Induction and Promotion

Councils at the bottom of the hierarchy, which have no subordinate councils of their own, are called basic councils.  Only basic councils may induct new order participants from the public or expel participants from the order.  By becoming a member of a basic council, a person becomes a participant of all the sectors that council is part of, including the order.

​

You are a "member" of a council.  You are a "participant" in sectors such as the order.  The word "member" is reserved for councils because it implies a right to participate in deliberation and other processes.  Participants in a sector who are not members of the sector council do participate indirectly in that they have some bearing on who is selected for membership in the sector council (through the ratings they give in the councils they are members of) but this is not direct.  An order is a group of interlinked councils and people are members only of councils.  Everybody is a member of a basic council, if no other, and remains a member of that council consistently.  

​

To be a participant of an order a person must be a member on a basic council.  A basic council inducts a new participant by resolution.  A majority of the council members must vote in favor of a candidate for the individual to be inducted.  Subsequently, the leader of a basic council can expel any other member of the council who has a negative seniority score.  For each member of a basic council who has a negative seniority score, the leader also receives an automatic demerit at the end of each evaluation meeting.

 

 A basic council admits members of the public to membership on the basic council by simply adopting a resolution to that effect.  That is, new members may actually first visit an evaluation meeting, but they are admitted to membership at a business meeting.  The vote requires what all resolutions do: a majority of all members, not just a majority of those present.  

​

Leaders are given the power to unilaterally expel members who have a negative seniority score.  Does this mean a resolution can't do the same?  That isn't stated, so the order (meaning resolutions handed down from any level) can decide either way.  What is definitely implied is that a negative seniority score is required for a member to be expelled.  Regarding the unilateral power of the leader this is explicit: the power is given only conditionally.  Regarding the power of  councils to use resolutions to expel members who don't yet have negative seniority scores (presumably if a majority want someone out it's only a matter of time) the intent is unclear.  But the DROP does explicitly say an "organization" can admit or expel members by resolution.  And councils are "organizations," so they should be able to do so and still be in accordance with the DROP.  They'll just be violating sector policy if a higher sector has resolved to ban such behavior.  So while the act will be valid and the expulsion real, that doesn't mean the sector can't impose consequences.  This is especially true of councils above the level of basic council.  The DROP allows organizations to do this, but this Code specifically spells out exactly how councils above the level of basic council gain and lose members.  If the high council admits a bunch of council members who are not leaders of departments then it is in accordance with the DROP and in violation of the Code.  Such actions should be treated as void and all actions resulting from them should be treated as void.  Schism should result.  At lower levels than that, severe demeriting of all supporting the action might be able to bring things back under control.  Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.  

​

It's not mandated that a negative seniority score directly causes expulsion.  It just makes the individual vulnerable to a leader decreed expulsion that the leader is being strongly...encouraged...to apply.   At personal cost a leader of a basic council can forgive (but not expunge) a negative seniority score.  But essentially such a score dooms a member to expulsion sooner or later probably.  So seniority scores have consequences.   Except that in higher councils above basic level a negative seniority score is nothing special.  The demerits that make it come about, however, will have echoed down into the lower council that the member leads, and thus they do affect membership in the higher council.  

​

Other than the president, leaders normally start terms at the beginning of the year.  At the end of each year, all leadership status ends (except for that of leaders whose terms run until leap day) but council member status continues initially.  In the first moment of the New Year, the most senior member of each basic council becomes the leader of that council and a member of the next higher council.  Above the level of basic council, it goes this way: in order of increasing level, through a succession of moments, each council gains as a member any leaders of immediately subordinate councils who were not previously its members, then members of the council who are no longer leaders of immediately subordinate councils cease to be members of the council, then the most senior remaining member of the council becomes its new leader.  Whichever continuing member of a council had the highest seniority score after the first second of the year will be its leader for the entire year.  Once attained, leader status continues regardless of any other status (including life or death) and regardless of subsequent seniority score.  At the start of each New Year, continuing members on each council retain former seniority scores on the council and new ones start with seniority scores of zero.

 

A cascade occurs when the ball drops.  It sounds complicated but it's just that the senior continuing member of each council  is on the next higher council.  And that next higher council is made up of leaders of subordinate councils.  And its new leader is its most senior continuing member.  Leader status, once assigned, lasts until the end of the term regardless of anything whatsoever as long as the council or some some successor of the council continues to exist.  Leaders who die continue to hold office.  Leaders who resign continue to hold office.   What this means is that nobody else can hold that office until the next term begins.  Any provision for interim appointments would likely get abused.  

​

Unlike other leaders, a new president is chosen every leap day instead, and a president may not serve two consecutive terms. 

