This topic has come up a couple of times recently, so let's get it on the table for the next RA.
SC seems long to have quorum problems, and little effective way for dealing with it.
Judiciary acts. The most important of its functions is adjudicative, and only needed episodically: dispute resolution on demand. Not frequent, we hope, but essential to a real government when rarely needed. The results there have been disappointing, in my view.
I think it is a serious flaw that there are no procedural rules. None. Of course it is the SC that should have done something with its own rules ... ever. In SL and CDS, we need to be tolerant of our volunteers and their schedule needs. In six months as chancellor, I have been trying to clear up the CDS executive a little .. and in many ways I still am woefully behind! But at least I have been putting some effort in. Patroklus, you preceded me as LRA; would you not have been a little embarrassed if you had no operating rules for the RA? But this is an embarrassing and long-neglected state of affairs, for the SC. We do not need something complex. But years and years of nothing is inappropriate, even for SL. We are now years past the old judiciary debates that obsessed a prior pack of CDS politicians ... and we are capable of far more constructive, efficient dialogue today.
Administrative acts. The SC also has some periodic, regular functions. One is CDS election management. This last one went poorly. We got multiple frustrated calls from candidates of all factions, and no one could do anything. Status was unclear, reports cursory and late. I feel it was badly done. The second continuing SC job is to moderate these Forum boards. Look at the names on the BBS marked as admins. Gwyneth, no longer on SC, is still doing it; one SC member also has admin rights, recently, but the other SC members never were. Nice of Gwyn, but the current SC's not ever bothered to take this on? I may not know the whole picture there, but here as well, there are some moribund signs.
Finally, there are no conflict of interest rules! SC members are free to vote to seat ... or unseat ... or ban from CDS ...their own friends or enemies. I find this unprofessional beyond words. It utterly robs SC of credibility. That problem is instantly obvious to anyone who is not in a long time powerholding group. If we want to support e-commerce, a simple, clear method ... and plausible, fair neutrals ... are essential.
It is my plan to ask the next RA to ask the SC to write procedures within two months, or it they fail to do so, to launch a commission with a deadline to amend the constitution or take other steps within the RA's power accordingly.
.
Regards Jamie