Join the new world

Requester: odan

...

Mael Dunbar
Congressman for I&W


... pick one name and stick to it 😛

Odan requested a debate with this text 😐 easy as that

indeed. so it is an actual debate so we can try and get it straightened out once and for all.

I still believe this shoould be optional. If no active enough deputy can be found, better dont appoint anyone.

doubt there will be enough support to make it a completely separate election again, so i think the best addition to the current (d)CoC laws would be something along these lines:

change:
article 4
2: 2. On the 27th of each month, or when the Chairman of Congress leaves office before his term has ended, a topic will be opened in the debating section of Congress where all citizens of the eNetherlands can candidate themselves as Chairman of Congress. Each candidate is obligated to run with a candidate for the dCoC position, if a candidate does not have a dCoC candidate they will be excluded from the vote.

add
article 5
4: If the dCoC resigns the CoC is obligated to assign a new dCoC, this assignment will be immediately voted on by congress

I don't really see what the reason is to see the dCoC as a separate entity. If you don't have confidence in the ability of a CoC without a deputy you just don't vote for him. If he halfway the term makes the decision to appoint a deputy you don't like you can make known that you don't have confidence in that decision. If that doesn't work you can ultimately start a MoNC.

Well, obviously the law needs to be changed so that people are forced to announce that they won't have a deputy in the first place.

Also as the CoC interprets our lawbook, a deputy can be very helpful to remove the appearance that he only interprets it in his personal interests, especially if this deputy is from another party.

Regarding the recent turmoil: ElGorro interpreted that it was fine to not announce he would be running without a deputy, which was one of the things that triggered that MoNC. One of the reasons being that it was not even clear whether the dCoC position was optional, as it had always been filled.

It would be convenient if the CoC could step aside and say "I'll let my deputy interpret the laws", and avoid immediately requiring a MoNC...

When did this ''dualism'' in CoC vs. dCoC - ever - occur? I can't recall many instances of a CoC ''stepping back'' to let dCoC interpret things due to a conflict of interests.. Seems nice in theory, doesn't work out that way in practice.

It may be left to be nice in theory, as the CoC can always overrule the dCoC. So typically whenever we had 2 active (d)CoCs, it would always end with the CoC doing just this.

But it is highly odd that the CoC gets to decide the interpretation of the rules regarding the CoC position and CoC election, which he definitely plays a major role in, while by convention he votes neutral in his own election. So in one instance he does step aside, while in the other he doesn't...

it has happened in the past when a debate was directed towards a CoC that he would step back and only let the dCoC handle the debate.

My debate was earlier! 😛

https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-congress-changes-on-the-deputy-chairman-2693712/1/20

Do you require any action from the chairman?

Nah, it was lost in the Chairman mess and joke proposals so let's await this proposal first.

Dedicating an ''election'' to this irrelevant position is too much for me. You vote for a certain Chairman - and considering the fixed political balance that result will just copy with a ''dCoC'' in a vote - so I consider this a degradation of the improvements made on this recently (by making it an appointment) - and even better would be that this is optional whenever CoC feels he needs backup.

well the dCoC is technically voted upon together with the CoC. so if a replacement happens i feel it needs to voted on by congress.

I remember just a few weeks ago I was ''appointed'' dCoC as a placeholder. Be gone with this obligated decoration!

How about making the procedure to require the candidate Chairman to announce his deputy or state that he will run without. That way Congress can decide per situation if they allow the Chairman to run without deputy.

This I like. If congress trusts someone can manage CoC duties alone without the help of a dCoC that should be fine. And if they prefere someone with a dCoC than they will either vote for the other guy or reluctantly vote for that single player as no one else applies for the job.

This is a sole congress matter which only congress should deal with. The Government will not interfere with these matters however with that being said, ministers are free to give their own opinions.

Every Dutch citizen is free to give their own opinions.

I prefer clarity in either case, but I prefer one with a deputy in case CoC falls out for any reason. Otherwise a new vote is required to elect new CoC. Continuity is important to keep Things running.

Agreed, this comment suggests the comment by elgorro is a valid one. It is the decision of congress to vote a CoC. We csn vote one down who runs without dCoC but in case we trust CoC to not go up in smoke he can become a CoC. This also allows for flexibility in times when candidates and even deputies are scarse believe it or not a year ago we had to start multiple votes to even find a CoC candidate.

we all know not having a dCoC can lead to bad things, and even a CoC that is trusted can become ill/hurt/unable to log in.

those multiple votes had to be started because willing candidates kept getting voted down by people that weren't willing to step up themselves.

Yes also true odan, so ideally we want a CoC to have a deputy. Congress can ask CoC to get a deputy if he does not have one yet. Maybe we can even have people volunteer. If he doesn't want a deputy we can always vote no if we believe this person will not be active. RL might always prevent activity but one does not get ill that often and no internet access can be anticipated as you know what you have planned (most of us do).

Maybe an idea to bring my suggestion to the vote? I believe its a good compromise.

Ok, here come the silly questions:
1. What does a chairman of Congress 'do' (in erepublik)?
2. What happens when an active government doesn't have a CoC? What will go wrong? What is broken?
3. Do all government positions need a backup? (In case of temporary internet failure) or is it only a problem if this happens with the CoC?
4. Is a dCoC a passive CoC until the CoC, CoC's no more? Or does it actually do something while the CoC is alive and kicking?
5. What if the Chairman of Congress is Disabled in Connectivity (if the CoC is DiC) can we then make fun of that situation until the next erec.. elections?

1. administrates/moderates congress. so opening/closing debates and votes. making sure the law is followed in those instances etc.

2. (d)CoC isn't a governmental role. no votes/debates etc.

3. preferably yes all positions should have a "deputy" or state secretary in gov. however a government and it's members if needed can handle multiple departments if needed when a minister or secretary isn't online.

4. no a dCoC isn't passive he has the same responsibilities and privileges the CoC has, the only thing that sets them apart is that the CoC can overturn a decision by the dCoC.

"4. Is a dCoC a passive CoC until the CoC, CoC's no more?" You just broke my tongue