[Discussion]Removal of a Senator

[Ghost Rider]

I'll be blunt, what should be done with The Duchess of Zeon?

She used to be a member of contribution. Some may have words of little warmth to her, others may feel she was a paragon to follow, but in the last year and three months she has contributed not one post to the board and has not once voted in the Senate.

Should be be allowed to keep her title and perks of being a Senator, or should we demote her for the lack of partcipation for a place she was given a grandfather pass into.

As stated, this is just discussion, no voting will happen at this time.

[RedImperator]

There's a third option: create a category of "inactive" Senator (what to call it can be decided later), so that a Senator like the Duchess who has left the board won't be counted when calculating a quorum. This would be a way to recognize the accomplishments that earned that poster a right to be a Senator, while simultaneously acknowledging that that person has, for whatever reason, left us. There IS a mechanism to remove a Senator (a little too autocratic for my tastes, but that's another discussion), but that's for misconduct. We could certainly just expand that mechanism to cover inactivity, but it doesn't seem fair to lump people who may have left for any number of perfectly good reasons with those who got expelled for abusing their powers or because they got banned from the board.

Perhaps a proposed amendment:

1. When a Senator shall have made no posts in any forum on the board for a period of six consecutive months, that Senator will become "inactive".
2. Shall a Senator become inactive, any other Senator may start a poll where, shall two-thirds of the Senators present vote aye, the inactive Senator shall be given the honorary title "Senator Emeritus" and retired from this body.
3. A Senator Emeritus shall have none of the rights and privileges of a Senator, and will in no way differ from a regular member save any way explicitly described in this amendment.
4. Shall that Senator Emeritus return, any Senator may start a poll, where, shall a majority of the Senators present vote aye, that Senator shall be restored to his office, without needing to be nominated first.
5. Shall a Senator retire from the board or resign his Senate position, he may request the title of Senator Emeritus, provided that Senator is in good standing, as determined by the administration.
6. In the event a Senator anticipates a long-term absence but intends to return, he may notify the Senate Whip of this circumstance and provide a reasonable estimate of his time of return. Shall a Senator do this, he may not be declared inactive until six months past the time of this estimate.

[The Yosemite Bear]

I second RI's suggestion, after all Pick's big bro still deserves recognition for what he's done for us. Not to mention David, or the perpetually without net acess (Haas and LT Hitman)

[CmdrWilkens]

I think the idea of Senator Emeritus has merit yet I dislike sperating the categories of "inactive" and "Emeritus." I think for the sake of simplicity it would be easier to simply hold the phrase "inactive" as a purely internal designation and only change status, count towards quorum, and priveledges after a removal vote.

The idea of voluntary resignation is also a worthy one as, with responses to my vote spam, I have already recieved notice form one senator the said individual wished to be removed and discounted from further action in the Senate. I would offer that a resignation will become effective when a Senator shall have trasmitted by PM or e-mail to any Executor or the Chancellor their desire to cease participation. At this time the member shall be removed, the Senate notified (whether by PM or post) and the floor opened for nominations to the title "Senator Emeritus"

Also I think we should add that those who voluntarily resign are removed from the list of members eligible for nomination to the Senate for a minimum of one year and shall only be made eligible again upon transmittal of a PM or e-mail to any Executor or the Chancellor of their willingness to accept nomination should it be offered again. The Chancellor and the Executors shall all have discretionary authority to refuse the re-eligibility.

So yeah I tried to simplify one thing and ended up making the other terribly more complex but I would like to hear ideas on it and those are mine.

[Simplicius]

RedImperator's proposal seems sound and simple enough as-is, and I would support it with no alteration save one addition.

The only question the proposal raises is whether a voluntary Emeritus can return to active status like an involuntary one can. I would like to see a simple clarification of this.

One option is to grant voluntary Emeriti the same process of return as an involuntary one. However, that forcibly defeats the purpose of voluntary retirement, as the process of returning an absent Senator begins in the Senate, not by request.

Another option is to vote on returning a voluntary Emeritus upon receipt of a request to do so. This would work, but it rubs me the wrong way - why retire, if one is going to ask to return shortly thereafter? If one truly needs a break from the Senate, a leave of absence should be a reasonable favor to request.

Another option is to bar voluntary Emeriti from returning to the Senate. This is simple, but requires that someone keep track of which Emeriti are voluntary and which are involuntary, and that means paperwork. Ugh.

CmdrWilkens presents us another option, which is feasible, and makes a distinction between voluntary and involuntary retirement. However, it too adds procedure which might otherwise be eliminated, as that minimum year will have to be clocked.

