View Topic

Greetings, new Underhusen! Now that the election is finally over, we need to go about the business of selecting a new Speaker. Because we had a run-off election which has shortened the session, the procedural rules allow me to shorten the nomination period, so we're going to do this a little differently. Please state whether you would like to be considered for Speaker or not...as soon as everyone replies, we'll begin the election.

I would not.

I nominate @Laurentus

I nominate @tatte and @Barnes.

I thank you for the nomination, Robin, but I don't think I'm active enough at present to do a good job of being Speaker.

I nominate @Laurentus

Does this count as you not wanting to be considered for the position? It's not a traditional nominations round, everyone is supposed to state their own preference.

Id be fine with the position, actually, but I consider Laurentus to be WAY more qualified than myself. Barnes too, in fact, though I nominated the former over the latter because Barnes has been speaker for the past two or three Underhusens.  That's basically my reasoning, @tatte

That's still somewhat vague.

Please state whether you would like to be considered for Speaker or not...as soon as everyone replies, we'll begin the election.

Let's try this: I nominate @BraveSirRobin and @Reux. Now as long as you two and @Barnes responds we should have direct answers from all of you.

As much as I would want the job, I think it'd be better for me to spend more time focusing on the Information Ministry this summer. I mean, I know this is already going to be my last term for a while (meaning, I will have to take a break for a term or two after this, if our Underhusen is still the same after this term).

I feel that @tatte is far better at ensuring everyone's activity and proposing ideas for reform region-wide. I would take up the post if everyone else declines, but for now, my vote goes to tatte.

Nope, not doing it

So that seems to be a no from everybody.

Would we like to try again?

Or we could take a vote amongst all the candidates.

While I can't find anything technically illegal about that suggestion, I don't believe it would be wise to attempt to force the job on someone who truly doesn't want it.

However, the procedural rules do allow us to skip the voting if there's only one candidate for Speaker. Since nobody really wants the job, my advice would be to discuss among yourselves which person would be willing to stand, with the understanding that that person will automatically win.

I'll do it.  Boom.  Drama solved. 

Now everyone has to agree...cause if someone else throws their hat in the ring we have to have an election.

And here's where everyone throws their hat into the ring and causes Speaker drama