Military judge panel thingy

Whaleboy · June 19, 2003, 10:21

I propose that we have a body that looks at nations, what they have said about their nations (preferably on a specific national thread as well as NS, otherwise, just NS), and compares it to the militaries they have posted.

If there are inconsistencies, for example, an army consisting of 3% of the population (0.8% being v.militaristic w/ lame economy), a navy consisting of 400 battleships, airforce having 650'000 planes and a population of 100 million, we can PM that person and request they change their post, and failing that, we can publish the inconsistencies, with modified figures for people to use.

It will serve to prevent nations having gargantuen militaries that are completely disproportionate to the capabilities of that nation, while still allowing those nations to possess unique technology and differences. The other "credit" based system would stifle such innovation.

It would appear that for such a thing to work, only people with scientific, technical and economic backgrounds should be part of this, as determining militaries for nations requires grounding in these fields.

As such, I personally feel that three good choices would be Drogue (Economics), UR (has posted some very technically accurate posts) and myself (almost obsessive love of the scientific). The three of us all have well thought out militaries that our nations would be able to sustain.

However, other people may also have soemthing to bring to this idea, so could all wannabe judges post here or PM me, and tell me what you can bring in respect to the three required fields. After that, I shall make a poll of all serious applications (i.e. not lay people and not disproportionate military), and the three people with the most votes will become the first judges.

Archaic · June 19, 2003, 10:27

I would be putting myself forward as a judge on economics (You'd need a Free Marketer to balance Drogue's socialism at least. ^^; ). I don't think we should limit ourselves to one judge for any section either, just so no one can possibily claim the judge was biased against him.

In any case, I suppose you need my qualifications? 2nd year student of International Business at the Queensland University of Technology, with a specialty in the Japanese Language, and with a bias towards Politics, Ethics, and Economics subjets (Simply because they're far more interesting to me than more dry subjects such as Export Management, International Currency Markets, etc)

Whaleboy · June 19, 2003, 10:32

Ok, fair enough, perhaps a max of 4 or 5?

I dont want it to get too big, because of practical concerns, too many people will probably get too cumbersome. We'll see how it goes with regards to people applying here on this thread, I'll give it more consideration if there are many serious applicants.

Theres always the possibility of electing new judges every few months or so.

Drogue · June 19, 2003, 15:36

Archaic: I am no socialist. I am firmly a Free Market espouser. Although I'm no Monetarist, I am no Keynesian either. I just want environmental concerns shown too.

I agree with having Archaic as a Judge, but I think we should have a panel of 5 (majority rule of 3 needed) and that we should vote from all who apply. We need at least 1 economic and 1 technical people, but that will happen with 5 judges.

I agree with elijah and UR too.

Whaleboy · June 19, 2003, 18:26

Well I need UR to post here or PM me to confirm, so I can add to the poll, which I'll do on Saturday.

Thus far, its myself, Archaic, and I presume Drogue?

Jack_www · June 19, 2003, 18:56

This is interesting idea. I know elijah thinks that my millitary is overstated. As far as men that I have in I dont think so, but in terms of tank I do have too many. Jackson is coming up with a new tank and will sell off the old ones and replace them with new ones but not so many though. Also if you need more judges and no one else steps foward I would like to be one.

Whaleboy · June 19, 2003, 19:03

I wont speak for the project before its members are elected, but when that does happen, and looking at your nations, the modifications we propose will not be that severe, but we shall give that matter closer inspection.

Upon your military changing to a reasonable level (I believe that posting a "markscheme" set of standards for militaries would be a good idea as the first thing we do), then you will be eligible for election to this position and would surely make a welcome addition.

Whaleboy · June 19, 2003, 19:06

(ooc for some reason it wont let me edit, the servers seem to be running rather slow, so I cant tack this bit on /occ)

If you wish, PM me about it, giving stats about your nation (population, economy and tax rate), and I can give you a rough and dirty guide to your a reasonable military.

