The Atlasian Occasional News - Formally stopping publication.

[Napoleon]

Strongly approve Mr. President. I like seeing you take charge. You make a great point about the media. The RPP has this remarkable way of spreading propaganda our party needs to learn to counter effectively. While some cabinet members haven't been giving their all, you've done everything you've needed to, and promptly. I like it. The Senate has been focused on amendments, whichever is less involving for the executive.

[Oakvale]

Okay, first of all, and most importantly, I deeply resent the President's implication here -

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have a policy of publishing stuff from people who approach me and ask for anonymity, unless I genuinely think it'd add nothing to the debate, or it contains an unproven or potentially slanderous allegation (the latter happened a couple of times during that "Invaligate" business). I didn't "approach" this person, since honestly I didn't even notice Snowguy's comments, let alone construe them as a dig at Polnut.

If I wanted to criticise Snowguy I'd do it publicly, and, in fact, did, in the approval ratings thread, quoted below, typos and all -

I'm disappointed that Snowguy has been relatively inactive so far, but I'm hopefully he can improve. It's early days yet.

...but then subsequently retracted my comments, because they were based on a cursory look at the White House thread and were thus an unfair and inaccurate look at Snowguy's activity -

I'll have to retract my comment from earlier in the thread. My criticism of Snowguy's apparent lack of activity was based only on his White House thread - I foolishly didn't think to look in the threads of various Senate bills. Oops.

If you feel that I shouldn't have published my source's comments anonymously, or at all, that's fine, and that's a worthy topic for debate. But please don't accuse me of some kind of bias just because I'm publishing some minor comments from other people.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Okay, first of all, and most importantly, I deeply resent the President's implication here -

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have a policy of publishing stuff from people who approach me and ask for anonymity, unless I genuinely think it'd add nothing to the debate, or it contains an unproven or potentially slanderous allegation (the latter happened a couple of times during that "Invaligate" business). I didn't "approach" this person, since honestly I didn't even notice Snowguy's comments, let alone construe them as a dig at Polnut.

If I wanted to criticise Snowguy I'd do it publicly, and, in fact, did, in the approval ratings thread, quoted below, typos and all -

I'm disappointed that Snowguy has been relatively inactive so far, but I'm hopefully he can improve. It's early days yet.

...but then subsequently retracted my comments, because they were based on a cursory look at the White House thread and were thus an unfair and inaccurate look at Snowguy's activity -

I'll have to retract my comment from earlier in the thread. My criticism of Snowguy's apparent lack of activity was based only on his White House thread - I foolishly didn't think to look in the threads of various Senate bills. Oops.

If you feel that I shouldn't have published my source's comments anonymously, or at all, that's fine, and that's a worthy topic for debate. But please don't accuse me of some kind of bias just because I'm publishing some minor comments from other people.

Of course I wasn't referring only to your paper, but every media source in Atlasia.  I also resented the fact that the only media article to mention me since I became president was so someone from the previous administration could whine about me.  You didn't ask me for a comment or a statement to include in your article.. instead just posting the criticism on its own as if it is indisputable fact.

I'm not accusing you of dirty business behind my back... just incomplete work.  You've been an ally and it would be really stupid for me to accuse you of such.

As far as publishing your source's comments anonymously, that's fine.  Of course I'd love to know who it was, but I respect your and their right to keep it anonymous as not to cause personal hard feelings.  My comments regarding press releases were not meant as a criticism of Polnut, who did a fine job as president.  I was just acting incredulous towards people who think I'm inactive because I don't churn out an article an hour.  My point was mainly that Polnut and I have different styles.  I don't like to write big long press releases that include pictures and audience reactions... while it adds realism, it just isn't my style.

As for RPP members who disapprove of me and continue to label me as inactive... they were never going to change their minds anyway.  

[Marokai Backbeat]

3. I think it's nice having a low key President, gives the Senate time to focus on amendments and other reforms. Not every President should be expected to operate similarly, that would get boring and repetitive.

I enjoy this spin! Oh, the times we live in..

