Regarding Immigration Policy
•
by Prince Andrei
This is not an article about which party is better, it is a debate about what policy is best for this great nation.
There has been a lot of ridicule of New Era immigration policy and how it will result in PTO. For all the young ‘uns out there, this means if we let in too many people from one single country, they have critical mass enough to elect their own congressman and let in all their evil demon friends from Croatia, Greece, Bulgaria, Argentina etc. This then results in them electing their own CP or more congressman to change the MPP alignment of the victimised country. Sad face 🙁
Until recently, High Priest Ian Keers controlled immigration into eUK entirely by himself. This had the benefit that Keers has a lot of experience and so has more knowledge of who’s a goodie and who’s a baddie.
However, there is no way one man can know every single bloody player in erepublik and what their intentions are. New Era policy whereby congressmen can pick who they want to let in is better, as they will allow who they think is trustworthy. Lots of people will be in contact with more people than Keers can possibly be and so there is the potential for more population growth via immigration.
[img][/img]
TUP have countered this by declaring a new council, which is fairer because it completely eliminates all bias caused by the Keers system. However it is not fair because it is not in public and it’s closed up in the forums. New Era is wholeheartedly opposed to the forums, where everything gets locked up and all public posts are 3 years old.
Everyone is here to play eRep not eUK forumland – Alphagrem
Personally I’m not really convinced by the 5g deposit and you’re in, as long as you join New Era. As much as I want my party to grow, this is a little cheap.
“(We should be) putting recruitment ahead of national security” – Dan Moir
[img][/img]
The deposit thing has been ridiculed and insulted “Goku I dnt lik u u hav no fwends nd arnt vewwy noice” by people who haven’t bothered to properly formulate their own argument. However, the other idea that people can be let in if they’re ❤
months old, because anyway they could just make a new eBritish account and bam they’re in holds water rather well.
BACKGROUND CHECKS WILL STILL BE DONE. This is how TUP led governments have always done it, this is how New Era will do it. No one wants a PTO of eUK. New Era is for a new way, better way of doing things, not destroying what’s gone before, just doing it slightly differently. This is how change has always happened in England irl, rather than the gestapo/guillotine methods those strange foreign people use on the continent.
Comprendo?
Please discuss
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Voted and agreed. The downside to the new committee system is you can only apply and nominate via the forums. So if you are banned or have no access you have no legitimate voice in principal...which to me is wrong. If the forums are the bee all and end all then the moderators need to be accountable unlike now sadly.
That said at least the citizenship comittee is coming into existence.
The problem is this, the forum is a good community tool for things like the citizen system. What you guys at NE need to do is either play the game on the forum - at least the congressmen - or propose a workable alternative solution. You may also benefit from asking your PP to stop releasing the first thing that comes into his head. It's becoming obvious NE doesn't have consensus as a party in regards to the things your PP publishes.
Hugh, you might suggest to the people at the forum that they just set bans for certain sections of the forum, with congressmen having access to the congress regardless of any previous bans/infractions. Might help.
You could just follow my advice but just drop the deposit part if you feel more comfortable about it Andrei.
There is consensus in New Era about using the UKPP Citizenship system "use your brain", the recruitment methods are optional. I don't expect everyone to PM newbies either!
We are tracking the data so we could test the difference between Andrei's method and mine.
If you're going to quote me then quote me correctly rather than trying to quote part of a sentence that has an entirely different meaning. The sentence you are quoting was from me pointing out that New Era are putting recruitment ahead of national security. Something I'm totally against!
Still haven't learned how to spell my name. Sigh.
Dan Moir, I agreed with your point, just not everything you said. Do you disagree that we should put eUK before party politics. You're far more partisan than me, disagreeing with me on principle, simply because I'm New Era.
Goku, what's my method? What you looking at data of?
Keers, Trolololololololol
I'm not sure that the public posts on the forums are three years old, in fact I posted some this month at the very least. At any rate, it's difficult for you to say people are unable to formulate arguments when you yourself are incorrect, call Keers "high priest" or say that TUP have decided to have a council (as opposed to all the congressman from different parties who agreed).
The NE and UKPP congressmen voted in favour of the proposal by a similar margin to every other party, and had a similar level of representation.
Nowhere in my article did I mention a "TUP council for TUP members only". I said that TUP *proposed* the council. I disagree with it and New Era disagree with it. That is what I said.
You're still not formulating an argument, just attacking me based on misinterpretation of what I said.
Iain proposed the committee legislation, it was then seconded and voted in by Congress members who voted with open postal votes for those refusing to use the forums