I'm making the poll on Saturday, so if you catch me before then, and then make the modifications, you can run in the election.

Urban Ranger · June 19, 2003, 22:39

Quote:

Originally posted by elijah
Well I need UR to post here or PM me to confirm, so I can add to the poll, which I'll do on Saturday.

Thus far, its myself, Archaic, and I presume Drogue?

[OOC]
How come things happen when I am sleeping or doing something else? You guys watch me or something?

[/OOC]

Yeah, I am willing to be part of the panel. Since I am a Keynesian, I get to balance out the two Free Marketers somewhat.

Sheep · June 19, 2003, 23:44

Just letting you now if Archaic is a judge, I will either ask for judge status myself, or disregard him in all respects. This is due to a bias I feel will be there.

I am a socialist so I put myself forward as a economic judge. As for my credintials (as Archaic gave his) I hold a Bachelor of International Relations and a Bachelor of Communications majoring in not only in economics, but also journalism. I am currently finnishing a Masters in International Relations due to finnish in two weeks. (Of course I am young for this, but I finnished school two and a half years earlier than normal). My GPA was an average 6.015, which is on a scale on 7.

Of course with limited time due to me finnishing my masters, this is why I seem to rush my posts. Also without the aid of spell checking my atroucuios typing makes the spelling suffer. Hell but I suppose Arahic wont be calling me an idiot or dumb anymore.

Sorry mate, like I said be careful what you say to others and not everything is what it seems.

Archaic · June 20, 2003, 00:35

I'm going to call you for bullshit on that one Sheep. Assuming you finished school 2 1/2 years early, that means you've had at most 4 years in University. (Your birthdate's in your profile. It killed your arguement.) Even if you went unit overloads for the whole time, a duel degree in what you listed (Which is an Arts degree, not a Business degree, and so while you could have done some business subjects like politics, etc, an economics subject would've been outside your standard units, and therefore an elective, not actually part of your main course) takes 3 years at the quickest pace. A Masters by coursework is not completed in a single year either.

And of course, this is Griffith you're going to. A 7 there's barely worth a 4 at QUT, given the massive gap between the abilities of the business faculties. Here's a tip, look at your textbooks for the business subjects. Half of them would've been written by the lecturers I study under.

As for being careful with what you say to others......you have no idea how ironic that statement is. A wind of change is blowing Sheep, and from tonight, you are going to get quite the shock. For one who supposedly has all those degrees, it's a bit pathetic that I could be such a better diplomat than you, and get the court on side to make legal the coalition blockade.

Sheep · June 20, 2003, 00:50

On the country. Most of my 'units' called courses at Griffith are economical or political based. I have been doing eight courses twice the needed level for two years. I am nearing completion of my masters. Of course QUT is a better university, but it full of stuck up *****es and snobs. I feel sorry for you having to go with those frigid wastes.

Anyway, the reason I chose to go to Griffith, was because not only has both my mother and father attended there, it also offerefd the best scholarship. My masters is a thesis based masters, that if I want too could lead straight to phD studies.

Although I may take a year off see the world, do some work so I can earn a bit of spendings, and generally have fun. Thats the diffrence about you and me. I am smart, don;t advertise it and don;t really need too. Meanwhile I am having fun coasting through uni (probs could do a lot better if I actually tried) and running amok. You, I bet apart from the computer time, you don;t actually leave the books.

Have you ever though I am playing a character as Field Marshall Dunning and that I feel rp is supposed to be played charactefully. Perhaps I could be somewhat more diplomatic, but why? I am a dictatorial regime which does not get along with you. We don;t declare war straight out but don;t love you either.

I fail to see where you sould get the court to side with you. However I will congratulate you if you can.

