Elected or Appointed Ministers?

Togas · January 9, 2004, 02:53

This is a public opinion poll to see how the team feels about this issue.

Please debate the issue in this thread and only vote once your mind is made up.

ISSUE:

Should the Ministers for this team be appointed by the Consuls or should they be periodicly elected?

Thoughts on each option:

APPOINTED:
Consuls pick and choose people who work best with them.
Can easily and quickly replace a minister.
Minister don't have to campaign or worry about losing their job in the middle of a long-term plan.
Consuls easily overrule Ministers (who serve at the whim of the Consuls)

ELECTED:
More variety as more people involved.
Ministers represent who the people want advising the Consuls -- less direct power by the Consuls over the Ministers.
Constant hastle of elections and trying to find people to run.
Who wins a popular election may not be the "best" person for the job.

Debate!

--Togas

Paddy · January 9, 2004, 03:37

I am torn by the decisions you have presented...

I have voted that Minister should be appointed by the consuls....

Yet I feel that:

- Consuls pick and choose people Ministers who have put up the best campaign... thus Ministers do have to campaign.

- If Ministers campaign well enough other members may approach the consuls with their recomendations.

- The Consuls need to be in concensus to overrule Ministers

I understand what you mean by 'Who wins a popular election may not be the "best" person for the job' but if we only want the best people, then don't we just need to run a tounie and then let the winners play the game...?

BigFree · January 9, 2004, 04:27

Apoointed...it just makes more sense to me.

Donegeal · January 9, 2004, 06:29

Appointed.

Damn, that is a good document. Who the hell came up with it anyway?

Hot_Enamel · January 9, 2004, 09:01

There is a perception in the ISDG, that the consuls wield too much power.

Appointing their own ministers is one such example.

Personally, I dont thave a problem with it.
But why dont we :
1. The consul chooses his minister.
2. The members confirm his appointment by poll.

The Consul also has the option to provide 2 or more candidates...(say if more than one wants the job & the consul doesnt mind working with either)
In this case, the people have an old fashion vote.

This is similar to the system that was floated in Australia a few years back when there was a referendum to become a republic (It failed...we are still a monarchy - long live the queen

)

Regs

Rhothaerill · January 9, 2004, 13:52

I would agree with Hot_Enamel's proposal to have the consul's choose and the populace confirm.

civman2000 · January 9, 2004, 15:04

I agree there should be a confirmation process requiring 67% approval. I also think that if the consuls cannot unanimously agree who to appoint they must give multiple choices for confirmation.

conmcb25 · January 9, 2004, 17:10

Quote:

Originally posted by civman2000
I agree there should be a confirmation process requiring 67% approval. I also think that if the consuls cannot unanimously agree who to appoint they must give multiple choices for confirmation.

I agree with H_E's idea but not the 67%.

Just because we need to keep this simple. Lets just go for a simple majority. Easy simple, and wastes less time then if we didn't get 67%, lets say it was 60%, then what do we do? Hold another election? Then we have to find someone else?

This is my own opinion and not a counselor decision

notyoueither · January 9, 2004, 17:37

I agree with Hot_Enamel as well.

The confirmation polls in the other game have worked well, even though they were not mandated.

Also, 67% is too much for any sort of election, IMO.

Kloreep · January 9, 2004, 18:08

Hot Enamel's proposal sounds good to me.

Quote:

Originally posted by civman2000
I agree there should be a confirmation process requiring 67% approval.

67% is a tall order, especially if there's an election with two popular choices. Let's stick to simple majority.

Quote:

Originally posted by civman2000
I also think that if the consuls cannot unanimously agree who to appoint they must give multiple choices for confirmation.

I think they would have to do this if they could not agree on a choice. But no need to legislate it; the electoral system is there if they want to put up multiple candidates for whatever reason.

Wooglin · January 9, 2004, 20:01

I like H_E's proposal.

Octavian X · January 9, 2004, 22:45

Wow, not a day into the new term, and your already trying to limit our power?

