Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Welcome to The Rejected Realms

Government:

Delegate: Wabbitslayah
Officer: Frattastan (Foreign Affairs)
Officer: Marilyn Manson Freaks (Outreach)
Officer: PowerPAOK (Media)
Officer: Relfa (Culture)

Other Officials:

Speaker: Vulturret
RRA High Commander: Frattastan
RRA Commander: Guy
RRA Commander: Wopruthien
Welcome to The Rejected Realms, NationStates' ejection-free zone!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you can only view some areas of the board and you can only post in the Troubleshooting and Suggestions forum. If you register an account, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customising your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Register now!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Votes of no confidence?
Topic Started: May 17 2011, 09:05 PM (730 Views)
CrazyGirl
Member Avatar
RRA Commander
I'm not so convinced we can't fill a vacancy.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Biyah
Member Avatar
High Priest of the Cult
If we can fill a vacancy, then that person can challenge in the already established manner. If they can't or won't, why would we want to make the job very easy for them by removing the officer? If they can't work up the necessary enthusiasm to challenge someone, do we really want them?

If the officer isn't doing their job, it's going to be obvious.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Naivetry
Member Avatar
Spammer
I think we can fill a vacancy, too.

What I'm not sure about is why it would be easier to vote to create a vacancy (=vote of no-confidence), than simply to challenge anyone who becomes inactive. Having a vote of no-confidence adds an extra step to the process of replacing an inactive Officer. If we can in fact fill a vacant position, why would we need to have that extra step?
Edited by Naivetry, May 23 2011, 05:02 AM.
[nation]Kandarin[/nation] the Younger/[nation]Lirantha[/nation]
~
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
I am in agreement with Biyah.

EDIT: Me wants to be Officer of Making CrazyGirl Coffee!
Edited by Guy, May 23 2011, 08:14 PM.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Spartan Termopylae
The Fool on the Hill
A challenge is a vote of no confidence. If you can't do the job well enough to issue the challenge, then you talk to someone else who could, get them to challenge.

The only person who should be subject to a vote of no confidence is the delegate. A challenge still doesn't quite sit right for the delegacy
When you play the game of thrones, you win, or you die

Liebe ist fur alle da
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Naivetry
Member Avatar
Spammer
Looking at how the constitution is working with Earth's challenge and Uni's resignation, it occurs to me that although we have rules for an uncontested election, we don't have any way of creating a vacancy other than through the resignation of an Officer.

I think I'm okay with that, because it seems to be working as we want in this case. But if what I think is the correct procedure (= allowing 3 days for other candidates to step up, then skipping straight to a confirmation vote) is in fact the case, it could be made clearer by reordering that bit of the constitution or adding in a clause.

Spartan - I'm not sure how that would work. If I understand it correctly, a vote of no-confidence creates a vacancy in government. But the Delegate is the one position that has an in-game existence, primarily, and a vote of no-confidence here will not create a vacancy in the game. We have to have a Delegate, because the game doesn't allow us not to. :P And if that's the case, then we had better have someone ready to replace the old Delegate immediately - so the challenge system seems most appropriate to me. Then again, I'm a Yank, and we don't do much with votes of no-confidence, so my only experience with them is in NS. Let me know if I've misunderstood something!
Edited by Naivetry, May 25 2011, 06:57 PM.
[nation]Kandarin[/nation] the Younger/[nation]Lirantha[/nation]
~
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Spartan Termopylae
The Fool on the Hill
The way i was thinking was more it creates instant election. The incumbent keeps control until then, but has all executive powers revoked
When you play the game of thrones, you win, or you die

Liebe ist fur alle da
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Naivetry
Member Avatar
Spammer
I guess I could see that, but we'd still need a new Delegate in that case. What appeals to you about a vote of no-confidence as opposed to simply a challenge?
[nation]Kandarin[/nation] the Younger/[nation]Lirantha[/nation]
~
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Spartan Termopylae
The Fool on the Hill
Its more immediate and in the form ive suggestrd imvolves a total freeze on the delegates power until they either survive the vote or get replaced
When you play the game of thrones, you win, or you die

Liebe ist fur alle da
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Naivetry
Member Avatar
Spammer
Do you mean that the Delegate's powers would be suspended as soon as a vote of no-confidence was passed, or as soon as it was proposed?
[nation]Kandarin[/nation] the Younger/[nation]Lirantha[/nation]
~
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Spartan Termopylae
The Fool on the Hill
As soon as it it seconded. Id say that the instant someone seconds it, people should vote in favour. In a challenge id imagine that the incumbent hold power until the challenge is complete. A no confifence vote has more urgency.
When you play the game of thrones, you win, or you die

Liebe ist fur alle da
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Biyah
Member Avatar
High Priest of the Cult
With an officer, putting the position on hold is possible

This is not so with the delegate. they still have to act for the region, or the drawn out process can mean a loss of the seat or breach in security.

~B
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sedge
Member Avatar
Admin Slave
Yeah, this was an Officers only suggestion. Votes of no confidence for the Delegate are pointless and dangerous. There's always an in-game delegate whether we like it or not. We'd have to have a challenger for that, to replace them.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Thought Transference
Member Avatar
professional loafer
I assume we would never e foolish enough to consider extending "no confidence" votes to the Delegate. Biyah is right, allowing a challenge to the Delegate that suspends Delegacy powers is a recipe for invasion. But in case it's necessary to avoid anyone later saying there weren't many objections, I'm objecting now. :)
Peace,
TT

Coffee is the cause of all things. (Thales, 2nd ed.)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Spartan Termopylae
The Fool on the Hill
Well, folks shant be saying nobody objected. Everyone but me objected. Im always part of a minority of one on issues at the moment. Ah well. C'est la vie
When you play the game of thrones, you win, or you die

Liebe ist fur alle da
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Assembly Archives · Next Topic »
Locked Topic