[tmthforu94]

The Atlasian Sentinel would like to publicly request an interview with the President. He may respond if he would like to by personal message.

[Oakvale]

Oakvale, editor, Atlasian Occasional News: Let's start at the beginning. Like many people that are relatively new to the game, I wasn't aware of you until you returned and for Northeast Governor. I know you were Mideast Governor for a period, and my research shows you ran for the Presidency in 2007.

Could you describe your early career as Mideast Governor, and your first run at the Presidency? That, in particular, interests me because I find primaries in the game fascinating (not the least of my reasons for having questions about the UDL later). Also, you recently referred in passing to 'mistakes' you'd learned from as Mideast Governor. What were they, and what did you learn?

Former President Polnut: My God, that was such a long time ago. I had only known Atlas for 2 months, and only been registered in Atlasia for a month when it became clear that Governor Frodo was not active and a replacement was needed.

I honestly thought 'f*** it, I'll give it a bash, I couldn't be any worse". Ran unopposed, not because people thought they couldn't beat me, but because nobody else wanted the job.

The Mideast was in a total mess, there was no real legislative activities, so policy debates just weren't happening. Part of what I did was to essentially take the reins of the legislative process myself, I put forward Bills on natural disaster preparedness, filling-in gaps for the protection of same-sex couples that weren't covered under Federal law and some carbon emission stuff. I think because of that more aggressive or pro-active position I got more discussion going.

I was re-elected but I had an opponent then in Masterjedi.

I had Inks as my Lt Gov, this was also a time when I learned how important it was to work with political adversaries when you can. Inks copped a lot of crap from his side when he didn't try to rip me down when he ran for Governor when I left office.

I made a mistake when it came to the reading of the Mideast Constitution. I held the Gubernatorial election almost a month too late. I apologised at the time, and nobody brought it up as an issue at the time, it was only when I was running for president, I suppose as a bit of an insurgent candidate that 'the powers that be' brought them up again.

I had been asked since mid-2007 to run for President. I admit being a little hesitant, but part of me thought... if they want me to try, I'll try.  It was during the time of the Colin Wixted/Jas administration - everybody thought them untouchable... I think I did too.

Earl organised a progressive primary to organise a united progressive candidate. But what was clear was that I was doing very well and while I might not beat the incumbent, it was going to make it difficult for him to win outright... and it was about that time that they pounced. Peter, one of the founders of Atlasia believed that I "was incompetent, and should apologise to the people of the Mideast" for mismanaging their constitutional affairs - otherwise known as my innocent mistake in regard to the election. I got some incredibly condescending messages from those close to the Administration telling me, "it's not your time" "wait your turn" "if you win, it'd be a huge mistake... but I hope I'm wrong" etc etc.... I actually like to think that a generally successful term is the best revenge.

I didn't continue in the run because I knew that if I somehow did win, those same people would have sought to undermine everything I did.

Overall what experience taught me was never to de-value the merit of new people to Atlasia. They're vital and deserve equal time and respect. I knew that from being one myself...

O: Q2. Shortly after the UDL burst onto the scene, you were elected Chair, and, given how quickly the party disintegrated, you were really the only significant chair in the party's history.

In my analysis, the two watershed moments for the UDL were its disappointing returns in the Senate elections, and the death blow that was the insanely bitter and personal Presidential campaign. Can you reflect on the UDL's rise, fall, and on the impact of the contentious primary, and wider campaign, on the party's demise?

P: That was an amusing period.

I think unlike many in the UDL, I didn't join because of some issue with Bgwah or the JCP... hmmm, on reflection that probably isn't intellectually honest. When I returned to Atlasia and got involved with the JCP, I found myself deeply frustrated with its structure. I found it to be quite inflexible and not exactly welcoming of change, which I personally found odd.

When... Kal contacted me and asked me to join, I saw it as an opportunity for an alternative progressive organisation to run both parallel and when necessary complementary to the JCP.

