Senate Debate - Lyonnesse East

[Control]

Hello and welcome to the debate thread for Lyonnesse East candidates!

I'll be your moderator tonight (and tomorrow night, and the night after). I'm going to pose a question here every two or three days until the election closes and our lovely candidates, Thedairos of The Circle Party, Free Las Pinas of the Mayor Shelter Political Party, and Haivon of the Welcoming Islands Party. Our candidates give their answers to each question and then debate each other's points. Candidates are encouraged to disagree, especially since debates like this are primarily to demonstrate the difference between our choices, but they can feel free to agree and expand in I would ask that non-candidates keep posting to a minimum but I will allow occasional clarifying questions.

Our first question: "In your opinion, what makes the difference between a successful House and an inconsequential one? What would you do to help inconsequential Houses grow?

[Free Las Pinas]

Thanks for hosting this! I'm going to kick it off now since I'm wide awake! 

Jul 12, 2020 21:05:09 GMT -5 Control said:

In your opinion, what makes the difference between a successful House and an inconsequential one?

I believe that an exemplary House is founded on two ideals: a diverse and cooperative team and a devoted leader. The team must be diverse to offer various skills and knowledge that the House would collectively possess. They must also be cooperative to ensure that the House would have a good team ethic, can offer support when/if needed, can execute plans to reach their set goals, and ideally, have a good time together. On the other hand, the devoted leader is essential to ensure that the group has someone to trust and respect, which means that they serve as the glue holding the team together.

Jul 12, 2020 21:05:09 GMT -5 Control said:

What would you do to help inconsequential Houses grow?

I would have to ensure that they work together by (1) giving them time to reach a consensus on the goals and plans they'd like to achieve and (2) using the House Cup and Shield competition as an incentive to get them to participate in recruiting, which would bring new people into their House if they do well.

[Thedairos]

Thank you also from my part for hosting this debate, Control!

The first point of what makes a successful house would of course be the activity, especially of the founder and the steward, since otherwise the house would be classified as inactive. Another point would be the number of house members. These vary from house to house, ranging from 1 to about 30 people and might not directly have a big influence on the success of a house, but it certainly affects the community and might give the house a slight advantage during the House Cup and Shield Competition.
In addition to that, a frequent participation in the House Competition is desirable because it can grant a house points to rank up and gain fancy titles. To participate, it is required that the house roster of all members is kept up to date. There are guides that can help with that and if a house has difficulties, I'd be glad to help too. I would of course also make sure to remind all house founders to update the roster before the competition.
While it is certainly not necessary, it can also help to appoint a house steward in case that the founder might CTE.

Now, these were all of the "hard skills" a successful house would need , but there are of course also some "soft skills" that may be required. This starts with the community itself, more specifically the dynamics that is special and makes a house unique. The founder should encourage this activity and interaction between house members by welcoming new nations to their house and giving them the space to talk. The House Cup and Shield Competition and other events I will host as senator will additionally spark the activity in a house.
Lastly, I would also like to implement a subboard for each house to give the members more room for interaction.

[Haivon]

Jul 12, 2020 21:05:09 GMT -5 Control said:

Our first question: "In your opinion, what makes the difference between a successful House and an inconsequential one? 

Thank you for creating this debate! Now, to the question.

In my opinion what makes the difference between a successful House and an inconsequential House is the leadership of the house. Many Houses with Influential Leaders and collaborative ones became very successful and many of those are the ones we most talk now days. Another thing that also influences a house is the enter on competitions, as many become successful, they get many members and so became successful ones, as here it came my idea to promote the House Cup and Shield Contest even more. Another thing that influences a lot the house are active and collaborative members, as those help a lot the activity of it and consequently 'forces' the leader in case he doesn't care to much to help improve the situation of houses. But still a good leadership is something essential, because there is the base to the creation of a big and influential house.

