Osiris Fraternal Order

I would like to bring up for the consideration of the Deshret something that has been brought up before, our constitution, the State Code. It is a fine document, broadly speaking, not flawless, but then nothing ever is. However, I would not be calling for a discussion if that was all I wished to say.

The reason I wish for a discussion on this matter is inactivity. Inactivity has been a rather chronic problem in Osiris, at least for as long as I have been here (so, from around July of 2013 to now). I do not say that we are never active, certainly we have some activity that kicks up around elections and the start Pharaonic terms and we have always managed activity around the various conflicts that have arisen in our region (whether this is healthy activity is something I'm less than sure of, but I shan't condemn it all).

This tendency towards inactivity is not something that is unique among GCRs, I will grant, it has been part of Balder's experience, as well as those of TWP and the NPO. Other GCRs have, however, done well in avoiding it (I would say, of course, that I am not saying all GCRs not listed have avoided it, I am simply not involved or observant enough in them all to make such a claim; though I feel confidant in saying TNP has managed quite well).

Now, the reason I bring the State Code into this matter. It has been my view that this region relies too heavily on the Pharaoh. It places incredible emphasis on the powers and discretion of the Pharaoh[note]The debates over mandatory Ministries and the Scribe of Justice (Linky, Linky, Linky & Linky, to provide but a few), all placed centrally to them the idea that the Pharaoh should be able to determine their cabinet, essentially, however they wished, and that powers should remain with the Pharaoh, and in each of the instances I note above, proposals limiting the Pharaoh's unfettered discretion failed and proposals widening it further succeeded; the Pharaoh sets, with absolute discretion, the endorsement limits in the region, excluding for the Atef; the Pharaoh may unilaterally eject and ban any nation in the region; the Pharaoh, effectively, appoints every office in the region, excluding the Keeper and the Curators.[/note] and often does whatever the Pharaoh wills[note]I note, this place, over about nine months, voted for a non-aggression pact with TRR, at the Pharaoh's behest, then revoked it, at the Pharaoh's behest, then voted for, essentially, the same agreement again, at the Pharaoh's behest. During a period of about a month and a half that overlapped with the aforementioned, this place also declared war on Lazarus and revoked said declaration, both at the Pharaoh's behest. Of the Pharaoh's nominees for office, only three times has this place failed to confirm as the Pharaoh would wish, all of them at the very beginning of the Order, in the first round of nominations to the Atef (I say three as Severisen and Revert were both immediately resubmitted and confirmed, together with Zeorus(I recall well, I was among those rejected, though I would join the Atef later)). This place has recalled only two officials, both at the request of the Pharaoh (Linky & Linky).[/note]. The Pharaoh must drive all activity in the region and, if they do not, then almost everything grinds to a standstill[note]Simply look around you.[/note].

This is not the only arguable problem, however, another rather large problem that I am myself quite concerned about is the Pschent and the judicial system in the region more broadly. The Pschent as it is is rarely well staffed, it often has had inactive Elders or simply has not had enough Elders appointed for all of its positions, and part of the reason for this is that Elders generally must be reasonably trusted and competent individuals, but they are, by being on the Pschent, disqualified from doing much else in the region. There is then the fact that here in Osiris we do not much use the Pschent, it has heard only two criminal cases to completion[note]OFO v Ridersyl and OFO v Cormac Stark, the case against Bob Moran failed due to inactivity and the cases that have been brought against others have not had sufficient evidence to warrant trial.[/note] and only one judicial review[note]The review brought by myself in relation to mandatory ministries. An earlier review was lodged on the Colonies and Territories Act but it was not completed.[/note], which compounds the difficulty of finding people to do the job, as interested active citizens do not want to be stuck in an inactive branch.

So, I have outlined some of the things in Osiris that I see as being problematic, which, I think, is the easy part. The difficult thing, then, is what we can do about it. Part of it is what I've been endeavouring to do here in the Deshret, bringing up topics and engaging in a debate to try to encourage activity here, and a substantial part of it is breaking away from the culture we presently have, one of reliance on the Pharaoh, Vizier and the Scribes, because that culture is not good for the region and it is not good for those who are or who wish to be the Pharaoh or Scribes. However, I also think that a change in our culture should come with a change in our law and our systems.

That is the end of the discussion I hope to have in this thread, to concoct for Osiris a system that fosters activity by spreading out power, by limiting deference to any one official or branch, by limiting the existence of "do nothing" offices, and by allowing for greater turnover between offices.

