View Topic

So I thought of a nice lengthy post at first talking about my qualifications, why I'm running, what I planned to accomplish, the usual stuff that most people expect in a campaign.

To start things off, I'll post this video (apologies to people who can't see it, it's SNL doing a spoof of when Hillary Clinton announced her intent to run for president):

Like Laurentus, it's hard for me to pinpoint specific goals to accomplish if I get elected.  But the two things I continue to promise: I'll be a calm and level-headed sort that will respect the opinions of the other UH members even if I personally disagree with them. 

My main goal is to always represent the interests of Wintreath's citizens and make sure that their voices are heard.  If there's legislation you want to see, concerns you have about existing legislation, or want to have more of an opinion on current discussions...my main focus as always is to make sure that you're getting that representation as we were elected by you, so your opinions are always ones that matter immensely.

On the topic of things I agree with from other candidates, I also greatly agree with the idea of honoring those who helped rebuild the bridges and mend the wounds from the November/February incidents.  They were turbulent times, possibly the worst in Wintreath history that almost destroyed the region completely.  It only makes sense to pinpoint those that took the time and effort to get together and reconcile and give them honors for their service.

I thank you for your time and consideration, and hope that when election time comes...you choose to vote Pengu.  Because remember that age old motto of mine: A vote for Pengu is a vote for you!

Thank you for running in this term's election, Pengu. I look forward to seeing how your campaign develops.

As I've asked of other candidates in one form or another, do you have any ideas about how to represent the wishes of our member base? Will you put forward any proposals on how to encourage member engagement both with our political process and with our forum and Discord communities?

With the real world in quarantine, I'd say this is an ideal opportunity to capitalise on a lot of people spending a lot of time indoors on computers - it's a great time to lock in some new and active members to the community if we seize the moment.

Thank you for running in this term's election, Pengu. I look forward to seeing how your campaign develops.

As I've asked of other candidates in one form or another, do you have any ideas about how to represent the wishes of our member base? Will you put forward any proposals on how to encourage member engagement both with our political process and with our forum and Discord communities?

With the real world in quarantine, I'd say this is an ideal opportunity to capitalise on a lot of people spending a lot of time indoors on computers - it's a great time to lock in some new and active members to the community if we seize the moment.

To be honest, I've always thought that best way to capitalize on the wishes of the majority of the member base is...

wait for it...





wait for it...





An Open Assembly.

*Pauses for gasps, angry shouting, profane slurs about his mother and something about a watermelon*

But yeah, I've always thought the OA would be the best idea for representing the members' wishes and whatnot, because it gives them an actual chance to speak up and be a part of the legislation, rather than having to watch from the sidelines while only a handful of members handle the laws.  Unfortunately, despite this being what I consider the best option for that, we've never been able to agree as a whole on how we'd even handle an OA, let alone been able to agree on whether it should even exist.  Though I'd be interested to see if opinions have changed on it since our last...attempt.  *shudders at the constitutional convention*

Outside of that, I like how our current system is in regards of getting members interested, but I feel like it could be capitalized on a bit more.  There's normally a Secretary that posts in the Citizen's Platform with  the new topics, but we could go even further.

When a new non-UH centric legislation (aka legislation that doesn't just focus on UH policies such as their default seats) pops up, I think there should be something set up on Discord, especially for important policies or commendations/revocations, where members of the UH can communicate directly with the citizenry.  Sure, it's nice that citizens can see when the UH posts in their topic/forum and that we can ping them in the Discord Platform/mention them in the Platform on here when we have something to say.  But what about being able to talk to them directly in more real time?  Why not have UH weekly meetings where the people can get involved with the legislation? Or a meeting when a crucial legislation comes up?

I agree extremely that we need to capitalize on getting members more involved, and I think directly involving them in such a way is a good step.  Rather than keeping it disconnected with separate topics, we can connect them in things such as Discord UH Public meetings...sort of like how city governments may have public meetings for the public to get involved and get their input in.

I think it'd be a monumental step forward.

An Open Assembly.

