Working Group Drafts |
(04-29-2016, 06:23 AM)Zak6858 Wrote: I feel no. 6 in the first part should be given a time you have to wait before one can be called. The system by itself could be worked around and the whole Cabinet could be removed from office right after the election. We can do this, if most people think it would be necessary. But I do agree that the political process would make it incredibly unlikely. (04-29-2016, 07:39 AM)griffindor13 Wrote: If this Charter was to go into effect, would there be elections for all government positions immediately, to fully enact the new charter all at once? Or would it follow the rules of the new Charter stating the month of the election, and it being a delayed start to the various government positions? I forgot to post a continuing resolution that explains all of this. It'll be at the end of this post! The order of election is reversed from what it is in the Charter: the PM/Cabinet are elected first, then the Delegate. I think it's important for us to have a fully functioning forum government before we elect our first Delegate under this system. After this special election, future elections will be run how it's written in the Charter/Election Act. (04-29-2016, 09:01 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Couple questions. 1. The way I imagined this working is how it works in most RL legislatures. There's a vote called, and the person who gets a majority of the vote becomes the Chair. It's an Assembly-driven process, rather than an election with a solid time-frame and start/end dates. The terms for the Chair wouldn't necessarily line up with any other office, which is ok because it's its own thing now. 2. I can see how this doesn't make much sense, if the Delegate isn't involved in the day-to-day forum government. That should be changed, so that the motion of no confidence only applies to the Cabinet. 3. I asked Eluvatar how TNP does it, and he linked me to their explanation. We talked a little about our requirements, and he seemed to agree with them. It would be great to get a more in-depth look from him, though. The influence requirement is simply the minimum number of endorsement multiplied by 365. It's roughly congruent to the influence you'd have holding that many endorsements for a year. We should create dispatches that let people know about the CRS, and really do a much better job of improving our WA numbers. TNP has a their WA Development Program, which is incredibly successful, so we should mimic that. As for how many would be eligible immediately: Tsu, DM, Kris, and Farengeto. The following people would be eligible if they increased their endos: myself, The Solar System Scope, The Sanghelios Legion, and Curlyhoward. There are a couple others on the cusp of reaching the Vassal category. If we do a better job of encouraging endoswapping, more people will be eligible, and we could probably reduce the Vassal requirement to Apprentice. 4. The Great Council would be a wipe-the-slate-clean event, as it should be. No more calling Great Councils just to make a few amendments. If anything, previous Great Councils generated a lot more disappointment and discontent, and this one is going exactly how they should (imo). Personally, I think previous GCs were far messy and basically vehicles to push pet projects. Future GCs should be modeled after this one. ~*~*~
Quote: |
Users browsing this thread: |
1 Guest(s) |