Now there are, and have been[note]A couple can be seen here, presented by everyone's favourite founder of the Order/traitor to the Order, Cormac Stark[/note], a vast number of ideas as to how one should go about what I have proposed. I will not be providing a structure or a list with titles such as "executive", "legislative", "security council" or anything of the like for others to follow in their ideas, as such structures may well limit ingenuity and unique ideas, which I wish to encourage. I will, however, outline briefly a, deliberately, rather unusual idea that I have; I do not claim it to be fully fleshed out, it has only been under my consideration for today, so if anyone is interested in its basic premise should feel free to add to it, while those who are not interested should feel free to criticise it.

My idea, essentially, rests on three offices, largely independent of each other.

One of these offices will hold the delegacy. This office is intended to have limited functions. It will not have oversight of most of what is traditionally viewed as being purview of the executive branch. Instead, it will perform the tasks of the administration of justice and of security. It will hear and decide trials of complaints brought by citizens and will act in an inquisitorial fashion in doing so. The holder of this office will be supported in its duties by a wider group of high endorsement, high influence nations, over which it will usually preside. The said group of nations will hear and decide trials of complaints brought that are against the holder of the office; it and the holder of the office will determine the endorsement limit (more on that later) and reviews of the lawfulness of statutes and actions of officials. The holder of this office would either be elected or would be selected from among a group of candidates limited in some way, both would have lengthy, but not unlimited, terms of office. The group of nations would either be elected and serve even lengthier, overlapping terms of offices, or would be selected from among a group of candidates limited in some way and would serve terms of similar length to the holder of the office, though they would be overlapping rather than all chosen en bloc.[note]I should note that I am aware of the apprehension that this particular part of this idea will be met with, considering the Kemetic Republic and the Council of Ma'at during it. I would accept divorcing the judicial functions of this group away from it, but that gives rise, I fear, to the creation of a "do nothing" branch.[/note]

The second of these offices will have wider, domestic functions, it will have oversight of most of what is viewed as being within the purview of the executive branch. It will deal with cultural and internal affairs, and the world assembly. The holder of this office will have the right to appoint junior officials to assist them. The holder of the office would be elected and have a relatively short term (read: the same as the present term of the Pharaoh or shorter), its officials would be appointed solely by the holder of the office.

The third of these offices will have wider, external functions, it will have oversight of military and foreign affairs. The holder of this office will have the right to appoint junior officials to assist them. The holder of the office will negotiate with foreign power and agree treaties, it will also be responsible for declarations of war and military actions more generally. The holder of this office will be elected and have a lengthier term than the second but a shorter term than the first, its officials would be subject to a confirmation vote to be appointed.

The Deshret will remain: it will exercise a power of recall over all officials; it will elect or select the three officials mentioned above, as well as the group of nations mentioned above; it will legislate and make policy through resolutions; it will ratify any treaty or declaration of war; it will have the power to revoke any endorsement limit set by the group of nations, with old limits or a statutory limit set by basic law taking the place of such limits; it will have the power, if a petition is brought to it against any conviction, to vote to confirm or set aside such conviction; it will have the power to pardon or commute any sentence. The Deshret will be presided by an officer that it shall elect.

So, now that that outlandish proposal is out there, let's see how we go.

l like what you are saying, however I'm not so sure I like the idea to fix it.

Maybe bringing certain positions to election by the Deshret?

Maybe even having the Deshret become am elected body to weed out the persistent abstainers who seem only to vote to keep membership in that body?

I'm looking forward to this discussion, and I'll have my proposal to solve some issues in a few days to contribute to it, this will be good for us.

I'm not sure I like the structure you laid out, but discussion is always a good thing.

I do like the idea of electing the Deshret, How many seats would you think it should have though?

These are interesting changes you are proposing and are no doubt a radical shift from what we have at present. At present, I feel indifferent to them as they are so unique and have not yet been implemented by any other region I am aware of. Hence I do not have a sample region to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes.

However, with that being said and echoing the statement mad by Ainocra, I am pleased that a discussion is being had.

What I have garnered from your comprehensive explaination is to reform the fundamental leadership of Osiris into three roles. Am I correct in saying this? If so, I note the possibility that the same issue with Elders may reoccur with these roles. In the sense that inactivity plaguing our region will not be remedied by creating what appears to be a more bureaucratic system.

