Chat rep powers

[Shaitan]

Should appointed chat room representatives hold the entire power of their department in the chat room? Specifically, should a chat representative have the right to vote in spot Council polls if they are the representative of their department in the chat room? Should this extend to the Forum if the Leader and Deputy are absent?

The YES choices will be aggregated for the overall YES/NO decision.

 

[Justus II]

I voted no. The leader has a deputy to represent him/her when absent. The chat representative is just an appointed assistant, there to speak for the department and ensure that the president is aware of the leaders instructions, as well as letting the leader know about what happened. I do not think, however, they should have legal authority, since they were not elected. I know the deputy technically wasn't either, but at least they ran, and it is an official position according to the constitution. For example, they are in the chain of command.

 

[Eklektikos]

I think that they SHOULD have full powers during turn chats. If they don't then it leaves open the possibility for decision making by a small minority of leaders/deputies in the face of vocal opposition from a majority of chat-reps. If you counter this by saying that the council members would have to take their opinions into account and not fly in the face of such opposition then surely you might as well just allow them to vote anyway. The idea that 2 departments could carry a vote against 6 others can only be contrary to democratic principle, as is the idea of anyone having to vote against their own judgement because the opposing majority do not have voting rights. Empowering the reps is the only way to ensure neither of these things can happen.

On the other hand I don't think they should have powers in the forum. If a leader or deputy of a department regularly fail to find time to vote in the council then it's questionable whether they should hold that position at all. Since we don't seem to have this problem I'm not entirely sure why the question was brought up

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by Eklektikos
Since we don't seem to have this problem I'm not entirely sure why the question was brought up

To define the position in its entirety. Better to go a bit farther than needed now than have to revisit it because we didn't go far enough.

 

[Eklektikos]

Originally posted by Shaitan

To define the position in its entirety. Better to go a bit farther than needed now than have to revisit it because we didn't go far enough.

good answer

 

[Cyc]

IMHO, These people are called Chat Room Representitives, so why has the forum even been brought into the poll. Silly option. Just adds to the confusion of the issue, especially when "the yes votes will be aggregated for the overall YES/NO decision. " Simplify...

Of course the chat Room Reps (CRR) should be able to vote in a spot vote. That's their job. The Leader chose them to represent the Department. If the Leader doesn't want the CRR to vote, then they should get their butt into the chat, or get another CRR to accomplish the voting in a manner they are happy with.

The President has a hard enough time getting advice and suggestions from the attendee's as it is. Limiting their voting power would grind the game to a halt. Suppose the Cultural Dept. wanted to override a Governor but couldn't attend the chat. Would he empower the CRR to demand the override? You bet. But then the Cultural Leader wouldn't let The CRR vote in the spot vote? Doesn't make sense.

Either put your faith in your people or don't use them.

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by Cyc
IMHO, These people are called Chat Room Representitives, so why has the forum even been brought into the poll. Silly option. Just adds to the confusion of the issue, especially when "the yes votes will be aggregated for the overall YES/NO decision. " Simplify...

Originally posted by Shaitan
To define the position in its entirety. Better to go a bit farther than needed now than have to revisit it because we didn't go far enough.

The question of further powers would eventually be brought up. This position grew out of a request for a fill-in to become an official appointed position defined in the Constitution. I simply felt it was past time to define it.

Aggregating the YES decisions allows all of the debate and discussion to occur in one thread instead of having two polls. One for the YES/NO choice and one for the WHICH YES choice.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

As with many things, I find myself siding with Cyc on this topic.

Due to the global nature of this game and it's participants, I think that the use of Chat Reps is absolutely vital, and therefore those individuals should be empowered to act and vote during the chat session itself.

There is one key point in the argument. That being these individuals were not elected. Well, in the US at least, much of the real work of governing is accomplished by staffers as well.

I think it is up to all of us as citizens to hold our government accountable for their actions, and those actions would include whom they trust as a rep, and what actions they took. Further, the more areas that are covered by department discussion and policy based upon the world situation prior to the chat, the easier it will be for the rep to act within the intended guidelines.

Those people empowered as official reps need to be clearly defined in advance, and I applaud the work that has been done already in that direction.

While I strongly support the use of empowered chat reps, I am equally opposed to those folks having any power outside of the specific chat they attend. In the forums the only official voices are the elected leader themselves and their deputy. Delegation of duty within the forums should not be allowed. Not every leader can attend every chat session due to the timing (I know that full well from my term) but, there is no excuse for an elected leader to not be guiding their policies in their forum thread.

Failure to do so should be judged harshly by all Phoeneticans.

Bill

 

[eyrei]

Speaking of chat reps, I need one. Any volunteers? I think I will have internet access from home starting tomorrow, so I should be able to attend most chats. However, I will not be available tonight, except for by some miracle, and I have a prior engagement on Saturday.

If a chat rep is duly appointed, he/she should have the power to vote as a leader during the chat. They cannot have full cabinet powers, as that would enable them to overturn the decisions of the leader.

 

[disorganizer]

i voted yes. reason:
if the leaders and the deputies are not there, its THEIR problem. so they should be punished by loosing ALL of their powers to the chat-rep for the turn-chat

 

[Chieftess]

I also support the 'in chat only' option. Chat reps are sort of like Press Secretaries.

 

[allhailIndia]

Being the chat rep, I feel my powers are akin to that of Press Secretary, but I feel, since I was not voted into power, I should not be allowed to make the big decisions in the Forums.

I suppose the Ministers have to take into account if the chat reps and the dept. want the same things ( I am a spice trader ) and then make the choice.

 

[Shaitan]

Giving full departmental powers to chat reps in the chat is definitely the winner here. I'll add this to my Constitutional Ammendment Proposal (coming soon to a theatre near you).

 

[chiefpaco]

Shaitan, do you have a number of changes for 1 ammendment? Or will each change be a separate proposal? If the former, I have some I will PM to you if you wouldn't mind including.

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by chiefpaco
Shaitan, do you have a number of changes for 1 ammendment? Or will each change be a separate proposal? If the former, I have some I will PM to you if you wouldn't mind including.

I've been accumulating changes and will propose them in a single (very large) ammendment.