Constitution: Changes to article H

[MOTH]

I present the following discussion on proposed changes to the wording of article H.

Article H.
              No person shall hold multiple positions of leadership 
              (President, Vice-President, Department Leader, 
              Judiciary, Provincial Governor) simultaneously,
              nor shall have more than one accepted nomination at the
              commencement of the general election.  In addition to a
              position of leadership a person may simultaneously hold 
              one Deputy or pro-tem position.

The change is to strike the word Deputy from the list of positions of leadership in the first paragraph and to add the entire last sentence.

Please discuss.

 

[MOTH]

Under the current definition there are 27 positions of leadership (7 Executive, 3 Judiciary, 5 Governors, 1 VP, 6 Executive Deputies, 5 Deputy Governors) and perhaps 21-30 people with the time available to hold one of these positions. The end of Term 3 has only 21 out of 25 positions currently held by a person. For Term 4 the situation seems to be about the same (a couple of existing people have expressed desire to be more active and at least 2 people have stated they just want to be citizens this time around).

This change would allow an active person to assist a second department in a supporting role and be able to officially cover for that person (post TC instructions) in the event of a temporary absence. The holiday period is coming up soon and having every position occupied will help to keep things moving.

I did not add anything about what would happen if a leadership position was declared vacant or the leader resigned. The language regarding vacancies is currently in the Code of Laws, thus I did not feel the details of that aspect should be in the constitution.

 

[Sir Donald III]

The ONLY thing I would do is allow a person to Accept both a Legislative (Governor) Nomination and either an Executive or Judicial Nomination. They would still only be allowed to hold 1 office (including Deputies & Pro Tems), and would either have to choose which office to hold, or else have that office chosen:

i.e. if the Minister's race is contested but the Governorship is uncontested, the person gets the Governorship and withdraws from the Minister's race. And vice versa. If this guy wins 1 race and comes in 2nd in another, the 3rd place person in the other race gets to be deputy.

I might also consider joining the JA and PD elections together, the only seeming difference between the two being which side of the bench they work on during CCs. (The winner gets to choose the desired office, the immediate runner-up gets the other.)

I can see having people being deputies and pro-tems for multiple departments, but I can NOT see having a person holding both an Office and a Deputyship in another department.

 

[MOTH]

I am not proposing any changes in the nomination process or the restriction to having accepted only one nomination at the start of an election. Nor am I proposing any change in the election process for determining deputy. This is really about filling vacant deputy positions.

I do see your point about a separation between Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary. How about adding:
"a person shall not hold a deputy or pro-tem position in the same branch of the government as their position of leadership"
Something doesn't quite ring right with this. Is there a lawyer in the house who could help provide clear wording for this part? How about just someone with better writing skills than me?

 

[gert-janl]

The ONLY thing I would do is allow a person to Accept both a Legislative (Governor) Nomination and either an Executive or Judicial Nomination. They would still only be allowed to hold 1 office (including Deputies & Pro Tems), and would either have to choose which office to hold, or else have that office chosen:

I would think completely the other way around. In order to keep the three branches of government separated, I would not accept one official being in more than one government branch.

I might also consider joining the JA and PD elections together, the only seeming difference between the two being which side of the bench they work on during CCs. (The winner gets to choose the desired office, the immediate runner-up gets the other.)

I like this idea.

Then, finally, the proposal. I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand one could argue like MOTH, that some positions need to be filled, and are currently vacant. On the other hand I really believe that one official should not fill more than one position.
Remember that we are using the current system to enable new players to get a (high) position in the government, and to prevent a 100% veteran government without room for newbies. Yeah, maybe we shouldn't worry too much about empty deputy positions. As long as we can fill all official positions, preferably with some contested elections, I am happy.

 

[Chieftess]

The only problem with this is (and it's been tried before) is that we spread out our government. There starts to be massive vacancies (just want until -- if ever -- we get more provinces!). We'll have vacancies in deputies, and maybe even governor spots. Even leader positions might remain vacant. 25-30 positions can be hard to fill sometimes.

 

[MOTH]

@Chieftess,
I'm not sure from your post if you are in favor of changes or not. Are you in favor of loosening the restrictions at least as far as deputies go? Or are you arguing that my changes do not go far enough and we should overhaul this article to allow for people to hold two positions under some limited conditions?

 

[Strider]

It sounds good to me, I can see nothing overly wrong with it. So I give it my support.

 

[donsig]

I do not think this is needed. Excluding leaders from being deputies gives new citizens more opportunities to enter government. Also, our government should not grind to a halt if we do not have all our deputy positions filled. I doubt ALL our elected officals will go AWOL at the same time.

