Term Length?

:yes:

After the month to settle in, the couple of weeks when RL gets in the way, you're already half way through the term, and that big scheme you had planned isn't worth starting as you'll never finish it...
 
While I mentioned the possible idea, there are negatives and well as positives to doing so.
The reasons for examining it are, frankly, due to the drop-offs in activity that seem to occur at the same time every year. While it isn't the only period, the term that overlaps the beginning of November to the end of January is the worse.

There's also another period (for some) during the May-July period for those who are students in the Northen Hemisphere. But the mid-December to late January one is a killer. I had to frontload as many things as I could into November, and try to have some other ideas ready after New Years, but losing attention for had of the term is a pain in the rear.)

Is it worth discussing? Yes. Is it worth changing? That depends on whether we can come up with a formula that neutralizes the problem of activity levels during those RL periods that trigger the slow periods.
 
I am in agreement with the Prime Minister. This is especially difficult on the position of the Delegate to have a short term, in my opinion, considering the time involved with transferring the Delegacy to the next in line, gaining a good position, then be forced to drop and do that all over again. It is difficult for the security of the region to have a shorter-term Delegate, again given the time to gain endos then drop them.

I am for the elimination of all term limitations (like the 3/4 term rule or whatever it is, not obviously the length of the term) myself, however if the Regional Assembly wishes to concentrate on term length, then I am fine with that.
 
Dalimbar, I won't be supporting the removal of term limitations, period.

It forces the region to develop new leadership rather than create an oligarchy of the exact same people being elected.

I will, once I address higher priorities, come back and see what type of 4-month term schedule can avoid the calendar problems that come up with the current particular three-month cycle.
 
If people wish to keep in competent members of the government, then by all means they should. I have always felt it was undemocratic to restrict voters to only certain candidates, especially considering when those candidates most of the time are competent and committed enough to the governance of the region. Otherwise they wouldn't have likely been voted there in the first place.

Anyways, if we go by this current term, the calendar should look like this:
  • February* - May
  • June* - September
  • October* - January
* Denotes the election month.
 
Dalimbar:
If people wish to keep in competent members of the government, then by all means they should. I have always felt it was undemocratic to restrict voters to only certain candidates, especially considering when those candidates most of the time are competent and committed enough to the governance of the region. Otherwise they wouldn't have likely been voted there in the first place.

Anyways, if we go by this current term, the calendar should look like this:
  • February* - May
  • June* - September
  • October* - January
* Denotes the election month.
Click to expand...
Objections?
 
None from me, except that the pattern in this region tends to be that ministers have a flurry of activity at the start of their term, which tails off as the term progresses. I have a concern that this extension to terms may simply prolong the duration of relative inactivity.
 
And some people are never active even from the beginning of their term. Combined with the changes proposed by Grosse, making it somewhat easier to remove Ministers (and with the inactive provisions brought in last term) I don't see that as an issue.

I support this.
 
Haor Chall:
And some people are never active even from the beginning of their term. Combined with the changes proposed by Grosse, making it somewhat easier to remove Ministers (and with the inactive provisions brought in last term) I don't see that as an issue.

I support this.
Click to expand...
Closing this thread because it is over shadowing the Formal Discussion, wowee zowee.

The Formal Discussion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top