvious?

Eurussia also wonders why Marquette didn't even bother to fill up his last vote whom he withheld until the end instead of voting for Eurussia? Worst even prioritized to give his votes to other parties. Just wondering.

Is this going to be another CoJ case?

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:22 pm

Great Empire of Ireland wrote:Is this going to be another CoJ case?

Not worthy. Eurussia leaves this issue to the Party.

Ireland Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:23 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
Great Empire of Ireland wrote:Is this going to be another CoJ case?

Not worthy. Eurussia leaves this issue to the Party.

Ah ok. Well I take a neutral stance on this

Marquette (of Pacific) Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:30 pm

I never said who I would use my 6th vote on. For all you know, it could have been for you. You just needed to talk to me about it and I might have voted for you.

However, I never got a chance to use it because you decided to end the voting so abruptly.

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:38 pm

Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:I never said who I would use my 6th vote on. For all you know, it could have been for you. You just needed to talk to me about it and I might have voted for you.

However, I never got a chance to use it because you decided to end the voting so abruptly.

Eurussia believes that such is an unbelievable excuse. As we have said and to our confusions, such request should even be necessary when the voter perfectly knows of party principles and party rule? Yet didn't even bother to immediately put other parties in his ballot?

New Tarajan Sat Feb 01, 2014 8:55 pm

These's no need for disappointment and recriminations.
So, both of you, stop, now.

About Eurussia concerns: if you're referring to the policy followed by MYSELF, then, I already informed you, explaining the reasons behind my policies. And I believe they're still valid.

The only thing I'm sad about, right now, is that Marquette didn't gain a seat in the Council, since he's a valuable member of this Party.

Now, we need to look forward, working on what we have.

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:06 pm

New Tarajan wrote:These's no need for disappointment and recriminations.
So, both of you, stop, now.

About Eurussia concerns: if you're referring to the policy followed by MYSELF, then, I already informed you, explaining the reasons behind my policies. And I believe they're still valid.

The only thing I'm sad about, right now, is that Marquette didn't gain a seat in the Council, since he's a valuable member of this Party.

Now, we need to look forward, working on what we have.

As we have agreed, I don't have any issue with your votes. We have no problem with that. My concern and great wonder is that of Marquette's that he prioritized other parties and even left a useful last unfilled vote until the very end knowing that it could have been used for the Party and its members. Anyways, the damage has been done to Eurussia and the Party and I believe Marquette has paid the consequences.

Anyways, as you've said, let's just move forward.

Ireland Sun Feb 02, 2014 1:04 pm

I suggest that Royal Britannia Empire be taken off the member list as he/she is not a member anymore.

Great Eurussia Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:02 pm

ELECTION REGULATION ACT

Authored by the Empire of Great Eurussia

Eurussia hereby consults the Party for the additional provisions nor revisions of this proposed regulation on our elections which aims to delegate the election administration to an appointed entity of the WA Government, and as well as the standard rules that must be implemented by law. So as to reduce the burden and duties constitutionally mandated to the Secretary General of the World Alliance.

* The President of the Council can appoint a member of the Council to become the Election Commissioner that will remain in office at the pleasure of the President and can be dismissed anytime by the President.

* The Election Commissioner must have the primary duty of handling the elections including but not limited to regional reminders, making threads, asking the Founder to announce elections, count votes, verify votes and other duties as may be prescribed by law.

* The Election Commissioner must follow the election rules enshrined in the Constitution especially the timing of the election, the proper procedure and whatever is prescribed only by law.

* The Election Commissioner's duty shall cover the elections on Council, Parliament, and Court of Justice.

* All election results can only be effective, official, and enforced with the certification of the Secretary General as to respect what is tasked by the Constitution.

* No puppets, registered or not, may vote, run, and take office in the regional government.

* No nation that are not on the WA Map may vote, run, and take office in the regional government.

* Any conflict that may arise on the course of the implementation of this law in terms of roleplay matters and out-of-character matters shall be resolved by Court.

On the other hand, I am also thinking of giving this duties to the WA Delegate just to give him something to do. Well, share your opinions.

These are just initial proposals, feel free to suggest revisions or additional provisions so we could present this on the Parliament.

New Tarajan Sun Feb 02, 2014 7:20 pm

For me, the idea is good and there's no need of modification, but I want to know the opinions of the other Members.

About the idea to give the role to the Delegate...well, I prefer not, for a simple reason: as President of the Council, it's my intention to strenghten the role of the Delegate in its own sphere, in order to have a more strongly-projected World Alliance.

Marquette (of Pacific) Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:12 am

I am not in favor of the bill. The way things work now are efficient. We have the Speaker to dictate voting in the Parliament, and we've got the President to dictate voting in the Council. We don't need any more ridiculous bureaucracy than we already have, and we don't need to give the delegate responsibilities just because. I say if we're going to make any more changes than we already have, we need to have a good reason for them, and I don't see any good reason for the positions this bill proposes.

Ireland Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:13 am

I am in favor of Eurussias proposed bill

Great Eurussia Mon Feb 03, 2014 10:55 am

Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:I am not in favor of the bill. The way things work now are efficient. We have the Speaker to dictate voting in the Parliament, and we've got the President to dictate voting in the Council. We don't need any more ridiculous bureaucracy than we already have, and we don't need to give the delegate responsibilities just because. I say if we're going to make any more changes than we already have, we need to have a good reason for them, and I don't see any good reason for the positions this bill proposes.

You don't get the point of the bill at all. Not suprised. The purpose of the bill is to ensure that most duties that are handled by the Secretary General are handled by the elected WA Government. Yes it is smooth running and it case it is perfectly fine to hand it over to the properly appointed official to allow more nations to exercise duties while having the Secretary General maintain the certification to make results official so as not to violate the Constitution.

Anyhow, thanks NZ and Ireland for your support.

Ireland Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:03 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:I am not in favor of the bill. The way things work now are efficient. We have the Speaker to dictate voting in the Parliament, and we've got the President to dictate voting in the Council. We don't need any more ridiculous bureaucracy than we already have, and we don't need to give the delegate responsibilities just because. I say if we're going to make any more changes than we already have, we need to have a good reason for them, and I don't see any good reason for the positions this bill proposes.

You don't get the point of the bill at all. Not suprised. The purpose of the bill is to ensure that most duties that are handled by the Secretary General are handled by the elected WA Government. Yes it is smooth running and it case it is perfectly fine to hand it over to the properly appointed official to allow more nations to exercise duties while having the Secretary General maintain the certification to make results official so as not to violate the Constitution.
Anyhow, thanks NZ and Ireland for your support.

well no offense to you. But I believe some power should be taken from you else it would make you a king in sorts. And that is the last thing we need.

Sponsored content