Taijitu

Government of Taijitu => The Ecclesia => Proposals and Discussion => Topic started by: Stone Shark on November 29, 2014, 03:57:17 PM

Title: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on November 29, 2014, 03:57:17 PM
Seeing how easy it is to get Citizenship, one simply has to request it and they are almost always immediately accepted, I feel that it would be better if we were to tighten the rules as to avoid potentially harmful individuals to our community from joining. However I like that our citizenship rules are much more liberal and I will definitely keep it more liberal than other regions.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Khem on November 29, 2014, 04:16:27 PM
I am firmly against any requirements beyond having a Taijitu nation and asking. Though I do rather enjoy your proposal if we were to be more restrictive, it is well written.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on November 29, 2014, 04:23:32 PM
Quote from: al' Khem on November 29, 2014, 04:16:27 PM
I am firmly against any requirements beyond having a Taijitu nation and asking. Though I do rather enjoy your proposal if we were to be more restrictive, it is well written.

Thank you.  :wb:

This is just preliminary drafting, I can liberalize it even more, I would be happy to in fact, however we do need some restrictions, like an Oath of Citizenship, it holds legal implications as well, should one violate our laws we cannot prosecute them, because without taking an oath they have not agreed to uphold our laws.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Khem on November 29, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
I am not necessarily against a new Oath of Citizenship as such does make one feel the part of Citizen ever more so. Also not completely against a questionnaire though I would not like its responses from citizens to count against them in obtaining such status but more as a getting to know you prompt.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on November 29, 2014, 04:30:40 PM
Quote from: al' Khem on November 29, 2014, 04:28:18 PM
I am not necessarily against a new Oath of Citizenship as such does make one feel the part of Citizen ever more so. Also not completely against a questionnaire though I would not like its responses from citizens to count against them in obtaining such status but more as a getting to know you prompt.

I like that idea. Perhaps the Oath could be mandatory, and the Questionnaire could be optional, but filling it out would only count towards gaining citizenship, unless of course their were some glaringly obvious problems, like a history of bans etc.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Khem on November 29, 2014, 05:07:27 PM
Of course bans from certain regions may even be seen as a good thing (*cough* Aurahyperia *cough*). Yes i agree it would allow for the red flags to raise at a more opportune time for dealing with them and gathering the necessary intelligence.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Delfos on November 29, 2014, 05:18:57 PM
I don't like the symbolic stuff to get in the way of citizenship like the oath, copy pasting an oath means nothing.

I do like the questionnaire, with a simple questions about Taijitu so that they actually read about the Ecclesia and other stuff, again like Khem said, I wouldn't like the questionnaire to limit that person's citizenship to Taijitu.

I have a history of bans (I got banned from Taijitu, I'd say for protesting but others don't have that perspective) and I'm an obvious problem since I contest everything that is decided apparently, do I  not deserve to be a citizen? It's really unfair to judge someone through a questionnaire or what perception you have of their history. Fighting against two SD dictatorships would never show up in my history.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on November 29, 2014, 05:55:30 PM
I have edited along the recommendations I have received.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Myroria on November 29, 2014, 07:21:29 PM
Here are my brief thoughts:

1. I think that this reform of the system is sorely needed. Taijitu has grown immensely since the Glorious Revolution and I would like to see the application standardized. That being said,
2. Delfos makes a point that oathbreakers will be oathbreakers. However, I think - to echo what Khem said - that it provides an excellent way to "get into character" and really feel like a citizen. I think the oath is a great idea and I wholeheartedly support it.
π. The questionnaire - I agree with Khem that it shouldn't be required. I like the "fast-track" idea - applicants who care enough to open up will naturally have more attention paid to them anyway so why not officially encourage it?
¿. To address Delfos' concerns - our good revolutionary friends in Lazarus include a "short history in NS" question on their application. Here, someone like yourself with a long history of fighting oppression could make a case and defend their actions. If, like you, their heart was in the right place, the Initiator or their deputy would surely see so upon their investigation.
€. Two corrections in the oath: Citizens should take this oath in good conscience (;)), and a period would fit nicely after "egalitarianism".
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Gulliver on November 29, 2014, 08:36:29 PM
I like the idea of reintroducing an oath so long as it's simple and to the point. I'm not sure how I feel about a questionnaire though. Any questions that would be useful, like history of previous bans, could just be left out and there wouldn't be any easy way to check that. On the other hand, I can see the value in a simple question asking for a brief background in getting to know the applicant and making them feel a bit more vested.