Jul 12, 2020 23:05:09 GMT -3 Control said: 

What would you do to help inconsequential Houses grow?

For me the base for a successful house is a active and collaborative leader. After many active members, the leader might not even need to be 'that' active, but in it's beginnings a House will always need a good leader. For me a thing we should do make leader to be really active is a subside that in return he would do propaganda, call for new members and many other things to improve the situation of the house and so much probably growing into a successful one. Also, this should be a thing to all house leaders, because a good leadership with support will become more than a successful house. 

[Thedairos]

Okay, so now that we all answered the questions, I think we should start debating.

Haivon,if I understood this correctly, you said that house founders should (be allowed to) advertise their house to attract more members. However, it is custom and also expected that members join the house of their recruiter, as most of the house system in general is quite centered around recruiting (e.g. the House Competition). Would your idea of advertising houses also include the abolition of this "rule"? Should nations instead be able to choose the house they join?

[Haivon]

Jul 13, 2020 14:50:33 GMT -5 Thedairos said:

Okay, so now that we all answered the questions, I think we should start debating.

Haivon ,if I understood this correctly, you said that house founders should (be allowed to) advertise their house to attract more members. However, it is custom and also expected that members join the house of their recruiter, as most of the house system in general is quite centered around recruiting (e.g. the House Competition). Would your idea of advertising houses also include the abolition of this "rule"? Should nations instead be able to choose the house they join?

Thank you for asking.

I have notion that members of a house are mostly those recruited by the House leader. But this doesn't means that always a nation will join a House of it's recruiter, and many times they prefer to join the houses they most like and fell comfortable in. And this is why I think there should be a subside for houses, so they would develop themselves more and consequently being able to acquire the Nations they recruited. Housing will still be centered in the Nations joining the house which they recruited, and the making of advertising doesn't means that the house system won't be more centered around recruiting, but it's objective is actually improve the house situation by creating competition, as many House leaders would start go behind those nations which they recruited and for make them join making it a interesting place where you would be interested in joining. Like, as far as I know many nations here didn't joined the house which leader recruited them, besides it being it's objective, so this rule won't be that damaged, and I understand it and I don't see why change it. (I'm an example of this)

[Free Las Pinas]

Hello, sorry for the relatively late reply. The three of us live in different continents, so I hope you understand

For Haivon :

You mentioned that House leaders should be granted subsidies to "do propaganda". From what I understand, this is to advertise and spur activity in their House. While I do think that Houses should [continue to] be able to advertise (specifically to those who don't know who recruited them), I don't agree with with this statement:

Jul 13, 2020 15:57:09 GMT -5 Haivon said:

Housing will still be centered in the Nations joining the house which they recruited, and the making of advertising doesn't means that the house system won't be more centered around recruiting, but it's objective is actually improve the house situation by creating competition, as many House leaders would start go behind those nations which they recruited and for make them join making it a interesting place where you would be interested in joining.

I personally don't think that we should be funding and encouraging Houses to fight over new Islanders seeking a place in our forums. Your explanation for this is so House leaders would ensure that their recruits would join their House to avoid them joining a different one. On the other hand, I think that this somewhat worsens the situation. There's nothing wrong with new Islanders joining the House of their recruiter, so I don't think that we should make a competition out of this.

Instead, we could encourage Houses to recruit new forum members who don't know their recruiter or active game-side players who may not remember theirs.

Regarding Thedairos :

I don't think I have much to say, since we laid out similar views. The only thing I want to mention was their statement on giving Houses sub-boards. Although I didn't mention this, I do agree with it. Sub-boards will allow for extended conversations, planning for competitions, and/or possible recruitment campaigns they'd like to hold.

[Thedairos]

Haivon ,thank you very much for the clarification!