Point blank no to the election of the legislature. We (Osiris) have been down that road, and I will oppose any attempts to return us to that. Other things I will consider, but to this I flat out oppose. I am not making it easier for groups and factions to control this region, that is not the OFO. That is KRO Lite, says the person whose faction had 3/5 seats on the Sepatarchy in the final days of the KRO.

I'm afraid that I'll have to join Raven in being against electing the Deshret. A citizens' legislature forms a core part of what I would wish for Osiris' identity to be, a place where it is truly open for all citizens to express their views and make proposals and have them be considered, rather than for such expression to be dependent on the patronage of some high official to be effectual. I appreciate the idea of an elected legislature as being a place in which skilled and effective legislators can craft and pass laws without having to worry about an inactive bunch of citizens who abstain simply to maintain membership, but, in the main, such legislators can get business through in a citizens' legislature and it still leaves it open for new citizens to come forwards with ideas and to have contributions from such skilled legislators to help them without having to give the process entirely over to those skilled legislators. The problem of inactive members in a citizens' legislature is not solved, per se, by an elected legislature, it seems, to me, more that it is avoided but still extant, in that inactive members are still inactive but just not involved in the legislature itself.

What I have garnered from your comprehensive explaination is to reform the fundamental leadership of Osiris into three roles. Am I correct in saying this? If so, I note the possibility that the same issue with Elders may reoccur with these roles. In the sense that inactivity plaguing our region will not be remedied by creating what appears to be a more bureaucratic system.

That is correct, essentially. The system is more complex than what exists at present, I will admit, to some extent that was the point, as the tendency so far, to me, has been one of streamlining in order to allow for a more "efficient" executive under the Pharaoh, and that streamlining, in the main, has not aided activity. If I may use an example, the removal of mandatory ministries has not led to the creation of innovative new ministries or led to the compacting of existing ministries down, we have the same ministries now as we did then.

I accept that it is possible that the problem that exists in the Pschent could arise in the proposed system, however, it does endeavour to reduce the existence of branches where that is overly prevalent now. The Pschent and the Seshat are both gone, their role becoming linked with the role of the present Atef, incorporated in the Delegacy-holding office and the council of nations linked with it; I should note that I think administration of citizenship could pass to this, or to the presiding officer of the Deshret if an all-citizens legislature is introduced; this body would not be unchecked, in addition to rotation through a means of election/selection by the Deshret, it would also have the exercise of most of its powers be liable to some kind of revocation by the Deshret.

The foreign affairs controlling office would be the most similar to what exists presently, but would allow the Deshret to more clearly direct the foreign affairs of the region, as it is electing a person for that purpose; the office would be checked in much the same way as the Pharaoh's foreign affairs powers are checked now, with the possible exception that I would wish for a greater majority to ratify treaties or declare wars.

The domestic affairs office would be less regulated than the Pharaoh is present and would allow for a person who is interested in the cultural, internal side of things to hold high office and put their ideas into effect without having to be trusted enough to hold the delegacy or be judged for their military and foreign affairs alignments; the office would be able to appoint people without needing confirmation and shape things largely as they want, however, I would say that I would make recall of the appointed officials for this branch require a lesser hurdle than those appointed in the others, to recognise the fact that they were not already expressly approved by the Deshret.

The idea is to create for each office/branch a clear focus, one handles justice and security administration (the security side would give a more consistent reason for it to do things than the justice side, I will accept), another foreign affairs, another internal affairs. It gives people a greater opportunity to choose what they want to do, in terms of seeking elected office, rather than having to choose between being responsible for all of the executive or being responsible for procedure in this place.

Kay. I think we need to have a talk.

I don't like reminding you all that I am the only person bar -one- left from the Council of Ma'at still in Osiris. I was appointed to the Council not long after it was watered down; I was even involved in the discussion of that proposal which reformed it, following the coup in which two members of the Council - the Chairman and one other couped the region and removed Madjack from its delegacy. It led me to fifty hours of hell and completely changed Osiris for the worse - it led to another coup in July, plus months of fighting which only finished properly when I left the region in May 2014.

What is being proposed is essentially that, with terms rather than a life appointment. Please, for all that is good and holy, don't do that. If you want to repeat history so badly, just restore the KRO and be done with it. Do you understand what exactly the original Council of Ma'at could do had it wished? Do you understand the power and unlimited authority it had?

The old system worked so well, it ended up with them couping; with the priests having felt angry and boxed in by their system. Have you seen the inside of the old Ma'at section on the old board? I have. I was part of it.They used to have to find ways to share their opinions with eachother. They felt unable to share them openly because they could - and would have - been accused of attempting to interfere with various processes of Osiris.

Elected Legislature?
> Guess who ran the elections?
> Guess who decided how many seats were up for election?[note]Response to Kai-Repat from the Council of Ma'at

We have reviewed your request received on the 25th of May 2013 regarding Article 2, Section 4 of the Book of the Dead for the June-October legislative term.

The Council of Ma'at hold the belief that the current number of seats on the Sepatarchy are sufficient to the needs of the region and that it would not be beneficial to the region to reduce said number.

Whilst we understand why such a request would be made, we feel it would be best for Osiris if the number of seats remains at five.

Therefore, to state it officially: In the June election for the Sepatarchy, there will be five seats up for election. If requested, the Council of Ma'at will evaluate the situation in September, prior to the October elections.

Regards,

Lord Ravenclaw
Spokesperson of the Council of Ma'at[/note]

Security Council?
> Guess who?

Final Court of Appeal?
> Guess who?

I will oppose with every last piece of influence I still hold in this region any attempt to revert Osiris to any form of trio akin to the Ma'at. It's no longer my job to protect Osiris from itself; I've been whipped raw by this community far too many times for doing just that. If this is the path you want to take, then go right ahead. But when this implodes, you'll find that the people who have picked up the messes and pieces time after time aren't here to do it any longer and you'll be back to the same cycle Osiris had which caused it to be both a laughing stock and a joke across NationStates.

I worked hard to change that, as did so many others. The past is the past for a region, do not relieve it.

I am not convinced that our inactivity woes are completely due to the fact that we have a powerful Pharaoh whom the region rely's on. I do not disagree that inactive Pharaohs have brought the region to a standstill, but there are other factors that do contribute. Political reform and activity can only translate into regional activity for so long, after that, other means will be required to keep things moving and from the looks of things political reform/activity is all this region has got.

Also, your suggestion has me intrigued. I can certainly see the benefits of a system where the workload is divided up between willing and elected officials and it is certainly unique. However, there are still the disadvantages of having high-portfolio position as electable ones. I'm sure most, if not all, are aware it's not too great a stretch from other regions political systems and what such may bring. Do we think Osiris is ready for such a radical change?

Not forgetting, this is theory, but what about in practice? I understand it early stages is discussion but someone has to bring it up I cannot help but think that our current predicament will only be temporarily resolved yet resurface later on from new factors under a new political process.

If I may address the concerns of Raven, knowing full well that I am doomed in any attempt to do so.

What is being proposed is not the Council of Ma'at. There is to be no elected legislature under what I propose, the issues of determining the number of seats it has or administering its elections do not arise. Administering elections generally, perhaps, however there is no need to presume that simply because it was in the past seen as appropriate for the Council of Ma'at to administer elections that my proposed body logically must, were I to choose, I would likely have elections administered by the presiding officer of the Deshret, for the Deshret would elect the offices being an citizens' legislature (an exception to that would be the election of the Keeper themselves, which may present more difficulty).

The proposed body is not to function as an appellate court, it is to function court of first instance. It's convictions or acquittals would be liable to appeal to the Deshret, its sentences liable to be overturned (indeed, I am somewhat tempted to say its rulings in this respect should not be effectual until confirmed by the Deshret). Its rulings on matters of law would be liable to be overturned in a like manner, by the Deshret, albeit through passing legislation rather than a simple motion to set aside the ruling (for what I think is an acceptable reason, namely that simply setting the ruling aside would leave no ruling in its place).

Evidently the proposed body is, however, intended to function as a security council. Personally speaking, I would say that this is actually the greatest threat that the body poses, rather than any of its other roles, because a security council body, of high-influence, high-endorsement nations, is always going to pose a risk to the region. It is irrelevant what other powers the body holds (indeed, it could hold none, as our present Atef), being, by their nature, within striking distance of the delegacy and with enough influence to do damage if they willed is what makes them a threat to the region. However, if we then consider the powers in relation to this that I propose they be granted, perhaps we can see a further threat: I propose that this body take up assessment of citizenship applications, I do not see that this grows inextricably more of a threat to the region simply because a group deals with it rather than the Pharaoh or whoever is appointed Scribe, and, regardless, what I propose would grant to the Deshret the right to overturn such rejections; I propose that this body take up setting of the endorsement limit, I do not see that having it set by this body is so much worse than it being set at the discretion of the Pharaoh, particularly considering the Deshret would have the power to revoke the limit; I do not propose to give this body the power to eject and ban on grounds of wanting to reduce the banned nation's influence, but only on grounds of violating the endorsement limit or on conviction (which conviction would be liable to appeal, or, as I have alluded to earlier, require the Deshret's confirmation).

There is a part of Raven's post that confuses me, I will admit. It is this portion:

The old system worked so well, it ended up with them couping; with the priests having felt angry and boxed in by their system. Have you seen the inside of the old Ma'at section on the old board? I have. I was part of it.They used to have to find ways to share their opinions with eachother. They felt unable to share them openly because they could - and would have - been accused of attempting to interfere with various processes of Osiris.

It confuses me particularly because, if we look at the present equivalent of the Council of Ma'at, the Atef, we see that its authority is far more constrained that that of the Ma'at, yet we have not suffered from rogue Guardians. It seems to me that, in many respects, the problems with the Kemetic Republic were not all to do with its system (many of them were, I will accept) but may, in fact, have been in relation to the people in said system, who, it will be known were roundly condemned at the founding of this Order and for some time before and after for having sought to hold this region to their will and for having used means believed despicable and outside of any structure of this game to have done so. It confuses me also as it is something that has been brought up before, in other debates, in respect of the powers of the Pharaoh, the idea that power should not be constrained because it will only lead to those who are constrained seeking to exercise that power anyway; I do not wish to be beholden to the idea that we can't trust those in our community who we elect to high office to follow our laws and that, therefore, we should not try to make them and, instead, should widen our laws to make way for those who wish to be powerful and won't stop at betraying the region to get power.

I await the response decrying all I have said as nonsense and not understanding things.

---

Moving on, I do accept that this region does not simply need reform of its political structure. I do, however, think that reform of its political structure is important in terms of recognising and entrenching a change in its culture.

I don't know whether Osiris is ready for a radical change and, I must be honest, my proposal is so substantially different to what exists presently because I wanted to suggest a system that would be outlandish enough to prevent others from worrying about whether their own proposal would be viewed as the strangest or the worst. I intend to think my proposal through and flesh it out and to argue for it, if I continue to think it could be viable, but I do not intend to doggedly hold onto it if it is clear the Deshret will not countenance it.

In practice, it will require much more effort than I am making out. The region will have to work at it to make it work, but that is true under the present system as well. The main difference is that my proposed system makes more allowances for the simple fact that people get tired being in power and having to do things, particularly the things that bore them, and splits things up more, so people are more able to focus on what they want. There are some practical problems that would occur in the system even when it is working well, the WFE, welcoming telegrams and the like, in-game stuff, not within the realm of those that I propose to be within the delegacy, what happens here; my answer, the Deshret says what happens here, it can pass an act detailing the exact specifications for everything, or it could pass an act saying that the delegate posts things as instructed by other offices, it could mix the ideas, specifying, for example, that the endorsement limit and a link to the forum must be on the WFE but that other things are to be specified by the other offices. To me, and I would hope to others, it is a proposal still in the process of being fleshed out.

---

As something a bit different to what I have proposed, what about, instead, a more radical grant of power to the Deshret. Do away with the other branches, give the Deshret power to legislate and appoint officers as it will, have the Delegate exist as a sort of caretaker role within this system (perhaps presiding over the Deshret, as well as, inherently, the region) rather than governing it all. A more ad hoc system of government.

First of all, sorry for being a shitty inactive Pharaoh and probably inspiring this thread. Second of all, thank you for making the point that this region relies far too much on the Pharaoh's activity for its own good. Osiris is a region of sheep in all the worst ways sometimes.

I tried to read the massive amount of words that have been written thusfar to no avail. So I have but two things to input on this topic:

1. For the love of god please don't bring back anything from the hell that was the KRO
2. Encourage and cultivate a community of people who can come in and make an impact immediately if they put in the effort. Good citizens should not have to suffer under the heel of career oligarchs before they join the club. Wherever Osiris goes from here, we need to emphasize that there are no barriers to what you can become and nobody is going to stop you if they feel like you're stepping on their toes. This game is supposed to be fun, so make it fun for people for fuck's sake

koth out