I think the 'vibe' very early on was positive, people wanted to be involved, wanted to contribute and I honestly thought there was a chance for the UDL to become a major party. But unlike many, I never thought it would topple the JCP, and I didn't see my role as the first Chairman to do that.

However, things started to change. I think more as a reaction to what happened in the JCP, the UDL started to want too much flexibility. In many ways the biggest voices ended up in the UDL and they 'would leave the party unless xxx' happened. I think that period spelled out the fate of the party. You had 3 or 4 people who felt they knew best, aligned with no real concept of party discipline. Rules are important, unless you can have a way to develop some kind of consensus... you're screwed.

In relation to the February election campaign, I never experienced such a stressful time in Atlasia... until I had to deal with the Senate as president... *laughs*.

I'll admit not having been thrilled at the time with Marokai presenting a full UDL ticket before any kind of internal processes had been determined to select the UDL ticket. I understood his enthusiasm, but I don't think it was the wisest move.

Then Ben entered the race, which I always believed was completely his right to do. But it did leave me with a considerable dilemma. Marokai and I now have a good relationship, but I don't know how he views that period completely. I felt there was a sense of entitlement, and Ben I think played up the persecution. So the atmosphere between the two camps was brutal... and for those outside, it might have appeared that I was some kind of bystander, but behind the scenes, I certainly wasn't.

I wanted a democratic process within the party to determine the UDL's nominee. And to try to ensure party unity behind that ticket. But I knew that was probably an impossible outcome.

Then there was drama over what kind of ballot, halting a private ballot, then holding a public one.

My personal view was that if Marokai had just presented himself  and went through a primary process with Ben, he probably would have won quite handily.

My other concern was that a badly divided left would likely lead to Tmth being elected. Bgwah and I had discussions about this, I think he doubted the risk. I started some preliminary discussions about a Unity ticket, but in the end the negotiations fell apart.

When Marokai dropped out of the race, and Ben claimed the nomination as the runner-up... I then knew that Tmth would win. Not because of Ben, but because the dynamics of the election shifted too far and I predicted a pretty high vote exhaustion rate.

I think the Senate race is a bit of a red herring, the inability to unite and be pragmatic is what doomed the UDL. I do think that as Chair I deserve some of the blame, but I doubt I could have cracked any whip, let alone crack it hard enough to get it to function properly.

O:: You ran for Northeast Governor shortly after you returned to Atlasia, and lost despite running an active campaign, to a candidate who'd later be recalled for his inactivity. How did that campaign and the results thereof affect you, and, ultimately, your decision to seek the Presidency?

P: Sure, the Northeast Gubernatorial run was again something I consider to have been a calculated risk.

Knowing the way I normally think about elections, I don't think I would have run without thinking I stood a chance. But equally I knew it was a small chance. The only way I could would be if the... silent majority, if you will, of the Northeast turned out to vote against the POP who actually hadn't done anything except trying to turn the region into an anarcho-libertarian nightmare.

Of course, considering how nasty and personal the campaign became at the mid-way point, it was clear they were concerned that I could have been a big legislative road-block for them.

Since I didn't have much hope of winning, the results per se didn't really have much of an effect - except needed a bit of time away from the regional politics. I did get a little chuckle out of the recall, if I was brutally honest.

I think what that election did show me, is that with the right message, I could attract cross-over votes from the centre and the right, which gave me a little more comfort if I ran for the presidency.

[Oakvale]

O: Speaking of which, to use something of a stock question, why did you decide to run for President? I'll admit that I was somewhat surprised that you became the JCP's nominee so easily despite chairing the UDL (although you did have my support, for the record!), although I suppose, like you said, it was clear that you fronted the UDL without any animosity towards the JCP.

P: I think the simplest answer to that question is that because I thought I could do a good job.

I honestly thought my view of what the presidency should be about was what was important. I don't like the idea that partisan interests should be confused with national interests. I would serve with a party 'tag', but would always put the national interest ahead of that. Which meant advocating positions that I as a progressive might not be 100% in favour of, but as President and Commander-in-Chief I felt other obligations had overridden them.

