Goethe wrote:
Murphy wrote:
Currently, the entire process is telescoped into a single Agoran
Consent period, requires a separate slate of support and objections
for each candidate,
One is forgetting the worst aspect of the old system, the continual
stream of nomination periods with no nominee, leaving a nonperforming
incumbent (or empty office burdening the speaker) in place for 2+ weeks
at best and considerably more at worst (happened to me as deckmastor).
I didn't forget it, hence the clause that the CfN remains open
until there's at least one candidate. But if there were no
candidates under the election system, then surely there would be
no candidates under the consent system either?
Perhaps the IADoP should be required to ensure there's at least one
candidate (i.e. required to nominate someone, requirement reinstated
if that player declines, requirement waived if someone else's nominee
accepts).
How about a compromise: start out by consent, but if during the
consent period another candidate declares (or is nominated by
someone else), consent fails and triggers an election.
Note that the proto doesn't repeal the consent method, only the
IADoP's requirement to use the consent method quarterly.
