NationStates Jolt Archive

Alright, the votes are in and now it's time to put those issues in to effect. Please vote for the issues that are up for a vote, and if you want submit a proposal on how to bring issue 5 in to effect.

This meeting will be open until 11:59 EST on Friday.

1. Nominating candidates to elect the first permanent chairman- (nominate candidates here, elections will occur in another thread.)

-Sergei Antropov, Vetalia

2. Reforming the voting system of the COMECON:
The nation of Lifesblood wishes to adjust the voting system to set a minimum of 2 votes and a maximum of 10 votes for any nation, with voting rights based on population.

-VOTING DEFERRED UNTIL ISSUE 3 IS VOTED ON-

3. The nation of Kampfers wishes to reform the voting system to create a "one nation, one vote" policy in regard to voting on electoral system reform. On issues designated for the electoral system, each nation will receive one vote regardless of population.

By order of the Chairman, this vote will go by the 1 nation-1 vote policy.

Yes: 3
No: 0

4. Voting on admitting new members to the COMECON, if any new applications come in

-We would like to welcome Honako, Mauvasia, and Droskianishk to the organization.

-New applicants can submit an application here.

5. Adding a vote of no confidence provision to allow the council to remove the chairman of the COMECON and mandate elections for a new one. Each nation is invited to propose how they would structure the vote, and we will vote to choose the best proposal.

-Vetalia submits that a vote of no confidence requires a 66% majority vote to pass in order to ensure that a potential chairman veto is overridden.
Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 14
No: 0

6. Drafting a proposal to remove members from the organization:

Vetalia's proposal is to have nations inform the chairman that the feel another member is doing something illegal, and the chairman will call a meeting to place the offender before the rest of the community to defend themselves. After they have had a chance to plead their case, the community will vote and a 66% majority vote (using proportional rather than the one-vote system) will result in them being banned for a week. Two bans will result in permanent expulsion.

Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 9
No:0

Dai Yuddha Ossyria's proposal is to kick out any member which may lead this alliance into "foolish wars", defined and to weed out inactive members. Perhaps organizing a system where a inactive member is put on probation until removal, and for belligerent nations who lead this alliance into wars which would not serve the greater good of all members."

Votes for the DYO proposal:
Yes: 4
No:0



Also, here are the updated general vote allocations for each member nation:


Praetonia 13
Mauvasia 11
Maraque 10
Lachenburg 10
Pan-Arab Barronia 9
Vetalia 9
Googlewoop 8
Leocardia 6
Droskianishk 5
Granate 3
Shakal 3
Dai Yuddha Ossyria 3
Wagdog 2
Grantes 2
Aurum Domus 2
Vetaka 1
Kahanistan 1
Greater Honakon 1
Kampfers 1
New Manth 1
Lifesblood 1
Arab-Canada 1
Marckov 1

OOC: is this meeting two?

OOC: This is the meeting where we discuss how we're going to actually apply the stuff passed in the first meeting.

-VOTING DEFERRED UNTIL ISSUE 4 IS VOTED ON-


OOC: don't you mean "until issue 3 is voted on" or am I just confused?

OOC: don't you mean "until issue 3 is voted on" or am I just confused?

OOC: Yeah, I just noticed it. I moved all of the numbers up once the failed proposals and stuff were cleaned out.

Obviously, Kampfers votes in favor of item 3 and brings it case to the floor. Noting that in most cases, (OOC: quoted from star wars, lol) all who have power are afraid to lose it, we believe that the powerful nations will refuse item 2 in order to remain dominant members. Thus we have proposed, that when voting on voting, every nation should recieve one vote. This way, even the smaller man has a say in the issue. It would allow every nation to have the chance to affect how much power within the alliance it has on a daily basis.

Also, propose a new item, which would also reform voting. It states that new members recieve 1 vote until they prove to be active members of COMECON-SD. The qualifications of an "active member" are quiet low, they just need to attend one or two meetings.

Also, we would like to propose that someone write a law concerning how members of COMECON-SD are kicked out. This area is very vague, and could use some clarification. Suggested reasons could be inactivity, foolish war, etc. Someone can write this up and propose it as a new item.

