Region Supports DEIA Nominee and EIA Reform in Equal Numbers

Calvin Coolidge

Spellcaster
Forum Administrator
Honoured Citizen
Citizen
With the ongoing discussion surrounding the nomination of Kazaman for Director of the Europeian Intelligence Agency, I released a poll that garnered 39 responses from the public. Here are those responses with some hopefully helpful analysis.

EIA 1.jpg

  • Frustrating to see Senators blatantly stalling on the nomination
  • kaz is trustworthy and a longtime player, im really hoping he gets confirmed
  • I have little confidence that the DEIA actually does anything, my abstention is not a reflection of Kazaman.
  • I would vote aye, but President Lime has bungled this nomination and I understand why Senators feel like they are being yanked around. I do believe the EIA is important, but it seems like everyone involved with it (DEIA nominee and President) seems insistent on shooting themselves in the foot whenever possible.
  • why delay what is essentially ceremonial as Kaz is likely acting as de facto Director already.
  • Because I do not feel like that we know enough about him of how well he is going to do in this role for Europeia.
  • Kaz would never betray this region, he’s well connected and has been in the EIA for ages.
  • I was firmly in Kazaman's corner until that answer to Gleg. What the hell was that?
  • Full support. While Kaz is an old geezer he does have Europeia's best interests at heart.
  • There's nothing to gain by defeating this nomination in favor of reforms without a plan ready.
  • Kaz is probably the most qualified person after NES - but there is a big gap.
We can see that while the consensus is perhaps not as broad as the nominee and the President would like, a clear majority would vote for Kazaman to become DEIA. Digging into the comments, while we do see some critiques of Kaz's performance during the nomination process, as well as some critiques of the position itself, most believe that Kaz is the right pick for the position due to his experience and loyalty to Europeia.

EIA 2.jpg

  • I voted "Nay" because I do not believe increased oversight is practical. I do believe the confirmation requirement for the DEIA should be removed.
  • Structural change could be needed if theres an identifiable problem. Right now it's only a speculative one with no objective backing whatsoever. If there's an actual articulable and observable problem, then we can talk about change.
    depends on the bill. being too open about who is in the eia, will lead to other regions investigating those people. hems proposal includes a 3 people committee, and you might even have 3 such people right now (hem lloen monkey), then again monkeys sig isnt the best :p but what if a senator decides to abuse the information. classified info could be used as ammunition in the wrong hands including the hands of some of our own citizens
  • As long as the oversight doesn’t compromise EIA operations ofc
    it would very much depend on the content, but I feel there is room for some reform.
  • I've answered aye, but I say that very carefully because of the possible repurcussions of trying to force any changes on an area that requires the utmost discretion in its practices. So ultimately my answer would be dependant on the bill proposed.
  • Because I think the EIA could have a lot of issues that could happen if the wrong person was in charge of the EIA of Europeia.
  • It’s a secret agency for a reason, having oversight in it is literally the fastest way to make it as obsolete as some of the senators seem to think it is.
  • I'd lean aye, but the scope is a bit too broad here. Depends on what ideas ultimately make it into the bill.
  • Any change to EIA should be done carefully and slowly. It's much safer to carefully reform, rather than to overstep and cause an FA scandal
  • It's at the very least worth exploring given the historical nature of the EIA and the departure of NES.
  • I need to know the details before I vote on anything.
  • Specifics would probably matter, but I lean for the general idea of it.
Here we see that with roughly the same margin the public would like to see some changes made in regards to the institution of the EIA. The specifics will ultimately dictate how much public support fluctuates, so the Senate will need to proceed with caution as they go through the discussion of any structural changes or increased oversight. There is, of course, also a good amount of commenters who would oppose any oversight or changes at all, which is sure to make this a rather contentious issue going forward.

EIA 3.jpg

  • Hard to say what it looks like without NES
  • With some significant changes
  • What's the downside?
  • ever since ive had access to more sensitive info, ive been much more supportive.
  • Not unless major change in the structure of the organization is created.
    [*The EIA is very important our our adversaries abroad would LOVE for us to nix it. They are probably lapping up this shitshow right now.
  • even if it just exists as a name, it holds power over other regions.
  • Not in the same form. Intelligence functions will be important to securing a Frontier, but the entire apparatus needs reassessment
  • Because of what have NES has done for the region, but there could be information not being shared without any of us knowing to the President in Europeia.
  • For sure. We don't expect admins and moderators to include us in their conversations, and I feel like EIA is the IC equivalent of that
  • Certainly, though it could look different in the future.
  • It’s important and fills a roll different from The Watch and the EAAC.
  • The Senate doesnt need to provide oversight here.
Here the public is clear in its support, with very few in favor of abolishing the EIA. The reasons range from wanting to continue gathering intel, protecting our existing intel, and having it simply serve as a deterrent. Regardless of the reason any attempt to outright abolish the EIA would meet heavy blowback.

And that is the poll. All together I think the picture being painted here is a little muddled, since there is equal amounts of support for the nominee and for reform, which the nominee seems to be pushing back against. We will see how the Senate and the nominee reconcile this difference as the process continues, if they do at all. Either way, we are likely to see some version of the EIA continue for a long time to come. Until next time, this is Calvin Coolidge, preparing to discuss this article on radio very shortly.
 
I would vote aye, but President Lime has bungled this nomination and I understand why Senators feel like they are being yanked around. I do believe the EIA is important, but it seems like everyone involved with it (DEIA nominee and President) seems insistent on shooting
Would this commenter like to share how? I think Kazaman has given very elegant responses to each question he has been asked, and fail to see how he is "shooting himself in the foot." Indeed he has said on the Senate floor he is happy to engage in any reform discussions the Senate wishes to take up.
 
I would vote aye, but President Lime has bungled this nomination and I understand why Senators feel like they are being yanked around. I do believe the EIA is important, but it seems like everyone involved with it (DEIA nominee and President) seems insistent on shooting
Would this commenter like to share how? I think Kazaman has given very elegant responses to each question he has been asked, and fail to see how he is "shooting himself in the foot." Indeed he has said on the Senate floor he is happy to engage in any reform discussions the Senate wishes to take up.
I'll be honest, I'm not sure where you "bungled" this. Kaz maybe put a bullet through his big toe with his response to Gleg, but otherwise... I don't really know.
 
Back
Top