ti-legacy.com

What do you think?

It is rather complex I know, but I think others should have a chance at the role but if no one stands up to run for it and the incumbent wants to do it again they should be allowed to.

I like the idea of others getting a shot at the position, but I don't think it should be regularly voted on. Icly(as far as I know from the last time I played) the King/Queen would appoint the person to power. That person reigns until they die/get rp'd out/go to ahalin/quit/or got to ahalin. It would work like the other guilds in that the person is in power until someone wants it more.

I actually voted for two consecutive terms. A term usually implies a limited amount of time, and at the end of that time someone can compete against you for said position. So folks still will have a chance at having a second term, but they will have to still "fight" for it. Also it allows for some loopholes. One could be seneschal for two terms, wait a term, and return for another two terms.

It also allows new blood to get into the position, because frankly if a person is allowed to run as often as they please, we are just going to see the same person in the spot every time since you've stated the bid system is about influence and power. Why wouldn't the gls place their support in a candidate they know is capable of doing the job versus someone they don't actually know is capable of said job, but is vying for it? The first option at least forces there to be new blood at least once every so often.

I lean towards a single term (wasn't an option above, so selected 'something else'); at 6 OOC months, I think for the usual reasons of game/position/player churn is already stretching it as too long. Any high end political appointment such as that should cycle through regularly.

Given the increased gravitas of the role under the new setup (Ducal equivalent much as the Regent and Keeper of the Seal were), I'd probably suggest limiting it to the nobility as a 'first round offer'. if there are two or more nobles, have the voting go ahead. If there is one noble, they get the job. If there are no noble takers, allow gentry to nominate with the rules as above. I'm already of the opinion that it is stepping too far towards a populist democratic vote (which no self respecting noble should be in a position to win) so restricting it in this manner seems reasonable and thematic to me.

By all means, if there are no other takers in the above, I'd allow the incumbent to keep the job.

This does give me a thought on how to rejig support somewhat, which I'll raise elsewhere...

If we repurposed the position to be one of city-wide authority rather than kingdom wide (ie the Lord Mayor), a popular vote of some sort (with convoluted terms perhaps) wouldn't actually be that out of place for the period - the Lord Mayor of London was first elected in 1215 and serves a one year term. By custom Mayors cannot be elected to consecutive terms.

Geras wrote:If we repurposed the position to be one of city-wide authority rather than kingdom wide (ie the Lord Mayor), a popular vote of some sort (with convoluted terms perhaps) wouldn't actually be that out of place for the period - the Lord Mayor of London was first elected in 1215 and serves a one year term. By custom Mayors cannot be elected to consecutive terms.

I've been under the impression that is exactly what the seneschal is suppose to be, mayor of the capitol and nothing more. Infact in kinaed's topic discussing city council, that is exactly what she calls it.

Kinaed wrote:Dear Players,

Here are the questions that you asked about Court dissolving, and here are our answers:

• What powers does the Seneschal have?
The Seneschal is a Queen-appointed role similar to a governor or mayor. The Queen appoints the Seneschal based on whomever comes most strongly recommended to her after the previous Seneschal's term is complete. The Seneschal is a Great Lord (that is, a member of the nobility, regardless of social origin), and has all of the rights and privileges that entails.

Hmm. I'm going to call this poll "no two consecutive terms allowed", meaning that once one hits the end of their term, they cannot bid again until someone else has had a term.

So I know this is an old topic, but recent events have raised a topic that is in relation to this. We decided that a seneschal could not run two terms in a row, but what happens if a seneschal does not serve their whole term, either death, removal or other factors? Could the previous Seneschal run again even though it technically hasn't been a full term?

Personally that's the sort of thing I'd like to see determined IC.