Finally, we wish for the Chairman to draw up a constitution after the first 7 years worth of meetings are adjourned. (Thats 7 days, enough time to lay out a base)

ooc: bump for responses

OOC: 7 days will roughly be the time between now and the start of the next meeting, so that's good.

We second the proposal to put new nations on probationary status, in order to ensure they are active in the organization's development, but wish to make it more specific and exempt nations with more than 1 billion people from that requirement, since they are already well established.

We also second the idea of establishing procedure to remove members:

Our proposal is to have nations inform the chairman that the feel another member is doing something illegal, and the chairman will call a meeting to place the offender before the rest of the community to defend themselves. After they have had a chance to plead their case, the community will vote and a 66% majority vote (using proportional rather than the one-vote system) will result in them being banned for a week. Two bans will result in permanent expulsion.

However, this will require a list of offenses that could lead to being removed from their position, which will be developed with the first official charter one week from today.

With regards to issues three and five, we vote in favor of both proposals. We think that when it comes to electoral reform in particular, every member-state should have an equal say.

We agree with the Kampferian delegation's suggestion of giving new members one vote, regardless of population, in order to keep only large nations from joining, voting on some particularly senstive issue, and then becoming an inactive member.

We also think it to be very important to kick out any member which may lead this alliance into "foolish wars" as the Kampfers delegate put it, and to weed out inactive members. Perhaps organizing a system where a inactive member is put on probation until removal, and for belligerent nations who lead this alliance into wars which would not serve the greater good of all members.

Just my two cents for now.

OOC: Do you support the Vetalian proposal for how to implement issue 5, or do you have your own idea for how to do it?

We support Vetalias proposal for item 5, but prefer Dai Yuddha Ossyrias new membership policies proposal over the Vetalian proposal. The Dai Yuddha Ossyria once again helps to equalize the power, and Kampfers is a strong believer in equality, especially when it comes to nation size (although if we were a big nation, we would probably believe less firmly in this, lol).

"The Chairman has ordered that the vote on issue 3 be strictly one nation, one vote, as that would be the fairest way of deciding on the issue."

We agree with Vetalia's idea on how to implement issue five, but with regards to removal of members we will need a clear definition of what would be considered "illegal" acts.

The current idea is to leave it up to members. What they'll do is raise their concern with the chairman nation, and the accused nation will be brought before the entire organization to allow them to plead their case. Then, upon conclusion of the involved parties' testimony, we'll all vote on it and if it gets a 2/3 yes vote, the person is banned from the organization for a RL week. If they are banned again, it's permanent.

It enables us to catch people who might be able to use a loophole in a specific law, but it also has the drawback of enabling any nation to raise an accusation against another at any time.

The current idea is to leave it up to members. What they'll do is raise their concern with the chairman nation, and they'll take it before the entire organization to allow them to plead their case. Then, we'll all vote on it and if it gets a 2/3 yes vote, the person is banned from the organization for a RL week. If they are banned again, it's permanent.

It enables us to catch people who might be able to use a loophole in a specific law, but it also has the drawback of enabling any nation to raise an accusation against another at any time.
As a safeguard, how about we require a vote to even bring the issue to the larger 2/3 vote? An 'indictment' of sorts, to prevent merely unpopuolar nations from being unfairly evicted on spurious charges out of spite...

That's a good idea. I think we should have a simple majority to bring it to vote and a 2/3 vote to remove them (kind of like impeachment, with a double vote for safeguards against fraud).

I have to agree with Wagdog, we don't want people getting trigger happy when it comes to ejecting certain members.

I also agree. I dont want a single bad day someone has to get them ejected because they called someones mom a cow or something.

On another note, should COMECON have some sort of Joint Military Command Council made up of, say, five members whose job is to present certain military situations to the alliance's attention and work towards advancing strategic development projects and so forth. This really isn't a proposal, I'm just looking for feedback.

I just want to mention that the reform to the removal proposal has been put in to effect even if it's not mentioned on the ballot itself.

In regard to the military council, I mentioned this briefly to Wagdog in the first thread and I think it would be a good idea. That council could convene the security council if necessary, and otherwise it will just act as an advisory and intelligence service for us.

I imagine it will have an equal number of big and small nations to balance out their concerns.

Are we simpy appointing members of the security council? If so I would like to be a member of the Security Council if thats ok.

