[Discussion] Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Welcome to the forums of the Undead Dominion of Lazarus. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features

Pages:
1
2
3

[Discussion] Conflict of Interest Disclosures
Tweet Topic Started: Jun 28 2017, 06:09 PM (255 Views)
Amerion	Jun 28 2017, 06:09 PM Post #1
Star Destroyer Posts: 6,524 Group: Accused Member #29 Joined: Apr 9, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Amerion Discord Amerion#9702	I propose we mandate in the Elections Act that every person submitting themselves as candidates in any senior capacity (I.e. Celestial Being, Sovereign, Defender of the Realm, Convenor, Prelate) have to fill out a Conflict of Interest Disclosure.



The Church of Satan	Jun 28 2017, 06:35 PM Post #2
I HAVE CHORTLES! Posts: 861 Group: Accused Member #7 Joined: Apr 8, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Lazarus CoS	Seems reasonable. Only right that voters know where else a candidate has their time devoted.



The13th	Jun 28 2017, 07:43 PM Post #3
Guy in the Public Eye Posts: 455 Group: Citizen Member #547 Joined: Mar 3, 2017 Political Views Independent Alignment Neutral Good Military Stance Neutral Nation in Lazarus Daybreak13	I agree- it would help to inform voters about how active and devoted a candidate would be, and would lessen the chance of a conflict of interest problem in the future.



Aumelodia	Jun 29 2017, 12:30 AM Post #4
🌺 His Divine Eminence Posts: 584 Group: Accused Member #495 Joined: Dec 20, 2016 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Aumelodia Discord Somyrion#8047	Full support, I'm surprised we don't have one already as it seems an only natural procedure for someone holding an office. :p



Lamb	Jun 29 2017, 07:24 AM Post #5
Posts: 884 Group: Regent Member #387 Joined: Aug 7, 2016 Alignment Chaotic Neutral Military Stance Raider Political Views Anarchist Nation in Lazarus Scum	I don't really get the point of this. It's a prevalent practice that people inquire on candidates' other commitments during the campaigning process. This isn't something that voters are typically without and if they are, it's likely because they are considering other aspects of a campaign as a priority or don't see the information as prevalent (though I personally agree it is). Formalizing this process can seamlessly project an outlook that favors those that are only present in Lazarus and Lazarus alone compared to those that are in other regions, positions, etc. I think everyone should address their other interests and involvements across NS when campaigning and that people should question those candidate thoroughly, but to impress a "conflict of interest disclosure" inherently suggests that their other involvements are in direct relation to their work, presence, and commitment here in Lazarus and that they should be discriminated against because of this. I don't think that is the real intention of this idea, but it's clear how something like this can be exploited to fashion such an image. Edited by Lamb, Jun 29 2017, 07:31 AM.



Amerion	Jun 29 2017, 07:41 AM Post #6
Star Destroyer Posts: 6,524 Group: Accused Member #29 Joined: Apr 9, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Amerion Discord Amerion#9702	The point is to ensure that constituents are kept informed of who they are voting for, as opposed to relying on the good graces of the candidate or have to dig through pages of a discord channel to see where that candidate (may) have stated their current commitments. Rather, this stipulation would mean that such information is kept on record and easily accessible. It is arguably similar to politicians having to comply with ethics regulation and financial disclosures upon entering service. It guarantees transparency as opposed to our current state, where we rely on these pieces of crucial information coming up in the natural order of discussions which may very well not even occur. Your point that a "conflict of interest disclosure" inherently suggests that their other involvements are in direct relation to their work, presence, and commitment here in Lazarus is noted. However, why should we preclude such discussions - such legitimate discussions - from occurring? If a candidate is heavily invested in another region where he or she is in a position of great responsibility, should the voter not have a right to know? Know that that candidate potentially may not be able to fulfil their role in Lazarus given their commitments elsewhere? With the state (and curse) of past Sovereigns having gone inactive after taking office, I would strongly contend that the voter has that exact right. This is common-sense legislation. One that is enacted in real-life and elsewhere in NationStates. To reject it on such basis is to akin to rejecting transparency. Edited by Amerion, Jun 29 2017, 07:43 AM.