​

There is no provision for interim presidents.  If a president dies you don't get a new one until the next leap day.  Further, the president has a different term from anyone else, so theoretically the president could be no longer a deputy.  All this is worth it to keep it simple.   You probably can go four years without a president.  The high council will operate just fine.  

​

On leap day, whichever deputy has the highest seniority score on the high council becomes the new president unless that individual was the previous president.   

​

Nobody can serve two consecutive terms as president.  The president is just whoever was the most senior member of the high council at the first moment of leap day.  As with the leaders of all councils, the office is held for the duration of the term.  That means nobody else can take that office no matter how negligent or incapacitated the leader.  The office is filled for that whole time period.  The only way to take that office is to be most senior deputy on leap day and not the immediately previous president.  This is a four year term, except that sometimes it's an eight year term due to the way there are exceptions to usual the leap year system, part of the Gregorian calendar.  No need to compensate for that.  It will be fine.  

​

An order lacking a president may choose one by resolution of the high council, but if it fails to do so by the close of its first business meeting without a president, then the most senior member of the high council becomes president, to serve until the next leap day.

 

Leaders hold office from the time they take office until the end of the term, but sometimes leaders can take office mid term when the office was truly empty (rather than merely held by a corpse or something).  This mainly means when a council is newly created.  But a newly created council might have no unequal seniority scores.  Using age as a tie breaker for parliamentary priority, such as who speaks first or calls meetings to order, is one thing.  Using it to decide the initial president of an order is something else entirely.  So it should be possible for a newly created order to get a chance to elect someone (pass a resolution appointing someone) first.  If that doesn't happen, seniority can prevail.  Clearly these people don't care.

​

Evaluation meetings are always in locations or settings which have been prescribed by resolution of the council.  The high council establishes rules for setting a recurring schedule of times and days for regular evaluation meetings of all councils throughout the order.  Evaluation meetings must be scheduled to occur at least monthly and no more often than weekly.

​

Using the word "setting" leaves it open for meetings to be held virtually.  The council holding the meeting decides where and how to hold its meetings.  The wording "the high council establishes..." just means the high council sets some kind of scheduling standard order wide.  Ideally, each council of a particular level will be at the same time and all the different levels will have times set centrally.  The advantage is that it prevents anyone from being able to attend two council meetings of the same level at once and it coordinates things so leaders at higher levels won't have schedule conflicts.   That way nobody has an excuse for missing a meeting, "Oh, I was at the high council meeting, I couldn't make it to the meeting of my own basic council."  

 

The council decides where, the order decides time.  Or sets up a system for deciding time.  Actually, I'm tempted to wish I had used different words than "establishes rules for a recurring schedule".   The intent is that  the high council could set up alternative times, especially for basic councils.   It could have been, "the high council dictates recurring evaluation meeting times for all councils."    But I stepped back from that and made it that they can establish rules for setting those times.  That is, they can set up how councils are to pick their times.  This can be anything from the high council authorizing itself to dictate exact times for each individual council all the way to giving councils total latitude to set their own times.  Ideally they would set a range of options for each level, designed to not conflict with options for other councils, and taking into account possible travel times.   Ultimately maybe leaving that latitude to the high council was best after all.  

​

In accordance with the DROP, organizations (such as councils) can hold business meetings any time a quorum is assembled, but this code demands that no business meetings ever be started during an evaluation meeting.  Calls to initiate a business meeting during an evaluation meeting should be ignored as void because a meeting is already under way.

 

The DROP takes higher priority and it is possible for a senior member to call a business meeting during an evaluation meeting.  Such an action can be taken, but it can also be treated as void because it violates the Code.  Thus it can cause a schism.  Nobody who would do such a thing should ever get seniority and anyone who does so should get drummed out (through the proper procedure).  Any speaker in such a meeting who doesn't immediately propose the meeting be adjourned should be stood down, as should all comments on the motion.  Just go right to a vote and stop the meeting ASAP.  The leader who called it can still call it again, but hopefully it was a mistake.  If necessary, enough members should stay temporarily absent that the meeting can't be called again if the senior member is intent on calling a disruptive business meeting.  And the evaluation meeting should not be considered ended.  It doesn't require a quorum.  It's just been interrupted and disrupted.  After that is dealt with, let it resume.  No actions (other than adjournment) of any disruptive business meeting called during an evaluation meeting should be treated as anything but void.    That IS something the DROP can allow.  An order resolution (adopting this Code) has voided those actions, and that's not void  because the superior organization takes precedence according to the DROP.  The senior member of a high council could repeal that element of the code in a meeting disruptively called, but that would basically put the whole order into schism with being under the code at all.  If such a thing looms the members should just walk out during commentary.  A bad leader or senior member can be cut out by simply meeting somewhere and not telling that person where, then taking whatever actions are necessary to defang the disruptor.  A majority can work around the individual.   

​