(02-19-2018, 09:49 AM)sandaoguo Wrote: I think it’s a matter of practical necessity that non-main justices are “side jobs.” The court is as active as it’s ever been, and yet only a single Justice is currently needed. The vast majority of the time, associates aren’t needed. So it’s unrealistic to expect active players to tie themselves down to a job they’ll rarely get to do. It’s not perfect, but few things are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the vast majority of the time justices aren't needed, then instead of making two AJ positions why not make one or allow the Chief Justice to select a deputy justice that the assembly then approves of?

The logic of "We don't really need the position, but it's important enough to create 2 more of, but it's also going to be treated as a side job" doesn't make sense.  We already had a three member court that did wonders. /sarcasm

It is the difference between stating that we want a legislative branch because of need and we're creating part-time jobs for already active players who hold full-time jobs.  If the goal is to give active players who already hold jobs another source of power, then nope.  

Again, I'm going to keep bringing up Legislator Committee because it functions in a similar way (3 members selected by the cabinet and then approved by the Assembly). Right now it's barely functioning as envisioned most likely because we don't need 3 members. Also the very fact that we can't get a third member.  If this law and the doubling up is fine, then we also need to allow Legislator Committee members to not be firewalled.