I just want to mention that the reform to the removal proposal has been put in to effect even if it's not mentioned on the ballot itself.

In regard to the military council, I mentioned this briefly to Wagdog in the first thread and I think it would be a good idea. That council could convene the security council if necessary, and otherwise it will just act as an advisory and intelligence service for us.

I imagine it will have an equal number of big and small nations to balance out their concerns.

Oh, I must have missed that post. Anyway, I would certainly support a proposal for a military council in the same vein as what you just described.

Are we simpy appointing members of the security council? If so I would like to be a member of the Security Council if thats ok.

I'm not sure if that is the case or not, but I would certainly like to stand for a position on the council if it is the case, as a rep. for the smaller nations (considering I have only three votes, I think I fit into that category).

I'm not sure if that is the case or not, but I would certainly like to stand for a position on the council if it is the case, as a rep. for the smaller nations (considering I have only three votes, I think I fit into that category).

I would be a smaller also. I have 3 votes too.

Oh, I must have missed that post. Anyway, I would certainly support a proposal for a military council in the same vein as what you just described.

Yeah, it was only one small post in the entire thread.

Shakal, there already is a security council and all member states are part of it. This council would be like an assistant to the security council, keeping states up to date and recommending whether or not the larger COMECON needs to get involved in a given situation.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Members of COMECON-SD, Droskianishk would like to again submitt its proposal of a vice-chairman coming from a nation with 5 votes or less, and the Chairman coming from nations with 6 votes or more in order to more balance the divisions between large and small. We also believe it is a good idea to establish (through means of the entire organization voting) committes or councils to vote on issues going to vote, instead of the entire organization taking the time to vote on every issue that comes to hand.

Prince Nikako Kutz of Droskianishk

Though a small nation and in favor of the electoral reform proposed by Lifesblood, we vote against making that vote a one nation, one vote proposal. Any reform of the voting process should be careful to balance the concerns of larger and smaller nations, and not to deny the larger members of this alliance their rightfully influential say.

We second the proposal from Droskianishk regarding the vice-chairman position, and wonder if this might help allay the concerns of some smaller nations.

With regard to the military council, while attempting to avoid arrogance I would nonetheless like to propose New Manth as a member. We keep a very large military for our size and spend a good deal of effort keeping up to date on international happenings (OOC: I glance over most MT military threads here).

I vote in favor of the Vice Chairman. I also would wish to be on the military council, along with a few other members.

OoC: Perhaps the Military Council should be rotational with only one or at most two permanant members?

I think if the Council includes everybody that wants a seat it'll be too cumbersome and if it doesn't and retains the permanant aspect people may get irritated/Council may be used as a political shield/tool instead of trying to do what is best for COMECON.

What do you guys think?

OOC: I figure it should be a small number, 4-5 maybe, and split between large and small nations? If there's more than that number of candidates we can just vote.

Droskianishk would like to see those members of COMECON who wish to be members of a 'Security Council' present their war records to all members of COMECON, so that the entire body (General Assembly or GA) can vote as to which members they would like to see in that council based on the responsibility and succesfulness of those nations. We also believe that there sould be a set number of nations on the Council, 6, with two Co-Chairmans one being a 5 vote and under nation and the other being a 6 vote and over nation (All nations when voting 'in council' or 'in committee' only have one vote in the committee) and in case of a tie vote the Chairman of COMECON casts the deciding vote.

Prince Nikako Kutz of Droskianishk

OOC: I figure it should be a small number, 4-5 maybe, and split between large and small nations? If there's more than that number of candidates we can just vote.

OOC: I agree. 5 nations, 3 big, 2 small. I wish to be on it, and am pretty darn active, so I think I would be a good addition.

OoC: Perhaps the Military Council should be rotational with only one or at most two permanant members?

I think if the Council includes everybody that wants a seat it'll be too cumbersome and if it doesn't and retains the permanant aspect people may get irritated/Council may be used as a political shield/tool instead of trying to do what is best for COMECON.

What do you guys think?

OOC: I agree. Also, Vetalia, could you change my name to Greater Honakon, as I am representing my whole region.

