[Discussion] Nominations for a New Senator - June/July

Post by **Dalton** » 2006-06-08 01:31pm

Please post your nominations here. Remember to provide links to supporting evidence! Nominations are up on July 28.

Post by **Zaia** » 2006-06-22 01:35pm

No one has any nominations?

I have one or two, but I'm not allowed to suggest people.

Post by **Edi** » 2006-06-22 01:41pm

You aren't the only one, Z. I've a couple of ideas as well, and have to keep quiet. Then again, it's no disaster if we do get a dry month every once in a while.

Edi

Post by **Zaia** » 2006-06-22 01:42pm

Agreed. I just find it a little frustrating that we can't nominate.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2006-06-22 01:46pm

Can't you suggest it to a Senator for consideration?

Post by **Edi** » 2006-06-22 01:50pm

Zaia wrote:Agreed. I just find it a little frustrating that we can't nominate.

You aren't the only one, honey.

Gil Hamilton wrote:Can't you suggest it to a Senator for consideration?

No, because the rules prohibit that too. Any suggestions of someone as a candidate invalidate the suggested person as a viable candidate, and it doesn't make any distinction between a peon or a staff member doing it. So Senators only, in a very strict manner.

Edi

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2006-06-22 01:55pm

Edi wrote:No, because the rules prohibit that too. Any suggestions of someone as a candidate invalidate the suggested person as a viable candidate, and it doesn't make any distinction between a peon or a staff member doing it. So Senators only, in a very strict manner.

Well, under a strict reading of the rules, the suggested person won't necessarily be invalidated, though the suggester would be barred from the Senate:

iii) If you get asked to nominate someone else then inform the Senate and we'll make a decision on whether to bar them (we'll certainly bar the person asking).

But, yeah, that would make it a very bad idea non-Senators to make suggestions unless there is some kind of ammendment to allow for it in a controlld manner. There doesn't seem to be a need for that at this moment, though.

Post by **Edi** » 2006-06-22 02:00pm

Being barred from the Senate candidacy is rather redundant for the mods, since the Senate is basically the pool of potential new mods anyway. But when you take it together with the mods barred from nominating rule, it seems to go against the spirit of the rules if we have the Senators act as our proxies. Which is why we've kept our traps shut. Or I have anyway.

Edi

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-22 02:30pm

I nominate your mom. I hear she's very popular.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2006-06-22 08:06pm

I know that Senators can't be a Governor or anyone elses proxy, but I don't see the harm in people making suggestions for a Senators review. The Senator, after all, is free to not make the nomination, after they make their own investigation and review of the candidate. Governors might catch some gems that any given Senator might miss.

If it is against the rules it is against the rules, I guess. We could have a Senatorial amendment to the rules that if the Senators draw a complete blank on nominations, it would then become open for the Governors to make suggestions for Senatorial vote.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2006-06-22 10:19pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:I know that Senators can't be a Governor or anyone elses proxy, but I don't see the harm in people making suggestions for a Senators review. The Senator, after all, is free to not make the nomination, after they make their own investigation and review of the candidate. Governors might catch some gems that any given Senator might miss.

If it is against the rules it is against the rules, I guess. We could have a Senatorial amendment to the rules that if the Senators draw a complete blank on nominations, it would then become open for the Governors to make suggestions for Senatorial vote.

There's nothing wrong with having a month or even two go by without nominations. Even with the number of Senators we have now, we don't get anywhere near 100% participation in Senate mattters, so it's arguable we have a more than comfortable number of Senators already. As a result, I don't think there needs to be lot of pressure to add more every month.

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2006-06-22 11:58pm

Either that or we could alter the rules to allow for Governors to nominate. Simply require a seconding by a non-governor perhaps. Anyway I'm drawing a blank for nominations since my involvement in debate has gone down.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-23 03:05am

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:
Gil Hamilton wrote:I know that Senators can't be a Governor or anyone elses proxy, but I don't see the harm in people making suggestions for a Senators review. The Senator, after all, is free to not make the nomination, after they make their own investigation and review of the candidate. Governors might catch some gems that any given Senator might miss.

