Constitution Poll: Appointments and Absences

Appointments and Absences


  • Total voters
    25
  • Poll closed .

Chieftess

Moderator
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
24,160
Location
Baltimore
OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: Appointments and Absences

There are a few points to vote on in this poll. Once this poll is finished, the final article will be written and voted on. As there were no points on appointments (pardon the pun), I will provide the appointment option from the previous demogame.


Elected Officials can appoint deputies
Elected Officials can not appoint deputies (deputy is runner-up)

Unoffical Absence - An absence that is not reported in the absence registry, whereby the elected official has not posted in the past 72 hours (3 days).

Official Absence - A written absence in the absence registry of up to one week.

If an official extends the absence, the deputy assumes the respected position (or an official is appointed by the president)

The official, or president if need be, will announce the appointment in the citizens forum. If there are any objections, a citizen can create an override poll. This poll follows the polling procedures.
 
For the Official Absence..I don't like one week..What happens if somebody is going on vacation for more than 7 days? I like the Unoffcial Absence though...

- TP
 
My "Other" is for Unofficial Absences. Until we know what kind of government we're using, actually stating out loud what legnth restriction you want on it is silly. With a traditional government, I believe the "not posting Instructions for 2 T/Cs would make a Leader Absent. That worked, but I fail to see that option posted above. If we use an alternate government, 2 T/Cs would probably be too long of a time frame. Heck, with the alternate, 3 days could be too long. So, not only have you left out an option, but the Absense portion is premature.
 
Public polling on the constitution? That's as bad as public election polling...
 
Noldodan said:
Public polling on the constitution? That's as bad as public election polling...
Noldodan, have you been smoking that Hobbit ganji again? We've had public polling on Constitutional matters for a while now. :rolleyes:
 
I must be the only one that wants to still see the runner-up deputies :(
 
It just says they can appoint deputies (i.e., in the case of an absence), not that deputies can't be the runner up in an election.
 
Chieftess said:
It just says they can appoint deputies (i.e., in the case of an absence), not that deputies can't be the runner up in an election.
wooo wooo wooo, does this mean those options require the elected official to ask the runner up to be deputy first?!?
 
Black_Hole said:
wooo wooo wooo, does this mean those options require the elected official to ask the runner up to be deputy first?!?
it means it could be put in the COL to do it that way...
 
MOTH said:
it means it could be put in the COL to do it that way...
which is the exact opposite of the way i wanted it...

so CT didnt actually put an option for the elected official has full control of their deputy!?! great poll...
i dont want the official to be forced to choose the runner up first, however there is no option for it not being this way
 
Attempting to decide mulitple issues in one poll is always, always a bad idea.

Most of the polls CT put up were good, but this is one of the bad ones.

Sigh.

-- Ravensfire
 
On deputies, I would like to see a place where people can register their interest in being a deputy, and a time limit on getting a deputy appointed after which the official gets some "help".

Deputy promotions to the absent official's position should be automatic.

We need to define how the President is replaced if there is no VP, and who appoints replacement justices.
 
ravensfire said:
Attempting to decide mulitple issues in one poll is always, always a bad idea.

Most of the polls CT put up were good, but this is one of the bad ones.

Sigh.

-- Ravensfire

No need to kill the messanger. I merely put up the options that I saw in the discussion thread.
 
I voted for all of the options since they all sound good to me!
 
My other is for the absent period:

For unofficial absences: 2 turnchats without instructions appeared to work well for the traditional style government, for an alternative government I think we'd need to see a bit more detail or be prepared to adjust it as we find out how it all works in practise.

For official absences: a blanket 1 week? what if someone is elected to a position even if they state at the time they're on holiday for a fortnight? OK, in that position I wouldn't personally run, but if they are the only person prepared to run what then? Perhaps it needs to be more flexible - arrangements for planned absences above a week are to be agreed with the president might be one way of doing it.
 
Chieftess said:
No need to kill the messanger. I merely put up the options that I saw in the discussion thread.

CT - far from it, but this just isn't the best poll you've put up. When you're trying to decide multiple issues (which this poll is), put them in seperate polls. This is one is confusing and complicated.

-- Ravensfire
 
I feel sorry for people who have to decide between having a life an playing a DG, but the DG shouldn't be held hostage by one citizen, no matter how important they are (grin).
 
ravensfire said:
CT - far from it, but this just isn't the best poll you've put up. When you're trying to decide multiple issues (which this poll is), put them in seperate polls. This is one is confusing and complicated.

-- Ravensfire
I must agree. We must tackle one issue at a time. It does seem that some of the issues in here are contradictory and need refinement.
 
Mock polls. We used them for DG5. When did we decide not to use them in DG6?

@GoodGame - Who's holding the game hostage?
 
If the game has to come to a grinding halt for the president to take a real life vacation, that's holding the game hostage (grin).
 
Top Bottom