The Greater Honakon representative stood up to make his votes:

"In regards to the candidates, we again wish to state that we will not stand for Chairman and support Sergei Antropov of Vetalia's wish to be become leader of the organization.

As for the proposal by Kamp to change the rules for voting on the issue of how many votes each nation has to one vote per nation, we would like to express our support, and say YES to this issue. Though, currently, as for Lifesblood suggestion, we wish to ABSTAIN.

Currently we also wish to voice our support, and say YES to issue #5. However, we are currently undecided on which of the two last issues to vote yes, and which to vote no."

Droskianishk would like to see those members of COMECON who wish to be members of a 'Security Council' present their war records to all members of COMECON, so that the entire body (General Assembly or GA) can vote as to which members they would like to see in that council based on the responsibility and succesfulness of those nations. We also believe that there sould be a set number of nations on the Council, 6, with two Co-Chairmans one being a 5 vote and under nation and the other being a 6 vote and over nation (All nations when voting 'in council' or 'in committee' only have one vote in the committee) and in case of a tie vote the Chairman of COMECON casts the deciding vote.

Prince Nikako Kutz of Droskianishk
Although we will be flexible regarding the precise composition of the Military Council, we agree that a split in the Co-Chairmans would be good to ensure at least a minimum level of representation for both small and large nations. Being interested in the council and agreeing that war record should play a vital role, we offer this summary of our military record proper; excluding certain skirmishes which were truly peripheral and bear not mention.

Strator War
War (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518037)
First Anti-Slavery Innocence Summit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=518830)
Second (Daniel G. Pearce) Anti-Slavery Innocence Summit (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=520934)

Circum-Zansk War
Zanski Theater of Operations (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=519573)
Other Operations (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=521350)

The Fighting Stars Wars
First (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=521428)
Second (theoretically ongoing, but no actual combat as yet...) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=526490)

Hatarian Blockade Crisis
Blockade (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=526209)
Aid Effort (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=526500)

We abstain for now.

OOC: Just a way of me saying I missed alot.

I've read your responses, but I have to go to class so I can't update the information or respond in depth just let. Unfortunately, the lab's a good three hours long so I won't be back until then.

We'd also like to express our support for the 'Vice-Chariman' proposal brought forth by Droskianishk. Although, we would need to define exactly what their responsibilities would be not just for the Vice-Chairman but also the Chairman.

We support the Vetalian as the leader.

I also want to propose a standard assault rifle cartridge to make COMECON-SD warfare more efficent. Ammo commonality will also make fighting togther easier as we wouldn't have to worry about differences. The cartridge I propose for standardisation is the 6.7x53mm Imperial cartridge manufactured by Doomingsland Defense Industries:

Drawing on experience from both the DR-31 and DR-78, designers and Doomingsland Defense Industries put together a round that would have managable recoil but superior kinetic energy and knockdown power. The result of this was a blending between cartrages: the 6.7x53mm Imperial cartrage. Standard issue cartrages use a 135-grain bullet. While it is more than twice as heavy as the 5.56x45mm NATO cartrage, it is still light enough to allow for superb kinetic energy from the long case, which is acualy a shortened, necked down 7.8x63mm case.

Using advanced quick burning powder and superb ignition with a steel case, the 6.7mm cartrage's combination of weight and kinetic energy produces what the Empire sees as the perfect round: excellent range, excellent penetration, excellent terminal performance. This allows for the penetration of body armor at long ranges while maintaining awsome knockdown power. When used in close quarters, the 6.7mm cartrage is positively deadly, piercing most body armor and dropping men with a single hit. When used in two-round burst, a kill is almost assured.

In order to penetrate armor and put down an enemy soldier, DDI designers came up with a blended metal bullet for the new 6.7mm cartrage. While this round is seen to have questionable results by some nation's militaries, blended metal rounds have served the Empire well through multiple wars with distinction, effectively penetrating body armor and causing horrific wounds.

I think that Aurum Domus brings up a good point. Many military alliances have proposed similar agreements with the purpose of diminishing logistical burdens and are considered vital logistics enablers by providing military commanders increased interoperability with allies and enhanced operational readiness.

We will not Standardize our military equipment to the standards set by this alliance. As such we will not refrain from helping nations in need with Equipment and Ammo.