I think in many ways I don't think people necessarily saw me as a JCP member or a former UDL Chair. In fact, I tried to make efforts to forge that more complementary relationship between the JCP and the UDL.

In the end, I believe I had the right agenda, the right message for the right time.

O: After taking office, you quickly kept one of your campaign pledges by establishing a blue ribbon committee on the ever-popular issue of game reform. Unfortunately, despite early promise, it fell apart. How do you feel about that, and do you think there's anything you could have done differently to keep the committee together?

P: It was an important promise to keep.

I mean, I've never been a strong reformist. I think reform, when needed is important. However, I never understood people who are so driven by constant reform that it is the sole purpose for being in Atlasia.

However, I wanted to let those reformists that I was interested in their concerns, and the best way to do that was to have a set of reform principles and ideas that could be a framework for future reforms.

I don't think the fault for the less-than-successful outcomes from the reform panel lies with the panel. I believe the panel members took their roles very seriously, and I was personally pleased with the dedication and often vigorous discussions that took place.

I took the position that I would take a back seat in the discussions. I would take on the recommendations, but the Senate would have to be the drivers of reform, as they have been during my term.

but it became pretty clear that the Senate had little time for the panel's work. Which I saw as a huge shame. but to be frank the panel's work saw my view on reform shift. perhaps, if i had been more pro-active than I had determined was appropriate the outcomes could have been better.

I hope at some future point the panel's work will be re-examined.

O: You've spoken before of your frustration with the Senate. Can you explain in detail what kind of problems you had, why you think they happened, and how future Presidents could possibly avoid them? Do you have any advice for President Snowguy in dealing with the legislature?

P: That was tough.

I think this experience showed me the fundamental difference between the Senate and the president.

I think I went in with a pair of rose-coloured glasses on. I believed that given I worked with a Senate with a naturally supportive majority, I should have had a relatively easy time, when it came to the passage of my legislative agenda.

I found myself butting up against the same people over and over again, ironically, I had an easier time working with 'blue avatars' that I had with my own party. That's not to say that they were obliged to, or that I always had a difficult time with the Senate, because most of the time, it worked well.

But the debate around the troop withdrawals was the real crux.

My policy, from day one was a responsible and phased withdrawal from all theatres. However, the Senate was presented with an extreme Bill that was both unrealistic and highly irresponsible. I neogitated privately with the sponsor and I believed we had achieved a reasonable compromise... then it went quiet for another 3 weeks. Before I started discussions again. While  I completely understood the position of those who wanted a more aggressive withdrawal, I don't think they really understood the position I was in. What I think as me, is immaterial, but as Commander-in-Chief, I would veto any Bill that would destabilise the military situations or would undermine our positions in a global sense.

But in the end, we eventually got an agreement.

As for advice for the President.... I think he's been around long-enough to know how this place works. But I would say this, don't assume anything. Being president your concerns are bigger and you serve a more diverse constituency, than just those who voted for you. Very often you need to stop thinking about yourself as yourself, and be prepared to stand up to your allies.

[Oakvale]

O:  How do you think the Presidency as it exists fits into Atlasia? Some have said it's basically an ineffecitve figurehead position, and that any real work is done in the Senate. What's your response to that analysis. and do you think there's a way the Presidency should be made more or less powerful?

P: I think people have a different perspective on the role of the president, once they're in the job.

From the outside you say "well, surely they can make x happen... or y not happen", when in reality the role of the president, at least from the way I chose to undertake the job, is about the exercising of more subtle authority.

Each president brings their own views and importantly, temperament to the office. I consider myself pretty level-headed and not exactly welcoming of conflict, but I'm more than capable of digging my heels in when a fundamental is being challenged.

I suppose the best way to describe my view of the presidency is the exercising of hard and soft power. Sure, I would veto a Bill if it wasn't going to be effective and threaten it if I thought the Bill was dangerous, but I think what's most effective is the soft-power. I mean I had tons of press-releases and transcripts etc etc, which I know some found unnecessary, but beyond that I worked behind the scenes a lot. I entered a lot of negotiations that the public never knew about, that's what I mean by soft power.