I propose a refinement to CmdrWilkens's proposal, whereby the minimum year and receipt of a PM are eliminated. The voluntary Emeritus returns to the pool of general members and may be nominated at any time after requirement, with the option to decline.

I feel the procedural hurdles to a second nomination may be safely removed simply because there are already three mechanisms in place to defeat the rapid return of a recent retiree: the common sense of the nominating Senator, the common sense of the voting Senators, and the ability of the nominee to decline nomination.

[InnerBrat]

I'm in regular IM contact with the Dutchess. I could ask her whether she intends returning though I think the answer would be no, as she's moved on.

Uh, yeah, I think the Emeritus status is a good one, in principle. But specifically, where the senator is contactable, I think it's only fair to do so.

[Edi]

We should ask her if she has any interest in coming back. If not, then I do not see any obstacle to removing her from the Senate.

As far as the whole removal of Senators process goes, this is something of an anomalous case in many respects. When the Senate was created, the Duchess was included due to her earlier contributions to the board, but she had already withdrawn from SDnet at that point. Had it been known then that she would be this inactive and possibly not coming back at all, she would not have been included in the Senate.

From that perspective, it is an open and shut case.

The rest of the proposals I think are workable, but I also dislike the idea of Emeritus Senators. If someone steps down from the Senate or leaves the board and eventually gets removed due to inactivity, then I see no reason to accord them any special status. Just like former moderators do not have any distinguishing tags to that effect, why should former Senators? The board regulars will know who has been here, and maintaining a simple sticky post with the names of former Senators (possibly with reason for no longer being a Senator tagged on) would be a lot easier than creating a massive bureaucracy to handle this thing.

[Keevan_Colton]

Why is it that we keep coming up with more rules, regulations, procedures and paperwork?

This is a webboard not the US Senate...

[The Yosemite Bear]

the law of thermo dynamics, into any open social system beurocracy will continue to grow until the heat death of the social organization results in dictatorship.

[Surlethe]

What about Senators who don't want to be Senators? Sea Skimmer mentioned to me that he wants nothing to do with this enterprise; is there any reason he should remain a Senator?

[InnerBrat]

OK, I've spoken quickly with Marina - she would very much like to return at one point "but at the moment it is impractical", for a number of personal issues.

Whatever status we decide to give her now, I would support re-nomination to a Senator position upon her eventual (and hopeful) return.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

We should ask her if she has any interest in coming back. If not, then I do not see any obstacle to removing her from the Senate.

As far as the whole removal of Senators process goes, this is something of an anomalous case in many respects. When the Senate was created, the Duchess was included due to her earlier contributions to the board, but she had already withdrawn from SDnet at that point. Had it been known then that she would be this inactive and possibly not coming back at all, she would not have been included in the Senate.

From that perspective, it is an open and shut case.

The rest of the proposals I think are workable, but I also dislike the idea of Emeritus Senators. If someone steps down from the Senate or leaves the board and eventually gets removed due to inactivity, then I see no reason to accord them any special status. Just like former moderators do not have any distinguishing tags to that effect, why should former Senators? The board regulars will know who has been here, and maintaining a simple sticky post with the names of former Senators (possibly with reason for no longer being a Senator tagged on) would be a lot easier than creating a massive bureaucracy to handle this thing.

I agree, if someone voluntarily steps down from the Senate, or chooses to leave the board and not come back, or they're inactive for a really long time, then they should just be removed from the Senate and that would be that. I suppose if we really wanted to honor an ex-Senator in some way, we could open a poll to grant them the custom title of "Senator Emeritus," or something similar, if they didn't have one before, or wouldn't mind having their current custom title changed to it. I think it would be the most expedient way of recognizing a given Senator's contributions to the board without creating a huge morass of new rules to deal with it.

<ADDENDUM>

And I suppose if a given Senator goes away for a really long time, is removed from the Senate, and then returns at some point down the road . . . provided they return in good standing, there should be nothing barring them from being nominated and voted into the Senate once again, should the Senate and moderators vote for it.

[RedImperator]

The rest of the proposals I think are workable, but I also dislike the idea of Emeritus Senators. If someone steps down from the Senate or leaves the board and eventually gets removed due to inactivity, then I see no reason to accord them any special status. Just like former moderators do not have any distinguishing tags to that effect, why should former Senators? The board regulars will know who has been here, and maintaining a simple sticky post with the names of former Senators (possibly with reason for no longer being a Senator tagged on) would be a lot easier than creating a massive bureaucracy to handle this thing.

