Immigration and you!!!
Day 3,074, 03:06
•
Published in Australia 
•
by
•
by eAus Department of Information
This article is to update the community to show you that we feel the immigration process into eAustralia is important to us and important to keep you safe.
Some of you might be aware that we are in the process of having a working module for immigration.This started on the very first day of Dill’s term and is currently still going due to change over of new PP’s.
What most will not be aware of is there will be no 100% perfect/accepted module that we can use, not all parties will agree but what is needed is an acceptance of a base module that we can work and modify where and if needed.
The current discussion are going great
With some great input from PP’s to move it forward.
Well, we could only hope it was. This is where you the community can now come forward into this discussion and possibly help your current PP to make sense of the mess left over from the Dictator module.
Currently from where we started at the beginning of the term we have not progressed enough due to some PP’s not having their party members involved, some wanting to keep the older version of ASIO, some wanting to move towards a committee etc etc.
Now if you are a youngster and require some information regarding the two different styles between ASIO and a committee, jump into your party page and hit up the PP so they can give you the honest difference between the two.
Failing your PP enlightening you, I am sure if you ask below there will be a citizen who can advise you of the difference.
Should all parties (via PP) be unanimous in their vote on the immigration policy or should there be a majority vote by parties (via PP) for acceptance of the immigration policy we use?
Note: this is not accepting new citizens, this is for eAus to have a formal immigration policy on who runs/background checks
Now this is where you may get lost. Do not be worried as you will not be the only one.
The two different immigration modules that are currently up for grabs are
Committee
1. All applicants for citizenship should apply using the in-game application and then complete the Google document on this https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Ta5EL4DxcCRNbwL0jNtkfaYAHbLJ5wQcRNf6-5zS1wo/viewform :
2. Once the application has been received, a committee of nominated representatives from each party will review the applicant and each applicant will be given a risk rating. A rating of 3 will be Very High Risk, which means that this applicant has a history whereby their behaviour may not be conducive to Australian values and freedom. A rating of 2 means that there is an acceptable level of risk and a rating of 1 means they are an Australian returning home. Ratings of 3 are not recommended for entry.
3. The committee have 24 hours to vote. At that point the committee chair will proceed based in the majority vote. This will occur regardless of whether all committee members have voted. Given this, it is highly recommended that committee membership is limited to players who can remain active for the period of their committee membership.
4. Congress will then be told whether or not they should grant access.
5. Details of all immigration requests and votes will be posted on a weekly report from the Chair of the committee, along with any information on congress people who grant access without authorization of a vote.
6. All Australian political party presidents support the protection and process
ASIO
1. ASIO will be under the directive of the Executive Branch and the Country President
2. On the 6th of each month, the new Country President will nominate an Australian citizen to be the Director of ASIO for that month to a committee of the top 5 Party Presidents.
3. The Nominee will be scrutinized by the committee, after the committee is satisfied with the process, a vote will be made in which a majority is needed for the approval of the Nominee as Director of ASIO
4. ASIO staff will rollover each month, however it is the prerogative of only the Director of ASIO to hire/fire staff.
5. The Director of ASIO can only be relieved of his/her duties by either a majority vote from the committee or by the Country President.
Now there may be sleight of hand happening below in the comments but rest assured the two above is the closest (rough drafts) that can be agreed upon with an 80% acceptance of PP’s for each one. Based upon actual input or drafts presented from PP’s
Community, we call upon you to help settle this dispute. Take a good long hard look at what ASIO used to do in the past, what happened in the Dictatorship terms and what the committee has done in recent terms.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Great summary of the state of affairs. I believe the latest revisions of both the Committee and ASIO have majority (or even consensus) support of the ADP membership.
The RSU is no longer taking part in the discussions.
The RSU will support the democratic right of it's member's to use their CS passes as they see fit.
Before anyone says something negative...
I support the RSUs desire to go with pure game mechanics. Maybe everyone should just do what ever they want to do and forget other people. After all, the game is all about making yourself look good. Plato needs to develop a true Anarchy mod. Whoever has the most points can tell everyone else what to do.
The ADP being criticized by members of other parties for using pure game mechanics is the reason we ended up in this mess. The ADP released a public policy, and we've stuck out the negotiations, only to have it come to this. I assume that we'll be going with ASIO as the remaining parties all agree to the latest revision of that.
The RSU is going for pure game mechanics due to the fact that a so called negotiations is not actually being negotiated.
It helps if all parties have an established position to negotiate from.
Rusty D - 4 Days ago:
"But once I knock off, I will present the RSU draft for immigration policy."
I'm still waiting to see this. It's not yet too late to come back to the table, but the rest of us can only wait so long.
I removed myself from the thread Gudz, hence why you might be waiting quite awhile....
Don't worry the time is up now, we're moving on with the parties who are interested in reaching an agreement.
Cop out.
"The RSU is going for pure game mechanics due to the fact that a so called negotiations is not actually being negotiated."
Why complain about something you hardly participated in. We put things in front of you and you gave vague answers with no alternatives. All other parties have been active throughout the talks and discussing amendments.
It's YOUR fault if you wish not to be a part of negotiations.
Having personal attacks from a minister when I originally stated that RSU doesn't support an ASIO model....
