[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: *sigh* well...
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: if you're up to it,
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: we can still exchange a few ideas.
[9:13] Jon Seattle: very true
[9:14] Gwyneth Llewelyn: They will be posted on the forums anyway, for people to comment and discuss
[9:14] Pip Torok: yes
[9:14] Jon Seattle: I am not sure what a quarum would be in this case, but it seems we would not have one no matter how defined
[9:14] Gwyneth Llewelyn: haha
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Actually, since the commision is not a policy maker
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but just an extended forum so to speak
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I suppose that the worse we can do is to re-discuss the same topic some other day?
[9:15] Jon Seattle: true,
[9:16] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, some bit of history perhaps... more for Pip's sake.
[9:16] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Jon, I think that we had no Chancellor when you moved in to the CDS
[9:16] Pip Torok: <listens>
[9:17] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So why do we have a Chancellor elected as it is right now?...
[9:17] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Freakness of a certain paranoia The CDS started having now Head of State and no Executive — deliberately so.
[9:17] Jon Seattle: Ah, good question. The RA was trying to run the sim
[9:17] Jon Seattle: make everyday decisions
[9:17] Gwyneth Llewelyn: That too
[9:17] Jon Seattle: its not the best body for that
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: When it was clear that the RA took too long to do the day-to-day chores...
[9:18] Jon Seattle: And the old guild had just collapsed
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ... yes exactly
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn *nods*
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So there were several choices available... delegate to a non-elected body for instance
[9:18] Jon Seattle: Pip, the old guild used to do a lot of day to day work
[9:18] Jon Seattle: but it had become a kind of closed club.
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes.
[9:18] Jon Seattle: No one could join
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: And rarely met, etc
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: That too
[9:18] Jon Seattle: yes, and that.
[9:19] Pip Torok: mmm
[9:19] Gwyneth Llewelyn: A mixed approach was picked, which is not uncommon in some Parliamentarian systems
[9:19] Jon Seattle: Pip, the old guild was a government body -- not like the new guild.
[9:19] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ie. we vote for factions, and the winning faction gets to form a "Cabinet" with a "Chancellor"
[9:19] Gwyneth Llewelyn: AH yes, that's a good point
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The Old Guild was really a Government branch, with the same powers as the RA or the SC
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Just not elected
[9:20] Jon Seattle: Yes, it was a synthesis of european and US systems.
[9:20] Jon Seattle: (That is the Chancellor )
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes... a strange mix
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The idea behind it was that the winning faction
[9:20] Jon Seattle: We were trying to fill the gap left by the collapse of the old guild.
[9:21] Gwyneth Llewelyn: should collaborate closely with a "friendly" Executive, so they should be able to "elect" it.
[9:21] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Also it allowed individuals (not necessarily part of a faction) to be part of Government,
[9:22] Jon Seattle: The idea was never that the Chancellor would make policy herself -- rather that the RA would stop trying to do things like approving the moving of a fountain from one location to another.
[9:22] Gwyneth Llewelyn: one thing that the CSDF always promoted hehe — "more avenues of participation", even outside the faction system. Granted, a candidate for Chancellor needed always faction support, since they would be elected in a RA session by the RA members...
[9:22] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, so the RA would be "strategy" (policy) and the Executive woulf be "Tactics" (executive acts)
[9:23] Jon Seattle: Pip, at that time Moon and I were the CDSF reps, the minority, Claude, Justice, and Pel were DPU
[9:23] Jon Seattle: so it was a bit of negotiation to work out an agreement that would work
[9:24] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Now things started to become a bit more confusing when suddenl we found out that the Leader of the Representative Assembly, by setting the RA's agenda, would wield a lot of political power too. We seem to have "two heads of state" these days: the LRA and the Chancellor. None are directly elected by the citizens, but indirectly through the representatives.
[9:24] Pip Torok: i see
[9:24] Gwyneth Llewelyn: This is something that this Commission is set to review. Does it still make sense? Should we change the system? If so, what would we recommend?
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Notice that the major reason why we don't have a directly elected Chancellor is mostly because of "confusion of powers"
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: An example... imagine that the Executive and the RA are at odds about something: is it "policy" or "executive action"?
