Post

Podria wrote:

-snip-

I will first answer your questions, then comment on your answers.

1. To say it simply no, since I belive there is always room for improvement. But I think Assemblians were at least somewhat happy with my methods and policies given the approval raiting.

2. Firstly, no you don't have quadruple the experience. I had 2 term you had 4 and as Wasc already stated that you win in over all terms for the GA the once you have been part of were far less active so even if I'm not your equal in GA experience I still bring a good amount to the table. You had two terms as Speaker, that is true.
   In regards to executive expirence, you were Minister of World Assembly Affairs, this portfolio dosen't exist anymore and I as Secretary did WA recommendations. You served two terms as Minister of Roleplay granted, but with the Roleplay basically running indepentent from TLA affairs I don't see in which aspect this would improve the quality of a Secretary since they usually do not interfere much with the Roleplay besided appointing the Minister. For Community Affairs, you held that portfolio for one month in which you hosted one game night which I have done too. I also was involved with holding the poll for non-discord assemblians for game nights and was involved in the planning for new concepts for Community Affairs.
   Now onto the portfolio which is closest to Secretary, your term as Vice Secretary. I don't know how much resposibilites you had under Greylyn as VS so I can only go off the way I utilised my VS, which was mostly an advisor role. So yeah that will most likely granted you good experience, but you also didn't serve the full term.
   But what you either forgetting or are unaware of, I as Secretary was involved with all of the decisions. I was involved in the opening of both of our new embassies, as already stated earlier I was involved in the planing of new cocepts for Community Affairs, I run the recruitment API since January and I recorded Population Data for the Pop Tracker.
   So yeah I do belive I have more experience for Secretary because I served a term as one, while you did not. That does not mean that I do not think you could be a good Secretary.

3. Yes my platform look quite bare, one part being that I simply formulated thing way shorter than you did and do not intend to bring back an old concept. The second half of your "What will I do?" section is nearly the same thing as I have in my "What can I expect if you get re-elected?" the main difference is I said it in a single sentence.
   I said I will introduce no big changes, that does not mean no changes. With big changes I meant things like your Volunteer program or a new ministry. I will still try to get new faces into offices where I think that is an option and I would continue the ideas for changes to Community Affairs, that I dropped after Wasc resignation. They were named in the State of the Assembly.

   Now to your answers, Wasc already said a thing to this.

   I simply don't see why we need to create a program where you have to rely on the people signing up, when we already utilise it where it is needed. For Foreign Affairs and Roleplay we already utilise such system. For Information it would only work in a very limited way, since Llorens was only able to help Argentigrad out with it was because Llorens already had the form from a previous year, or at least that is my understanding of the situation and the same thing goes for Recruitment. For the Population Tracker you could have one person writing down the data I doubt you need a volunteer for that, this should stay the resposiblity of the Minister since they are the ones with access to the Account where the Data is presented. Running the API wouldn't work well either, the main issue we had with recruitment was that it halted after an error so I run the script and wrote a short restart script for it that could work in a handful of limited setups. And no they did not really got outside help, only if you count the Secretary as outside. So we already have volunteers where it is needed, why create a program when the ministries create their own suited to their needs when needed.

   I fear your proposal would make talking points less public, let me explain why.
   The GA and SC server have 1/4 or less members than the social server and I reckon the same would be true for the open cabinet server. Also not everyone reads ever message, so maybe 20-30 people would read the messages there, that is at least my guess. So why not continue it the way we currently do where people use the ping feature on the social discord? There it is more likely people would read it. For an example I use the difficulties we had with the API in early December, if Llorens would have asked if everything runs smooth there how many people would have known these issues? Or when people asked when will the census be posted? Far less people would have read that. But in the social server people have a significatly higher chance of knowing these things. Also which channels would you make public to read? Because if you make the department channels public wouldn't that increase the chance of moving some communications to DMs? And for non-discord members that would keep them just as uninformed about happening as they currently are. So this proposal does not help non-discord assemblians and it would make it harder for people already using discord to get the information since they would have to join another server.