Regardless, I do think the process by which applications are submitted, reviewed, rejected, and possibly appealed to a vote of the Ecclesia, should be formalized and there should be some standard form to fill in, even if the information is the same as now.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Delfos on November 29, 2014, 08:52:30 PM
Quote from: Gulliver on November 29, 2014, 08:36:29 PM
I like the idea of reintroducing an oath so long as it's simple and to the point. I'm not sure how I feel about a questionnaire though. Any questions that would be useful, like history of previous bans, could just be left out and there wouldn't be any easy way to check that. On the other hand, I can see the value in a simple question asking for a brief background in getting to know the applicant and making them feel a bit more vested.

Regardless, I do think the process by which applications are submitted, reviewed, rejected, and possibly appealed to a vote of the Ecclesia, should be formalized and there should be some standard form to fill in, even if the information is the same as now.

In case we change our process, I believe Gulliver summed an acceptable proposal. Yet i'm still not sold in the institutionalization of the citizenship process.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on November 29, 2014, 09:09:33 PM
Quote from: Myroria on November 29, 2014, 07:21:29 PM
Here are my brief thoughts:

1. I think that this reform of the system is sorely needed. Taijitu has grown immensely since the Glorious Revolution and I would like to see the application standardized. That being said,
2. Delfos makes a point that oathbreakers will be oathbreakers. However, I think - to echo what Khem said - that it provides an excellent way to "get into character" and really feel like a citizen. I think the oath is a great idea and I wholeheartedly support it.
3. The questionnaire - I agree with Khem that it shouldn't be required. I like the "fast-track" idea - applicants who care enough to open up will naturally have more attention paid to them anyway so why not officially encourage it?
4. To address Delfos' concerns - our good revolutionary friends in Lazarus include a "short history in NS" question on their application. Here, someone like yourself with a long history of fighting oppression could make a case and defend their actions. If, like you, their heart was in the right place, the Initiator or their deputy would surely see so upon their investigation.
5. Two corrections in the oath: Citizens should take this oath in good conscience (;)), and a period would fit nicely after "egalitarianism".

1. I do as well.  :)
2. Agreed.
3. My thoughts as well.
4.
5. Done.

Okay I have updated once again with suggestions.


Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Myroria on November 30, 2014, 01:57:44 PM
Quote from: Delfos on November 29, 2014, 08:52:30 PM
In case we change our process, I believe Gulliver summed an acceptable proposal. Yet i'm still not sold in the institutionalization of the citizenship process.

Perhaps when we submit this to a vote we have "yes, with questionnaire", "yes, without questionnaire", and "no" options?

Part of me likes how easy it is to become a citizen but I think as we grow standardizing the process will just make things a lot easier for everyone and will let us keep track of the roster more easily.

In addition, as we grow and especially as the Militia becomes more active we should be concerned about spies and saboteurs. This isn't foolproof by any means but at least it, and a background check, is a hurdle for agents to jump over.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Delfos on November 30, 2014, 05:41:04 PM
I understand your concerns, but we have other mechanisms that need to start working for that kind of thing, regional security and judiciary.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Myroria on December 02, 2014, 03:46:32 PM
I don't think we need to add bureaucracy we don't need at this time like Regional Security when we could just let the Initiator and their deputy handle it.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Delfos on December 02, 2014, 11:59:56 PM
But you're adding bureaucracy to the citizenship, that is not the right argument, and you always had Regional Security, just not institutionalized.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on December 03, 2014, 12:53:17 AM
Quote from: Delfos on December 02, 2014, 11:59:56 PM
But you're adding bureaucracy to the citizenship, that is not the right argument, and you always had Regional Security, just not institutionalized.

I'm confused. Where has bureaucracy been added anywhere in this legislation?

