Criteria/standards required to be a Senator

[ray245]

Given that people are discussing over the issue of what kind of contribution does it take to be a member of the senate, I think opening this thread is a good idea.

In my opinion, the point of nominating people into the senate is not to ensure the board's culture are fully represented in the senate , but to choose people who are good or mature enough to make certain decision for the community as a whole.

People with sound reasoning skills that can justify why certain members should be permanently banned or titled.

What do you guys think about what does it take to be a good senator?

[CmdrWilkens]

The standard is whatever the standing Senators want it to be. Ray I understand what you want to do but I'll be blunt that this thread is going to be, if it is anything, pointless.

[The Romulan Republic]

I think (in the full awareness that my opinion on the matter is likely worth squat to those who actually make these decisions) that the ideal Senator would be someone who:

a) is familiar with board culture, histories, notable personalities, etc,

b) has their own distinctive voice/personality/contributions,

c) is respected by the majority of the board (if there's any way to gauge such a thing), and

d) is able to conduct themselves in a rational, mature, and yes, respectful manor.

To clarify that last point, I am fully aware that this is a board is dedicated in part to the "mockery of stupid people," but I also feel that someone in a Senator's position should be approachable by less distinguished board members as opposed to intimidating, and that those in a position of authority/mock authority should strive for some degree of professionalism.*



*This should in no way be construed as a suggestion that the current Senate is generally unprofessional. I'm merely stating what a Senator, to my mind, should be, not debating the extent to which the current Senate fits this definition.

[Mr Bean]

This thread is pointless as there are no standards for choosing a Senator except popularity. We are not picking court Justices here but people who get to vote on board policy.

[Hotfoot]

Still having a huge problem with reflex posting. Got to think twice before posting a reply and creating a thread

QFT

I'll be watching this thread.

[Ace Pace]

This thread is pointless as there are no standards for choosing a Senator except popularity. We are not picking court Justices here but people who get to vote on board policy.

Precisely, Notability and some standards of posting seem to be the primary criteria.

Since I'm the guy who got Ray being a fool on this particular topic, I guess I'm obliged to answer. What the criteria should be and what they are are quite different things. If you want to discuss what they should be, go right ahead, doesn't matter. Infact, irrelevent. I could lay out a series of points, describe the standards of debate, lack of civility, acomplishment in flaming. No one would care because the Senate isn't composed of these things.
What they are is what i wrote above.
Which I don't see as a negative thing.