I agree with Free Las Pinas , that there are some exceptions where nations have no other option but to choose a house. I myself was recruited by Cerb, so I was in that exact situation and I later decided to join the house of my Welcome Buddy Tas. So what I'm trying to say is that most people who may choose, probably join the house with the members they are most familiar with. This is why I don't see any point in allowing houses to advertise, for example on the RMB or Discord, because I think the complications would be higher than the benefit.
By complications, I mean the following:
1. Should advertising for houses be free because they don't make any profit off of it? Or should it be paid because only a small group benefits from the ads and not all of XKI?
2. Should we set limits to the amount of advertising? So far, there are no limits, but wouldn't there be a high risk of an ad war because every house will try to convince new members to join them?
3. If house advertising was allowed, shouldn't other organizations like political parties also be enabled to advertise for new members?

These are all questions that would need to be sorted out when allowing house advertising and I simply don't think it would be worth it.

I agree with the idea that house founders may encourage nations who are part of this exception (recruited by cerb/ don't remember their recruiter/ etc.) to join their house, but only by direct invitation per PM or telegram and not by general advertising due to the reasons I mentioned above.

Finally, I'm glad that you like my idea of sub-boards, Free Las Pinas . I think a big problem the house system is currently facing, is the lack of activity and interaction in the houses and a proper sub-board might help with that.

[Haivon]

Jul 14, 2020 2:23:02 GMT -5 Free Las Pinas said:

Hello, sorry for the relatively late reply. The three of us live in different continents, so I hope you understand

For Haivon :

You mentioned that House leaders should be granted subsidies to "do propaganda". From what I understand, this is to advertise and spur activity in their House. While I do think that Houses should [continue to] be able to advertise (specifically to those who don't know who recruited them), I don't agree with with this statement:

Jul 13, 2020 15:57:09 GMT -5 Haivon said:

Housing will still be centered in the Nations joining the house which they recruited, and the making of advertising doesn't means that the house system won't be more centered around recruiting, but it's objective is actually improve the house situation by creating competition, as many House leaders would start go behind those nations which they recruited and for make them join making it a interesting place where you would be interested in joining.

I personally don't think that we should be funding and encouraging Houses to fight over new Islanders seeking a place in our forums. Your explanation for this is so House leaders would ensure that their recruits would join their House to avoid them joining a different one. On the other hand, I think that this somewhat worsens the situation. There's nothing wrong with new Islanders joining the House of their recruiter, so I don't think that we should make a competition out of this.

Instead, we could encourage Houses to recruit new forum members who don't know their recruiter or active game-side players who may not remember theirs.

Don't worry it, I'm not the best in time either. 

Yes, there is nothing wrong with new Islanders joining the House of their recruiter. But the thing is, we should encourage houses, but the probability of two people choosing the same person for join their house is actually high, so when at the same time people in the Forum start go behind those people, at the same time would be competing, and it doesn't mean that it would be a direct competition, but this would make people improve the house as they would prefer join them, by so improving the house system. And houses leaders which recruited the nation would so have an advantage on this because they would already say to the person that they were the ones to go behind them, making so they be interested in joining the house. Like, this doesn't mean that the nation would need to take the Nations from other house, but more for have more members. So the objective is not lower the other house but increase your house. 

[Haivon]

Jul 14, 2020 5:03:19 GMT -5 Thedairos said:

Haivon ,thank you very much for the clarification!

I agree with Free Las Pinas , that there are some exceptions where nations have no other option but to choose a house. I myself was recruited by Cerb, so I was in that exact situation and I later decided to join the house of my Welcome Buddy Tas. So what I'm trying to say is that most people who may choose, probably join the house with the members they are most familiar with. This is why I don't see any point in allowing houses to advertise, for example on the RMB or Discord, because I think the complications would be higher than the benefit.
By complications, I mean the following:
1. Should advertising for houses be free because they don't make any profit off of it? Or should it be paid because only a small group benefits from the ads and not all of XKI?
2. Should we set limits to the amount of advertising? So far, there are no limits, but wouldn't there be a high risk of an ad war because every house will try to convince new members to join them?
3. If house advertising was allowed, shouldn't other organizations like political parties also be enabled to advertise for new members?