[9:25] Jon Seattle: Well, its still a complex topic
[9:26] Pip Torok: mmm
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Both RA and Executive would claim, if directly elected, that both have the citizen's trust through the universal vote.
[9:26] Jon Seattle: Pip, where are you in RL, that is the country?
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So it could become... tricky
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: UK
[9:26] Pip Torok: right ...
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So in case of doubt, the Queen decides
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn *chuckles*
[9:27] Jon Seattle: lol
[9:27] Pip Torok: in efeect
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah, that's my old plan — postponed for another term
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn *giggles*
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Anyway...
[9:27] Jon Seattle: Its interesting, I wonder where DPU would stand today -- back then there were no european members.
[9:28] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The current setup makes the Chancellor quite powerful in terms of executive action, BUT they're totally dependent on the RA.
[9:28] Pip Torok: should that make a difference?
[9:28] Gwyneth Llewelyn: As we have seen on the past term — the RA can kick the Chancellor out at any time, without giving a reason.
[9:28] Jon Seattle: Pip, I think it does in that people are most comfortable with the system they are used to.
[9:28] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Sometimes it does, Pip... different cultural approaches.
[9:28] Pip Torok: I see
[9:29] Jon Seattle: It took me a while to get used to a more european perspective
[9:29] Jon Seattle: when I did I learned quite a bit that was new to me
[9:29] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ... which is also hardly uniform, Jon... just ask our Swiss citizens what they think of our system
[9:29] Jon Seattle: yes
[9:30] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The Swiss don't elect their presidents either... in fact almost nobody knows that they *have* one. They rotate presidents every year I think, they have three, one for each language area
[9:30] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Anyway... but pooling in ideas from several different systems is actually a good idea
[9:30] Pip Torok: what ive noticd is that the RA assumes there is only one level of sanction: impeachment as opposite to levels of reprimand
[9:31] Jon Seattle: Its sort of the government to have if people are very civilized? Or so they argue a lot?
[9:31] Jon Seattle: *do they
[9:31] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes — there is a "vote of confidence" on new SC members, but that's all
[9:32] Jon Seattle: Pip, in theory the RA could exersize finer control over the Chancellor via the budget -- but our budget process is not well developed. It could use some development.
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'd say that our issues are basically: 1) How does the Executive gets in power? (elected/appointed... and by whom?) 2) How is a balance of powers guaranteed between the Executive and other branches? 3) How do we avoid overlapping roles, and who will be the arbitrer when some other branch believes the Executive is trespassing?
[9:33] Pip Torok: But the whole point of a chancellor is to _devolve_ work away from the RA
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: originally, yes, Pip
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well... we can think on what is "weakest" in the CDS: we're slow at making decisions
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Example: a griefer comes in and deletes things
[9:34] Jon Seattle: Pip, true, but of course not to make policy -- since the Chancellor is not part of the legislative process today.
[9:34] Gwyneth Llewelyn: It takes weeks or months until we decide what to do about it
[9:34] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The point of having an Executive was that day-to-day operations should be dealt *immediately* BUT could always be reviewed later at a slower pace.
[9:35] Gwyneth Llewelyn: e.g. dealing with events, land sales, griefers
[9:35] Gwyneth Llewelyn: all these should be dealt with "immediately"
[9:35] Jon Seattle: Pip, if you could choose a model, what would it be?
[9:36] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, good starting question!
[9:36] Pip Torok: mmm id need notice on such a question
[9:36] Gwyneth Llewelyn: hehe
[9:37] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Perhaps we can start from the other way round... given the current system, what faults do you see with it?
[9:37] Jon Seattle: I thin we all would, but its good to start thinking about it
[9:37] Jon Seattle: Good question
[9:37] Pip Torok: well weakness in decision making (as gwyns pointed out)
[9:38] Jon Seattle: yes
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Because the Executive doesn't know what powers they've got? (Jamie will change this hehe)
[9:38] Pip Torok: always the need to make decision "on the hoof" without adequate thought
[9:38] Pip Torok: *also
[9:40] Pip Torok: I thimnk the Chancellor plus Exec should have wider day to day powers (eg griefers etc) but that there shd be set policies over say land-sales
[9:40] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So perhaps what we need is just a list of powers.
[9:41] Pip Torok: at the same time they _shd_ be visibly accountable to the RA
[9:41] Pip Torok: but that the RA have a flexibilty of sanctions ...
