Print

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

[Eric]

http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,9185.0.html


While I personally am not too concerned about the swing of the Council topic itself (cause it seems pretty straightforward based on Shadow's response) but it did bring back to mind that, by the current rules, a member of the Council could be pulled into voting on a topic regarding themselves.

To my knowledge, there are no formal rules on this matter prohibiting the accused or accuser from voting on a Council topic.

 Any interest in formally making guidelines on that, especially if multiple Council members end up in the box? Or on defining what a conflict of interest even is?

[Dart Terumī]

How is my topic considered a "conflict of interest" when neither Athos or Rusaku are on the council?

[Chinote]

How is my topic considered a "conflict of interest" when neither Athos or Rusaku are on the council?

He said "could." He's trying to address the possibility of a Council member having to vote on a situation involving them before it becomes an issue.

[Dart Terumī]

How is my topic considered a "conflict of interest" when neither Athos or Rusaku are on the council?

He said "could." He's trying to address the possibility of a Council member having to vote on a situation involving them before it becomes an issue.

Re-reading it more slowly, I see that now. My bad!

[Trev]

I guess they abstain? Like if the Athos and Rus challenge thing had to be decided, I would have excused myself since it would have affected me.

[KayentaMoenkopi]

ok, while I feel this should be obvious...because what defendant sits on his own jury...

I feel that if formal complaint is made about a council member because of his Host/summoner duties, that he should not get to vote on the ruling, but rather be treated like any non council member host/summoner.

[Eric]

ok, while I feel this should be obvious...because what defendant sits on his own jury...

I feel that if formal complaint is made about a council member because of his Host/summoner duties, that he should not get to vote on the ruling, but rather be treated like any non council member host/summoner.

The first part is obvious from that standpoint, yes. But then that leaves an even number of council members, causing a potential tie vote situation. And there is no formal procedure for tie votes.

Also, does any formal complaint lead to forced abstinence or does the complaint need to go through a process to evaluate whether its legit or not? I'd hate to see people pull up complaints regarding council members they just don't want to vote against them.

[KayentaMoenkopi]

As it stands, the council members were voted in. The time to object to them is over. They have the job now and will make the votes.

The only time a council member would not vote, is when they are the issue under discussion. the community placed confidence in each member to vote with an unbiased and well informed stand point being the basis of the vote they cast.

I see no reason to complicate that at this point.

Ties? Well I did not want hosts on the council to begin with, so here we are. When and if a tie occurs, the council will just have to work it out, stay in deliberations until the tie is broken. To reach a tie in a vote will just mean the job is not done yet and the work must continue.

first and foremost, as with any vote...the council must reply upon the rules and not passion when it comes to casting their vote. It's not a matter of what we think is fair and what we want or who we like.

[Eric]

As it stands, the council members were voted in. The time to object to them is over. They have the job now and will make the votes.

The only time a council member would not vote, is when they are the issue under discussion. the community placed confidence in each member to vote with an unbiased and well informed stand point being the basis of the vote they cast.

I see no reason to complicate that at this point...

I cannot disagree with that logic, for the time being.

I disagree over the ties part though. If the Council is even steven and there is no budging, there has to be some fallback, which will probably be Community Vote at that point.

[Dart Terumī]

I'm also in agreement that if a subject pertains to a Council Member, then they abstain their vote.

As for ties, I also agree with continued deliberations until it is broken. A community vote can be flooded with biased votes.

We enforce the rules, not emotion or favoritism, like Kay said.

[Camel]

I'm also in agreement that if a subject pertains to a Council Member, then they abstain their vote.

As for ties, I also agree with continued deliberations until it is broken. A community vote can be flooded with biased votes.

We enforce the rules, not emotion or favoritism, like Kay said.

[Ace]

I'm also in agreement that if a subject pertains to a Council Member, then they abstain their vote.

As for ties, I also agree with continued deliberations until it is broken. A community vote can be flooded with biased votes.

We enforce the rules, not emotion or favoritism, like Kay said.

[Eric]

Ok then.