Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Eric]

I'm short on time so this vote thread isn't going to be as pretty as the others, but the question is above. I've had an epiphany (if you thought reading my longer posts was a chore, try proofreading them and wanting to add more till the end xD) and I want to propose that we open up the Council floor to more members. See: http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,9045.45.html for that, and for discussion purposes.

1) Allow Jinchurikii/Beast summoners and Kage onto the Biju Council

2) Do not allow Jinchurikii/Beast summoners and Kage onto the Biju Council.

1] Vote Count: 12

2] Vote Count: 2


*This is all under the assumption that there is a biju council. Additionally, this vote will be open until November 3rd, 2016.

[Ѕhadow]

1

[Hazama]

1, for sure. I always wanted to be on the council from the get go but couldn't cause I had a beast.

So I am totally down for number one.

[Eric]

Vote count updated.

[Vail]

1

[Raifudo Oppa]

1, which is Spanish for 1.

[Iburi Ray]

1

[KayentaMoenkopi]

2

the whole point of not having bijuu holders and kage on the council was to avoid conflicts of interest. How often is a council member going to have to abstain from voting if they are dealing with their own clan members or are actually part of the issue being voted upon? Potentially, if hosts are on the council, they will end up in a position to discipline themselves.

see the problem here?

[Dart Terumī]

2

the whole point of not having bijuu holders and kage on the council was to avoid conflicts of interest. How often is a council member going to have to abstain from voting if they are dealing with their own clan members or are actually part of the issue being voted upon? Potentially, if hosts are on the council, they will end up in a position to discipline themselves.

see the problem here?

I vote 2, as well, for the exact reasons she posted.

[Eric]

Vote count updated.

-------------------

I vote 1 for reasons I mentioned in the discussion thread.

[Trev]

1

Although I see Kay and Dato's point. Which is why I think for the jinchs for example, they talk amongst themselves and nominate one member. That way the council is not full of them, and they have some representation.

[Genesis]

1, as long as the majority of members aren't bijuu.

[Camel]

1, as long as the majority of members aren't bijuu.

I second this.

[Rusaku]

1 with a member count of 3 jinks 4 non jinks.

[Ace]

2

the whole point of not having bijuu holders and kage on the council was to avoid conflicts of interest. How often is a council member going to have to abstain from voting if they are dealing with their own clan members or are actually part of the issue being voted upon? Potentially, if hosts are on the council, they will end up in a position to discipline themselves.

see the problem here?

I strongly agree with Kay, however I am one for compromise.
I vote *1,* contingent on a separate voting topic to be created for the allocation of the number of seat(s) for Jinchurikii/Beast summoners and Kage.