[9:41] Gwyneth Llewelyn *nods*
[9:41] Jon Seattle: I would agree with all of that
[9:42] Pip Torok: (yes i know this is very like the PM system in the UK!)
[9:42] Jon Seattle:
[9:42] Gwyneth Llewelyn:
[9:42] Pip Torok: in many ways two principles shd be have primacy
[9:43] Pip Torok: 1 quick firm consistent decisions (right or wrong!)
[9:43] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, I agree.
[9:43] Pip Torok: 2. the visibitlity of accountability
[9:43] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Actually, I'm for a very strong and efficient Executive...
[9:43] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ... and totally so, Pip: the citizens need to know what the Executive is planning to do
[9:44] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Right now hmm I think that the Executive isn't even "required" to publish their Acts or decisions — unlike the RA
[9:44] Pip Torok: quite ... you know that the problem with all electorates is apathy ...
[9:44] Gwyneth Llewelyn: We had a problem in the past... let me give you just this example...
[9:44] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The Chancellor has the power to overrule covenants, at their whim.
[9:44] Jon Seattle: I definitly agree with you there Pip
[9:44] Pip Torok: !!!
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So, if someone wishes to do a building that does not conform to a Covenant,
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: they ask the Chancellor for permission.
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: This is the "City Hall" role of the Executive (inherited from the Old Guild)
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Now...
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: in the past, this was quite used (and abused!)
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Specially,
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: because it was NEVER published who got permission to do this or that
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So we have lots of cases of a Chancellor coming up to a citizen,
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and saying: "hey, you cannot have non-Roman houses in COlonia Nova"
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and the citizen answering: "oh, I asked the FORMER Chancellor for permission and got it"
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ... and if the former Chancellor isn't available,
[9:46] Pip Torok: <phew!>
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: or forgets about that
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ... well, the current one tends to get along with it
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So, of course, this should NOT happen
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: All "waivers" should be mandatorily published somewhere, even if it's just on a forum thread!
[9:47] Pip Torok: agree
[9:47] Jamie Palisades grins - solved our political issues yet?
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: That way, we can check on them, and the RA, if they think the Chancellor is being "too permissive", can change the COvenants
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: oh hiya Mr. Chancellor Sir!
[9:48] Jon Seattle: At the moment we are having trouble finding something to disagree about
[9:48] Pip Torok: <bows low>
[9:48] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well put, Jon
[9:48] Jamie Palisades smiles - small groups can find that sometimes. I suppose you will post resuilts and we'll get more input on the forums
[9:49] Pip Torok: but then ... _how do we elect the Chancellor_ ...<main point!>
[9:49] Gwyneth Llewelyn: To recap for Jamie's sake — instead of tackling the question of "how should the Chancellor be elected" we're actually saying that it's more important to list the powers of the Executive; demand transparency; have the RA get more sanctions besides just kicking the CHancellor out of office.
[9:49] Gwyneth Llewelyn: You're right, Pip
[9:49] Gwyneth Llewelyn: hehe
[9:50] Jon Seattle: I find I don't care that much -- as long at the chancellor is not in the role of a US president -- promoting legislation
[9:50] Jamie Palisades smiles - well we had a fine demo of that issue last term, didn;t we?
[9:50] Jamie Palisades: That's an interesting comment Jon, but before rising to the bait -
[9:50] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah yes, Jon — again that's another approach: what should the Executive NEVER be able to do. I agree on one thing: NO ability to pass legislation.
[9:50] Gwyneth Llewelyn smiles back at Jamie
[9:51] Jamie Palisades: some would argue that the original design of teh CDS system anticipated that the chancellor woudl be transparent .. or not .. and that the RA would like it .. or not .. and then act to whack the Chancellor if they did not
[9:51] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, well argued indeed....
[9:51] Jamie Palisades: that system arguably works if three thigns are prsent
[9:51] Pip Torok: In theiry that shd be a working agreement between Chancellor and LRA
[9:51] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes.
[9:51] Jamie Palisades: 1. chcanellor candidates
[9:51] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Or at least Executive and RA (slight difference!)
