+- Forums (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum)
+-- Forum: Second Floor (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=112)
+--- Forum: Board Meeting Room (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+---- Forum: Past Proposals & Discussions (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+---- Thread: [Discussion] Appointments (July 2019) (/showthread.php?tid=854)
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Wymondham - 07-15-2019
Imaginary;6663 Wrote:Atlantica and Wymondham have both spent a fair amount of time participating in our legislature, so I think it's reasonable to have them on the court to help interpret the laws they've spent time thinking about already.
I don't understand the other appointments.
LZ has never participated in an operation the Guard has organized. I think if possible positions should be something you earn through participating well at a lower lever here in Lazarus, not just because you have experience from elsewhere. For example, many such as Whatermelons and Ryccia have participated regularly in the Guard's operations and are knowledgeable about r/d. Should the position now be going to LZ instead of one of them? I look forward to working with LZ now that he has joined the Guard, but I don't think it's appropriate to immediately make him the leader of it when he hasn't even been a part of the department before.
I feel similarly about the appointment of John Laurens, not because he hasn't been present in Lazarus, but because he doesn't have very much experience doing things in the current government. Yes, he has assisted NR in Internal Management, but I have not seen him take the initiative to DO a whole lot for the region in the position. Wouldn't JoWhatup, Ryccia or myself, who have put in a significant amount of effort into this region as Directors, be better appointments to the CLS? I would like to see JL building up our region more as a Shareholder or in one of the departments before entrusting him with such a high-security position.
Furthermore, I think it's important to consider what these two appointments, if they pass, would imply about our region. They don't seem particularly meritocratic, and I was under the impression that was the kind of government we were shooting for.
I am inclined to agree with Sylv
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Großadmiral Der Löwe - 07-15-2019
Mm, yes
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Legalist Zombal - 07-15-2019
A meritocracy is a government as based by ability, not participation.
You have to think of the ability the person HAS and the ability the person WILL HAVE. Ryccia would make an amazing pick, if they weren't already a director. I have played longer than Whatermelons, and I have set aside my conflict of interests elsewhere where they have not. I have the ability, and I have the ability to focus on Laz. I have done R/D for 3 years now, I have lead many times in different places as well as been part of a lot more in the past. You seem to believe that I am not a good pick because I was not yet part of the Guard, however you ignore that I have helped the region and have the ability. I have the skills needed, and I stepped up when we needed that position.
You have to think that Ryccia also needs to worry about being a Janitor AND a Director. I will be giving up my Vice Director of Internal Management role, if confirmed, to even better focus on the military itself. I have attempted and have done a fair amount for Laz and I do not plan on stopping.
All in all, A meritocracy is a gov't based on the ability and skills the people have, and will have. The ability to focus and to help rather than just by how much they are liked by their peers.
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - whatermelons - 07-15-2019
Um my only other military is Antifa which we've participated in so no conflicts of interest.
Also agree with Immphginary
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Imaginary - 07-15-2019
I don't mean to say that someone else would particularly be a better leader of the Guard than you would LZ; I'm aware of your extensive r/d leadership skills and experience. But as you have not participated in r/d in the Guard before and there are other viable Shareholders who have, I don't think you would be a suitable choice for the position currently. Once you gain some experience in our military and seem to be doing well, I will consider this appointment appropriate. But currently I don't.
For example, I would think it odd if Treadwellia had chosen Ark or Somyrion/Aumeltopia to be our Director of Public Relations because they had more extensive FA experience than Ryccia when I resigned. Ryccia had been actively supporting and spearheading FA efforts in the FA department while neither Ark nor Somy had even become an ambassador, so Ryccia (despite perhaps not being as well prepared as Ark or Somy might have been) was the obvious choice.
Similarly, I think someone who has been actively participating in the Guard would be an obvious choice as its new leader.
Sorry for not explaining what I meant by meritocracy: I think those who do things for our region should be able to progress in the direction they've focused on based on how well they've done their job; like climbing a corporate ladder. :)
-
In response to JL's comment on this topic via Discord that he hasn't 'seen anyone else stand up and say “I volunteer”':
I think people should be promoted because of what they've done for LazCorp, not because they ask to be promoted.
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Atlantica - 07-16-2019
I’m not going to comment on my appointment for conflict of interest reasons, other than to thank the Delegate for granting me an opportunity to serve Lazarus in this capacity. For reasons of conflict of interest, I’ll be abstaining on my own confirmation vote.
I’m also going to abstain on the matter of Legalist Zombal’s appointment. To be clear, I do not doubt at all LZ’s ability to lead the Regional Guard well, especially considering his experience and qualifications, and I think he’ll make a fine leader - for that reason, I can’t vote against his appointment, nor do I impugn upon LZ’s integrity and loyalty in any way. I cannot, however, vote for him in good faith either - I believe that close collaboration with ANTIFA must be an essential part of our military policy. I acknowledge the NPO’s presence, but while I’m no friend of the NPO’s, our war with the NPO ought to be a strictly IC matter, whereas antifascism ought to be an OOC matter. Altering what should be an OOC policy based on IC considerations is not something I can support.