And as a figurehead? sure. Ineffective? no. The president can present an agenda, a direction, even a spirit. I believe the president is there both as a leader, but also as a referee between competing interests. Which makes it so important to be able to step back and look beyond party or ideological ties.

I believe the president has the right degree of authority, and how that authority is exercised is really up to who holds the office. If they exercise it effectively... in many ways they probably look more impotent.

O: On a related note, but what's your opinion on the current relevance or lack thereof of the Cabinet? While Tmth passed some important legislation giving the SoEA and SoIA new powers, the positions remain hard to fill and fairly under the radar, with little visible impact on the game, especially the SoIA. Any ideas on how to resolve this? Should positions be eliminated? Combined? Will the proposed amendment allowing Senators to hold Cabinet positions help?

P:
Both the SoIA and the SoEA are important members of the Cabinet. If we didn't have events to react to, assuming anyone bothers to, it just be about devising new ways to elect people... which would have driven me insane.

If you're about public policy development, more than game reform, which I admit I am, those roles need to be there.

There are so few in Atlasia who really care about foreign policy, indeed, few of my predecessors had time for it. But I wanted to elevate the role of foreign policy in my administration. In Secretary Ben I knew I had a strong ally in that endeavour, even if I did need to scale back the autonomy he had known under previous presidents.

SoIA is a hard job to fill. I think my experience has made me more sympathetic to re-joining the GM and the SoIA into the same role. Marokai did such a good job as GM...

I don't support a permanent mix of the branches of government. I support flexibility in how the Cabinet is structured, say if someone bails, the President should be able to request that another Cabinet member serves in their stead.

If it were a Senator serving, they should no longer be able to vote in the Senate, IMHO.

It's a difficult thing, because it comes down to a lot of variants "the effectiveness of who's serving", "the desire of the Senate and President to engage" - these aren't things you can fix with game reform or constitutional amendments. It's a bigger but deeper change in the minds of those in Atlasia.

O: More generally, from your experience in office are there any specific reforms or changes you'd like to see enacted to allow for a more efficient government?

P: Again, I think we fixate on reform too much. We go through a round of reforms... the novelty wears off, then people become bored and think the answer is more reform.

When in my mind, the answer is two-fold, figuring out what Atlasia is supposed to be and greater commitment from those who are involved.

When there are useful reforms, they aren't given time to work. All post-reform periods have teething problems, there will always be rough edges that need to be smoothed over. But it seems to never get to that refining period to know whether or not they actually work.

The issue is the mindset of participants in the process, not the process itself, at least to me.

O: Finally, any general comments or insights on your Presidency that we haven't covered? Any advice for your successors? Any gripes?

P: Being president is a huge honour, and a way to really make your mark in Atlasia. But it's also a prick of a job. You have 40% of the people annoyed at you at any one time... and God help you if you decide to act on principle...

You need to be prepared to piss people off. It shouldn't be the sole driver, of course, but you serve the whole nation, not just a party.

But how I approached the presidency, is like all of my predecessors and successors, is very personal. So I would suppose the only thing I would say is 'be yourself, hold true to what you believe in, but know you serve all'.
 
O: Okay, that's it! Thanks for agreeing to this. I enjoyed interviewing you very much, even if it did take place on a geological time scale due to myriad problems at my end.

P: I enjoyed it, thanks.

[Oakvale]

Hi, everyone!

It's been over a year since I last properly updated the Occasional News, although we have done some polling in the interim. Unfortunately running an newspaper is a demanding job, even when the publishing schedule is, well, occasional.

So I've decided to formally shut the door of the Occasional News, and am excited to announce that I will be joining The People's Paper as their staff legal analyst.

This paper had a good run, most notable covering the Invaligate scandal, and I enjoyed providing in-depth interviews with several prominent Atlasian political figures. However, all things must pass. Goodbye, and thanks!

-  Oakvale

Editor