[Discussion] I'd like to be an endorsee

[Milograd]

Hey y'all. Now that I'm allowed to have a nation again, I'd like to begin accruing as much influence in the region as possible, for the good of Lazarus. I am therefore interested in receiving permission to bypass the endorsement cap. I would like to explore democratic ways of doing this.

My plan to pursue this goal is as follows:

1. • If I have majority approval, I will ask Imki to nominate me as an endorsee.
   • If I do not have majority approval, I'll try again somewhere down the road.

Having been away from Gameplay for so long, I'm a bit rusty, so I hope you won't read too much into the "strategy" behind this post. There is none. I'm simply being straightforward and trying to engage in democracy. It's a new look for me. No bamboozle.

So yeah ... Whose minds will I need to try changing about this being a terrible idea? Long responses aren't needed, I'll be aiming for brevity.

 

[DaddyStalin]

Is there anything you hope to gain through this?

 

[Cormac]

I'm fine with it if Imki decides to appoint you. Full disclosure, I'm also fine with it if she doesn't.

 

[Imaginary]

Under what circumstances would you attempt to coup? (meaning, removing the constitutionally appointed standing delegate from power against their will)

 

[Cormac]

For the record, because I find this honest and straightforward approach kind of interesting, I'd be down for being an endorsee too.

 

[Milograd]

For the record, because I find this honest and straightforward approach kind of interesting, I'd be down for being an endorsee too.

Although you're joking, I actually support this, and will now be arguing for it as well.

 

[Milograd]

Is there anything you hope to gain through this?

More endorsements and say in the direction of the region.

Under what circumstances would you attempt to coup? (meaning, removing the constitutionally appointed standing delegate from power against their will)

Several come to mind as the most likely circumstances.

1) If the region was stagnant, the delegate was a part of the problem, there was no in-the-system way to replace the delegate, and if I had someone who could be a better delegate. This likely wouldn't be myself, since I'm never going to be as free as I was as a teenager.

2) If I felt the community was facing an existential threat with permanent consequences (i.e. a years-long occupation) that the delegate wasn't equipped nor willing to stop.

Having said that, I truly don't think I would do it for any other reason. There was a thread about whether to remove Imki a while back, and my sense was that the citizenry could've made her step down in that moment if they wanted to. If that's where we're at as a region -- i.e. we can have legitimate discussions and accountability about the performance of the delegate -- then there's no reason for me to ever do anything outside the rule of law. I can win a debate if I'm truly right. If I can't, I probably shouldn't double-down on what everyone else disagrees with.

This is a lesson I learned from my history of subversion. Subversion for the sake of it isn't fun. There are better ways to achieve the ends I wanted in the past.

 

[Imaginary]

Why do you want endorsements?

 

[Cormac]

For the record, because I find this honest and straightforward approach kind of interesting, I'd be down for being an endorsee too.

Although you're joking, I actually support this, and will now be arguing for it as well.

For the record, I wasn't joking. I'm genuinely interested in being an endorsee as well.

I also found Milo's answer to Imaginary's coup question refreshing and I now have gone from indifference to support for him being an endorsee.

 

[Milograd]

Going to rewrite l8r

 

[Milograd]

Why do you want endorsements?

On a level that is hard-to-visualize but totally concrete in practice, a GCR's "identity" is intrinsically tied to who has influence in it.

On NationStates, influence comes from two things: your actual "influence," and the number of endorsements you have.

I think it'd be extremely good for us, as a forum community, to have me as an endorsee. Again, the reasons for this are somewhat abstract and thus hard to articulate without surrendering brevity.

I can (and will) take a shot at doing so tomorrow (or today, since it's 1am here), though.

 

[Amerion]

To clarify, by endorsee, you mean being on the Council on Lazarene Security yes?

 

[Milograd]

Actually **** it. I'll try now.

There are two reasons you get involved in a GCR community, really:
1. You're roped in by someone or something
2. You seek the political intrigue and consequence that UCR's can't provide, by virtue of having founders and being replaceable

So, as a GCR -- and in particular, as a sinker -- I think it's very important that we have a set of endorsees who are chosen with a lot of focus and intention.

To understand why, I would point to Balder. Balder's endorsement situation has a ton to do with the region. As a player, I have no desire to join Balder, because the people they've chosen to have champion their region are boring and lack inspiration (in my eyes, but I respect them both). If I wanted to leave my mark on Balder, I'd need to work years at it -- years that wouldn't be fun for me. I can tell that by looking at who has already left their mark there.

In looking for a home, nations look for places where people like them thrive, and where they believe they can make an impact. And that's why I'm really convinced that we should make me an endorsee. While making me an endorsee would benefit the region (and I'm willing to write essays arguing why), I think the act of making me an endorsee under these circumstances is most important. I want to see Lazarus stop thinking of Lazarus as something we need to "protect" and "govern," and reimagine it for what it is: a friend group of NS players that we're in. If our group ("the Assembly") is cool with me being an endorsee, we should 100% do it. And that's how we should do everything.

 

[Milograd]

To clarify, by endorsee, you mean being on the Council on Lazarene Security yes?

I wasn't thinking of this proposal in the way I suspect you are, but yes. I'd be cool participating in the council.

 

[Harmoneia]

You know I adore you and have nothing against having you here as an endorsee in normal circumstances, but I can't helpt but ask why you think we should believe that you will be loyal to this group of friends, as you put it, and not some other group? While I agree we shouldn't think of a region as something to be "governed," we do protect friends, and that can be tricky because it can be a matter of ranking hmgroups, not necessarily regions, based on principle, importance, or simply affection.

 

[Milograd]

 

[DaddyStalin]

I really like the new look at Lazarus. It's a game not a hyper-realistic political simulation.

With that being said, there is plenty you could do that would screw up Lazarus with the additional endorsements, but if you are willing to stick to the promise that you outlined above, I see no real major issue with it.

 

[Amerion]

While I appreciate the frank honesty, it would be foolish for Imki to nominate someone who cannot guarantee absolute loyalty to both her and her successors (Tubb, etc).

Granted, there is a very good argument to be made to have you become a member of the CLS and then, later on in the future, to mount a successful coup so as to continue the fun of GP - but ultimately, it isn't in the interests of the 12th Mandate.

Taking a step back, security councillors couping and replacing the status quo is so meh, it's overdone - sure, it'll blow up the GP forum for however long it lasts, but there's nothing that would make me go, 'woah, that's so impressive.'

 

[Constie]

Woah, Amerion. I disagree with your first line completely. A member of the CLS should be loyal to the region of Lazarus and the Mandate first, not to any singular person in power.

 

[treadwellia]

My advice: let the folks in charge think this proposal over and act accordingly. Trust has to be built, and the situation must be studied first.