Lamb	Jun 29 2017, 07:52 AM Post #7
Posts: 884 Group: Regent Member #387 Joined: Aug 7, 2016 Alignment Chaotic Neutral Military Stance Raider Political Views Anarchist Nation in Lazarus Scum	Amerion Jun 29 2017, 07:41 AM Your point that a "conflict of interest disclosure" inherently suggests that their other involvements are in direct relation to their work, presence, and commitment here in Lazarus is noted. However, why should we preclude such discussions - such legitimate discussions - from occurring? If a candidate is heavily invested in another region where he or she is in a position of great responsibility, should the voter not have a right to know? Know that that candidate potentially may not be able to fulfil their role in Lazarus given their commitments elsewhere? With the state (and curse) of past Sovereigns having gone inactive after taking office, I would strongly contend that the voter has that exact right. This is common-sense legislation. One that is enacted in real-life and elsewhere in NationStates. To reject it on such basis is to akin to rejecting transparency. If you acknowledged the rest of my post, it is riddled with the fact that I am a proponent of that knowledge being accessible and that it is something that should be actively sought after by voters. The basis I've rejected the formalizing of that process isn't what you've addressed. The voter does have that right, just as they always have. I'm not against the concept you're trying to enforce, just making clear the potential repercussions of enforcing it: "Formalizing this process can seamlessly project an outlook that favors those that are only present in Lazarus and Lazarus alone compared to those that are in other regions, positions, etc." Also note the end of that sentence that you decided to cut-off in your post: "...and that they should be discriminated against because of this. " Perhaps I've had more experience witnessing an active voter-base pursuing this type of knowledge commonly throughout a campaign in a region or maybe I just haven't seen this really enforced in regions I've been in, but I still don't see the necessity or feel the urgency. If I were to inquire to a candidate about their other affairs in foreign places and they seemed reluctant to answer or completely refused, I think anyone would think twice about supporting them. Edited by Lamb, Jun 29 2017, 07:54 AM.



Amerion	Jun 29 2017, 08:03 AM Post #8
Star Destroyer Posts: 6,524 Group: Accused Member #29 Joined: Apr 9, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Amerion Discord Amerion#9702	I'm relieved to see that we are on the same page as to the validity of such information being in the public sphere. Perhaps our differing views on the necessity stems, as you say, on our experiences elsewhere. Although, I think the potential for discrimination is vastly outweighed by the cruciality of the knowledge, which, as you and I agree, is beneficial for transparency. And if indeed, there are detrimental repercussions then I assure you, I will be the first one to support a repeal of this amendment. However, if we are to base all our legislative acts (and there are very few, to begin with) on the fear of 'what if' then we willingly subject ourselves to a pitiful existence, and I refuse to do so.



Wintermoot	Jun 29 2017, 02:14 PM Post #9
Like Love At First Sight <3 Posts: 632 Group: Accused Member #11 Joined: Apr 8, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Wintermoot III	Full support. Quite frankly, people who are devoted to Lazarus and only Lazarus should have an advantage, and I say that as someone who's involved elsewhere. I think regions should do all they can to cultivate native communities of unique people found nowhere else, because those people will do the most to make a region unlike any other. Even if one doesn't agree with me there, if the information is already expected by voters, why not go ahead and formalize it as something that needs to be part of a candidate's campaign and save everyone some time?



The Church of Satan	Jun 29 2017, 04:41 PM Post #10
I HAVE CHORTLES! Posts: 861 Group: Accused Member #7 Joined: Apr 8, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Lazarus CoS	It keeps voters informed. Oh sure it can be used to make a candidate look bad but so can literally everything else or are you not familiar with how vindictive politics in NS is?



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Cosmic Council Archive · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3