Head Executive(s)

So yes, I think I should wait a few hours more before I put a finalized version with the recommendations so I can get more opinions on this.

PS. I hate how every time I do something like this I get the same or similar response. *Leader man on another game: I need you to get information on our enemies as to where there bases are. *Rhetorically answers: What? Like this? *throws in concise format of all the information asked* -Leader: That's perfect, do that!

@Vizindolf: Your proposal is good--it is a sound compromise.

I think I may just slightly prefer to let the legislature propose things and pass them independently and let the Consuls veto/pass them, instead of sending the resident proposals through them. Because resident proposals are so rare, the referenda for them won't be a problem of time since they only take a standard two days, and it also won't really help contribute to the legislature's activity. That said, I feel that it won't hurt to be more democratic and just go ahead and do the referenda.

I do, however, very much appreciate your compromise, Vizindolf, and I believe we should keep it on hand if people begin to get more proposal-happy. Perhaps we could use both compromises, actually; say, in a given week or maybe two weeks, a proposal is made by a resident. That first one will be decided via referendum. However, if there is a second, third, etc., then we can employ your compromise and allow the legislature to deal with them, which would slash RMB clogging and manage the difficulty of mass telegrams. That system would allow straight democracy at intervals it can be handled, and those more frequent can be more efficiently handled by the legislature. How does that sound?

I honestly thought that all proposals go through the Consuls and I really do enjoy the idea of a 2 day limit for referendum.

I gave out my proposal mostly because I wanted to contribute more than just voting. And a few questions. 1) I would like to ask how it would be played out if we did both, like would it be pre-schedualed which proposal would be used for a specific week? 2) Why deal with the RMB when the forum is obviously more of a controlled environment and we don't goof around too much here and when we do it is on specific threads.

@Qora- Smittywerbanjagermanjensen? HE WAS #1.....

I'm glad all of you are so eager with these proposals, and maybe giving more time for others to contribute is a great idea.
There's just one thing that I'm concerned about, and that is the people having the right to vote. It's not going to be good enough for the consuls, the IWURC, the justices, however you want the system run, to only be able to vote. Everyone needs the right to see the proposal and have a direct vote on it. That is my main wish. It wouldn't be the same IWU if it wasn't that way...

@Rachara I can see your point but would you prefer voting to be compulsory or optional? I can see how we can send it to... some group and they say "Ok this seems good. Let's get everyone to start voting on it."

I'm quite glad you got the reference.

I've got a simple idea, but it's probably not without it's flaws. What if instead of Consuls and Justices, we just combine the two into an elected Senate or House? It goes something like this, we elect 6 Senators or Governors or whatever you want to call them. Someone decides to submit a proposal and it goes directly to "Senate". If they all vote unanimously, then that's that. If not, the proposal goes to referendum. This way an unnecessary referendum can be avoided. The proposals are made public before the senate receives them, but can't be voted on by the general public yet. This way, if the senate makes a decision that is disliked by the vast majority, the issue can be referred directly to Kialga. The person in charge of this would be a mediator, also elected by the people. 

If anyone has something to add, or just wants to call me crazy, feel free.

All I am suggesting is that the proposal be checked and seen to be fit enough to become referendum, and then sent out as a mass TG. Of course voting should be optional, but we have to give them that option. That is why I will be voting for whichever compromise gives the people the right to vote. Not just the consuls/IWURC/etc.

And of course I got that reference; Spongebob is awesome :3

@Solaray---that is quite nice sounding, actually...

@Solaray, this reminds me a lot of "The Senate and People of Rome" lol, SPQIWU (Senate and People of the International Western Union). I quite like this as it seems to make elections easier in terms of actual number of offices.

@Qora: About conducting the system in which both are used, when the first proposal was posted, we would simply conduct a referendum like usual; if there happened to be one or more after it in that given period, it would simply go to the legislature instead. About the RMB, we use that because far less than half of our members actually have a forum account, so it would severely restrict the ability of most people to contribute.

@Rachara: I certainly agree with you on the purpose of democracy, and with the 2-day standard we've used until now, I feel we wouldn't have a problem working with the referenda. So why don't we do this: instead of immediately using Vizindolf's compromise and mine together, we could employ the most popular idea from this vote and see how well it works. If it ends up being the first compromise, then we can test how well we can handle the referenda; if it actually does get to a point where we cannot handle it, we can use Vizindolf's plan as a backup. If necessary, we could even do a referendum AND a legislature vote at the same time; however, I think it will be years until we get anywhere near that frequency. So is that agreeable?