If it is against the rules it is against the rules, I guess. We could have a Senatorial amendment to the rules that if the Senators draw a complete blank on nominations, it would then become open for the Governors to make suggestions for Senatorial vote.
There's nothing wrong with having a month or even two go by without nominations. Even with the number of Senators we have now, we don't get anywhere near 100% participation in Senate mattters, so it's arguable we have a more than comfortable number of Senators already. As a result, I don't think there needs to be lot of pressure to add more every month.

There doesn't need to be one every month, but it is frustrating to have a name, not see it come up month after month, and not even be allowed to suggest it under the strictest reading of the rules.

The original rationale for barring governors from nominating was so that it didn't appear the mods were trying to stack the Senate with loyal cronies who'd rubber stamp everything they did (we did, after all, pick the first 25 or so). I think that rationale can be safely said to be obsolete; anybody can look at the Senate and see that 1) the senators are fully independent of the governors, including our hand-picked list of charter members and 2) the mods don't vote as a bloc and so we couldn't effectively pack the Senate if we tried. I think an amendment to the rules may well be in order; I simply don't see why the likes of Zaia and Edi can't be trusted to nominate good candidates, nor do I see why the Senate can't be trusted to reject those nominations if they're not suitable.

Post by **Coyote** » 2006-06-23 10:42am

It is good to go without nominations every so often, lest we end op as all Chiefs and no Indians. I was actually pondering the suggestion of "Summer Nominations" and "Winter Nominations" so we can just get a group of candidates once every six months and select from them.

Post by **Dalton** » 2006-06-23 12:11pm

Probably what we're gonna wind up doing, Coyote.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2006-06-23 04:23pm

That and poor Dalton isn't left having to pick up the bag every month

Post by **Dalton** » 2006-06-23 05:58pm

Connor MacLeod wrote:That and poor Dalton isn't left having to pick up the bag every month

Sometimes it feels like Mike, myself and Capsaicin are the only admins fucking doing anything.

Oh, wait.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-06-25 05:40pm

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:There's nothing wrong with having a month or even two go by without nominations. Even with the number of Senators we have now, we don't get anywhere near 100% participation in Senate mattters, so it's arguable we have a more than comfortable number of Senators already. As a result, I don't think there needs to be lot of pressure to add more every month.

It could also be that, for the time being, we have simply run out of potential nominees. There are already many august members of SDNet who have been elevated to this forum. It was inevitable that a lull would be reached after the initial investiture of senators when there were so many candidates available and it may take a while before some of the newer members show potential for membership in this body. I do not think that allowing one to three months perhaps to lapse before another call for nominations will hurt. Let's see who emerges from the new class on the boards.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-06-25 05:48pm

Patrick Degan wrote:It could also be that, for the time being, we have simply run out of potential nominees. There are already many august members of SDNet who have been elevated to this forum. It was inevitable that a lull would be reached after the initial investiture of senators when there were so many candidates available and it may take a while before some of the newer members show potential for membership in this body. I do not think that allowing one to three months perhaps to lapse before another call for nominations will hurt. Let's see who emerges from the new class on the boards.

Perhaps, instead of monthly nominations, whenever a Senator or Governor feels there are new potential candidates, he can move to open a nominations thread. This would eliminate any wasteful, unused threads, as well as make the process of nomination more expedient.

Or, instead of moving to have a nomination thread opened, after each vote, open a new thread which stands until three members are nominated; at that point, vote, lock the old nominations thread, and open a new one after a month.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2006-06-27 05:48pm

In future we should avoid calling elections for new senators unless more then one nomination is placed. You never know what kind of riffraff could get in here.

Post by **Dalton** » 2006-06-27 07:34pm

Well, since we've failed to garner any new nominations, I'll keep this thread open through July.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-06-27 09:35pm

Here is a radical suggestion. Read the old nomination threads and look up the past suggestions who got nominated but didn't make the vote.