Changes to the order of succession.

Abacathea

Abacathea

TNPer
In the coming days I aim to make a change to the order of succession as chair of the Council. I have made this call per watching activity levels of the members and watching the reports of the Council in terms of endorsements and tarting for a period prior to my coming to chair up to now.

It stands to reason to me to have the most active at the top, as a result I propose the following minor change, but change none the less which I will ultimately be bringing to the RA.

NAME​
[c]
Category​
[c]
Last Endo Count​
[c] Romanoffia [c]Vassal[c]
389 Endorsements​
[c] McMasterdonia [c]Truckler[c]
402 Endorsements​
[c] Democratic Donkeys [c]Truckler[c]
394 Endorsements​
[c] Grosseschnauzer [c]Vassal[c]
328 Endorsements​
[c] Great Bight's Mum [c]Vassal[c]
250 Endorsements​
[c] Lord Byron [c]Vassal[c]
279 Endorsements​
[c] Former English Colony [c]Truckler[c]
363 Endorsements​
[c] HMS Unicorn[c]Vassal[c]
412 Endorsements​

Proposed change:

(N.B this table takes into consideration r3n's regular SC membership outside of his delegate role. Should a succession need to take place during r3n's role it will automatically default to FEC. This also will be the first inclusion of Ator People to the order of succession.)

NAME​
[c]
Category​
[c]
Last Endo Count​
[c] Romanoffia [c]Vassal[c]
389 Endorsements​
[c] McMasterdonia [c]Truckler[c]
402 Endorsements​
[c] Democratic Donkeys [c]Truckler[c]
394 Endorsements​
[c] Grosseschnauzer [c]Vassal[c]
328 Endorsements​
[c] HMS Unicorn[c]Vassal[c]
412 Endorsements​
 [c] Former English Colony [c]Truckler[c]
363 Endorsements​
[c] Lord Byron [c]Vassal[c]
279 Endorsements​
[c] Great Bight's Mum [c]Vassal[c]
250 Endorsements[c]Ator People[c]Minnow[c]
236 Endorsements​
 
Should this be here or in the other forum? Looks like it's being overlooked here.

I agree with the proposed changes.
 
Democratic Donkeys:
I think it is here because Aba wants to be more open. :)

I am fine with this order.
Click to expand...
That's an element to it.

There's certainly things that the SC needs to be covert and stealth like about, and I completely understand that, but this will hit the RA sooner or later and thus pointless to try and remain elusive with. Rather show transparency where there's no point not to be, and justify the non-disclosures when they occur, than hide everything and make us seem sketchy :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top