[9:51] Jamie Palisades: (can;t thraten to kick the person out if there are no feasibale alternatives)
[9:52] Jamie Palisades: 2. an ra willign to act! heh heh
[9:52] Jamie Palisades: as opposed o, say, one terrified of its own sanction power
[9:52] Jamie Palisades chuckles
[9:52] Jamie Palisades: and finally
[9:52] Jamie Palisades: 3. an RA who in fact gives a dman and listyerns to its electorare and is plugged into its citizens
[9:52] Jamie Palisades chuckles again slightly
[9:53] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Aaaah
[9:53] Jamie Palisades: I will refrain from saying anythign about factions today
[9:53] Jon Seattle: 3 is vitally important I think.. though perhaps a topic for another day?
[9:53] Jamie Palisades: and really to sum up my point is that the Chancellor-works-"at -the-pleasuyre-of-the-RA" system only works if there's practialy, intillegent replaceability
[9:53] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Jamie, with 1. you mean that we should have more candidates (something that the RA can't do much about!...) or that the candidates should be announced properly, have some time for campaigning, etc.?
[9:54] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (because on 2 and 3 this commission cannot recommend much )
[9:54] Gwyneth Llewelyn: It's philosophy
[9:54] Jamie Palisades: Gwyn I am nto sure if #1 is a problem .. just pointing it out as a precondition.
[9:54] Jon Seattle: nods
[9:54] Pip Torok: Jamie ... how about the principle of an elected vice Chancellor ready to step in "in case ..."
[9:54] Jamie Palisades: Empirically, I have seen n>1 plausible cnadidates for chancellor ever time there's been a vacancy for several years now. I think.
[9:54] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The precondition is that there are candidates?
[9:54] Jon Seattle: Gwyn, surly we can do something about #3.
[9:55] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So what happens if there aren't? The last Chancellor stays in power?
[9:55] Jamie Palisades: ooh that's an idea Pip ... but would that person get the job automatically, so the RA knows who they get it they fire the bad guy? Or is it just a "l;ady in waiting"?
[9:55] Pip Torok: whicj is what happens today
[9:55] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Jon: philosophically — as part of faction's manifestos — I'm sure we can! But in terms of *legislation*, what can you do? "If a RA is not reflecting the citizen's wish, they get a public dunking session?"
[9:56] Jamie Palisades: @Gwyn @ PiP: yes, that's my point, you would not wan t an RA to feel they can NOT hold a Chancellor unaccountingable becaue they have no other options.
[9:56] Pip Torok: it makes the RA cautious about their choice of Chancellor (and vice-C)
[9:56] Jamie Palisades nods
[9:56] Jamie Palisades: afk a sec
[9:56] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok, I like the Vice-Chancellor idea!
[9:57] Jon Seattle: Gwyn, my point about 3 is that we need to have effective ways for the citizen's views to end up having an influcnce on election and reelection
[9:57] Jon Seattle: (as I said, we may want to discuss that some other time..)
[9:57] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Oh, the election of the *Chancellor*?... or of the RA?
[9:57] Jon Seattle: But one of the weaknesses of a system that does not allow such messages to be sent and that RA members do not have to worry that much about elections.
[9:57] Pip Torok: in the end its the citizens _commitment _ to democracy ... can anyone influence that? <i think not>
[9:58] Jon Seattle: Gwyn, RA
[9:58] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ahhh
[9:58] Gwyneth Llewelyn: No, we can't, Pip
[9:59] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but a mechanism where citizens can somehow get together
[9:59] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and demand that either the CHancellor or the RA steps down...
[9:59] Jamie Palisades: I copmpletely agree, Jon. Teh RA is EXTREMELY unexposed to the threat of siapproval from citizens
[9:59] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, every six months it gets "exposed"
[9:59] Jamie Palisades: membed can go on rampages wiht very little fear of their gov't, faction or position
[9:59] Jamie Palisades: and do
[9:59] Jon Seattle: Gwyn, not really.. given the sandpaper of our electoral system
[9:59] Gwyneth Llewelyn: There is ONE mechanism right now ...
[9:59] Jamie Palisades: but 6 months is a long time by SL ADD measures
[10:00] Jamie Palisades: so there is Gwyn - empirically it seems not used
[10:00] Pip Torok: agree
[10:00] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Imagine a very unpopular, autistic RA.