board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

¶4: Hearings(Community Disruption): VOTING CLOSED

Post Reply   Page 5 of 6  [ 111 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
Author Message
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 3:11 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Any procedural questions raised by the jury should be referred to the Mayor who will be responsible for ensuring that hearings conform to the by-laws of the Charter.

Jn, I see you've eliminated the choice of no one overseeing hearings. I would prefer this to the Mayor overseeing them.

Maybe it will turn out that there are very few hearings and very few problems with them. If there are consistent problems, then the membership will recognize the need for procedural oversight of hearings, and the Charter can be amended to create that office.

Recognizing the need, failing to institute the office, and subsequently assigning the duties to (IMO) the wrong person is a completely unsatisfactory solution to me (so I will vote against the text).

Last edited by Cerin on Fri 13 May , 2005 3:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 3:12 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Well, we only need one a year, Ax. Ideally more than one, so the members haave a choice, but one willing and competent person would be enough.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 3:38 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
I give anyone in the post three months before they burn out. Tops.

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 3:39 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Referring to my previous post, would it be possible to have two simple choices for this ballot. One would include this sentence:

Any procedural questions raised by the jury should be referred to the Mayor who will be responsible for ensuring that hearings conform to the by-laws of the Charter.

And the other would not.

That would be a more satisfactory process for me, than voting against the entire text because of one provision (and perhaps there are others who feel as I do).

If not, that's fine, too. :)


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 3:44 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Cerin, yes. We can make that a voting choice.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 7:58 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Quote:
Voronwe: I undestood you up until the point where three Loremasters with revolving terms entered the picture. If you simply want the Mayor to do it, then your vote accurately reflected what you want, and I also agree with this solution as the only viable alterntive to a separate office.
Good, I'm glad that I was clearer then I thought I was. I do want the "Mayor" to do it.

Just to clarify, it was my idea to have two "Mayor" (though I called it Loremaster) positions which have identical responsibilies but have one year terms staggered by six months, so that (after the initial six months) there would always be someone with at least six months experience on the job.
Quote:
We do not nullify Article 3 by changing the name of the mayor. I just don't want to mess with that now because the job before us is dispute resolution. We can discuss the name of the mayor when we do the article on the mayor.
Good, thank you. I will call it "mayor" until we reach that point (at which time I will argue for changing the name to "loremaster").

As always, thank you for your incredibleness.[/quote]


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 13 May , 2005 10:19 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
I like the draft ballot as it stands. :)

Just a quick comment on a side issue:
Impenitent wrote:
First,
Hobby wrote:
...but let's not encourage admission of guilt with the promise of lesser penalties!...
Why not?
True, we've been sounding too serious about all this, as if life and death matters were decided here.
But what I meant was merely a question of principle - if you promise lesser penalties for admission of guilt, that can lead to people admitting things they haven't done, if they doubt that people will believe in their innocence.
Though, yes, I admit, that sounds too dramatic to ever occur on a messageboard, I can't picture a case where it would apply - so, as I said, it's just a principle that jars with me somewhat. :)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Impenitent
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 14 May , 2005 11:35 am
Try to stay perky
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Wed 29 Dec , 2004 10:54 am
 
Jnyusa wrote:
Voronwe: I undestood you up until the point where three Loremasters with revolving terms entered the picture. If you simply want the Mayor to do it, then your vote accurately reflected what you want, and I also agree with this solution as the only viable alterntive to a separate office.

We do not nullify Article 3 by changing the name of the mayor. I just don't want to mess with that now because the job before us is dispute resolution. We can discuss the name of the mayor when we do the article on the mayor.
Jn
Jn, following on V's suggestion, and you comment above, would it work if we leave the Article as it is and simply pass an amendment later giving the Mayor a junior or associate? (or staggered terms - we haven't got to the nitty gritty of terms yet, so that shouldn't require any changes to what we have).

It's just...having only one person responsible for a whole year is quite heavy...what if they're on holiday? or sick? or just sick of the board for a little bit? or RL requires attention? A whole year without back up seems too much to ask. A junior, or associate, or staggered terms would resolve that problem (and they could informally share the load, though that need not be spelled out, i guess).

Hobby - thank you. You are very sweet to give me rope as you did.

_________________

[ img ]

"Believe me, every heart has its secret sorrows, which the world knows not;
and oftentimes we call a man cold when he is only sad." ~Robert C. Savage


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 14 May , 2005 2:56 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Imp: A whole year without back up seems too much to ask

I tend to agree, but let's deal with that when we get to the Mayor article.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 14 May , 2005 4:21 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
Can we have a mayor for each "farthing?" I'm actually kind of serious...it gets around the multiple mayors thing that I know irks some folks (hi Maria ;) ) while not turning the job into something Herculean...

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 14 May , 2005 6:23 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Yes, but once we change the name to Loremaster, no one will complain about having more then one. ;)

But as Jnyusa the Wise says, why don't we table this question until we get to that article.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 14 May , 2005 6:46 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
Voronwe, in Brit-speak "to table" the item means to discuss it right now. :devil:

(Just one of those annoying little things in Intl. Bus.)

I'm going now to add your "reasonable doubt" to this paragraph.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 14 May , 2005 11:55 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
I'm uncomfortable with the unreasonable doubt clause. It just adds another decision into the process. I think it was clearer and less confusing without it.

Edit

No one's going to jail over this stuff.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 12:12 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Quote:
Voronwe, in Brit-speak "to table" the item means to discuss it right now.
I sure wait those Brits would speak English. Oh, wait ... . :oops:

Thanks for the tip, Jn.

Cerin, to me its clearer and less confusing with it. Regardless of what the penalty is. :) I suppose that this will need to be voted on as well.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 4:28 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
VOTING IS NOW OPEN

We'll vote for 24 hours until Monday, ~4:30PM GMT

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 4:48 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5168
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Question 1:
A. I agree to include this text

Question 2:
A. I agree to include the words in blue

Question 3:
A. Yes


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 5:19 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Question 1:
A. I agree to include this text

Question 2:
A. I agree to include the words in blue

Question 3:
A. Yes

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 5:22 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
BALLOT

Question 1:
B. I do not agree to include this text


Question 2:
B. I do not agree to include the words in blue


Question 3:
A. Yes


Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 5:53 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
Question 1:
A. I agree to include this text


Question 2:
A. I agree to include the words in blue

Question 3:
A. Yes

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 7:22 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
Question 1:
B. I do not agree to include this text.

Question 2:
A: I agree to include the words in blue.

Question 3:
A. Yes

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 5 of 6  [ 111 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
Jump to: