There is always the possibility that a faction will not have enough members to fill the seats it wins in the RA. This can occur when a faction receives a large number of votes but has no members willing to serve on the RA.
While not addressed in the constitution, it has been stated in the forum that these seats will be lost. Thus if there are five seats on the RA and a faction cannot fill that seat, the RA will contract to four seats for that term.
SC members, how does this sound?
~Ulrika~
Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
SC Topic: Unable to Fill an RA Seat |
|
|
Ulrika Zugzwang
Magnanimous in Victory
Join date: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 6,382
|
01-10-2006 17:00
_____________________
Chik-chik-chika-ahh
|
|
Aliasi Stonebender
Return of Catbread
Join date: 30 Jan 2005
Posts: 1,858
|
01-10-2006 17:27
There is always the possibility that a faction will not have enough members to fill the seats it wins in the RA. This can occur when a faction receives a large number of votes but has no members willing to serve on the RA. While not addressed in the constitution, it has been stated in the forum that these seats will be lost. Thus if there are five seats on the RA and a faction cannot fill that seat, the RA will contract to four seats for that term. SC members, how does this sound? ~Ulrika~ In absence of any further doctrine or law, this sounds reasonable. OTOH, there's a fairly good reason to keep the RA to an odd number of seats; since we're looking to hold a proper constitutional convention after elections this is an issue that should be examined. My own gut feeling is "allocate the lost seats to the other parties as if the faction that cannot fill them had not existed". That is, (to keep it simple) say we have four factions, and one gets two seats and the others one seat each. However, the two-seat faction only has one candidate who is willing to serve - the lost seat would then go to the next-most-voted faction. It is true this trades off strict representation for prudence in keeping the RA consistent, but on the other hand, if a faction can't gather enough solid candidates, should they actually be entitled to those seats? _____________________
Red Mary says, softly, “How a man grows aggressive when his enemy displays propriety. He thinks: I will use this good behavior to enforce my advantage over her. Is it any wonder people hold good behavior in such disregard?”
Anything Surplus Home to the "Nuke the Crap Out of..." series of games and other stuff |
|
Ulrika Zugzwang
Magnanimous in Victory
Join date: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 6,382
|
01-10-2006 17:51
It is true this trades off strict representation for prudence in keeping the RA consistent, but on the other hand, if a faction can't gather enough solid candidates, should they actually be entitled to those seats? To me it's a question of whether we want to retire a seat or pass a seat on to the next faction as you said. Passing a seat on is something that's easy to do too with the Sainte-Laguë method, you just pretend that there's an extra seat available (6) and let the standard algorithm pick the faction that should receive the extra seat. From there a seat from the faction that is short is retired. So, one could have the following options with three parties and five seats: Retire: 2-2-1 becomes 2-1-1 Pass: 2-2-1 becomes either 3-1-1 or 2-1-2 I think I like the option of passing the seat myself now that you mention it, Aliasi. ~Ulrika~ _____________________
Chik-chik-chika-ahh
|