Conference 1 | Crimes Investigation Board

[Peter]

Welcome to the first day of Union Summit 1.5. Today we will be addressing the Crimes Investigation Board. This is where everything is let out. Everyone has a say. And no backtalks, no disrespecting, no offensive language, just a nice, clean mature conference please.

Here are some questions to talk about:
1. Why do you think this is unnecessary?
2. Do you think the CIB will fail?
3. Undoubtedly, this is one of the reasons the tensions began. Why do you think that is?
4. Is there are way we can remediate this? What should we do with the CIB? Should we still give the CIB guidelines a try?
5. Any suggestions?

Keep in mind these are just a few questions. You may talk about whatever you feel pertains to the CIB. But CIB only please.

[Peter]

Here's what I have to say.

First off: I am a member of the CIB. In opinion, the CIB began as a result of the Union War. According to Dljrfn, its to create guidelines for future wars so that the catastrophe won't happen again. In a way, I do agree with him that the new members came right after the CIB was created and right after the war. But in a way, I agree with the new members as it is unfair to follow rules to which you had no say in.

To answer my questions, here's my opinions:
1. I think its necessary. But now that the guidelines were established, I dont see the need for the CIB anymore.
2.Well, we never actually gave it a try as dljrfn was saying.
3. Well, it began right after the results of the CIB votes were revealed to the public.
4. I think we should rid of the CIB, and merge its ideas with another committee like a future judiciary department as gaius suggested. But I say we vote on whether to keep certain CIB guidelines.

[Aranho]

1. The CIB is necessary. The CIB main purpose is to try to solve conflicts to prevent further conflicts. Also, it's aim is to make sure that the ongoing conflicts do not get out of hand.
2. Fail? We haven't tested it yet!
3. I think the main reason is that Gaius thinks that the CIB is some secret department. After all, if there is too much secret, there will be less trust.
4. We should still give the CIB a try.
5. We all know that once the CIB have agreed on something, it will let the non-CIB members vote. Here's my suggestion: originally, during the voting process, the non-CIB members have no say. Why not, during the voting, allow the non-CIB members have a say? This way, once the voting is over, the CIB could integrate the opinions with the original ideas. That way, we have a fairer law/guideline.

[Guest]

1. Why do you think this is unnecessary?
- Select members cannot speak for the whole
- Only limited to a few people
- Fewer people = less ideas
- Outside members of the CIB cannot voice their opinion, only vote

2. Do you think the CIB will fail?
- No it does what its supposed to do, but less successfully. It has already submitted a list of guideline, but it does not mean everyone agrees with it.
- Yes because as soon as warfare comes along, it could be difficult for 4 members to decide/agree if it violate an act/guideline. It could also be open to corruption as well. IE. an CIB member could be friends with one of the conflicting parties and support that party in discussion
- Yes because non members cannot voice their opinions

3. Undoubtedly, this is one of the reasons the tensions began. Why do you think that is?
- Same reason as #1
- Some members feel strongly in the CIB while other members do not

4. Is there are way we can remediate this? What should we do with the CIB? Should we still give the CIB guidelines a try?
- Merge the CIB to the judiciary department. The CIB purpose is to make sure everyone follows the guideline or laws. The judiciary department purpose is almost the exact same.
- Any law regarding warfare can be made by members and not a select committee would be successful, then it is the judiciary department responsibility to ensure everyone is following the law. Judiciary department covers *ANY* laws, undoubtly this would involve the warfare law. If the CIB exist, where does responsibility lies? CIB or Judiciary? Would create some conflicts. We do not need a seperate "Judiciary system" for warfare.

5. Any suggestions?
- Same as #4

[Guest]

1. Why do you think this is unnecessary?
I do believe it is necessary because of the mess that happened earlier with the war. Everything was all over, and totally unorganized. Plus the miss communication all between everyone.

2. Do you think the CIB will fail?
The CIB hasn't done anything yet. The only thing they did was release a draft of possible resolutions.

3. Undoubtedly, this is one of the reasons the tensions began. Why do you think that is?
Someone felt that the CIB was to speak for everyone, which is incorrect. They released a draft for EVERYONE to vote on. Not only that, they are also open for suggestions. However, some felt that this wasn't good enough. When it was created, no one had a problem until now. That's like me saying I want to be an Admin, just because the admins are a special group.

4. Is there are way we can remediate this? What should we do with the CIB? Should we still give the CIB guidelines a try?
Give it a try. The guidelines are not set in stone, they are still in the drafting process for everyone to vote on and make suggestions.

5. Any suggestions?
After giving the CIB a try, and let's say it fails, then merge it into SUTO. Unlike the CIB, SUTO is a inter-union organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is starting to get ridiculous. If all else fails, I say lets swept this under the rug and move on. Things like this happen, in unions new and old. Unfortunately, newer unions don't know how to handle situations like these and fall apart or lose a lot of members.

[Peter]

thanks for your responses you guys. I'm going to leave this thread open until tomorrow, so that other people have time to say whatever needs to be let out. Then we'll move on to the next topic and then we'll vote at the end of the summit.

Is that all right with you guys?

[Aranho]

I don't mind.

[Guest]

3. Undoubtedly, this is one of the reasons the tensions began. Why do you think that is?
Someone felt that the CIB was to speak for everyone, which is incorrect. They released a draft for EVERYONE to vote on. Not only that, they are also open for suggestions. However, some felt that this wasn't good enough. When it was created, no one had a problem until now. That's like me saying I want to be an Admin, just because the admins are a special group.

Just commenting on your comment.

At first, the CIB refused any non-members to add suggestion to their resolution, one of their member stated this explicity - drlfj - to me when I tried to suggest they make it more ironclad since there was a lot of loopholes in it. That was the start of the conflict. Because non-members ONLY could vote.

[Peter]

well personally, I have no problem in the whole union voting on whether to keep certain guidelines.

[Guest]

Just commenting on your comment.

At first, the CIB refused any non-members to add suggestion to their resolution, one of their member stated this explicity - drlfj - to me when I tried to suggest they make it more ironclad since there was a lot of loopholes in it. That was the start of the conflict. Because non-members ONLY could vote.

I remember reading the posts and I also made an objection as well. I understand what you are saying, but when it comes down to it, the CIB is just an investigatory board. The guides were made so they can check to see if "rules of war" were followed. So whether they were followed or not, they can't really do much else. Unfortunately, the CIB is only "union-wide", so if conflicts started between a AIN member and a nation of another union, the other nation doesn't have to follow the rules. That's why I wanted SUTO to be more involved with it, being created for situations like the war in April.

[Sponsored content]