Neat, I'm glad I didn't sound like a crazy person when I wrote that. I did think of it with the intention of keeping things simple without direct democracy or dictatorship.

@GROSS: The way you propose to use both compromises sounds very reasonable to me.

Yeah, it sounds reasonable.

Ok, so since we have reached evening, the vote for the specific idea to use is now complete. We will plan on using the first compromise, with a somewhat vague vote between 5 and 7 (I know not where Qora's and Solaray's votes lie now).

However, before we finish up this subject, I think we should decide what to do with regard to the second compromise, by Vizindolf. Should we put my first plan to combine them into immediate effect, or should we simply try the first compromise on its own, and use the second as a backup if too many proposals come in?

...in other words, do we combine them immediately, or test to see if the number of referenda is manageable with the first compromise?

I vote the second option. That way, we can preserve more of the democratic process, and continue to do so until we actually NEED to use an alternative. (this vote will only go for a couple hours, we need to wrap this up)

My vote is still with your compromise GROSS Independency and I vote for the second option.

I vote your compromise, GROSS, and the second option.

I vote for the first option.

I'm gonna have to vote GROSS plan, second option.

Ok, everybody. This is what we have so far, then.

1. There will be 5 executives.
2. The executives will have the ability to make proposals and vote on them as a single body.
3. Proposals passed by executives are voted on by Justices prior to going into effect (I'm not sure if everyone agreed on that or not, we mentioned it and then skipped over it).
4. Executives will review resident proposals for the purpose of promoting formal language and picking worthy ideas. If a proposal is sent back to the author the executives must list the specific problems with it.

The next thing, then, is to decide on a few other duties of the executives. Here is the initial list of additional jobs:
--The executives have the authority to order intelligence operations and request reports
--Proposals passed by the legislature must be passed or vetoed by the executives
--The executives are responsible for voting to expel or "forgive" inactive officials

If you have ideas for more duties for the executives, post them. We'll try to make this subject quick, so post yes or no for each of the listed duties above. Once we finish up on duties, we will take a little while to allow anyone to introduce new ideas to be decided on, and then we will move on to the next topic: Justices.

Yes

I say yes to all three as well.

Yes x yes x yes = 3(yes)

Yes to the third power.

Okay. So we have all agreed to allow the executives all three powers. Now, we have only three final things before we jump over to the Justices.

First, will we still call the executives the Consuls, or do we want to pick a new name?

Second, how long do we want to allow officials to remain inactive until the executives vote to expel them?

And, third, do we all agree that we should have a "chief" executive of the five to count votes? (that would be the only special authority--it would just mean the votes in executive decisions would go to that particular one)

1. I like the name "Consuls"...it's reminiscent of Ancient Rome.

2. Perhaps 7 days.

3. I believe that the "chief" should be chosen by the Consuls themselves.

I agree with Vizindolf on all three points. Once we have all five of our consuls elected, they should vote on a chief, themselves.

And just to give a heads-up, I will be proposing a recruitment team when the topic comes up. I think it is necessary that we have a steady recruitment setup, because I myself cannot recruit constantly, and I probably can stand for Iloistan and say he cannot either.

Ok. I agree with Vizindolf on all three as well. I believe it's safe to say we are finished on this topic. Now we will move on to the Justices. Here are the "notes" I have taken for the Consuls:

There will be 5 chief executives.


Executives can make proposals and vote on them as a single body.


Proposals passed by the executives must be approved by the Justices before going into effect.


Executives will review resident proposals for both grammar and proposal-worthy ideas. If a proposal is sent back to the author, the executives must include the specific problems with it. If the author feels the executives are being unfair, he or she can bring the proposal to Kialga for review. Problems that Kialga points out must be fixed or altered before the proposal can be voted on.


The executives have the authority to order intelligence operations and request reports.


Proposals passed by the legislature must be passed or vetoed by the executives.


The executives are responsible for voting to expel or "forgive" inactive officials.


Officials are deemed inactive after 7 days without logging on, unless a viable excuse was provided beforehand.


The executives will be known as the Consuls.


After all five Consuls are elected into position, the Consuls will vote to choose a head Consul, who will be responsible for collecting votes for Consul decisions.

This discussion will now move to the Justices section.