Actually, we do give former mods the title "Moderator Emeritus"--Lord Chaos and IDMR have it, and if I recall correctly, Wicked Pilot had it before he selected a custom title. The reason most retired mods don't have one is because they already have a personal custom title. That's where I came up with the title "Senator Emeritus" in the first place.

I don't see why a huge bureaucracy would be necessary for my proposal. It wouldn't be anything but a sticky list and a custom title if the user wants it. The position of Emeritus grants only two privleges:

1. Special recognition for having been good enough to get to the Senate in the first place. Senators are supposed to be the best members of SDN. I don't see why the best former members shouldn't be similarly recognized.

2. Easier readmission to the Senate. If they left in good standing, I don't see why their status has changed in regards to being in the Senate.

The rest of the proposal is just to ensure a process is followed so nobody is treated unfairly and the Senate has control over its own membership.

[Coyote]

Red Imp's suggestion has great merit; and as for the expanding pool of regs, well, we are evolving into a more complex society than the simple ASVS trilobite was.

A Senator Emeritus position is an excellent way to recognise past status and help in the board as it formed. It is also a way to recognise a former or absent Senator in good standing, as opposed to one who has been stripped of rank.

[Chris OFarrell]

IMHO, if someone has effectively left the BBS for an indeterminate time, or has not participated in ANY Senate vote or thread for a great deal of time despite PM's alerting them of that fact...I think they should be removed from the Senate period, their names recoded on a role (possibly a stickied and locked thread managed by the Chancellor?) of inactive senators.

If however they wish to rejoin the Senate at a later point, they just send a PM to the Chancellor who will make a thread asking for any comments. If there is no opposition, they are reinstated. If there is a call for a vote (which is seconded) then they have to be voted back in like any normal vote for a new senator.

[Ghost Rider]

The proposals are good, and for every other Senator, it's good. Every single one of them have participated.

The case of Duchess, her saying eventually...is the same as Joe saying "Eventually". It's a non answer, and she never once participated in the Senate in any capacity and got grandfathered into the group. Her last post was before even the formation of the group.

As for Senator Emeritus, fine. We can give them a title, but make it simple. All this jazz of dressing it up that it nothing more then this statement "If you leave, on good terms, we'll keep the door open, just PM an appropriate party to alert the group."

Simple, without drowning in twenty thousand procedures that are entirely uneeded unless we figure for some reason abuse over leaving and coming back because of too much Coke in the brain.

[Spyder]

We don't really need to legislate for this, personally I'd remove her from the list for now and if she becomes active again we can invite her back. It doesn't really have to be a big deal.

[Publius]

It is this Senator's opinion that this is more a matter of policy than of rules. Questions of absentee Senators should be handled on a case by case basis; this is the sort of thing best handled by voice vote or acclamation rather than division of the house. If there is an absentee Senator being recommended for transfer to the inactive list, why not simply move a vote? There is no real need for a formalized rule.

We were all chosen for our present distinction because we are intelligent, responsible individuals. It is more or less the consensus that if there is nothing preventing a Senator Emeritus from returning, then nothing need prevent it.

[CmdrWilkens]

Perhaps I should add a bit because the reason I put the extra language in about Senator Emeriti coming back is tht in my own mind I distinguish between a leave of absence (in which somone simply won't be participating and I won't send them PMs but theywould still count against quorum) and leaving completely. If someone has to take time off or away from this position then simply PM the Chancellor and/or the Whip and then we simply don't scream for your vote but otherwise go one like nothing is differnet but if you are leaving or are being removed then this indicates, to some degree, that either you don't want the responsibility (limited though it may be) or we collectively no longer wish you to have that responsibility. Given that view (again its mine though others may hold it) if someone turns around and wishes to come right back in just a month or two after they left then I am seriously left to wonder why you didn't just ask for a leave of absence. I'm sure we could reason it out but then again I'm the guy who likes to write rules and procedures so that's what I do then let other ideas take hold but my personal prefernce is for codifying some tim period to re-establish if a former senator really wishes to come back and be productive.

[LadyTevar]

I agree with Publicus that we should take the matter case by case, as sometimes it's a matter of vacation, and sometimes (as with the Duchess) it's a true leave-taking. I see no reason to codify rules regarding this, nor to give them extra titles.

[CmdrWilkens]

perhaps something as simple as adding that at the request of any senator they may be removed or upon a vote by a Category A majority in the case of inactive senators. It would make the language broad but still clear.