|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2008 11:41:26 GMT -6
Azul my fellow Talossans.
First let me say, SHAME ON YOU FOR NOT SIGNING UP FOR THE TA PROGRAM. (Oh yeah, that is going to be in every post I make until I get at least 20 people!!!)
Second, IMMIGRATION REFORM TIME!
We talked about it last month, time to talk about it again. Let's aim for quality, not quantity. (BOTH WOULD BE GREAT THOUGH!)
The kingdom is alive and well and ready to grew. We are not shrinking, we are not in decline, we are experiencing great growth rates, but this has slowed, recently, as is the cycle.
So... how can we improve the quality of new applicants?
Well, I believe having the citizen write the essay AFTER the 15 days or even 40 days would help. By the time, Talossa has started to mean something.
I support a probationary period of a month. Perhaps the essay at the end of that month would be better. For example, they send in their app, get their TA, get on the Witt, get sponsored, enter a probationary period, at the end of that, then they submit the essay.
MORE SUGGESTIONS. LET'S TALK! LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION. I'm listening!
(oh... I'm going to assume if you respond to this you're interested in being a TA, hehehehehe, and will contact you accordingly).
|
|
|
Post by Breneir Itravilatx on Jan 31, 2008 12:04:21 GMT -6
I would like to suggest the creation of a code of ethics regarding the intake process of new immigrants. This would go a long way toward creating an objective standard by which to judge individual speech within the immigration thread.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 31, 2008 12:47:35 GMT -6
That sounds like a good idea to me. I think we need to:
1. Make sure we're adequately verifying the identity of new citizens.
2. Encourage people to write more substantial essays.
3. Re-institute a civics test.
Putting the essay later in the process, as you suggest, will help with #2. Maybe we could also institute a minimum length, like 100 words or something. Some people just write two or three sentences. The essays used to be longer. Maybe a process like this:
1. Prospective submits an application (without the essay). After verifying the prospective's identity and assigning a TA, MinImm approves the prospective for a Witt account and introduces him or her to the nation.
2. After a 15-30 day period of questioning, if the prospective still thinks he or she can handle Talossan citizenship (wink), he or she submits the essay to finalise his or her application. The prospective is eligible for petitioning at that point.
3. Once a petition is made and seconded (seconding petitions is an informal process, not a legal requirement, but I think we should change that), the prospective has 30 or 60 days to complete the civics test. The SoS issues a grant of citizenship once all the boxes are checked: application complete including essay, petition made and seconded, civics test completed with a passing score.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2008 12:57:36 GMT -6
I like the track your own Cresti.
I had also, a while back, brought up the possibility of the MinImm being responsible for sponsoring new applicants. So, Talossans would write the MinImm to sponsor, and the MinImm would in turn sponsor. Then, after a time has passed, those who sponsor become public record upon request. This helps to work against the possibility of obligatory party affilation based on who sponsors the applicant. This would also eliminate the "i'm going to sponsor you first" game that has come up. Immigration is not and will not be treated as a game.
Granted, immigration law would have to be altered, but I think that is the road we're headed down anyway.
My goal is to create a process that will last, not have to be revamped in a year (unless, you know, we start getting thousdands of applicants, then I'll need a bigger office.)
|
|
Xhorxh Asmour
Talossan since 02-21-2003
Wot? Me, worry?
Posts: 1,754
|
Post by Xhorxh Asmour on Jan 31, 2008 14:35:30 GMT -6
I like what Sir Cresti and the Most Honorable ImmMin have proposed. I suggest a 30-day questioning period and 30 days to complete the civics test. The code of ethics sounds like a good idea too.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Jan 31, 2008 15:18:41 GMT -6
I definitely like the civics test. My other idea would be to have a sort of "immigration council" that would be elected that would confirm new citizens, that way no one could petition for them (of any party).