We'd also like to express our support for the 'Vice-Chariman' proposal brought forth by Droskianishk. Although, we would need to define exactly what their responsibilities would be not just for the Vice-Chairman but also the Chairman.

Agreed.

I also want to propose a standard assault rifle cartridge to make COMECON-SD warfare more efficent. Ammo commonality will also make fighting togther easier as we wouldn't have to worry about differences. The cartridge I propose for standardisation is the 6.7x53mm Imperial cartridge manufactured by Doomingsland Defense Industries:

We vote nay to this. Unless Aurum Domus wishes to pay for our militaries refit, we will not change.

Alright, I'm back. I'm going to get to work updating the proposals and everything.

Kampfers, in regard to ammunition standards, I believe that we can use money from the COMECON general fund for this purpose. However, I'd need to see some cost figures for how much it would take to retrofit our forces to use standard weaponry. We can't afford to break the bank for such a proposal.

We vote yes for all of the new issues except for the military retrofit, which we will abstain from until we have cost estimates for retrofitting our forces.

Droskianishk does not believe in the forced conversion of technologies whether or not they are paid for, however the open sharing of such technology with the decision left up to the sovereign governments of those nations is suitable.

[OOC: Whoops. It appears my phenomenal amount of activity has caused me to miss the opening of this thread. >.<]

With a look of utmost contriteness Tam Azuki pulled out his chair, glancing at the assembled delegates. "I apologise for my inexcusable lateness. Our flight was unfortunately grounded, due to an unseasonable snowstorm."

As the disturbance caused by his entrance subsided and the panel returned to normal discussion, Azuki settled into his seat; an aide presented him with a sheet of paper, and he skimmed through it, then read through it more carefully and thoughtfully began to mark it in neat strokes with his breast-pocket pen. Raising his head sharply, he listened for a break in the discussion; when it came he rose to his feet once more.

"Tam Azuki of Mauvasia."

"Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a few remarks to make on Mauvasia's position on the issues this council is currently discussing.

3. The nation of Kampfers wishes to reform the voting system to create a "one nation, one vote" policy in regard to voting on electoral system reform. On issues designated for the electoral system, each nation will receive one vote regardless of population.
"Mauvasia supports this policy; there is no reason a nation should be given essentially veto power over the council simply due to its increased population or economic strength. Some may say we are foolish to do this; but I believe if the principles were explained to the Mauvasian Senate or Grand Congress, they would be in full agreement with my assessment.


5. Adding a vote of no confidence provision to allow the council to remove the chairman of the COMECON and mandate elections for a new one. Each nation is invited to propose how they would structure the vote, and we will vote to choose the best proposal.

-Vetalia submits that a vote of no confidence requires a 66% majority vote to pass in order to ensure that a potential chairman veto is overridden.
Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 14
No: 0
"Is this under the currently extant system, or under one of the proposed system? If it is under the current system, Mauvasia votes in favour; but if proposal 3 passes, Mauvasia will vote against. Therefore, we will abstain for now.

6. Drafting a proposal to remove members from the organization:

Vetalia's proposal is to have nations inform the chairman that the feel another member is doing something illegal, and the chairman will call a meeting to place the offender before the rest of the community to defend themselves. After they have had a chance to plead their case, the community will vote and a 66% majority vote (using proportional rather than the one-vote system) will result in them being banned for a week. Two bans will result in permanent expulsion.

Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 9
No:0
"Mauvasia's vote is cast in favour.


Dai Yuddha Ossyria's proposal is to kick out any member which may lead this alliance into "foolish wars", defined and to weed out inactive members. Perhaps organizing a system where a inactive member is put on probation until removal, and for belligerent nations who lead this alliance into wars which would not serve the greater good of all members."

Votes for the DYO proposal:
Yes: 4
No:0
"Mauvasia abstains.

"Thank you."

Azuki sat back down.

OOC: WOOT, post 901!!!! Hey whatever happened to the proposal for a military council to inform COMECON of the current wars?

OOC: WOOT, post 901!!!! Hey whatever happened to the proposal for a military council to inform COMECON of the current wars?

OOC: I think we're still in the process of forming said Military Council haha.

