Re: spoon-discuss: Ministries

["Glotmorf" <glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 4/13/02 at 12:10 AM Wonko wrote:

>Quoth Donald Whytock,
>
>> Also, regarding,
>>
>> "A Vote of Non-Confidence is a proposal."
>>
>> Given that the failure to perform duties may occur at the beginning of
>the
>> nweek, and the proposal will only be acted upon at the end of the nweek,
>> should there be some sort of action accompanying the proposal that
>suspends
>> the minister from his duties until the issue is resolved?  Just to get
>> whatever he's supposed to be handling handled in the meantime?
>
>If e's failing to perform eir duties, why suspend em? "You're not doing
>what
>you should. So I order you not to do what you should!"

Failing to perform duties isn't necessarily just not doing anything.  I'd also read it as failing to perform them correctly -- that is, if they're not getting done right, they're not getting done.  If they're being done wrong, I'd rather they not be done at all.

>Also, does this mean that we could SHELVE a Vote of Non-Confidence? Or the
>admin could Veto it?

Yes to both.  The Admin may know of a good reason a minister isn't performing in a timely manner, and/or the players as a whole (as opposed to whoever posted the proposal) may be willing to give the minister the rest of a nweek to get going again.  But not two nweeks.

>> On another note, is electing ministers something we want a quorum for?
>
>Quorum like what? You mean, at least 2/3 of all players must vote, that
>sort
>of thing? 'Cause if we do, we might have trouble getting ministers if a few
>people go On Leave...
>
>One thing I'd like to see in this proposal is something along the lines of
>"If a player is a Candidate to be a Minister, e may refuse eir nomination,
>in which case e ceases to be a Candidate"
>
>Right now we could force people into Ministries they don't really want.
>Unwanted ministries would be bad.

So might a non-respresentative minority electing a minister courtesy of everyone's indifference to or absence from the election.  Better that it take a while for people to agree to a good minister than for one guy and some cohorts electing himself to be a bad one.

						Glotmorf