These are all questions that would need to be sorted out when allowing house advertising and I simply don't think it would be worth it.

I agree with the idea that house founders may encourage nations who are part of this exception (recruited by cerb/ don't remember their recruiter/ etc.) to join their house, but only by direct invitation per PM or telegram and not by general advertising due to the reasons I mentioned above.

1. I think I explained something wrong. Advertising should still be focused in PM and telegrams, but it will be subsided so people might improve it in better quality and do it in larger quantities.
2. As I said in 1, advertising will still be focused in PM and telegrams and on the maximum RMB posts. Also public adds won't be subsided so this type of war won't happen. Also it haves also the objective to make them join the Forum, as by those RMB posts many new nation might be interested in also joining the Forum. And also a rule for a maximum of a post per week should be also be created, as things won't get out of control. 
3. See 1 and 2 or if there is a thing I didn't got this question you can tell me.

[Free Las Pinas]

Haivon, thanks for clearing this up

I don't actually have anything else for now, so if Thedairos doesn't either, I believe we would just be waiting for the next question.

[Thedairos]

I don't have any more questions either, so I agree that we should wait.

[Control]

Sorry for the delay, been a bit busy IRL.

What do you think is the most important change that you'd like to see the Council or region implement outside your specific Senate seat?

Free Las Pinas, Thedairos, Haivon

[Free Las Pinas]

That's weird, I thought I was late when I looked through my notifications and saw I was tagged 11 hours ago! Anyway, I'm here now, so I'm going to answer your question.

10000 Islands has grown a lot within the past few months, and a lot of us have proved to be competent, hardworking, and passionate members of the community. This is why I believe we should establish more rules and requirements to be eligible for particular roles in the region. This wouldn't be to discourage new Islanders to take on big roles for the region, but rather encourage new Islanders to consistently work hard to get to the top and ensure power is balanced and lies in competent leaders.

For instance (and this was originally brought up by Control), to be eligible to found your own House you'd (1) need to send out 1,000 recruitment telegrams, (2) ask for approval from the MoI, and (3) be accepted by vote of the Council of Nine. The first one is easy enough to do, so easy that you can do that during your first month of service as a recruiter, which is why I believe it should be modified.

I can explain myself better, but I'd like to hear the answers of other candidates first and answer their questions later. (I'm actually quite excited to hear everyone's answers since I'm assuming we would come up with different things for this question.)

[Thedairos]

Sorry for this rather late answer, my time zone didn't allow it to me to respond much earlier.

From my point of view the main goal that the Council should strive for, is to create more unity in all of XKI.

This concerns for the first part the separation of on-site and off-site users. As it is already a well known problem and I also talked about this on the Campaign board, I won't go any more into detail about this.

But it also includes the partial disagreement about government related issues, such as most recently the discussion about which powers the CE disposes of, that in my eyes quickly became rather hostile.
We should remember that we are all working towards the same goal, which is making NationStates and more specifically our region 10000 Islands more enjoyable for all of us and we can only achieve this if we respect and support each other and we're all pulling in the same direction.

[Haivon]

Jul 19, 2020 14:43:33 GMT -5 Control said:

Sorry for the delay, been a bit busy IRL.

What do you think is the most important change that you'd like to see the Council or region implement outside your specific Senate seat?

Free Las Pinas , Thedairos , Haivon

Sorry for the time it took for answer!

LE isn't the first thing I learned in my history of political campaign in XKI, so I actually have many things in mind, but for me the most important one is that many nations cease to exist mostly because they don't have interest in NS and many times because they don't even know what is on NS or 10000 Islands, and judge before they know. We could do more fast ways of propaganda and bring new nations to events so they might get interested on it and theofore we would get many active nations. This isn't exactly a change, but a thing we should enforce even more.