I also want to propose a standard assault rifle cartridge to make COMECON-SD warfare more efficent. Ammo commonality will also make fighting togther easier as we wouldn't have to worry about differences. The cartridge I propose for standardisation is the 6.7x53mm Imperial cartridge manufactured by Doomingsland Defense Industries:

After a few moments of conferring with his superiors via some sort of text-messaging system, Azuki looked up. "Mauvasia votes nay. Not only would this proposal incur a great deal of extra expence that Mauvasia cannot afford at the present time, but we have moral objections to purchasing from a corporation that also offers monetary and political support to the Imperial Doomani government."

Alright, I updated it as much as possible. If I missed anything, mention it and I'll edit it.

1. Nominating candidates to elect the first permanent chairman- (nominate candidates here, elections will occur in another thread.)

-Sergei Antropov, Vetalia

2. Reforming the voting system of the COMECON:
The nation of Lifesblood wishes to adjust the voting system to set a minimum of 2 votes and a maximum of 10 votes for any nation, with voting rights based on population.

-VOTING DEFERRED UNTIL ISSUE 3 IS VOTED ON-

3. The nation of Kampfers wishes to reform the voting system to create a "one nation, one vote" policy in regard to voting on electoral system reform. On issues designated for the electoral system, each nation will receive one vote regardless of population.

By order of the Chairman, this vote will go by the 1 nation-1 vote policy.

Yes:8
No: 1

4. Voting on admitting new members to the COMECON, if any new applications come in

-We would like to welcome Greater Honakon, Mauvasia, and Droskianishk to the organization.

-New applicants can submit an application here.

5. Adding a vote of no confidence provision to allow the council to remove the chairman of the COMECON and mandate elections for a new one. Each nation is invited to propose how they would structure the vote, and we will vote to choose the best proposal.

-Vetalia submits that a vote of no confidence requires a 66% majority vote to pass in order to ensure that a potential chairman veto is overridden.

Votes for the Vetalian proposal:

Yes: 41
No: 0
Abstain: 11

6. Drafting a proposal to remove members from the organization:

Vetalia's proposal is to have nations inform the chairman that the feel another member is doing something illegal, and the chairman will call a meeting to place the offender before the rest of the community to defend themselves. After they have had a chance to plead their case, the community will vote and a 66% majority vote (using proportional rather than the one-vote system) will result in them being banned for a week. Two bans will result in permanent expulsion.

Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 40
No: 0
Abstain: 5

Dai Yuddha Ossyria's proposal is to kick out any member which may lead this alliance into "foolish wars", defined and to weed out inactive members. Perhaps organizing a system where a inactive member is put on probation until removal, and for belligerent nations who lead this alliance into wars which would not serve the greater good of all members."

Votes for the DYO proposal:
Yes: 33
No: 0
Abstain: 11

7. Creating a permanent advisory council to the organization to keep up to date on international events. There are several proposals for this system:

-A council consisting of 5 members, 3 large and two small nations, that would perform advisory and strategic analysis for the COMECON and advise the chairman on whether or not to convene the larger security council.

Votes for: 33

-A 6 member council with two chairman nations that would posess additional votes, 6 for the over nation and 5 for the under nation.
Votes for:0

8. Creating a vice chairman position and elaborating the powers of the chairman.
Yes: 33
No: 0

9. Implementing standardized military ammunition for all COMECON forces and authorizing the general fund to help pay the cost for nations unable to afford a retrofit.
Yes: 7
No: 29
Abstain: 9

Honako, your nation has been redesignated Greater Honakon as per your request. New vote allocations for the bloc will be done at the next meeting.

OOC: WOOT, post 901!!!! Hey whatever happened to the proposal for a military council to inform COMECON of the current wars?

It's in the works still. Once voting's done, we'll have yet another thread to elect members for the security council. And then it will be time to discuss the first draft of the COMECON constitution, which will hopefully be ready by Monday depending on the kind of work I need to do this weekend.

The Maraquean delegation once again arrived late, causing yet another slight disruption.

Kahtana stood up when the room was silent.

"Sorry once again for our late arrival. If I may, I shall now list our votes..."

3. The nation of Kampfers wishes to reform the voting system to create a "one nation, one vote" policy in regard to voting on electoral system reform. On issues designated for the electoral system, each nation will receive one vote regardless of population.

Maraque votes yea on this proposal.