If I may use IR terminology for a second. Youyr governments are always far-right based, cpaitlaist regimes based on the theory of realism. In other words 'might is the only acto in the international arena, and if I am stronger than you you have to do what I say'

My current regime in Sheepsta is leftist. anti-coporate, co-operative on most matters. I base myself on the theories of internationalism, globalism and interdependence. My general belief while bit left-field is that sovereignty in the real world will not last for more than another century or two. Globalisation already is passing from purely economic terms to political, cultural and other affects.

Now this is not to say I agree with it or not, this is what I feel will happen. Sheepsta is a nation based on the fact that the first pirotiy is to feed the nation and to defend it. Sheepsta has been overrun by enemies, invaded or subjugated to humilation by its neighbours most nobtabl Alecrast for too many times, and generally too self-respecting to let it happen to them again.

Sheep · June 20, 2003, 00:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Archaic
I'm going to call you for bullshit on that one Sheep. Assuming you finished school 2 1/2 years early, that means you've had at most 4 years in University. (Your birthdate's in your profile. It killed your arguement.)

My brithdat is 24th August 1983.

I was supposed to finnish school at the end of 2000 as with Queensland Education laws.

I finished June 1998, when I should of really been in id year 10.

I went straight to uni on a paid scholorship (why I went to Griffith as I aint rich). Did 4 subjects a semester for my first two semesters. 80CP. Then did 8 a semester for my next four semesters. 320CP. This makes 400 CP. Did a summer semester to make up the last 20CP. This takes me through to June 2001.

Took a year off went to Eastern Europe, Prague actually, and had fun with the 'locals' Man those women are the bomb. So thats June last year.

Did my year long thesis based masters for the last year and due to complete it in about two to three weeks.

It works out trust me.

Archaic · June 20, 2003, 01:05

No Australia University allows any student to do 8 Units a semester Sheep. 5 is the maximum overload. If you expect us to believe you're doing that many units, you'll need to provide an academic transcript. It'd be on your online account details with the Uni.

Sheep · June 20, 2003, 01:10

I wont do that. Mainly because that is personal information and disclosing this is not advisable. Same as you not disclosing your transcripts or say phone bills, or when you lost your viginity.

If 5 is the maximum then maybe you should talk to my friends. At least five people I know of do more. My mother did 8 a semester throughout her course. My father did 6. You obviously either have the wqrong information or its advisable only.

I do know you have to get persmission to go over 5. But I also know that it aint the absolute maximum mate.

Archaic · June 20, 2003, 05:57

Sheep, the standard is 4 x 12CP subjects. To claim you do 8 x 20CP subjects, which, just with class contact time and not including either transport, or the time to work on assignments and homework, is equal to a 40 hour working week.....just seems rather pathetic when you back down from providing any sort of proof whatsoever.

Look, I'll even provide my academic transcript as available on the web, minus my results. If you're wondering why I've only for 3 units a semester from the 2nd semester onwards, I underloaded on purpose to extend my degree a year, allowing me to take advanced subjects in Japanese that I wouldn't have been able to enroll in otherwise.

LIAM GREGORY POMFRET (4407059)

BS56 BACHELOR OF BUSINESS
Course entry: 08 Feb 2002
Expected course completion: END 2005
Course status: ENROLLED
Major: International Business, Specialisation: Language Specialisation
Attendance mode: I
Attendance type: FT
Total credit points achieved: 84
Home Campus: GP

2002/1
Unit Credit points Unit Status
BSB113 ECONOMICS 12 COMPLETED
BSB119 INTERNATIONAL & ELECTRONIC BUSINESS 12 COMPLETED
BSB126 MARKETING 12 COMPLETED
HHB081 JAPANESE 1 12 COMPLETED

2002/2
Unit Credit points Unit Status
BSB115 MGMT, PEOPLE & ORG 12 COMPLETED
HHB082 JAPANESE 2 12 COMPLETED
IBB202 BUSINESS & THE WORLD ECONOMY 12 COMPLETED

2003/1
Unit Credit points Unit Status
BSB114 GOV, BUS & SOCIETY 12 ENROLLED
HHB083 JAPANESE 3 12 ENROLLED
IBB210 EXPORT MANAGEMENT 12 ENROLLED

2003/2
Unit Credit points Unit Status
BSB122 BUS INFORMATN ANALYSIS & COMMUNICATN 12 ENROLLED
HHB084 JAPANESE 4 12 ENROLLED
IBB211 GLOBALISATION & BUSINESS 12 ENROLLED

Oh yes, and BTW, your "brain tumour" from earlier in the year.....that would've set you back a full semester, at the very least. You either lied about that, or about this, or more than likely, both. Nothing pisses me off more than lying Sheep...