The definition of Bureaucracy is:

a system of government in which most of the important decisions are made by state officials rather than by elected representatives

We are a direct system of governance, the Citizen-Initiator is a citizen, they are bound by the will of the people directly as the Ecclesia are the people. There cannot be bureaucracy in this system of governance.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Myroria on December 03, 2014, 01:03:03 AM
I would prefer to keep official offices to a minimum. We don't have enough threats to have a whole new section of government, but we do need some sort of protection. This proposal allows the Initiator to handle that, while being kept under the control of the electorate.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Delfos on December 03, 2014, 03:17:21 AM
Quote from: Myroria on December 03, 2014, 01:03:03 AM
I would prefer to keep official offices to a minimum. We don't have enough threats to have a whole new section of government, but we do need some sort of protection. This proposal allows the Initiator to handle that, while being kept under the control of the electorate.

cool story, but I don't think I need to clarify further my concern, I do want the access to participation to be "effortless" as you say, the less things people need to do to participate the better.

Quote from: Stone Shark on December 03, 2014, 12:53:17 AM
I'm confused. Where has bureaucracy been added anywhere in this legislation?

The definition of Bureaucracy is:

a system of government in which most of the important decisions are made by state officials rather than by elected representatives

We are a direct system of governance, the Citizen-Initiator is a citizen, they are bound by the will of the people directly as the Ecclesia are the people. There cannot be bureaucracy in this system of governance.

We can play with words all day if you want. You're giving power to a figure, whether or not he has a Citizen prefix, he has the power to allow people or not to participate in Ecclesia. This proposal, imo, adds fairly organized collection of information, which is fine, but as I said before, I'd rather people not have any restrictions accessing Ecclesia and that someone else to have the trouble finding out if someone is ok or not, because that already happens, information is already being exchanged in the NS game either way, we already have collective information, as I said, Regional Security already happens in an ad hoc small scale. We wouldn't be any more safe bc there's a fact-checking system to see if someone is lying or we doubt the applicant is lying. In other words, if you can't be Stasi, don't pretend you can, this system adds no real security, it's a false statement of security, the same way the oath is.

Oh, beware of the oath breakers.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Myroria on December 03, 2014, 07:37:31 AM
I would like to motion that we move this legislation to a vote.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Allama on December 03, 2014, 03:39:57 PM
Quote from: Myroria on December 03, 2014, 07:37:31 AM
I would like to motion that we move this legislation to a vote.

Motion seconded.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Stone Shark on December 03, 2014, 08:48:50 PM
Quote from: Allama on December 03, 2014, 03:39:57 PM
Quote from: Myroria on December 03, 2014, 07:37:31 AM
I would like to motion that we move this legislation to a vote.

Motion seconded.

Motion thirded.
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: St Oz on December 03, 2014, 09:56:01 PM
Quote from: Delfos on December 03, 2014, 03:17:21 AM
Quote from: Myroria on December 03, 2014, 01:03:03 AM
I would prefer to keep official offices to a minimum. We don't have enough threats to have a whole new section of government, but we do need some sort of protection. This proposal allows the Initiator to handle that, while being kept under the control of the electorate.

cool story, but I don't think I need to clarify further my concern, I do want the access to participation to be "effortless" as you say, the less things people need to do to participate the better.

Quote from: Stone Shark on December 03, 2014, 12:53:17 AM
I'm confused. Where has bureaucracy been added anywhere in this legislation?

The definition of Bureaucracy is:

a system of government in which most of the important decisions are made by state officials rather than by elected representatives

We are a direct system of governance, the Citizen-Initiator is a citizen, they are bound by the will of the people directly as the Ecclesia are the people. There cannot be bureaucracy in this system of governance.

We can play with words all day if you want. You're giving power to a figure, whether or not he has a Citizen prefix, he has the power to allow people or not to participate in Ecclesia. This proposal, imo, adds fairly organized collection of information, which is fine, but as I said before, I'd rather people not have any restrictions accessing Ecclesia and that someone else to have the trouble finding out if someone is ok or not, because that already happens, information is already being exchanged in the NS game either way, we already have collective information, as I said, Regional Security already happens in an ad hoc small scale. We wouldn't be any more safe bc there's a fact-checking system to see if someone is lying or we doubt the applicant is lying. In other words, if you can't be Stasi, don't pretend you can, this system adds no real security, it's a false statement of security, the same way the oath is.

Oh, beware of the oath breakers.

Maintain your cover agents, ready your tranqs and black bags on the target when he gets into position. Hail the revolution.

Copy that. Hail the revolution

Also fourth'd
Title: Re: Legislation Concerning Citizenship
Post by: Gulliver on December 03, 2014, 09:58:34 PM
I've moved this to a vote.