What is the actual power of the Chairman of Congress?
ElGorro
What is the actual power of the Chairman of Congress?
In the eNetherlands we came up with a made up position (one of many) of Chairman of Congress. This basicly to guide Congress to the made up rules of our Lawbook, to see everything is handled correctly. Every now and then someone is chosen who abuses the position, to boss around, like a Congressional President or even Dictator.
In this piece, we will have a look on two questions: What is the actual power of the Chairman? and Is it possible to have a Congress without a Chairman?
What is the actual power of the Chairman?
Lets have a look in the Lawbook for that:
- The Chairman of Congress moderates the Congress, and reviews accepted proposals on issues of grammar, spelling, and consistency of laws. -
Old rule, that was based on the former system we had on the forum. Its not really possible to moderate the ingame Congress we have right now. Also he can review new proposals to match them with the grammar, spelling, and consistency of laws. Nothing e.g. on declaring votes illegal or invalid.
- The Chairman of Congress is senior to the Deputy Chairman of Congress. -
Yeah, the Chairman can boss around the deputy to get him another coffee or something.
- The Chairman of Congress represents Congress and is responsible for informing Congress Members and citizens about events in Congress. -
Yeah, what exactly. Events in Congress. When we arrange a Congressional sport event, he will be the first to inform the others.
- The Blacklist will be managed by the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress. -
He is managing the blacklist, but not deciding who's on it and who's not. That is up to Congress.
- If no vote on the topic has been started after 168 hours, and 48 hours have passed since the last comment, the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress may choose to close the debate. -
Old rule, it's not actually possible to close debates anymore. That was based on the old forum system.
- The classified information in the private section of Congress can be disclosed by the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress or by a majority vote in Congress. -
He is allowed to release all kind of secrets we are discussing in Congress. Handy!
- After the voting round ends, the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress will calculate the votes and announce the outcome. In the case of a simple majority, the proposal will take immediate effect. -
The Chairman has to possess the power to count.
- (Deputy) Chairman of Congress is responsible for the moderation of voting messages and for publishing the result and details of the vote in "UNL Binnenhof" newspapers during the next 168 hours. -
Clear task. Inform the people on what is decided by Congress.
- The Chairman of Congress is responsible for administrating referendums via UNL Binnenhof newspapers. -
Another clear task, but let's hope we won't have one anymore with the current number of people in our community.
- The Government can at any time request the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress to modify the undermentioned list. Details of Governmental Programs can be freely edited, the launch or discontinuing of a Program, however, requires an announcement in the debating section of Congress. -
Administrating more lists. Ok, clear.
- The Government can at any time request the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress to modify the undermentioned list. (of Essential Documents of the eNetherlands) -
And even more lists to administer.
Nothing more is within the mandate of being elected as Chairman.
Is it possible to have a Congress without a Chairman?
Of course we can! We can do the same with one person appointed for a longer period as Wiki administrator and counter of votes. Let's organize it the same way, we organized the Key Keeper position. In a world like that, Congress Members can use their own newspapers to start debates and create their own pm group to organize a vote on that. Yeah, that sounds like a really simple system without any unneeded rules and to give a stage to power abusing people who frustrate Congress.
Thank you for your time to read this piece. Just give it a thought.
Comments
YES!
To be honest, the Chairman of Congress can potentially have quite some power, precisely due to the part where it says he "moderates the Congress". He can interfere if people go too far off-topic, etc. This includes people writing stuff in vote topics. As the person ultimately responsible for this, he can consider all sorts of text as meaningless comments. In our past vote, this included the word "njet", which according to our Chairman was a piece of meaningless text, and not a valid vote.
The paragraph on informing Congress is mainly meant to say that the Chairman can act as a means to contact all of Congress. For example, the government could include the CoC in a PM thread, so that he can pass on the required information to Congress.
A thing related to moderating congress and informing congress is the CoC's task to open votes. He has to create the PM threads in which congress can cast their votes. This requires a person who has (nearly) all Congress Members as "Friends".
The CoC is not meant to release current state secrets. He is allowed to declassify old state secrets, at a time where they no longer need to remain classified. Typically, this happens when he receives a request to do so. Such a request can come both from a member who already has access to this information or from an interested citizen. After receiving such a request, the CoC can also ask if relevant people have any objections.
An important thing that limits the power of the Chairman of Congress, is Congress itself. If a Chairman of Congress performs poorly or abuses his power, Congress is at all times free to intervene and have a motion of no confidence.
I only summed up whats in the Law. You are adding some stuff that isnt exactly there in the Lawbook. The Chairman can reveil all current state secrets, not only old. Also nothing on creating pm groups.
You are right on the last part, but I am sure two parties will vote that down.
It is not exactly there. But I believe this is roughly our current interpretation, and it is also not in conflict with what the lawbook says. In other words, it is at least as valid an interpretation as the one you present in the article.
I believe no lawbook can be complete. There will always be things overlooked, or requiring improvisation. As such, apart from what is written, an important aspect is what is actually done in practice.
The aspect of improvisation is also where the CoC comes in. Everywhere in the lawbook, things are intentionally left vague. The CoC has to decide what our laws mean, also considering what has been done previously, and what is desirable.
Whether this last aspect is understood by our current CoC is not clear to me. He often seems to prefer a more difficult path, than the one I'd prefer.
There was a COC who didn't do BS and there was a time where Congress wasn't just BS.