Objectionable Decision Act Proposal - Suggestion

I don't see what's the problem with the current system, yea there might have been rejections, but seriously guys, you don't need to swap factions each and every day. And after all, everyone can go up and challenge his faction leader if he has a problem with the current leadership.

no only sith can challenge the DL jedi cant challenge the GM unless it has changed

if he would ban all nf tffa or exile beh 'for the lulz' ,that would be considerable fuckup, and time to question his mental health and ability to run faction. but all this attention for this..

sess dislikes cog hence door into sith for him is closed. end of story

Yes it maybe due to that but the point is that we should take it into consideration...

If sess has a problom with CoG, he should kick him out of the sith just because he dislikes him. Spanish disliked dawn but he let him in, once he got sick of him he kicked him out of the sith. I think that Whoever the DL/GM is they should atleast give everyone at least 1 chance instead of just doing whatever they want. as said earlier, each side has a good argument, but heres the way i see it. Sess thinks that since hes the DL he can do whatever he wants with the sith, everyone else is saying that The DL/GM shouldnt have the most power. The Senate and council both outrank The GM/DL authority wise, so i think there should atleast be a chance with everyone that changes sides. Sure you cant just go and change factions willy nilly, but if its there first time doing it then the DL/GM should give them 1 chance. If they kick them out and they try to rejoin then i can understand where Sess is going with this.

So let me ask you all this. From what I am hearing from most of you is, letting the leaders personal feelings affect his judgement and his actions are ok? You would never see that in a leadership position. Leaders are to be impartial and fair, not reject somebody because they don't like him. I don't like the fact that Sess is DL for that reason, but I never complained or did anything because my personal feelings would have judged that decision. Leaders don't let their feelings get in the way of their duties. Never.

But then again Ara.. this is JvS, a star wars community. The Jedi if a recall in the movies have no say as to what the masters council does. They just have to deal with it. The sith on the other hand can fight for power and do whatever they want. I don't think sess or any other DL/GM have ever done anything way out there to abuse their power. When hero demoted dray, he had reason to according to the jedi and JvS rules. When sess rejected cog he was in his right to do so, as that is the sith way.

Funny how u say fight the sith leadership and take the spot ur self. obv I cant so that arguement pretty much goes down the drain

I fought myself into Sith , plus this entire act seems like another part of bureaucracy. If you do not have absolute or near absolute confidence in your leader then he/she should not be your leader or you may want to switch factions

Aardvark wrote:

I'm thinking of calling it the Senate Veto Act. What do you think?

The senate is jedi. 90% jedi.

EDIT: never mind, thank god aard finally retired teh inactive ones, but i still think sith matters should stay with sith, if the leader lost the faith of his people, the people will act, HIS PEOPLE, the sith. I believe the sith should have reign to do what the sith want, thats always been my take, the factions not interefear with the others. So if its a sith thing, only the SITH on teh senate vote, likewise for jedi, that is my take, take it or leave it, my only post in here (Or few)

Double EDIT: I also think that sith shouldnt be political, it should be if somebody abuses, he gets dethroned, if he doesnt get dethroned, people are happy with him, so as long as people are happy enough to telerate him, its fine, if they arnt, he gets challenged and the problem solves itself.... i really think the sith should be a food chain style, not a political please the people style, yes keep your own for sloughtering you, but he should have no need to keep the jedi happy since they are not part of his body as a SITH.

the DL has some responsiblities beyond his skill. so its not like some idiot can be DL out of the blue. that has been established.

there are certain conducts that everyone needs to follow when they are given power. Abuse them too much and it can have consequences

Umm, why try to fix which is not broken?

Disturbed wrote: If the GM decides to demote Skorp to GJ just because they got in a fight, that is objectionable.

why me XD

Talkin'boutFreedom wrote:Umm, why try to fix which is not broken?

more like there trying to break what isnt broken

If you really insist on changing this crap, then I propose something like that:

If anyone disagrees in the faction council with a questionable decision of the faction leader, then let's have a vote in which all of the faction council members vote and if you succeed to gain 2/3 majority, then the decision could be overwritten. Therefore the faction issues would still be kept in the actual faction instead of the Senate making decisions in these things.

I don't know why people are so faction based. We're all in the same clan and it's not anyones fault that most of the senate are jedi. Just nominate a sith and don't use that false argument. The senate is an all clan based thing. So if they picked a different faction than u idk how that would impact anyones decision.

i think the senate should be split into two, teh sith and jedi, they vote together if its a clan wide thing or a clan wide problem (absolutely nothing to do with factions) and then for a jedi problem, have the jedi senate do it, sith problem, hello sith senate. make it simple and sensible

thats why you have masters and dark council. abusing powers isnt allowed. like i said, even leaders get punished if they pull the cord too much.

then why does it go threw senate, instead of councils?

xzavier wrote:then why does it go threw senate, instead of councils?

Because councils can be stacked easily if the person in power chooses to? With the senate they get nominated, debated, voted on and then voted on in council.

And honestly I really do not think we need something like this but if you insist it should not even be dealing with a decision but it should allow the faction's council to override/veto the leaders decision. Another reason why I do not see a reason for this is that I have never seen an issue like this arise. Furthermore, we are indeed one clan and as such we help each other out, even if we are not the same faction.

EDIT: And also Disturbed, when you truly see someone abusing power please let me know and then we can fix it. I have not seen anyway abusing power as the way you have painted this picture.

the Charter clearly states the rules in wich all members must abide. Admins and power holding positions also have primary rules that they MUST abide by.