zeseryu
Veteran Member
Admin Officer
ops rights activist
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by zeseryu on Jun 10, 2020 20:38:12 GMT
I had a suggestion (https://totalfreedom.boards.net/thread/62655/elect-executives) with had 90% of the community supporting it, and while most of the suggestion is no longer relevant or has already been implemented, the major provision which we didn't implement was quarterly recurring elections for executive positions. Right now they are permanent (though technically, a vote-off has always been in the realm of possibility after inFAmas was removed), but in that suggestion it detailed how positions would be divided up into 3 quarters, and in each interval a position would have an election whether or not there was already an incumbent. I would support implementing this. Since the executive policy is currently being written, it's something to consider. zeseryu While I agree that Executives should only be in power if the majority of the community supports them, implementing a vote too often would push an incumbent executive to avoid taking risks that may benefit the server, for fear of re-election. What we absolutely do not want is an Executive putting the fear of re-election over their duty as an executive. Your system implements a vote way too often. My suggestion would be to have an election every 6 months instead. This would give the incumbent Executive time to perform his duties as a constituent and as a delegate towards this community. Furthermore, in our real world of politics, there's a reason why the House is up for re-election every 2 years, and is the sole proprietor of tax bills, as opposed to the senate being up for re-election every 6 years. I could definitely put something like "do you feel like this executive has done their job?" poll every 6 months. If the "no's" outweigh the "yes's" then a re-election for that spot would occur.
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 10, 2020 20:42:56 GMT
While I agree that Executives should only be in power if the majority of the community supports them, implementing a vote too often would push an incumbent executive to avoid taking risks that may benefit the server, for fear of re-election. What we absolutely do not want is an Executive putting the fear of re-election over their duty as an executive. Your system implements a vote way too often. My suggestion would be to have an election every 6 months instead. This would give the incumbent Executive time to perform his duties as a constituent and as a delegate towards this community. Furthermore, in our real world of politics, there's a reason why the House is up for re-election every 2 years, and is the sole proprietor of tax bills, as opposed to the senate being up for re-election every 6 years. I could definitely put something like "do you feel like this executive has done their job?" poll every 6 months. If the "no's" outweigh the "yes's" then a re-election for that spot would occur. I think there are 2 good ways of doing it: holding an election no matter what every 6 months, or having that sort of poll every 3 months and only then having a re-election. 6 months for this community may be too long just for an approval poll.
|
|
zeseryu
Veteran Member
Admin Officer
ops rights activist
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by zeseryu on Jun 10, 2020 20:53:47 GMT
I could definitely put something like "do you feel like this executive has done their job?" poll every 6 months. If the "no's" outweigh the "yes's" then a re-election for that spot would occur. I think there are 2 good ways of doing it: holding an election no matter what every 6 months, or having that sort of poll every 3 months and only then having a re-election. 6 months for this community may be too long just for an approval poll. 3 months also works. I do agree that 6 months is an awfully long time. This number can definitely be revised in the futute though. I will include this in the executive policy releasing soon
|
|
Darth
Veteran Member
Server Liaison
Posts: 2,534
| Likes: 1,826
|
Post by Darth on Jun 10, 2020 20:56:29 GMT
I think there are 2 good ways of doing it: holding an election no matter what every 6 months, or having that sort of poll every 3 months and only then having a re-election. 6 months for this community may be too long just for an approval poll. 3 months also works. I do agree that 6 months is an awfully long time. This number can definitely be revised in the futute though. I will include this in the executive policy releasing soon Four months, quarterly, seems more rounded. I suggest four months instead of three.
|
|
|
Post by Polaris Seltzeris on Jun 10, 2020 20:57:56 GMT
3 months also works. I do agree that 6 months is an awfully long time. This number can definitely be revised in the futute though. I will include this in the executive policy releasing soon Four months, quarterly, seems more rounded. I suggest four months instead of three. I don't think doing it quarterly is necessary in this way of implementing it. It should be every three months following the election of an executive, rather than just randomly choosing which executive to poll every 4 months.
|
|
zeseryu
Veteran Member
Admin Officer
ops rights activist
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by zeseryu on Jun 10, 2020 20:58:19 GMT
3 months also works. I do agree that 6 months is an awfully long time. This number can definitely be revised in the futute though. I will include this in the executive policy releasing soon Four months, quarterly, seems more rounded. I suggest four months instead of three. I will release a quick poll asking for the general consensus. I dont mind between the 3/4/6 months or whichever we pick but I'd like the communities thoughts
|
|