Declined | Removal of Levels of Membership

I move that we abolish the positions of Ambassadorial Member, Full Member, and BAT Member on the grounds that these roles no longer serve in their intended purpose.

At present we have seven full members: Grand Aescail, Loftindor, Prisharovia, Sukoyria, Tatra, Utrova, and Viatica. Of these, two are second nations owned by Full Members, Three others are nations very capable of becoming Full Members, and the last is currently being replaced by another which is looking as if it will very easily become a Full Member. As for the role of BAT member, we have had one in our history of the position who is now in another union and it is not likely he will be returning. As a result, we have one nearly pointless position, and another completely pointless position.

If passed, all members excluding Observers would become Members. Observership will not be affected.

So, what "type of member" would Loftindor be if this were to pass?

everyone would become simply a "member", whoops, wrote that in earlier but rewrote some of it and accidently omitted that part

So there would be members and admins?

Pretty much yes, and Observers.

Oh, that idea's pretty good.

I don't support this. I mean i get your idea. The levels are based off who can run for office to. If a person is new, personally they arent fit to run for high office, which makes sense for ambassadorial membership to build their understanding of the union and how we work

Yes they could be able to run for High Office but do you think they would run or much less be voted in? Besides, I'm pretty sure we have regulations in place that say that members cant run for office for X number of months regardless.

Which is directly related to membership...

The regulations that I am talking about have nothing to do with membership, but are located in an entirely different section. In the Charter, If you read Chapter Two (The Executive Cabinet) Section 1. b. iii., section 1. c. iii, section 1. d. iii, and section 2. e. you'll notice that in order for anyone to become an executive they have to be a member for five months or to be a minister a member for three months, and if someone were to come along who wanted to run for office with no experience, I doubt the union as a whole would vote them in regardless, and if they do then there's obviously a reason the entire union has done so. It's not really directly related to membership.

I also oppose, but for a little bit of a different reason. Frankly, there is no real difference between Ambassadorial and Full Members except that the full members can run for office and that their names are different colors. Ambassadorial Member status are for people "getting used to" the union and improving city journal skills, that's it. Full Member status is for those who have a CJ up to the quality standards of other full members and who have the knowledge of politics here to be able to run. Full Member status in this union is a privilege, not a right, and I believe it should stay that way.

I won't disagree with your reasoning but seeing as it's acting more as a right than a privilege at this point, that us why I'm arguing it's as good done away with as it is kept in place.

Again i highly disagree will. K50 hit it on the nose. Full membership is privilege, and honor for your peers to give you that status. Just because we disagreed with your reasons to vote ambassadorial in the application earlier doesnt mean you need to go appeal for a bill to remove all levels of membership.

It's not just that, I was starting to post this before you had replied there.

Very well then. Just don't expect my vote on this. I don't think its needed to remove all this

alright, to each their own.

I'm personally against this, for the reasons K50 brought up.

I agree.

"Observership" to be welcomed into the community and learn the basics.
"Membership" to be included in all aspects of the union.
"Admin" to run the place.

Simplifying things makes life easier.

I was just about to propose this but then I saw it here... Obviously I support Will here being only one of two active ambassadorial members.

I honestly, after some thought...will support this bill.

I support this. There aren't very many active ambassadorial members, anymore; so it probably won't make a big difference.

I think I support this, I mean there weren't that much ambassadorial members

I'll support it, but only if we distinguish between observers that are on Adonia, and observers that may come in the future who aren't on the planet.

that would be kinda like distinguishing between members who run for a ministry and those who don't. It's within their rights to be on this planet, but they may just not wish to exercise it. or like being on the Skype Chat.

I suggest making a new topic for this and lay out the ideas you wish to propose will