Osiris Fraternal Order

Are we satisfied with how the State Code is organized, or would we prefer a system like Balder's, as an example, in which the constitution is separated into multiple, shorter laws that have constitutional status?

Broadly speaking, I am fine with how the Code is currently organised.

Are we satisfied with the Executive overall, the Pharaoh serving as Head of State, Head of Government, and WA Delegate? Would we prefer to separate any of these roles into another office?

I am also fine with the executive as is currently is and, while it would be interesting to experiment with such separation and such experimentation would probably be easier now than later down the line, I see no particular reason to do so.

Now that we have abolished the Executive participation requirements for the Deshret, should we further define the role of the Vizier in the State Code or should we leave that to the discretion of each Pharaoh/Vizier team?

I favour leaving the role of the Vizier to be, largely, defined by the Pharaoh and Vizier as they believe necessary.

Are we satisfied with challenge elections for the Pharaoh or should we implement scheduled elections? Should the Pharaoh's term -- either under the challenge system or scheduled elections -- remain at three months or should it be shorter or longer

I am tempted to say both, with regards to the challenge system or scheduled elections, and for terms to be made longer, in a sense, by having an automatic election after, say, six months after the most recent election, with the ability to challenge after three months and before six. Such a system would, perhaps, make term limits more difficult, as a term would not have a definite length, though that could be solved by limiting the time a person can be Pharaoh to so many consecutive days and placing a bar on standing for re-election for a period of time after they cease to be Pharaoh (to prevent abuses by a person, say, being near to the limit, resigning, then running for re-election with the intervening days having broken the continuity).

Are we satisfied with a directly democratic Deshret that is open to all citizens or would we prefer a representative Deshret comprised of elected legislators?

As has been noted, a number of Councillors do not, currently, participate in legislating, beyond voting to retain membership and thus the ability to vote in elections and such, I am, therefore, tempted to say both, again. A system whereby a smaller group of Councillors are elected to a body that may take legislative action on its own may be interesting and remove the need for Councillors to check as often for votes on matters that do not hold their interest, perhaps with the full Deshret retaining exclusive purview of matters such as confirmations, removals, overrides and amending the Code (although on that last one perhaps requiring agreement of the two in place of the Pharaoh's veto would be preferable, if such a system were introduced).

Are we satisfied with Elders of the Pschent being appointed by the Pharaoh and confirmed by the Deshret for an unlimited term of office, or would we prefer elected Elders? Would we prefer an alternative judicial system altogether?

I am largely ambivalent but, in the event that elected Elders were deemed preferable, I would prefer for them to be elected asynchronously.

Are we satisfied with the Attorney General (Scribe of Seshat/Justice) being appointed by the Pharaoh and confirmed by the Deshret, with the ability of the Pharaoh to remove the Scribe from office, or would we prefer an elected Attorney General? If we maintain appointment, should we remove the Pharaoh's ability to remove the Scribe of Justice from office?

As a potential solution to the potential problem of the Scribe refusing to bring prosecutions against the executive, perhaps the Deshret could elect an office specifically for that purpose (I am not entirely sure whether that was what the Curator was suggesting in an earlier post or not).

[*]Are we satisfied with how the State Code is organized, or would we prefer a system like Balder's, as an example, in which the constitution is separated into multiple, shorter laws that have constitutional status?

There isn't really a functional difference between the two systems. We could even separate out the sections into discrete posts if we wanted to right now.

[*]Are we satisfied with the Executive overall, the Pharaoh serving as Head of State, Head of Government, and WA Delegate? Would we prefer to separate any of these roles into another office?

I'm happy with what we have.

[*]Now that we have abolished the Executive participation requirements for the Deshret, should we further define the role of the Vizier in the State Code or should we leave that to the discretion of each Pharaoh/Vizier team?

I feel like the vizier has a lot of responsibilities already. I'm perfectly happy with it remaining as it is now.

[*]Are we satisfied with the Hedjet? Should Scribes of the Hedjet be more or less autonomous than they are now? Should we have an elected Hedjet?

