An Open Letter on Immigration Reform & PTO Protection
Day 3,060, 12:01
•
Published in Australia 
•
by
•
by Legendary Viking Dragon
Dear Citizens,
Given all of the difficulties we in Congress have agreeing a process for Immigration Reform I am taking the rare step of making a public proposal to let the electorate decide.
This is not an official ballot, but I would ask people who care about PTO threats to read it and voice their opinion by stating YES or NO below in the comments.
Context
Immigration that is unrestrained and unchecked enables fast access to applicants via those people in Congress who are their friends.
In most cases this is harmless and a privilege of those getting elected into Congress. However, in some cases in some nations, this has led to corrupt congress members joining together and using this privilege to let in players that have negative intentions for the country. This can lead to takeovers of nations, loss of gold from treasuries, and of course loss of sovereignty and totalitarian dictatorships!
For many reasons Congress have been unable to agree a mechanism to manage this process, and so the following 8 step process is being proposed. I call it the 8 steps for freedom.
Vote YES if you want Congress to implement this.
Vote NO if you prefer the existing uncontrolled process to continue.
If you have general comments or ideas, please just add them AFTER your YES or NO.
Proposal
1. Congress will develop a Google Doc that contains the key questions we would like to know about CS applicants. We can build based on examples used by other countries.
2. Congress forms a sub-committee with a representative from each party, that reviews every application once the form is complete and an in-game request has also been made.
3. Congress sub-committee will review the player profile, application, news articles, in-game history and other data to assess the risk of granting immigration. They will rate the risk 1-3 (high, medium, low). They will aim to do this before the in-game application period expires.
4. The committee will then vote on the application request based on the security data presented. A simple majority will enable the application to be granted.
5. The committee will inform congress and a congress member can accept the request to allow the player entry.
6. The committee will publish a weekly report of all CS requests granted, who granted access, and whether they were approved by the committee or let in by a rogue congress person.
7. At the end of the term, the total requests approved officially, rejected and approved by rogue congress people will be published. This will enable citizens to see how their elected representatives behave and inform their next voting decisions.
8. The Chair of the committee will be an elected government representative, however their role is purely facilitating the above process. They have no executive powers to override the process.
END
Thanks for voting.
Stojke,
Concerned Citizen, Congress member and Immigrant.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
YES
Not agreed with the whole conception but you are half way right.
There should be not more than 3 players in committee for the size of our nation.
There might be no fine volunteers so I propose to give a privilege to this team. Government should grant them an Org for free. They will use it as they find best but once monthly they should provide a report published from this Organization.
All kind of trolling will be allowed in this media if someone let players in without permission. The committee should never provide CS and the only exception can be made after CP request written in the congress section.
* the members of committee should never provide CS - they will only inform who should be accepted and who is risky or totally unknown.
Don't agree.
If someone is on the committee and a member of congress and the committee voted for someone to come in, why would a committee member be prevented from accepting someone in.
Because if you are in this committee you will accept MEK member straight away and this way you will corrupt the whole scheme.
Correct, also If they are returning Aussie's returning in good faith I will do the same
Then someone else will approve their application but not a member of CS committee - we have plenty of passes.
http://tinyurl.com/April-Cabinet-Aus
Kind of premature as I'm still confirming positions but I wanted to say that Stojke89 has the full support of my office behind him. We WILL sort out what works. This is important for national security or at the least, national dignity.
While it is great in theory, I doubt it will ever work.
You will need to have every congress member sign off on it, but as history has taught us, people will act in a way they feel is right, be it accepting friends, accepting people for money, accepting others for what ever reason they feel is correct in their mind.
Ok.
1. we already have forms in place, but people choose not to implement them.
