[Draft] Applications Administration Act

[Cormac]

I'm going to go into more detail.

4.4 - We have a lot of in-game embassies with regions who no longer maintain embassies with us. I am not changing that as some of them were valued allies in the past who have been lost to the sands of time.

May I ask which of our in-game embassies belong to "valued allies in the past" who are now incapable of applying for a forum embassy? By my estimation, the only in-game embassies this would absolutely impact are Skyrim (dead) and Glass Gallows (dead). It could impact other regions, but all of the other regions remain at least somewhat active so with enough notification they could likely apply for a forum embassy.

The reason this is included is so that our in-game embassies actually mean something besides free advertising for the regions that have them. There should be some kind of actual exchange between us and these regions or we're giving them something for nothing.

At the same time, this clause would take a way a lot of independence of the delegate in this manner, which I am not in favour of. I do not want law after law strapped on in order to prevent me doing my own thing, or choosing embassies as I see fit.

Sorry, but part of the reason for the OFO was to shift away from exclusive decision-making by the Pharaoh and toward more shared decision-making within the community. Embassies shouldn't be a Pharaoh doing their own thing or choosing embassies as they see fit. The Pharaoh is supposed to be the representative of the citizens of the Osiris Fraternal Order, and our embassies should reflect meaningful relations between other regions and our region -- not just an arbitrary decision by the Pharaoh.

That, and if I were to agree to this, can I expect a law mandating me to vote according to the forum vote in the GA/SC? No, this is a slippery slope, and I am not keen on adding restrictions to the delegate - this is not TNP, and I will oppose any motions to coat the delegacy in laws, unless you are trying to provoke delegates to go rogue which they will do out of sheer frustration like the Ma'at originally done in 2012, which I don't believe to be the case here.

Would it be so bad to have a law mandating that the Pharaoh vote according to the forum vote in the General Assembly? Is there a reason the Pharaoh shouldn't?

I'm not in favor of adding burdensome restrictions on the Pharaoh either, but I am in favor of more accountability of the Pharaoh and the government in general to the community. Otherwise we're going to end up with the Kemetic Republic of Osiris by a different name, and with different hands in the oligarchical cookie jar. Expecting the Pharaoh to respect minimal regional standards regarding in-game embassies or GA voting aren't burdensome restrictions. They certainly don't turn us into The North Pacific, and I would point out that The North Pacific wasn't subjected to multiple coups d'etat multiple times over the course of last year. Becoming a touch more like The North Pacific wouldn't be such a bad thing.

If we ever have a Pharaoh who would overthrow the region's government because they don't like minimal restrictions on in-game embassies and GA voting, we have much bigger problems than in-game embassies and GA voting.

[Charles Cerebella]

And Charles what we are talking about probably belongs in the Criminal Code with a Clause here referring back to it.

Yeah I did mention in my first post in probably belongs there but I thought it made sense to raise it here in the context of this discussion.

[Lord Ravenclaw]

My apologies Cormac, in my sleep deprived and flu poisoned state, I ended up coming out with the completely wrong things, but thank you for the logical answer, it's added some food for thought and I'll try and explain my thought process (if I can find it again) once I'm feeling better.

I need to learn to sleep at night.

[Cormac]

No worries.

[Treize Dreizehn]

There's nothing in here about the Oath is there?

[Cormac]

There's nothing in here about the Oath is there?

There isn't. I don't personally see the need for an oath once we have a criminal code in place, but if Councilors would like to retain the oath I'm open to including language that would do that. I don't have a strong position on it one way or another.

[Lord Ravenclaw]

I'd like to clarify the statement from the other day, with the following that I said when speaking to Mcmasterdonia when he approached me regarding my comments on TNP.

TNP has evolved over the years adding laws as needed, as debated, and as the RA saw reason for, and it works for TNP for the most part. My concern in Osiris, is that we'll go too fast in adding laws. We'll add laws that aren't needed under the guises of security, or stability, or community, and we won't grow at our own pace. We are not TNP, we have not got the history, or the background or the reasons for our laws the way The North Pacific has, and it would be silly, and dangerous for us to legislate in the same way that The North Pacific has done gradually over the course of many years.

The thing I fear is that we'll just end up over-regulate the delegacy for fear that they'll turn rogue and thus create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So it is not so much as I don't agree with various laws, I am more concerned that we may end up going too far, too fast and over-legislating.

[George Holland]

Gotta love the back tracking.

[Lord Ravenclaw]

Mcmasterdonia can confirm if he so chooses, that the comments I posted above are identical, minus the line or so at the bottom from the discussion we had in the morning of the 2nd at around 6:36am in my logs, according to timestamps.

[Cormac]

I'm comfortable with removing the language related to in-game embassies if that is the Deshret's preference. I just want to make sure this is a matter decided by the community, but if the Deshret feels the Pharaoh should have discretion over in-game embassies that is entirely reasonable.