Whaleboy · June 20, 2003, 08:23

I'm not going to b!tch here, but this panel cannot have ooc conflicts undermining it, and all RP'd conflicts must be recognised as being only RP'd and a bit of fun.

As such, I am not satisfied that in this panel, Archaic and Sheep would be able to get along to the extent required to make this work, and if one is in and one is not, then that would serve to undermine the whole practise. As such, until the two of you can sort out your differences, I regret to say that neither of you will be eligible to stand.

Next election will be in a couple of months after tomorrow, we'll see how things go there.

I hope you both understand and don't take it personally, and understand my position, it is what im sure either of you would do in my position.

Giovanni Wine · June 20, 2003, 08:38

I don't think it is right to exclude Archaic and Sheep from the poll.

I mean we are going to vote for someone right? if we don't think they will be good judges than we will just not vote them.

I mean, if many people think that Archaic or Sheep is a good judge, excluding him from the poll only because of the other doesn't look fair IMHO.

Saluti

Whaleboy · June 20, 2003, 08:42

Perhaps, however Sheeps military postings would exclude him at this stage as previously agreed, unless he changes it before tomorrow which is when I shall begin the election. I'll poll Archaic, but I do not want the Sheep/Archaic animosity to disrupt the workings of this organisation.

Drogue · June 20, 2003, 09:09

elijah: If you want this to be taken seriously, let them stand. This is a democracy, and if you choose who stands, people will disregard it. If you feel it would bring conflict, post that you think people shouldn't vote for them, but it is for all of use to decide, not just you.

Urban Ranger · June 20, 2003, 22:31

OB (organisational behaviour) theories have it that a moderate degree of conflicts inside a group is fine, because that represents different ideas coming into contact. However, a high degree of conflict, such as what's going on between Archaic and Sheep right now, is destructive to the group.

Therefore, while in theory we should not bar both from standing in the election, we may have no choice unless there is some way we could find to moderate their clashing of heads.

GeneralTacticus · June 20, 2003, 22:32

Elijah, how are you planning to set the elections up anyway?

Whaleboy · June 21, 2003, 07:59

Im going to make a poll in a sec, where all who participates in the region can vote. The top 5 will become the judges, and there shall be elections every 2/3 months I'd guess, that would be presumably decided by the first panel of judges.

Considering the advice given, I shall allow Archaic to stand, but not Sheep, not because of anything related to a conflict, but because of the inflated military figures, that as I initially said, is a preventative for people to join. This panel is designed to help people give realistic military figures, I would hypothesise that inflated figures are because one does not know fully how the military impacts on the economy, and how much military one nation can have, so people try to make reasonable figures, not overstate their figures out of any malicious intent. As such, this panel will help to rectify that situation, by keeping that most important aspect of a nation with regards to foreign policy, within the bounds of realism, and to a level which the Int. community can recognise and interface with, related to ones nation of course.

It is not like the court, and will not become a conduit by which individual member nations can conduct elements of their own foreign policy. Hopefully, judges can keep this separate, but certainly other judges will be able to keep an eye on other judges making sure they do not abuse this position of power and this panel for their own ends. As such I can reassure people, specifically Sheep, that this will be a neutral unbiased organisation.

Poll coming up soon...

GeneralTacticus · June 21, 2003, 08:00

How many candidates are there going to be?

Last I checked, there were only four suggested...