5. Adding a vote of no confidence provision to allow the council to remove the chairman of the COMECON and mandate elections for a new one. Each nation is invited to propose how they would structure the vote, and we will vote to choose the best proposal.

-Vetalia submits that a vote of no confidence requires a 66% majority vote to pass in order to ensure that a potential chairman veto is overridden.
Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 14
No: 0

Maraque votes yea on this proposal.

6. Drafting a proposal to remove members from the organization:

Vetalia's proposal is to have nations inform the chairman that the feel another member is doing something illegal, and the chairman will call a meeting to place the offender before the rest of the community to defend themselves. After they have had a chance to plead their case, the community will vote and a 66% majority vote (using proportional rather than the one-vote system) will result in them being banned for a week. Two bans will result in permanent expulsion.

Votes for the Vetalian proposal:
Yes: 9
No:0

Maraque votes yea on this proposal.

Dai Yuddha Ossyria's proposal is to kick out any member which may lead this alliance into "foolish wars", defined and to weed out inactive members. Perhaps organizing a system where a inactive member is put on probation until removal, and for belligerent nations who lead this alliance into wars which would not serve the greater good of all members."

Votes for the DYO proposal:
Yes: 4
No:0

Maraque votes yea on this proposal.

I also want to propose a standard assault rifle cartridge to make COMECON-SD warfare more efficent. Ammo commonality will also make fighting togther easier as we wouldn't have to worry about differences. The cartridge I propose for standardisation is the 6.7x53mm Imperial cartridge manufactured by Doomingsland Defense Industries

Maraque votes nay on this proposal.

"Thank you." He sat down.

Jean-Baptiste de Nompère, promoted to représentant permanent du Lachenbourg auprès de COMECON-SD in the wake of his successful representation of the Grand Duchy during the previous assembly of members, brooded silently in the background of the emerging situation, listening intently to the proceedings as before. Adjusting his coat, he let loose the occasional sigh as his team of hand-picked translators continued to relay the unfolding dialogue to the vanilla ear-piece attached to the right-side of his head.

Taking a moment to record his thoughts on the yellow pad of college-ruled paper on the desk below, he slowly stood to submit his nation's collective judgment.

"Monsieur président d'un comité," Nompère began, his translator, a rather portly gentleman clad in a ill-fitting grey suit, following each phrase with its English equivalent. "Upon further deliberation of the proposals submitted to this very council, it is the collective judgment of my superiors and I that the following decisions be made."

"As stated previously, His Royal Highness sees no need in the further alteration in the appropriation of voting power amongst the Community. Thus, in relation to proposals two and three, the Grand Duchy votes 'nay.' Nevertheless, shall the consensus move in favor of either alteration, our Government shall gladly assist in finalization of any remaining details."

"Provided additional information as to the process of such procedures can be elaborated upon, the Grand Duchy of Lachenburg shall vote in favour of proposals five, six, and seven. As to the creation of a 'Vice-Chairman' position within the Community, our Government moves to abstain until the duties and responsibilities of said position have been enumerated upon."

"In conclusion, although my Government understands the need of logistical efficiency during times of war amongst nations bound by military pact, we feel that this position should be of a voluntary nature so as to not infringe upon the sovereignty of member states. Otherwise, Lachenburg votes 'nay.'"

With a cordial Merci, Nompère returned to his seat, awaiting the response of his fellow delegates.

"We thank Mr. de Nompère and his associates for contributing to the democratic process. Your votes have been noted, and we appreciate your participation in our organization." Antropov looked around, watching the meeting continue as planned. Things were going well, a rarity in international affairs.

3. The nation of Kampfers wishes to reform the voting system to create a "one nation, one vote" policy in regard to voting on electoral system reform. On issues designated for the electoral system, each nation will receive one vote regardless of population.

"We support this proposal; we do not want larger nations to be able to impose their will on smaller ones."

5. Adding a vote of no confidence provision to allow the council to remove the chairman of the COMECON and mandate elections for a new one. Each nation is invited to propose how they would structure the vote, and we will vote to choose the best proposal.

"We agree with the Vetalian representative."

6. Drafting a proposal to remove members from the organization:

"I was under the impression we were not obliged to intervene if one of our number were the aggressor; I see no reason to remove them for that. However, if they do not contribute, then a removal vote may be in order."

