[BILL] The Rejected Times Act

[Gorundu]

Here's an alternative legislative proposal which I hope will be more acceptable to everyone. I have incorporated bits from all proposed solutions so far, but the structure is mainly from Guy's.

The Rejected Times Act

1. The Rejected Times, as in existence prior to this Act, continues to be constituted in accordance with this Act.

2. The Rejected Times' mission is to report on events occurring in the Rejected Realms and outside it that are relevant to the NationStates community, and in particular to the Gameplay community, and to provide a range of views about those events.

3. The Rejected Times is published by the Rejected Realms, through its government.

4. The Rejected Times is guaranteed editorial independence from the government of the Rejected Realms.

5. The Rejected Times is led by the Editor-in-Chief, who has the responsibility to maintain a record of staff members, accept new staff, oversee regular publication, guide the editorial direction of The Rejected Times, and ensure its factual accuracy in a manner consistent with its mission.

6. The Editor-in-Chief serves six-month terms. A selection process shall begin immediately after the passage of this Act.

• A. The selection of an Editor-in-Chief shall begin with a nomination period of 4 days open to the staff of The Rejected Times, who may nominate any staff member for the position.
• B. Any nominated member must be seconded to become a candidate.
• C. The Delegate must choose a candidate to present to the Assembly for confirmation.
• D. The Assembly must hold a confirmation vote for the Delegate, which requires a majority vote to confirm.
• E. If the Assembly fails to confirm a candidate, the Delegate must choose another candidate. If all candidates fail to be confirmed, the Delegate may present any citizen to the Assembly for confirmation.
• F. The Assembly may remove an Editor-in-Chief from office by majority vote.
• G. If the position of Editor-in-Chief becomes vacant for any reason, the Delegate may assume the duties or appoint a staff of The Rejected Times as Acting Editor-in-Chief. A selection process must begin immediately for a new six-month term.

This bill is written with the assumption that we will not have a Media Officer from now on. I'm not entirely sure what is to be the fate of Rejected Radio. It was created by TRT, but it's not nearly as important as TRT, so I'm not sure if it should be afforded the same status. I suppose any mention of TRT could be replaced with TRRMC (The Rejected Realms Media Corporation) to include Rejected Radio in it.

The reason for the selection process I introduced for Editor-in-Chief is that I believe it gives all sides (Delegate, Assembly, and TRT staff) some say in the process. It also takes relatively little time compared to what CoS has proposed, which was essentially a full election plus another confirmation. Of course, this is all subject to change based on feedback.

[thechurchofsatan]

1.) I'm sure this was entirely predictable but I'm opposed to this part specifically because it isn't a constitutional amendment.

2.) This regulates the content TRT is allowed to write which is entirely not agreeable.

5.) This reduces the number of management positions in TRT by two to just the Editor-in-Chief. It would make the management more likely to be overwhelmed during periods of high activity.

6A-6E.) You might as well just skip to delegate appointment. No matter who's nominated it's still up to the delegate and ultimately it ends up specifically disregarding the staff's voice entirely by just saying "Well let's give anybody the job."

6F.) This is actually the one part I like about your proposal. Gonna add that to mine.

6G.) I don't hate it. That's the best I can say about it.

[Gorundu]

1.) I'm sure this was entirely predictable but I'm opposed to this part specifically because it isn't a constitutional amendment.

2.) This regulates the content TRT is allowed to write which is entirely not agreeable.

5.) This reduces the number of management positions in TRT by two to just the Editor-in-Chief. It would make the management more likely to be overwhelmed during periods of high activity.

6A-6E.) You might as well just skip to delegate appointment. No matter who's nominated it's still up to the delegate and ultimately it ends up specifically disregarding the staff's voice entirely by just saying "Well let's give anybody the job."

6F.) This is actually the one part I like about your proposal. Gonna add that to mine.

6G.) I don't hate it. That's the best I can say about it.

2) That's been TRT's mission since its founding, and the clause essentially has no effect anyway besides being a mission statement. I nicked it off Guy.

5) Nothing says the Editor-in-Chief can't appoint a deputy or similar if they need to. Not everything has to be legislated.

The rest I've already stated my opinion on in other places and vehemently disagree with you, so there's no point addressing them.

[thechurchofsatan]

2.) Codifying it into law that way will indeed have an effect. It makes it so TRT can only write about what's going on in gameplay. And for WA proposals it restricts TRT to SC resolutions because GA resolutions aren't relevant to GP. What if someone wanted to write about something going on in one of the roleplay areas of the NS forums?

5.) The deputy speaker of this very Assembly is legislated and has been for just under nine years now. So there is precedent for regulating deputies.

[Guy]

Unsurprisingly, I think this is the best attempt so far.

Clause 2 would not mean you can’t write on GA proposals. If it’s of interest to the readership, which is recognised as being NS at large, then it can go in. You’re entirely misreading the clause, which is about what TRT should strive for. I think any regulating statute that doesn’t have a similar clause isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

If the government is to be the publisher of TRT, then of course it can withhold publication of harmful / potentially rule-breaking / unlawful material etc because the responsibility lies with it.

[thechurchofsatan]

Of course then we have to define what it means by "harmful". Harmful to the government's agenda? It's reputation? It's policies on corn subsides? Such phrasing is dangerously vague.

[Deadeye Jack]

Honestly Andrew I see what Grim is saying when you make a whole new process for trying to get the TRT Staff to nominate people, then the Delegate picks someone, then the Assembly has to confirm. It's kind of convoluted. I would just change the election mechanism to what is essentially an Officer election where you must be on TRT Staff to be a candidate. Then the Assembly basically is picking the candidate from people who have some TRT experience and want the position.

Since the Assembly got to pick who was elected then we wouldn't even need a confirmation or recall vote. We could just leave the challenge provision in. That way the EiC wouldn't necessarily have to look over their shoulder for every article they publish but would potentially be open to challenge if they went too far outside of what the citizenry wanted. You could even make the EiC term indefinite unless the EiC resigns or is challenged.