No to the elected Hedjet. I'm a fan of how the scribes work right now, even if we've only gotten to see a couple really work.

[*]Are we satisfied with the Atef? Should Guardians of the Atef continue to be appointed and confirmed or should they be elected? Are we satisfied with the Atef's endorsement limit, 66% of the Pharaoh's endorsement count of ten less than the Vizier, whichever is lower?

The Atef appointment rather than election feels more Osirian to me. If that's a good or bad thing is up to the individual, but I couldn't imagine an elected security council here.

[*]Are we satisfied with challenge elections for the Pharaoh or should we implement scheduled elections? Should the Pharaoh's term -- either under the challenge system or scheduled elections -- remain at three months or should it be shorter or longer?


[*]If we do maintain challenge elections, are we satisfied with them or are there ways we could improve that system?

This is one part I am personally unhappy with, and as the guy who has had to administrate the last two challenges, let me tell you it's a hassle. The elections should just be scheduled. The challenge should be abolished. I'm happy with a three month term though. At least for now.

[*]Are we satisfied with a directly democratic Deshret that is open to all citizens or would we prefer a representative Deshret comprised of elected legislators?

From my view as both a former sepatarch in KRO and Keeper here... I prefer the open legislature.

[*]If we continue to have a directly democratic Deshret, are we satisfied with the way in which citizens are admitted to the Deshret, i.e., acceptance or rejection by the Keeper which can then be put to a vote of the full Deshret if any Councilor moves for a vote?

I like that the Desret has review powers here.

[*]Are we satisfied with Elders of the Pschent being appointed by the Pharaoh and confirmed by the Deshret for an unlimited term of office, or would we prefer elected Elders? Would we prefer an alternative judicial system altogether?

I am not entirely happy with how Elders are selected, to be quite fair. I have an idea to have revolving terms of 9 months with selection/confirmation by the pharaoh.

Basically like this: Elder 1's term ends now. Pharaoh appoints new elder/reappoints the same elder. Elder 2's term ends 3 months from now. New Pharaoh appoints new elder/reappoints the same elder. Elder 3's term ends 6 months from now. New Pharaoh appoints new elder/reappoints the same elder. Elder 1's next term ends 9 months from now. Rinse lather repeat. And each appointment requires confirmation by the Deshret.

[*]Are we satisfied with the Attorney General (Scribe of Seshat/Justice) being appointed by the Pharaoh and confirmed by the Deshret, with the ability of the Pharaoh to remove the Scribe from office, or would we prefer an elected Attorney General? If we maintain appointment, should we remove the Pharaoh's ability to remove the Scribe of Justice from office?

I would prefer an elected attorney general. The position needs to be free of executive influence.

[*]Are we satisfied with the limited requirements for attaining citizenship in Section 6 of the State Code? Should more citizenship requirements be defined in the State Code or should we continue to leave such requirements to statute?

The more open our citizenship procedure is, the better. Keep any further limitations to a minimum and to statute not the state code.

[*]Are we satisfied with the rights of citizens? Should any rights be added? Should any rights be restricted or removed?

So far we've had few issues with this. I'd say it's fine as-is.

[*]Are we satisfied with the broad power granted to forum administration to choose administrators and to enforce the forum terms of use and service? Is the limited review of ToS enforcement granted to the Pschent sufficient?

Yes and Yes.

[*]Are we satisfied with the process for amending the State Code? Should the Pharaoh continue to have veto power over amendments? Should the Deshret continue to be able to pass amendments on its own, or should amendments be put to all citizens in a referendum?

I'm for more open citizenship requirements because the Deshret is where decisions are made for the good of the region. I'd say keep the power in the hands of the Pharaoh and Deshret.

All right, it does look like we want some fairly significant changes to the State Code. I've seen these as the main areas that most people agree need addressed, even if not necessarily agreeing on the means of addressing them:

• Hedjet Appointment/Confirmation Reform
• Challenge System Reform/Scheduled Elections
• Justice Reform (Elder/Attorney General Appointment/Election)

I'm going to get started on a draft, though I still hope more Councilors will provide input here.