7. Creating a permanent advisory council to the organization to keep up to date on international events.

"Can you clarify on when a 'small' nation becomes a 'large' one? The terminology is quite subjective."

8. Creating a vice chairman position and elaborating the powers of the chairman.

"We are indeed supportive of such an idea."

9. Implementing standardized military ammunition for all COMECON forces and authorizing the general fund to help pay the cost for nations unable to afford a retrofit.

"For ideological reasons, we will not use Doomani ammunition."

"Thank you for voting. We have updated the totals accordingly.

In regard to your question, the split between large and small nations will likely be a population of 1 billion, since this is the current qualifier for veto power on the security council."

His Grace, Prince Nikako Kutz of Droskianishk rises to be recognized.

"The representative from Droskianishk is recognized"

I have just finished a brief conversation with my brother, King Kutz and the following have been agreed.

1. Since this was Vetalia's plan to form the COMECON, we believe that by all rights the Chairmanship should belong to them, as long as they should not abuse this position. However it may be to COMECON's advantage to have the Chairman not be part of the Vetalian delegation to the COMECON, perhaps a past president or something would be the best Chairman of COMECON. Before the voting on and seating of a Chairman however, we would like to have the powers of the Chairman set in stone.

3. Droskianishk votes yea.

5. Droskianishk votes yea.

6. Droskianishk abstains, supporting the first notion but the second is rather vague, we must determine what decides the greater good, the security council, or a general assembly vote or chairman, etc.

7. On this Droskianishk wishes to elaborate its position. The size of the committe or council doesn't matter, but the committee should act as the Security Council voting on what issues the Chairman WILL bring before the greater assembly. This Council should have a 1 nation 1 vote policy so that larger nations intrests do not mobilize smaller nations militaries. We would like the delegations to consider that the number of smaller and the number of larger nations in the committe should be equal in numbers, and there should be Co-Chairman nations of the committee (one a 5 vote and under nation or small, and one a 6 vote and over large nation.), in case of a tie the Chairman, should be given by the general assembly, will cast the tie breaking vote of whether or not the issue should be brought before the general assembly. Droskianishk also believes that no matter the proposal adopted both should include as the voting process the review of the military (war) records of all self nominated nations.

8. Votes yes pending that the chairman shall be chosen from a nation with 6 votes or more and the vice-chairman from a nation with 5 votes or less. And the powers or both are elaborated.

9. votes no but suggests that the free exchange of technology be encouraged.

"Yes, the Vetalian delegation notes that there are some potential conflicts of interest in regard to our dual membership and leadership role. That is why we want to create a vice chairmanship, to give another nation some contribution in the executive branch."

"Your votes have been noted. We thank the delegation from Droskianishk for their contribution."

OOC: Droskianishk, I've noted your input on the council, and once it passes I'll discuss it further with you because I like that structure.

OOC: Alright TG me or just write it on here I check this every day about 1:30 pm EST- 3pm EST, and tommorrows my last day of work this week till Tuesday so I'll check every day during the weekend.

7. On this Droskianishk wishes to elaborate its position. The size of the committe or council doesn't matter, but the committee should act as the Security Council voting on what issues the Chairman WILL bring before the greater assembly. This Council should have a 1 nation 1 vote policy so that larger nations intrests do not mobilize smaller nations militaries. We would like the delegations to consider that the number of smaller and the number of larger nations in the committe should be equal in numbers, and there should be Co-Chairman nations of the committee (one a 5 vote and under nation or small, and one a 6 vote and over large nation.), in case of a tie the Chairman, should be given by the general assembly, will cast the tie breaking vote of whether or not the issue should be brought before the general assembly. Droskianishk also believes that no matter the proposal adopted both should include as the voting process the review of the military (war) records of all self nominated nations.


OOC: Well, i dont think they should be the security council, but advisors to them.

OOC: bump?

I don't think I mentioned this before, but we also support Antropov as Chairman.

Noted. We've still got until midnight tomorrow for further voting and discussion, and then after that it's closed. Hopefully, I'll have a working constitution by Monday.

The Leocardian delegate arrives to the meeting late.

"Another new meeting?"