The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Senators don't have a job, Sir; they have a privilege. That is the point I was trying to make, they are not required to represent people, they are given the privilege of representing themselves. It seems this does however represent a really fundamentally different view of what the Senate should be between the two of us; however, Mike's idea of what the Senate should be is, as his own words state, much closer to mine than your's, and he is the ultimate authority here.
That adds to an argument I'll make here. Mike's original idea of the Senate mirrors yours. But he is in fact the supreme authority here. He is free to ignore or accept the Senate's rulings as he decides. He has agreed "provisionally" to accept new policies that he agrees with. The original purpose of the Senate was to offload policy work from the Administration side and let the Senate handle it, requiring him only to implement the policies they write up. It is not working this way, instead all issues are taken up in the commons and maybe, just maybe a Senator stirs him or herself to bring it up here were it will be discussed for a week, voted on (almost always approved) and passed on to the Administration who may or may not bother to implement the policy.
You will not get them. The majority of posters on the board do not care about the Senate, and the people who will vote will be the ones who regard the forum "drama" as a source of entertainment. Allowing votes will simply mean that Dark Hellion, etc, will be Senators so that people can laugh at what they do while they're in here. The responsible posters of great intelligence who are not to my knowledge in the Senate, like Kourenko, Eris, Mayabird, etc, etc, have posted in the House of Commons at most once, about relatively minor issues. The endless supposed "debates" over the representativeness of the Senate, and the idea it should be representative, are the result of a small cabal, as Havokeff has pointed out before, who are intentionally perpetuating a meme of conflict when none exists. And I can guarantee you that they will be the only ones who "care" enough to vote.
Then offer an alternative, the Senate is growing, members are idle are any an all discussion happens in the House of Commons. I contend and I can find enough staff to agree with me that the Senate is not "working as intended" My suggestion to switch to a form of democratic representation does not meet with your approval fine, suggest an alternative. I have two left in reserve. Bean plan 2 calls for handpicking a new smaller senate and then requiring a unanimous vote to add any new members and that all members are for life or until banning. Bean plan 3 calls for a complete elimination of the Senate and a complete reliance on the House of Commons, the HoC will remain powerless but retain it's position as an official place to gain attention for your cause.
What Duchess is your method?
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:
Also let me add on a separate track that a good third of current Senators are if not inactive then at least "quiet". Quiet in the sense they do nothing but vote and post that they have voted.
And that should be their right. We should in fact drop quorums and participation requirements entirely so that they don't have to vote at all if they don't want to. That is the entire point of my argument, and your stating this again does nothing to address that point. Why should Senators be forced to participate when that is more or less the exact opposite of what Mike intended the Senate to be?
[/quote]Mike has posted on this in the past
. Not bothering to participate in the Senate can be grounds for removal. If we want to go off Gospel Mike then you'll just conceed that point correct? In other areas and forums non-Moderator's don't have access to I can say Darth Wong has made similar statements that not doing anything but voting is his eyes a reason for removal. He may have changed his mind as those posts I found and will not copy here(Fellow Mod's dig back through to thread 5 and 4 for those posts) are a few months to a few years old. But he did say at the outset that active members were a goal of those he wished to have in the Senate.