Osiris Fraternal Order

Cormac wrote:Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:18 am Review could take months

Exactly my point

I am afraid I cannot support this draft then

As I said I am not opposed to a review but to do so with the possibility for an auto repeal would be a grave disservice to us and our treatied allies.

Ainocra wrote:Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:22 amExactly my point

I am afraid I cannot support this draft then

As I said I am not opposed to a review but to do so with the possibility for an auto repeal would be a grave disservice to us and our treatied allies.

And to do so without an auto-repeal would be to virtually guarantee they remain on the books despite any issues with them, because the burden will be on getting a majority for amendment or repeal rather than on getting a majority for ratification. There is no incentive to make alterations to problematic clauses. These treaties, like future treaties, should have to face a higher threshold of scrutiny.

It's disheartening to hear that the Keeper would rather delay democratic reforms for months, or possibly forever, than have to review our alliances and ensure they're supported by a broader majority of our citizenry.

Assuming this were to pass, there would be mounds of legislation to work through, new deshret procedures, new criminal laws, just to name a couple.

Putting a timer on our ENTIRE foreign policy while all that is going on would be a disaster for the order.

As a citizen it is my duty to oppose such recklessness.

As the Keeper it is my duty to point out what happened the last time you were given your head on foreign policy.

Ainocra wrote:Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:42 amAssuming this were to pass, there would be mounds of legislation to work through, new deshret procedures, new criminal laws, just to name a couple.

Putting a timer on our ENTIRE foreign policy while all that is going on would be a disaster for the order.

As a citizen it is my duty to oppose such recklessness.

As the Keeper it is my duty to point out what happened the last time you were given your head on foreign policy.

Some of our treaty provisions are also a disaster, and without putting a timer on them, they will not be corrected.

Nonetheless, I can see that you care more about the welfare of imperialist regions than you do Osiris, so I will strip the clause from the constitution draft for the sake of getting the more important reforms passed. I will not, however, forget that you were willing to put democratic reform and the welfare of Osiris aside for the benefit of a handful of imperialist regions.

Pharaoh, for the record, did support auto-repeal. Frankly, if we're not able to decide on if we should keep a treaty or not in a 90 day period, I think that in itself would pose a very strong argument for why a treaty should not be kept. If folks are our allies then it should be quick "yup we still want that" decisions, with changes to minutiae at best. If in 90 days we still don't know what kind of terms we want from a region in a treaty with them, then they're not worth pursuing as allies in my books.

Seems improper to remove the clause, and I'm in general agreement with Cormac on it all. *shrugs*

I am doing what I think is best for Osiris, I have no agenda outside of that.

I will be more than happy to work with you on a comprehensive review (assuming this passes) once it does (as I have said repeatedly)

but doing so under a timer would not be good and has the potential for long term harm.

Thank you for addressing my concerns.

We'll have to disagree on 90 days being a timer. 30 days isn't much, sure. 90 is a full Pharaoh's term, that's more than plenty of time, and I don't see much long-term harm. Furthermore, if there is a timer, it actually forces review, rather than potential stonewalling from various factions on changing terms in the treaties. People tend to get much more active and posting when they're actually on a "timer" to do so, rather than the leisurely attitude most of our Deshreti currently take of really only showing up for votes (no offense lads, but your input is always welcome on the real stuff too , you know).

Ainocra wrote:Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:31 amI am doing what I think is best for Osiris, I have no agenda outside of that.

I will be more than happy to work with you on a comprehensive review (assuming this passes) once it does (as I have said repeatedly)

but doing so under a timer would not be good and has the potential for long term harm.

Thank you for addressing my concerns.

The "comprehensive review" is useless without a timer, because for those who would prefer to change none of the problematic clauses of our treaties there will be zero incentive to do so. No incentive for compromise. Because if they simply have the numbers to prevent repeal -- and they do -- they need not change anything.

I've addressed your concerns only because I think democratic reform is more important than the problems in our treaties, and I recognize that your vote is needed for this to pass. But I can't even express how disappointed I am in you over this and you've lost my confidence as Keeper as well as my vote for any future endeavor.

Perhaps so Sire

but might I ask, just how many things has the Deshret passed for Royal signature in the last 90 days?

The "comprehensive review" is useless without a timer, because for those who would prefer to change none of the problematic clauses of our treaties there will be zero incentive to do so. No incentive for compromise. Because if they simply have the numbers to prevent repeal -- and they do -- they need not change anything.

I've addressed your concerns only because I think democratic reform is more important than the problems in our treaties, and I recognize that your vote is needed for this to pass. But I can't even express how disappointed I am in you over this and you've lost my confidence as Keeper as well as my vote for any future endeavor.

I understand you feel passionately about this, I think your words at this time are ill considered but I will not hold them against you in the future.

Cormac wrote:All treaties will be subjected to a re-vote within ninety days due to the expanded membership of the Deshret as well as the new, higher threshold of two-thirds for ratification of treaties. Any treaty that isn't re-ratified within ninety days is repealed.

Cormac wrote: Some of our treaty provisions are also a disaster, and without putting a timer on them, they will not be corrected.

Nonetheless, I can see that you care more about the welfare of imperialist regions than you do Osiris

I think this is absolutely absurd for the record.

---

I'm not convinced in having all citizens being part of the Deshret is a worthwhile idea, nor will opening it up to all citizens necessarily solve any activity issues, I know from experience. If that's what we collectively want to do, then fine. But this Deshret is already essentially open, all you have to do is sign up.

Automatically enrolling people is not going to bring quality new members, and it will also reduce the desirability and prestige of membership. Additionally, unless the current activity standards are imposed, it'll mean potentially lots of new members who only turn up to vote for R/D matters, and have no real interest or stake in OFO's wellbeing.

The other major change, is that of the Executive, and I think both versions are rather dangerously light on detail. Are the 3 month terms absolute cycles? What happens when an Officer resigns, is an election immediately held and then their 3 month terms are out of sync?

As the Hedjet is essentially the Cabinet, in the apparently preferred version 2, how could this function with only 2 members: the Pharaoh and Vizier. All the rest of the Cabinet would be Deputies? Why not just retain the current system over version 2 as its essentially the same but better written. Only version 1 is worth amending the law about because its actually a different system.