Let's get rid of the council vote!

[Hygro]

I had given it some thought and decided the council vote is entirely unnessisary. It's not like we people of the MSDG don't know whats best for the country, we just don't have the positions for every citizen to be in office.

Considering those who vote actively participate, we know how we are voting. I say do away with the council vote!

 

[Octavian X]

Resolutions of the Executive Council are still very necessary. We use them for emergency situations where a poll of the populace, though much preferred, is impossible due to extreme time constraints.

Also, when it comes to appointing people to fill vacancies, we want them to be placed in office as soon as possible.

 

[Hygro]

well give a short time frame and let anyone vote who can. It's not like those in office are actually particularly wiser about the situation.

 

[Ankka]

I think the counsil vote is OK.

 

[Bootstoots]

If there are extreme time constraints, the council vote wouldn't be used at all as our constitution has provisions for the President ratifying a treaty by himself with the Justice's approval. As far as appointments, we should use a poll rather than a council vote. And for treaties that need a quick approval but aren't extremely urgent, why not legalize a 24-hour treaty poll? I don't see why a council vote is needed in any situation.

 

[Ankka]

Oh... That sounds clever...

 

[Vander]

I'm not too keen of the council vote, either...

 

[Ankka]

Vote on the other thread for a result in this discussion!

 

[Hygro]

Wizard I cannot find a poll on the subject.

 

[Bootstoots]

The amendment that I proposed had to do with abolishing multiple Executive positions held simultaneously by one citizen, it didn't have to do with council votes, except for the fact that under the constitution before the amendment, somebody could control multiple council votes. However I do think that a constitutional amendment abolishing council votes would be a good idea, though I'm not sure that it would pass.

 

[Hygro]

it seems most people are for it. Bootstoots, your amendment is a start in the right direction though

 

[Ankka]

Whoops, I got mixed up here...

Sorry.

 

[Gingerbread Man]

I am not for it. Firstly, I think that executive members can only vote once in a council vote, no matter how many positions they hold.

also, a 24hr poll is a terrible idea. 1 - Many people wont be able to vote, or miss their go. 2 - Legislations or treaties may pass, without any discussion or thought, just vote and dispose of.

If anything, PM an executive about your opinion, to lobby them over. I would be happy to listen. The fact is that (most) executives check these forums on a daily basis, and watch it like a hawk. Normal users cant. (BTW, I have been a bit slack with checking here lately, but I usually check very often)

 

[Hygro]

Gingerbreadman, why do you value 4 votes over 10? what makes the executive council so smart or even active?

Our vice president hardly posts; FortyJ doesn't hold office so he can't vote; I'm always here and I cannot vote and I KNOW I'm just as good regarding our domestic or military affairs as anyone else; you say you're slacking off a bit, so while that doesn't mean you suck or anything silly like that, it does basically mean that you aren't really any wiser than the rest of us 10+ active members; Civgeneral makes a fine leader but seems to be here just as often as you, plus civgeneral and I have had some issues in the past that lead me to believe that while he's good, he ain't FortyJ; Octavian is about the only true MSDG fanatic in office so we have 1 out of 4 reasons to keep the council vote... not enough; players like wizard may not have a high post count per day, but most his posts are in the MSDG, in which he pays close attention, and yet he has no council vote. Did I mention bootstoots? I may have but I will again: he just played the save even though he holds no office, since our active gov't wasn't there. Where's his council vote?

Gignerbread Man, we have 4 executives. So if "most" check it regularly then what, 3 people watching the game that hold positions? I think this is power with too few people and I believe it turns many people off from the MSDG especially when active members can't vote on over half the votes.

 

[Bootstoots]

A 24-hour poll would be more democratic than a poll where only 6 people can vote, and only about 3 actually do. If they don't check into the forums during the duration that the poll is open, it's their own fault that they didn't see it. I have missed several SPDG polls that I didn't see in time to vote, but it doesn't bother me knowing that the poll was still democratic as it gave all citizens the opportunity to vote. Also, it may well take longer than 24 or even 48 hours for the council members to cast their votes. However, I do think the polls should be 48 hours or longer in duration whenever possible, but that a 24 hour poll should be held when necessitated, rather than a council vote.

 

[croxis]

do not forget that there are also lurkers hiding in the corners, reading these forums at least once a day [cough]ME[/cough]. Some chose not to hold positions for they do not know mp stratages, or not enough time to deticate to the game. However when a vote comes up, they vote....

 

[Hygro]

...and they know how to vote!

 

[Vander]

Aye, you can count on me lurking here twice a day for most of the week, if not more. I sure would like to feel more involved by actually being involved in the decisions that the coucil now votes on.

Besides, the Justice of the Court doesn't even get to vote in the council....

 

[Ankka]

IO also check this forum at least once a day if I can.

Duck was appointed as ambassador to GWT with three votes!

 

[Hygro]

I almost decided not to recognize that council vote it but I would have voted for him anyway