Mideast Governer Thread

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I've had a suggestion from a citizen to increase the number of petitioners needed to call a Moot. Any comments on that?

[MasterJedi]

I've had a suggestion from a citizen to increase the number of petitioners needed to call a Moot. Any comments on that?

I'd suggest 2/3 of the people.

[MasterJedi]

I've had a suggestion from a citizen to increase the number of petitioners needed to call a Moot. Any comments on that?

I'd suggest 2/3 of the people.

What would you do about inactive citizens?

Somebody should PM them about the decision to call for it. If a majority of citizens don't want it then it shouldn't be called.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

2/3rds of all Citizens might be too hard to get; 2/3rds of active citizens (or 2/3rds of non-inactive Citizens) could work though.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Does this go on the ballot now or next friday (I'm terrible at remembering dates, times, deadlines and so on...) ?

[afleitch]

Does this go on the ballot now or next friday (I'm terrible at remembering dates, times, deadlines and so on...) ?

Now. Funnily enough I just posted a seperate topic to that affect.

[afleitch]

I had to vote Nay i'm afraid. The selection method for calling a Moot was not clarified, all it said was that a Governor can appoint one at his will and they have the power to pass legislation. There was no guarantee it would be elected and therefore could have been interpreted by future Governors to mean an appointed oligarchy that could then be dismissed at the Governors whim. This I believe, would deeply undermime the Mideasts democratic institutions.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Hmm? This is what it says:

1. The Governer shall have the power to call an Assembly of all Citizens that shall be known as the Moot.
2. The Moot shall have the power to pass legislation and to make recommendations to the Governer.
3. The Governer shall be able to dismiss a Moot at a time of his choosing.
4. If a majority of Citizens sign a petition calling for a Moot, then a Moot shall be called whether the Governer wants one or not.
5. A Moot called by the People cannot be dissolved by the Governer, but may vote to dissolve itself.

It was designed to be a compromise and to act as a *check* on the office of Governer; if a future Governer chose to *appoint* a Moot, it would be a violation of the Mideast Constitution.
I would have rather seen elections over everyone, but I've accepted that we probably don't have enough people for that. Yet. It also (in theory...) gets around the main problem of everyone-is-a-member assemblies; it's not permanent and isn't designed to be. It has to either either the support of a majority of the People or of the Governer to be called.

[afleitch]

While I'll put my hands up and say I didn't not read correctly the 'all' part, I am still satisfied with my decision simply due to the open endedness of the amendment which would still allow a governor to dismiss a moot that he or she established at will. In other words a Governor could dismiss them if he or she didn't like what they proposed or what they were composed of. There is nothing to dictate what authority a moot would have, how far it would extend, how it could or could not override the Governor and a general code of conduct.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

due to the open endedness of the amendment which would still allow a governor to dismiss a moot that he or she established at will. In other words a Governor could dismiss them if he or she didn't like what they proposed or what they were composed of.

Potentially, yes. And if the People don't like that, then they can call another one and there would be nothing that a Governer could do about it. It's a little crude, but that possible conflict is intentional.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And that is also intentional; partly due to the old idea that a legislative body should be able, to a large extent, do whatever it feels like or have whatever powers it wants, on the basis that it takes it's right to exist from the People. And partly because I would actually like it, and Mideast politics, to be fun.

[Frodo]

It was a difficult decision, but I voted 'Aye'.  I still have reservations about the wisdom of this proposition (particularly the third point that effectively gives the governor carte blanche to dismiss the 'Moot' at will), but there is enough good about it to make it worth a gamble to enact.  I hope I won't come to regret my decision...

[afleitch]

It was a difficult decision, but I voted 'Aye'.  I still have reservations about the wisdom of this proposition (particularly the third point that effectively gives the governor carte blanche to dismiss the 'Moot' at will), but there is enough good about it to make it worth a gamble to enact.  I hope I won't come to regret my decision...

It needs a 2/3rds majority. My own rule of thumb is that if you have the slightest doubt over a constitutional amendment (emphasis mine) then you should always vote against it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Just 8 people voted. Not good. As over 60% were in favour, a modified version will appear on next months ballot. Suggestions for improving the existing proposal are welcome.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As from when I getteth round to posting them, this thread will be locked and replaced with an executive thread and a legislative (ie; propositions and so on) thread.
This was not done earlier, due to lack of time, due to real world concerns.

Thank you.