*Pauses for gasps, angry shouting, profane slurs about his mother and something about a watermelon*

But yeah, I've always thought the OA would be the best idea for representing the members' wishes and whatnot, because it gives them an actual chance to speak up and be a part of the legislation, rather than having to watch from the sidelines while only a handful of members handle the laws.  Unfortunately, despite this being what I consider the best option for that, we've never been able to agree as a whole on how we'd even handle an OA, let alone been able to agree on whether it should even exist.  Though I'd be interested to see if opinions have changed on it since our last...attempt.  *shudders at the constitutional convention*

Ah, I remember this and the many heated discussions it prompted. There was a lot of back and forth on the issue, with the eventual decision being (almost by merit of a LACK of decision) that it was more trouble than it was worth. What would you do differently this time around? Do you think there's support for an OA-style model of political process in the region? What form would it take?

(I had a browse back and, as I vaguely remembered, I did pull together a bunch of ideas in 2016 about how it could work that had elements of proposals from @Laurentus and @Gerrick, that you liked.)

Outside of that, I like how our current system is in regards of getting members interested, but I feel like it could be capitalized on a bit more.  There's normally a Secretary that posts in the Citizen's Platform with  the new topics, but we could go even further.

I definitely liked the role of Secretary, and I think it's worth bringing back for sure.

When a new non-UH centric legislation (aka legislation that doesn't just focus on UH policies such as their default seats) pops up, I think there should be something set up on Discord, especially for important policies or commendations/revocations, where members of the UH can communicate directly with the citizenry.  Sure, it's nice that citizens can see when the UH posts in their topic/forum and that we can ping them in the Discord Platform/mention them in the Platform on here when we have something to say.  But what about being able to talk to them directly in more real time?  Why not have UH weekly meetings where the people can get involved with the legislation? Or a meeting when a crucial legislation comes up?

I agree extremely that we need to capitalize on getting members more involved, and I think directly involving them in such a way is a good step.  Rather than keeping it disconnected with separate topics, we can connect them in things such as Discord UH Public meetings...sort of like how city governments may have public meetings for the public to get involved and get their input in.

It does seem that Discord has a lot of activity - but how much of this is just the same people who are active on the forums? Do we see people active there who aren't around on the forum, and do we see people from the NS RMB there that don't make the jump across to here? It sounds like a good idea, but I'm not sure on the realities of how it would improve engagement.

I agree extremely that we need to capitalize on getting members more involved, and I think directly involving them in such a way is a good step.  Rather than keeping it disconnected with separate topics, we can connect them in things such as Discord UH Public meetings...sort of like how city governments may have public meetings for the public to get involved and get their input in.

This makes a lot more sense to me (at least) and I would be fully behind such a suggestion.

Your biggest proposal is, of course, an Open Assembly. I wouldn't be surprised to see the term sending Mootles in to paroxysms of terror :p but I too would be interested to see if there is wider support for this change. Surely nearly four years is long enough..

If you're for an Open Assembly, you've got my vote!

Ah, I remember this and the many heated discussions it prompted. There was a lot of back and forth on the issue, with the eventual decision being (almost by merit of a LACK of decision) that it was more trouble than it was worth. What would you do differently this time around? Do you think there's support for an OA-style model of political process in the region? What form would it take?

(I had a browse back and, as I vaguely remembered, I did pull together a bunch of ideas in 2016 about how it could work that had elements of proposals from @Laurentus and @Gerrick, that you liked.)

Yeah, those were fun times, eh?  But yeah, I recall really liking your modified one especially since it tackled the idea of new members joining and jumping right in with it requiring 15 posts for them to actually take part.  I felt like it basically took the best parts of all of the proposals such as Gerrick's and made it into something that could actually do well if put into practice.  If we were to do an OA, I'd actually like to see it take that kind of route.

I think there's support for something different from the Storting, it's just difficult for people to agree on what that idea is.  But I think if we were to push more for an OA in a more substantiated way with a model like the modified version you posted, I think it'd be received a bit better.  Especially now that we're getting more and more active posters, I think it's at the very least worth exploring again.