 

[Chieftess]

MOTH - My point is that we'll wind up with many unfilled positions, especially if we decide to expand and gain more provinces. If you look at DG2, we had many unfilled positions because of that rule. Domestic had to take over about 5 provinces or so because no one could fill them.

 

[donsig]

MOTH - My point is that we'll wind up with many unfilled positions, especially if we decide to expand and gain more provinces. If you look at DG2, we had many unfilled positions because of that rule. Domestic had to take over about 5 provinces or so because no one could fill them.

I think that was due more to the fact that being governor of a very corrupt province is no fun at all.

 

[Civanator]

I doubt we will expand any more than we have now unless it be a couple base cities in the New World.

 

[snipelfritz]

I'm a little confused. MOTH, could you put up the old Article and the proposed one, one after the other? I'd appreciate it.

 

[MOTH]

for snipelfritz and others:
The current article H:

Article H.
              No person shall hold multiple positions of leadership 
              (President, Vice-President, Department Leader, 
              Judiciary, Provincial Governor, Deputy) simultaneously,
              nor shall have more than one accepted nomination at the
              commencement of the general election.

My proposed article H with some additional changes:

Article H.
              No person shall hold multiple positions of leadership 
              (President, Vice-President, Department Leader, 
              Judiciary, Provincial Governor) simultaneously,
              nor shall have more than one accepted nomination at the
              commencement of the general election.  In addition to a
              position of leadership a person may simultaneously hold 
              one Deputy or pro-tem position in a different branch of
              government.

 

[MOTH]

Are there any other suggestions on this proposed change before I present it for seconds and thirds?

To restate my basic idea:
I wish to loosen the restrictions on article H to allow a single person to have both a leadership position and a deputy position. This will allow for cross-coverage in the event of absences.

I could envision further restrictions made in the CoL to require that deputy positions be offered to players without an official position before they could be offered to a player with a position.

 

[Sir Donald III]

To restate my basic idea:
I wish to loosen the restrictions on article H to allow a single person to have both a leadership position and a deputy position. This will allow for cross-coverage in the event of absences.

I object to this on the very face of it. A Leadership position implies that you are willing to give your worth to that position. A Deputyship is not quite a Substitute teacher, it's also an advisor. But it does not require a full-time comitment except where the Minister is absent.

I would accept a person having Multiple Deputyships, provided that they vacate all Deputyships upon acceptance of a Full Ministership.


Maybe this would work:

a. No person shall hold multiple positions of leadership
(President, Vice-President, Department Leader,
Judiciary, Provincial Governor) simultaneously,
nor shall have more than one accepted nomination at the
commencement of the general election.
b. A person not in a position of leadership may simultaneously hold one Deputy or pro-tem position in each branch of government, but must vacate all Deputyships upon aceptance of a position of Leadership.

I could envision further restrictions made in the CoL to require that deputy positions be offered to players without an official position before they could be offered to a player with a position.

Er... no. This could take months to get to all the people who just popped in a City Name...

 

[Cyc]

Sorry, MOTH. I've been trying to ask myself (actually answer myself ) what advantage we would gain by making this change. I can't see one. If a Leader is absent and his Deputy must post for him or make a Judicial ruling, that Deputy can not already hold any other Leadership position, otherwise there will be a possible conflict of interest present. If the abandon their Leadership position to move from a Deputy to another Leadership position, then they have left the position we elected them to in order to fill a position we have no say about. SOMEONE is going to have to be appointed to a Leadership position is that position is deemed absent, whether it is the Deputy or some other citizen, so this will not shorten the appointment process. Therefore, I see no advantage in making this change.

The only advantage that is evident is the opportunity of a Deputy being present to post Instructions if a Leader is absent. But OTOH, who is going to cover the Leader who gives up his position to become the Deputy being promoted to make those Instructions? That persons Deputy? What if they don't have a Deputy? It goes round and round. I will probably vote NO on this.

 

[MOTH]

It appears that the examples I have seen were minor and that they have been handled in the past when they come up. I will let this die.

 

[GenMarshall]

I am not proposing any changes in the nomination process or the restriction to having accepted only one nomination at the start of an election. Nor am I proposing any change in the election process for determining deputy. This is really about filling vacant deputy positions.

Actualy, on the topic of the nomination process, I have posted a discussion thread that would help reform the nomination process to prevent the infamous "1 min crisis" in the FAs thread that I wish to have prevented in the future since there is no set exact deadline. The thread can be found here

 

[blackheart]

I can't say I agree with this proposition MOTH.

Cyc has a point here, it is hard enough maintaining one governmental job, let alone two three or four.