Elected Positions

[Dario Tashavan]

So, a thought occured to me in the discussion of Warden inductions and the like, and that was Elected positions. Is this something we expect regular turnover for? If so, how long should a term be? Should there be term limits? Do we allow for removal from office?

[Gintigael Gemweaver]

Off the cuff...
We should have a general poll to see if an election is needed. If one person thinks there should be an election, we should hold them to keep people happy. We could hold them at specific times that I said in a previous post on a different thread. quarterly? but set them up so that we don't have every Ring being voted for at the same time. And the Guardian position should be longer in power than the Wardens.
If there's a majority or supermajority that wants someone ousted because of bad leadership or because they're not as active then there could be a vote that needs a 75% or more to vote the person out of office. Or run an election.

[Dario Tashavan]

I like the idea of not having every ring voted on at the same time. I would say whenever the election is coming up, open up the option to put your name in the pool. If the election is unopposed, no vote is needed, if not, we have a vote.

[Hroderich Gottfrei]

I like the idea of having revolving elections for sure - but I also think that we should have a mechanism for calling a vote of no-confidence. 50+% of Wardens or 65% of all Keepers and Wardens?

[Leonidas Wahrheit]

I know in the Ring of Light it takes a majority vote to propose a vote of No-Confidence and a 2/3rds to remove one (or both) of the Oracles. I'll probably modify this for the Guardian as well. There really isn't a set "term limit" as there is an "our leader does not meet our interests anymore and we're voting him or her out."

[Leonidas Wahrheit]

(DOUBLE POST)

Also, we need measures in place for removing the Sentinel. I assume that will take place within the Inner Circle or should all of the Inner Circle members and Wardens have a say in that?

[Dario Tashavan]

I would think it takes a member of the inner circle to call for a vote to remove the sentinel/watcher, followed by a 2/3 majority of the wardens.

So what are the ramifications of a vote of no confidence vice a vote of removal?

[Lorhayden]

Removal is after No Confidence. You can have a vote of no-confidence and the person that vote is about can go and take corrective action without being removed from their position. My vision of something like this is that a meeting is called a vote of no-confidence requested, the vote passes a vote is then called for removal the vote fails. The person who was voted on then goes out and either changes their behavior or gathers enough Wardens to them and their way of thinking that the next time a NCV is done the vote fails. It makes for a lot of good internal politicking.

[Hroderich Gottfrei]

I'm in love with this idea of checks/balances. It should probably take one Guardian to call a NCV, but if 25+% of the Wardens petition for it, that could be adequate too - we want to avoid political power concentrating in a few elites with little chance of turnover. The more accountable our leaders are held, the better.

[Dario Tashavan]

Well, my guiding thought in the call for removal coming from an Inner Circle member was that if a significant portion of the group wants the Sentinel removed, and your Guardian won't call for it, maybe it's time to remove them too. =P

[Leonidas Wahrheit]

Dario makes a good point on that one. If all of the Guardians just decide that they like the Sentinel, but a vast majority of the Wardens don't, we should have something in place for that to happen like what you suggested, Hrod. Also, we need something in place just in case Dario's situation happens to surface.

CHECKS AND BALANCES. BALANCES AND CHECKS.

[Hroderich Gottfrei]

I never balance my checkbook.

Good point. Guardians are going to have to be careful, Wardens hold the real power.