H_E's idea sounds fine, so long as a similar procedure is put in place so that ministers may be removed easily. That's the reason the consuls were given power to appoint ministers in the first place - justification for removal.

Tassadar500 · January 9, 2004, 23:00

Since almost everyone is in support of H_E's idea why don't we just use it? I want the government organized A.S.A.P. Consuls should start picking the ministers tonight or tommorrow

notyoueither · January 9, 2004, 23:05

There can be no critic of a vice more vocal than someone who has experienced it. Me, just now.*

But seriously, OctX, what you mentioned is the way it has worked in that other game. The ministers have to work with the Consuls, because the Consuls have the final say on what is done in game (with the exception of rarely used Laws passed by the Senate).

The procedure to remove a minister would be for the Consuls to decide that a change is required, and to dismiss the individual and seek a replacement. That hasn't happened yet. It really hasn't had to happen, because as I mentioned, the Consuls have the final say on actions anyways.

* But I think someone else has said something similar.

Togas · January 9, 2004, 23:13

I voted "abstain" in this poll and was surprised to see the vote so lop-sided in favor of appointment thus far.

I also like the proposal H_E set forth. We'll give this thread/poll another day or so to see if anyone else has any strong opinions before any decision is made.

But do know that right now the new Consuls are beginning discussions on who we feel would do the best job in each of the Ministries.

--Togas

E_T · January 9, 2004, 23:36

Appointed and then Confirmed.

BUT, I think that we should have another twist to this so how about this:

Ministers
1) the various Ministers are first (at the start of the game), Appointed by the Consuls and confired by the Populus.

2) the term length of a Minister is 2 months

3) At the begining of every odd month, for 3 days, the Consuls ask for nominations or people who might be interested in the position. The Current Incombant is also allowed to try to be re-elected.

4) The Minister Nominate is then given 3 days to present to the Consuls and Populus, why they should be the new minister (or stay in their office).

5) The Consuls then decide whom to present to the populus, their choices for the Position, and the Populus Confirms the appointment in a 3 day poll. This is not limited to 1 canidate per position.

Just a thought. But this would have the best of both worlds

E_T

Paddy · January 9, 2004, 23:47

Ok, so when I read the Constitution, it has some very clear ideas on these matters.

So once we clear this up, does the Constitution get adjusted as well?

Edit: I had to go check

The Apolytonian Constitution

Section A. The Consuls

Number 8. The Consuls appoint Ministers.

Tassadar500 · January 10, 2004, 01:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Paddy the Scot
Ok, so when I read the Constitution, it has some very clear ideas on these matters.

So once we clear this up, does the Constitution get adjusted as well?

Edit: I had to go check

The Apolytonian Constitution

Section A. The Consuls

Number 8. The Consuls appoint Ministers.

Yes the Constitution will be amended but we must post a poll first due to rules in our Constitution.

Quote:

Originally posted by E_T
Appointed and then Confirmed.

BUT, I think that we should have another twist to this so how about this:

Ministers
1) the various Ministers are first (at the start of the game), Appointed by the Consuls and confired by the Populus.

2) the term length of a Minister is 2 months

3) At the begining of every odd month, for 3 days, the Consuls ask for nominations or people who might be interested in the position. The Current Incombant is also allowed to try to be re-elected.

4) The Minister Nominate is then given 3 days to present to the Consuls and Populus, why they should be the new minister (or stay in their office).

5) The Consuls then decide whom to present to the populus, their choices for the Position, and the Populus Confirms the appointment in a 3 day poll. This is not limited to 1 canidate per position.

Just a thought. But this would have the best of both worlds

E_T

I don't think that the ministers should ever be replaced unless replaced by a CoC. If they are doing a good job then you might as well keep them. And if they aren't then call a CoC. I think the system now works perfectly.

Paddy · January 10, 2004, 01:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Nuclear Master
I don't think that the ministers should ever be replaced unless replaced by a CoC. If they are doing a good job then you might as well keep them. And if they aren't then call a CoC. I think the system now works perfectly.