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 31, 2008 16:00:13 GMT -6
My other idea would be to have a sort of "immigration council" that would be elected that would confirm new citizens, that way no one could petition for them (of any party). That's an interesting idea. It'd kind of be a "light" version of the old law, which required Ziu votes for all immigrants. Instead we'd have a kind of standing committee that serves as an immigration review board.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Jan 31, 2008 16:02:30 GMT -6
Right that's the idea. It would consist of 5 seats per party running in the election and then 5 seats to be appointed by the King and then the three justices.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 31, 2008 16:23:46 GMT -6
Right that's the idea. It would consist of 5 seats per party running in the election and then 5 seats to be appointed by the King and then the three justices. I was thinking of something smaller. Maybe 5 members, with MinImm as chair (ex officio), and no single party having a majority. Or even three members, all from different parties, with unanimity required. Maybe if the board can't agree, they can refer the prospective to a vote of the whole Ziu. Or they just announce that the prospective hasn't been approved and any Ziu member who wants to is naturally free to introduce an immigration bill.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Jan 31, 2008 17:35:48 GMT -6
I don't think a specific immigration board is needed. Talossanity should not be judged by the criteria that would become endemic in such a situation. I think the current could well be codified better, and I like the idea of the essay coming at the end of the process. I think that represents perhaps the most important aspect of the civics test, so am not sure that would be necessary. 15 days is not a VERY short period in terms of the net, and allows people to engage fully quickly.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jan 31, 2008 18:37:09 GMT -6
I like the idea of a board, but I think it is important to maintain the introduction threads. They are a vital part of each citizen becoming introduced to Talossa.
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Jan 31, 2008 19:47:28 GMT -6
My own suggestion is that as soon as a person becomes a citizen, they should be made co-TalossAssistant (with their own TalossAssistant who guided them through the process) to the next prospective to whom their TA is assigned. Makes sure that as soon as someone is a citizen, he or she is given something to do, a duty, something that requires them to be involved, keeps them from being so lost with the, "okay, well, uh, I wonder what I do now?" feeling.
Just a suggestion.
Hooligan
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2008 19:48:04 GMT -6
I, too, am a little skeptical about the board. But if one were to be created, I think whoever is the Deputy would also need to be on it.
I'm trying to set an understanding that whoever becomes Ministry runs it as an apolitical seat, hence why I invited a member of the strongest minority party to participate. I believe this ethic is a vital part! The world is not perfect, things are often unfair, but we can strive to achieve a level playing field the best we can.
As of now, there is kind of an unofficial board, my deputy, the SoS, and I. At any point I can end an immigration process and fwd it onto the Ziu, once my deputy is trained, and I know I can trust him (which is developing quickly) I will trust his decision. Granted, that should not be invoked without explanation.
|
|
EM Vürinalt
Citizen since 12-20-2007
Parletz, am?c, en entrez
Posts: 979
|
Post by EM Vürinalt on Feb 1, 2008 6:21:50 GMT -6
My own suggestion is that as soon as a person becomes a citizen, they should be made co-TalossAssistant (with their own TalossAssistant who guided them through the process) to the next prospective to whom their TA is assigned. Makes sure that as soon as someone is a citizen, he or she is given something to do, a duty, something that requires them to be involved, keeps them from being so lost with the, "okay, well, uh, I wonder what I do now?" feeling. I think this is one of the most important aspects of this whole discussion. The hardest part of assimilating nicely is having something to do and keep them occupied. The TA program is good because, not only do they learn more about culture they didn't (or were afraid to) ask questions about, they also get to answer the questions of others. I think this is engaging for a new citizen and should seriously be considered. Now, for the "board" thing. Though I think it is important, there will always be that little aspect of fear in an immigrants mind going "well, I'm doing great hear, but will I pass the board??" For me, that would be a deffinate cause of worry because, unless this is worded exquisitly well, that "board" would create an image of a dark scary place with one light bulb hanging from the ceiling and cold metal chairs. I think if we make it a little less communistic and a little more democratic, then we're all good. For the record- I like the idea of submitting citizenship petitions to Witt, the prospective can actually see what's happening there and perhaps defend himself if needed.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Feb 1, 2008 15:47:21 GMT -6
SHUN!!!!!
|
|