2. Tried it, doesn't work. Banned members get on committee and do nothing
3. Bring it back to 2-3 day turn-around and there should be clearer guides for known returning players
We used previously something called ASIO, during dic terms a particular dic made away with ASIO and things have gotten progressively worse. ASIO was never 100% but it was far more workable than the current inactive committee
This shares many similarities with the ADP policy:
https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-adp-border-farce-policy-2588425/1/20
However there are two major differences.
1. The ADP policy still accepts the judgement of senators on applicants known to them, not matter which party they come from. There have been no issues resulting from these passes since the democratic revolution, and it is an easy matter for parties to preference more trusted senate candidates.
2. Without a deadline on committee business, it is likely that many applications from unknown applicants will continue to expire with no action, while the committee waits on the less active representatives to respond.
As these two points formed a large part of the consensus which was arrived at in the ADP party room, it could be difficult for me to sell any policy to the party which doesn't include these two.
The Border Farce conducting a review or all applications, no matter how they are passed, is still a good idea, or even investigating the character of new born eAustralans as I believe ASIO has done in the past. But I'd settle for the committee just investigating those unknown immigration applicants who are currently being ignored entirely.
[removed]
This seems like same process in China and America. It work ok.
I think if committee has timeline it work. So in China we said if all member of committee not voted on application by deadline, their vote is not counting and majority passes.
I see nobody follow instructions in your letter. I think there you have the problem. Nobody voted.
So I vote.
YES
One issue out of all this is I asked the question about the process/timeline and was not given any information. The discussion only was turned into a thread redirected about myself and a refusal to give the information on how it was working.
put it in congress to vote this month zero applications have been raised . and each raises as a proposal
Yes, with or without acceptance of all members, the weekly review will be fine for citizens out of senate.
1. 10 questions, all applicants fill it out, any congress member can give them the 10 questions, they fill it out and then post it here (Congress thread), then we (Congress) vote, simple.
2. A CS article that can be regurgitated with each new nominee so the public can have it's say, this way it's not only us (Congress) who have a say.
1. Problem is that after all the insults and obstruction, some people refuse to be part of the congress thread, I'm sure you can understand as you gave similar reasons for not wanting to be part of the forum. Also it was tried and there was no consistency without someone in charge of it.
2. It still needs someone in charge of doing it, which we have now, so hopefully something will happen, through whichever system the parties can agree on. I believe at least 3 parties now support a committee in principle, though they don't yet agree on all the fine detail.
NO!!! you're not listening, my system means that ALL congress has a say, and THE PUBLIC has a say ....
We don't need a "special group"
Dill has kindly said he will carry the link to the CS application on his profile while he is CP.
Congress can, once we get going have access to the sheet to send off to people if required.
An article will be made (awaiting a proof and access to an official government paper) failing taking too long Stojke or myself will release something.
Getting a continued system going again will take some time to get right but we are on the right path now. The system will look somewhere between the old ASIO and the new committee, this allows congress to still have a say but takes the lengthy process away from them to hand out passes quicker.
Don't need ASIO, read above ....
Between Henry, between.
slaps Guag, wake up .... No need for complication, just agree with my system and that's it, stop mucking around ....
Your process of just using congress?
Congress sends out questions?
Congress votes on pass?
Out of the 30 people in the thread only about 10 people talk, not really a majority of congress and not enough activity.
Community needs quick action and the path Stojke wants to take, should work better than leaving it in congress hands.
If by chance congress can be active with more numbers, I cannot see why that system shouldn't be used if the Stojke one needs re-jigging for whatever reason.
i wrote it again in simple terms in congress thread, read and comment there ...
Some of us aren't in the congress thread Henry, You should put it into an article.
Your own KHMC PM Ilene initiated the committee. The RSU PM Rusty supported it. The committee forms part of the ADP party policy. The APP Immigration minister Stojke has now released this article with different ideas on the same committee.
The only debate is how the committee should operate effectively, and your newspaper ideas have been taken on board and incorporated into it.
If you want to sell all these parties on a completely different system, you need to put a lot more work into it because you're going against the tide.
YES