I definitely liked the role of Secretary, and I think it's worth bringing back for sure.

It still technically exists, I just feel there could be more to it.  Engaging people's thoughts on Discord, for example.  Right now, the Secretary basically just posts a CP thread for people to talk in (sometimes, depending on the term).  But they could be engaging citizens in the Discord CP on their thoughts, doing polls on how people feel about the current session and what improvements could be made, that sort of thing. 

Actually, saying that last bit, why haven't we done polls yet?  It'd give candidates a better idea as to why they might not be elected a second time around so that they can improve, and it might actually restore some faith in the UH when it's shown that they actually care about how people are perceiving them.  Perhaps a mid-term poll that allows people to post feedback on how they view the current UH might not be such a bad idea.  I think that's another thing I'll want to push for...more Polls to the People (which hasn't been done lately), but having a mid-term poll that gauges the general consensus of the current UH.  Heck, since I keep bringing up new poll ideas, maybe this Election campaign should be called "Pengu Promises Polls" instead. 

It does seem that Discord has a lot of activity - but how much of this is just the same people who are active on the forums? Do we see people active there who aren't around on the forum, and do we see people from the NS RMB there that don't make the jump across to here? It sounds like a good idea, but I'm not sure on the realities of how it would improve engagement.

Actually, I've noticed that more Discord members, heck even some rmb people, have been joining up on the forums as well.  But I think the more we stick to announcing important forum events (and using the Discord CP to announce new legislature on the forums so that we can direct people to check it out on top of engaging them in Discord), the easier it'll become to get members engaged.  Likewise, bringing up the RMB, tailoring polls to current legislature being discussed (along with a link to that topic) might also be a good way to boost engagement on an rmb level for government affairs.  Until we decide to go the OA route, the best way to engage members is to find ways to, well, actually engage.  Keeping them up to date and getting their input on upcoming laws...even just polls, is always a good starting point.  Doing the weekly/important meetings on Discord so they can engage directly with the UH is another.

I agree extremely that we need to capitalize on getting members more involved, and I think directly involving them in such a way is a good step.  Rather than keeping it disconnected with separate topics, we can connect them in things such as Discord UH Public meetings...sort of like how city governments may have public meetings for the public to get involved and get their input in.

This makes a lot more sense to me (at least) and I would be fully behind such a suggestion.

Your biggest proposal is, of course, an Open Assembly. I wouldn't be surprised to see the term sending Mootles in to paroxysms of terror :p but I too would be interested to see if there is wider support for this change. Surely nearly four years is long enough..

Oh I'm sure I'm not the only one that still shudders when looking back at the disasterous Constituional Convention, and I wouldn't be surprised if even the words "Open Assembly" made some people have PTSD flashbacks.

But yeah, it's been 4 years since our last big attempt, and we've had a huge shift in members since then.  We still have our active ones and older ones, sure...but we also have a lot of newer ones, and even opinions of those older/active ones may have changed over time.  All in all, I'd love to see what the consensus is at this point in time because I think an OA is overall a much more productive system than the UH/OH system (which to me always spelled trouble in the abbreviation combination alone since it's literally "Uh Oh"), and could really benefit Wintreath in the long run since it allows practically everyone to get involved rather than a select few that get elected.

I definitely liked the role of Secretary, and I think it's worth bringing back for sure.

The Secretary position got effectively renamed to Officer of Information and got an expanded mandate. Under Katie it was a pretty nice office, we got regular weekly Underhusen recaps for a significant period of time. Eventually though, as tends to happen, UH activity ebbed down and Katie got busy. The office is currently vacant.

Yeah, those were fun times, eh?  But yeah, I recall really liking your modified one especially since it tackled the idea of new members joining and jumping right in with it requiring 15 posts for them to actually take part.  I felt like it basically took the best parts of all of the proposals such as Gerrick's and made it into something that could actually do well if put into practice.  If we were to do an OA, I'd actually like to see it take that kind of route.