I like the sound of that.

Would they then get the option of resigning / retiring with some amount of notice?

Tassadar500 · January 10, 2004, 01:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Paddy the Scot

I like the sound of that.

Would they then get the option of resigning / retiring with some amount of notice?

If someone calls a CoC and it passes (Once you call a CoC you must create a poll on it to decide what will happen). Since it has never actually happened before I would assume they would only have a day or two or no amount of notice at all.

Togas · January 10, 2004, 03:22

Just as a note,

I started this thread/poll to get a feel for how the team felt about the minister issue and if we should seek to change our (inherited) Constitution.

I'm happy to see that the team seems to prefer that we appoint Ministers.

I do want to make it known that we should take advantage of this time, before the game starts, to improve any rules, habits, or policies that we can. If there's things to be changed, I think I can safely speak for OctX and ConMcB when I say that we're happy to help facilitate the changes.

--Togas

Tassadar500 · January 10, 2004, 16:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Togas
Just as a note,

I started this thread/poll to get a feel for how the team felt about the minister issue and if we should seek to change our (inherited) Constitution.

I'm happy to see that the team seems to prefer that we appoint Ministers.

I do want to make it known that we should take advantage of this time, before the game starts, to improve any rules, habits, or policies that we can. If there's things to be changed, I think I can safely speak for OctX and ConMcB when I say that we're happy to help facilitate the changes.

--Togas

I was quite suprised, to say the least, that almost everyone agrees with appointed ministers instead of more of a mix. I think everyone agrees with H_E's proposal except the 67% (let's just have a simple majority).

Beta · January 10, 2004, 23:34

H_E's proposal with a simple majority.

And I like the two month term. It could end up with more people involved - which would be a good thing.

Tassadar500 · January 11, 2004, 01:58

Consuls- Any news on the ministers yet?

I will be posting a discussion thread on the minister terms or the lack thereof. Then depending on the support I will post a poll whether on not to institute the rule and ammend the constitution.

Octavian X · January 11, 2004, 02:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Nuclear Master
Consuls- Any news on the ministers yet?

Be assured, we're working on it.

Togas · January 11, 2004, 02:27

One thing is clear, and I don't think the other two Consuls will mind if I make this announcement:

Beta has been chosen to serve as our Foreign Affairs Minister.

My hope is that Beta will assemble a good team of ambassadors and others to work with him. I also would like to hear some of Beta's thoughts about how he plans to run the ministry.

In other news:

We are close on a decision on the other three ministries. And we're working on something new for Kloreep.

--Togas

rendelnep · January 11, 2004, 06:32

why add another level of elections to the roster? Appointment I say!!!

E_T · January 11, 2004, 17:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Nuclear Master
I don't think that the ministers should ever be replaced unless replaced by a CoC. If they are doing a good job then you might as well keep them. And if they aren't then call a CoC. I think the system now works perfectly.

A CoC (or somethine along that line) would be o.k., but the thing about having terms and new "elections" helps to keep people involved, especially newer people. This is one of the problems we have had with the PTWISDG, is keeping people interested and involved.

This would be one method that we could possibly keep interest up.

E_T

Beta · January 12, 2004, 08:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Togas
One thing is clear, and I don't think the other two Consuls will mind if I make this announcement:

Beta has been chosen to serve as our Foreign Affairs Minister.

My hope is that Beta will assemble a good team of ambassadors and others to work with him. I also would like to hear some of Beta's thoughts about how he plans to run the ministry.

In other news:

We are close on a decision on the other three ministries. And we're working on something new for Kloreep.

--Togas

This makes my Monday morning! Thank you for your vote of confidence. I will start a new thread shortly asking for ambassadors and ideas on how to run the foreign affairs ministry.

Rhothaerill · January 12, 2004, 14:12

Congrats Beta!

I imagine that if we do go the confirmation route you'll have unanimous or near-unanimous support.