Join the new world

Thanks Huey ! Couple of points.

Shouldn't members of congress all vote as to who they want the speaker be , not just the PP of the party ?

This all seems rushed along too soon, Closing date for Speakers was on the 24th ? Even before congress had be chosen , which doesn't seem right.

If a party has more congress members than another party then the first past the post again seems very unfair , I would like this whole process looked into has it is not very democratic as in a party with more congress members will head the speaker votes.

In the real life UK, 3 parties have to put forward a speaker first.

Thanks

'Shouldn't members of congress all vote as to who they want the speaker be , not just the PP of the party ?'
they do as stated in the article 30 votes were cast

'This all seems rushed along too soon, Closing date for Speakers was on the 24th ? Even before congress had be chosen , which doesn't seem right.'
ok that's fair enough i would suggest a congressman who would like the dates for this changed outline a proposal in which we can all vote

'If a party has more congress members than another party then the first past the post again seems very unfair , I would like this whole process looked into has it is not very democratic as in a party with more congress members will head the speaker votes.'
no that's the exact definition of democracy

if you (or new era in general) are not happy with the way the speaker was chosen any congressman is free to outline a proposal to re do this process and kravenn should facilitate a free and impartial vote on this as that's his job as speaker

No Mwcertberus , shouldn't members of congress vote who they want to put forward to be a speaker , you are talking about after the PP has selected someone to be put forward.

hopefully you read the rest of my reply too...
well currently the system is that all 5 PPs are contacted and they can put up 1 or more candidates for speaker
wigibob was contacted and didn't put up a candidate
also as stated if someone outlines a proposal to re do the vote and half of congress back it then it will be done
nothing is set in stone

That is a wrong system then mwcerberus This is simple on the vote should be a person from each of the TOP 5 parties, that is simple,

it would have been if New era had put anyone up

http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/speaker-of-the-house-protest--2282684/1/20

if that's the case, how could Huey win as speaker last term? I personally voted for BeeDeeCollecter in May, can't remember who the third candidate was, I could check my PMs, I suppose.

As others have stated , this is NOT real life, if it was the 3 biggest parties would nominate only [in the case of this month's results; TUP, New Era & UKRP]. As it turns out, your PP did NOT bother to nominate anyone, so you really can't complain about a process your party didn't bother to participate fully in.


tl:dr

STFU!!!!

On the voting form should be a player from each Top 5 party , anything else is a scandal

Why shouldn't small parties get the same chance as anyone else?

Just because we rank 6th,we shouldn't be able to put a congress candidate forward?

for Speaker

Well I'm only going by the game rules top 5 parties are allowed to run for congress , if others run they do it on another parties back. In the game just because you are 6th it means you cant run for congress, and you only do so by the good nature of another party.

If a party has congress members,they should be allowed to put a candidate forward.

Your PP didn't nominate anyone, maybe elect someone who actually cares to take part next time, eh?

Hold up, New Era also has a VP who is online all the time, you would think the speaker you go though the proper channels instead of holding a bogus vote , why miss out a main party when all it took was 2 seconds to come onto irc ? this is not right , I don't care who wins , but if people are going to make up rules and make up things like speakers at least run it all above aboard and right !

They didn't make anything up, Congress voted on these rules ages ago.

As to a Party Vice President...that position is meaningless. The Party President is the only one with mechanical authority, and is the person required to make the nomination under the rules set forth by Congress. Rules that very prominent members of New Era, including former PP/CP BigAnt were aware of...as noted by their participation in the debate and vote which implemented them.

The only fault here lies at the feet of Party President of New Era. He chose not to respond to the message, and he chose not to nominate someone for the position. If you want to complain, complain to him.

Whilst I appreciate this thorough response from the outgoing Speaker;

I believe that all Congressmen should be able to stand for Speaker, whether they have been nominated or not.

(you could have PPs vetoing someone from their party maybe but all should be able to put themselves forward).

Having nominations close the day before Congressmen even know they are elected is silly.

Also, PPs should be given more than 24hrs to either nominate a candidate(s) or veto a candidate - 24 hrs is not long enough for people to get a proper chance to vote in something important.

Feel free to open discussion on an amendment to the rule.

Why not just scrap the speaker role and have the CP or a minister open a mass message for congress and government to discuss and debate in...