I think there's support for something different from the Storting, it's just difficult for people to agree on what that idea is.  But I think if we were to push more for an OA in a more substantiated way with a model like the modified version you posted, I think it'd be received a bit better.  Especially now that we're getting more and more active posters, I think it's at the very least worth exploring again.

Feel free to use any or all of those ideas, at least as far as I can give permission for drawing them together! I see that the five-post citizenship requirement has been rescinded in efforts to boost citizenship uptake, but I maintain that a 15 post requirement for involvement in regional politics (barring sponsorship, of course) makes sense just to alleviate concerns about security - if those concerns still exist.

It still technically exists, I just feel there could be more to it.  Engaging people's thoughts on Discord, for example.  Right now, the Secretary basically just posts a CP thread for people to talk in (sometimes, depending on the term).  But they could be engaging citizens in the Discord CP on their thoughts, doing polls on how people feel about the current session and what improvements could be made, that sort of thing. 

Actually, saying that last bit, why haven't we done polls yet?  It'd give candidates a better idea as to why they might not be elected a second time around so that they can improve, and it might actually restore some faith in the UH when it's shown that they actually care about how people are perceiving them.  Perhaps a mid-term poll that allows people to post feedback on how they view the current UH might not be such a bad idea.  I think that's another thing I'll want to push for...more Polls to the People (which hasn't been done lately), but having a mid-term poll that gauges the general consensus of the current UH.  Heck, since I keep bringing up new poll ideas, maybe this Election campaign should be called "Pengu Promises Polls" instead. 

I can get behind polls - I think that's a brilliant way to increase interest and general participation (at the risk, perhaps, of poll fatigue) in the political process even if something like an OA doesn't materialise. It sounds like a very natural fit for the Officer of Information's mandate, as does the suggested Discord role you've put forward here.

Actually, I've noticed that more Discord members, heck even some rmb people, have been joining up on the forums as well.  But I think the more we stick to announcing important forum events (and using the Discord CP to announce new legislature on the forums so that we can direct people to check it out on top of engaging them in Discord), the easier it'll become to get members engaged.  Likewise, bringing up the RMB, tailoring polls to current legislature being discussed (along with a link to that topic) might also be a good way to boost engagement on an rmb level for government affairs.  Until we decide to go the OA route, the best way to engage members is to find ways to, well, actually engage.  Keeping them up to date and getting their input on upcoming laws...even just polls, is always a good starting point.  Doing the weekly/important meetings on Discord so they can engage directly with the UH is another.

As always, my activity is far more involved on the forum than it is the RMB on NS but a cursory look shows Wintreath having 375 nations within it and a fair level of activity on the RMB. It would be excellent to transition some of those members over to the forum and Discord, which you say has been happening - I would vote for anyone who's pushing policies that encourage this.

Oh I'm sure I'm not the only one that still shudders when looking back at the disasterous Constituional Convention, and I wouldn't be surprised if even the words "Open Assembly" made some people have PTSD flashbacks.

But yeah, it's been 4 years since our last big attempt, and we've had a huge shift in members since then.  We still have our active ones and older ones, sure...but we also have a lot of newer ones, and even opinions of those older/active ones may have changed over time.  All in all, I'd love to see what the consensus is at this point in time because I think an OA is overall a much more productive system than the UH/OH system (which to me always spelled trouble in the abbreviation combination alone since it's literally "Uh Oh"), and could really benefit Wintreath in the long run since it allows practically everyone to get involved rather than a select few that get elected.

An interesting position - I look forward to seeing how this develops over the coming term!

The Secretary position got effectively renamed to Officer of Information and got an expanded mandate. Under Katie it was a pretty nice office, we got regular weekly Underhusen recaps for a significant period of time. Eventually though, as tends to happen, UH activity ebbed down and Katie got busy. The office is currently vacant.

Ah, thanks for the explanation Tau.

Thanks for the Kate McKinnon's snl video, love her impression of Clinton
Good luck!!!!

She was such a fun watch for her Clinton impression.  Good luck to you as well!