Saying what the RSU disagreed with came back with a response that our thoughts were b***s***, is that negotiations ??
So I addressed the only democratic vocal person in the group and then removed myself from the thread, simple.
And apparently the 'game mechanic's ' way is fine for a few parties/ministers in the recent months, so why complain now if the RSU follows this process
As I said, if we all worried about personal attacks from the former leader of the RSU (who also held a cabinet post while some of those attacks were made and wasn't forced to apologise or resign), then nobody would be in eAustralian politics at all. I guess it's fine for the RSU to dish it out, but not so good for them to eat it.
Callumh could perhaps have expressed his opinion better, but it is his opinion, and I understand his frustration. The RSU as usual is quite willing to trash anything others propose, but in the rare cases when the RSU has offered alternatives (not that they have in this debate), they can't seem to handle the same level of scrutiny.
In other news J Seemore is still looking for those details on last month's MM and CM trading. It has taken you more than the 24 hours you expected from him, and more than the 3 days it took for him to deliver.
J can keep waiting.
And if you think the RSU is just trashing policy while your party refused to comply with any CS policy, think that.
The RSU left the discussions once became clear that the discussion would only be one way from a corrupt Department of Immigration and also PP who had hijacked political party.
Since apparently it has been fine to follow the game mechanisms for CS passes by many members of some select parties, the RSU will follow that standard until the government actually treats immigration seriously.
Rusty I don't understand half of that, please get an editor or provide a Renglish interpreter. At this point I don't think that even you understand what you are trying to say.
Maybe get someone from the RSU with a better command of English than you, like one of your members who speak it as a second language, and then they can provide us with that definitive RSU policy on immigration you promised a few days ago, then maybe the rest of us will have a frame of reference with which to understand the location of your head.
"The RSU left the discussions once became clear that the discussion would only be one way from a corrupt Department of Immigration and also PP who had hijacked political party."
Interesting seeing it was me who steered the conversation to ASIO. The others were having none of it.
I can easily understand it Gudz. Yes there is some errors in the text (due to lack of sleep and using my phone to reply) the bulk of the message is there and my point is clear.
But it appears as you have stated above, that the government has already agreed upon a policy. So the RSU will continue witg it's own internal immigration policy as it is not a signatory to the current governments one.
Silicon granules and undergarments Rusty. The government at no time dictated policy. The policy evolved due to the negotiation between parties. The RSU refusing to negotiate means that we are left with an agreement between 4 parties. Simple.
But I am not surprised that you confuse lack of negotiation with lack of people agreeing with everything you say.
We seem to have some serious allegations here regarding a corrupt government department and hijacking of parties, since I am part of the immigration department we need to put an end to this.
If there is any valid information regarding these two allegations please put them forward now.
ASIO has in the past run without having black marks against it's name (see Ranger's comment below) it cannot be used as a tool to further one's game play and can be stopped early on if it is (again see Ranger's comment below)
So again, if there is valid information put it up. If this is being used as a political witch hunt then please take your toys back to the sandpit and allow everyone to play nicely.
Well, it's a very informative article. I appreciate every effort that many have put into making this work.
I prefer my idea ....
1. 10 questions that all CS applicants receive and congress debates
2. A CS article on each applicant so the public can have their say
This gives us a 48 to 72 hour window from when the person applies to acceptance or denial, this enables everyone from the international public to the congress to have their say which is open and transparent.
Give it up Henry.
There is a questionnaire which you'll find the link to above and which I'm sure will be part of the final ASIO policy.
I'll also make sure that a newspaper is part of the final ASIO policy (it was already part of the latest revision of the committee). This will provide details of assessments and which ones were accepted by who, and the public will be able to provide feedback.
You can't expect the whole of eAustralia to agree with your policy word for word. Nobody in this process has gotten exactly what they wanted. That's what happens when people negotiate.
But my policy is the best :/
A good article. The debate in Congress has been challenging because of different political philosophies. That's ok.......and is why democracy works. People have different beliefs! Consensus government can never work and has never worked.
The job to be done now is for the democratically elected government to implement the policy they think is best for th nation. Those that wish to break the law will break it. That can be managed accordingly within the limited scope of the game.
The ADP and KHMC have agreed to the reform, with promising signs from the ARP and APP. The RSU refuses to be involved in the proceedings.
ASIO has worked effectively in the past.
Also, I don't think the notion of respecting in game mechanics and ASIO are mutually exclusive. ASIO can be a risk-assessment tool, and can still screen potential applicants for any possible issues of concern. Ultimately Rusty is also right and congress can approve or not. They can elect to use reports from ASIO to inform their deliberation or not.
The problem comes where either there is a policy to force congress to either approve or deny on the basis of an ASIO recommendation, or, if you have a congress group seeking to bring undesirables in on the basis of seeking a PTO.
Neither of these are avoidable as you can't stop a congress member clicking a button, nor can you force the ASIO model to work (you cannot control whether they click a button or not).
I'd suggest ASIO be a tool by which congress are _informed_ of the risks of their decision. If someone obviously over time makes bad decisions, then it's up to the voters to boot them or the party for which they stand.
That is all.
Ranger baby \o/