I’ll be voting to confirm John Laurens and Wymondham. Both nominees possess excellent experience in their respective fields - Wymondham is knowledge and interpretation of the law, and John Laurens in serving in an equivalent role during the Celestial Union - and both nominees don’t have, as far as I’m aware, anything that would make me reconsider my beliefs they’ll do well in their roles.
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Wymondham - 07-16-2019
As a note I to will be abstaining on my nomination as imo it is inappropriate to vote for one's self. I will be voting to confirm Atlantica and am undecided on the others right now
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - Imaginary - 07-16-2019
I'm going to reply to a couple questions John Laurens asked me about my thoughts on how meritocracy should function in LazCorp (I think those who do things for our region should be able to progress in the direction they've focused on based on how well they've done their job; like climbing a corporate ladder.) Thank you all for the lovely debate so far both here and on Discord. As Tubbius mentioned, it shows that people care about the future of the region if they're willing to put so much effort into discussing these things!
John Laurens on Discord: Does this imply that you are stuck in your initial choice for fear of losing your place in the ladder?
I: In some ways yes, in some ways no. I think people should still be credited for all they've done for the region in other areas even if they've chosen to work in a different department, but if they've gone to a different department and are no longer involved in the old one, I don't think they should be given a leadership role in right off the bat.
For example, Amerion wrote these beautiful reports on the region he was assigned to while he was part of the ambassador team, and I was about to reward him for his efforts by offering him the position of Deputy Director of Public Relations when he resigned as an ambassador and turned his focus to the court. While I very much still appreciate the qualities (accuracy, intrigue, detail, over-achiever-y) in Amerion that prompted him to make these reports and I think of them while considering him in other positions in the region, I would very much not (were I still Director of Public Relations) offer him my deputy position right off the bat as he hasn't been an ambassador here for some time now.
2. How does this work for Court Justices and members of the CLS, who can’t currently get prerequisite experience for this job here?
I think since since Court Justices are not high-risk positions they need somewhat different skills from CLS members. What I would look for in them is stable-headed individuals who have participated in the legislature a fair amount or have prior court experience. This isn't like something set in stone for me or anything, but I think that's a generally good place to come from for the kind of job.
CLS members on the other hand I think should have much more of a standing in the region. I don't think this is the place to "find a job that I finally like in the region" so much as to have collected a base of steady individuals who have already showed their competence and dedication to the region. This does not necessarily need to be done through the executive branch, although I think that is a cool way. I have not seen this kind of individual revealed in you yet, although I think with some effort it can be!
What part of being a CLS member interests you? If you'd like to help out with the LazENDO program as you mentioned you'd like to before, I'd be happy for your help or advice on how to make it better. If you showed your willingness to put effort into this region and its government and kept a steady head while doing so, I would have a better idea that you really cared about its safety and security and had the qualities I'd like to see in a CLS member. If that happened and Treadwellia offered you this position again, I would vote for you!
Again, this is not something set in stone. Not all of the current CLS members fulfill this, but although I think it'd be nice if they had, at the time they were confirmed our region was in different circumstances from now and fewer viable options were available.
Hope this answers your questions about my thoughts on it! I'd like to hear your opinions on them (or other peoples')!
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - New Rogernomics - 07-19-2019
It is not my place to comment on individual Council of Lazarene Security nominations, so I will not be doing that, but I will comment on the general requirements and optional requirements that would be good for the CLS in general and those that wish to join it.
Firstly, the CLS always needs to have balance, meaning it shouldn't be lopsided to any faction, or have an issue with citizen loyalty.
Here are a few CLS hypothetical scenarios, where the CLS has:
1) Two members of faction x, and two members of faction y, and is going to add another member.
2) One candidate that has loyalty to a hostile region.
3) One candidate that has multiple citizenship and is mostly inactive in Lazarus.
4) One candidate that threatens to coup the region often.
In example 1, the best policy is to want a neutral member or a member of the opposite faction/affiliation, as this would prevent one faction having total dominance over the CLS. That said, there would be exceptions to this i.e. such as if someone leans faction x/faction y, but isn't a member of them.
In example 2, it would have to be denied outright as a best policy. It would be inappropriate to have a member of the NPO as a member of the CLS.
In example 3, you wouldn't want an inactive candidate that isn't up to doing their duties. In the case of the CLS it would mean someone with few endorsements, and someone who isn't around the discord or the forum at least once a week.
In example 4, it would certainly work against a candidate, and it would have to be reviewed carefully - even if it is just a joke.
As for the optional, but useful requirements that could really act in favor of a candidate:
1) Has high regional influence already i.e. so in the case of Lazarus at least 100 endorsements.
2) Has some general knowledge of update times.
3) Has participated in military/organization operations in the past.
4) Has expressed loyalty to the region in some major way.
5) Understands the constitutional procedure, and would be active enough to vote as required on the CLS.
6) Has no favoritism. Meaning if someone is to be ejected that they like or hate, they won't let that influence their vote.
RE: Appointments (July 2019) - New Rogernomics - 07-19-2019
I second this to vote.