Lateral Branches: Difference between revisions

From Liminal State
Newer edit →

Mr Fox (talk | contribs)

3 user groups
347 edits
VisualWikitext
Created page with "Intrinsic Branches do not work directly with each other, but rather have a Lateral Branch between each whose personnel function as experts in the area where the jurisdiction of the two Intrinsic Branches intersect. Each Lateral Branch is staffed with experts at these crossroads and procedurally functions like any Intrinsic Branch. Each Intrinsic Branch appoints three delegates to represent their interests to the Lateral Branch, and decisions made by the Lateral Branch a..."
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Intrinsic Branches do not work directly with each other, but rather have a Lateral Branch between each whose personnel function as experts in the area where the jurisdiction of the two Intrinsic Branches intersect.
For issues and regulations that overlap with another Intrinsic Branch's expertise, both branches work through a Lateral Branch, whose personnel are experts in the area where the jurisdictions of these two Intrinsic Branches intersect.


Each Lateral Branch is staffed with experts at these crossroads and procedurally functions like any Intrinsic Branch. Each Intrinsic Branch appoints three delegates to represent their interests to the Lateral Branch, and decisions made by the Lateral Branch are decided by a vote among the three delegates from each of the two represented Intrinsic Branches and the Top Three Officials of the Lateral Branch itself.
Each Lateral Branch procedurally functions like any other branch, with the addition that each Intrinsic Branch appoints three delegates to represent their interests to the Lateral Branch. Decisions made by the Lateral Branch are decided by a vote among the three delegates from each of the two represented Intrinsic Branches and the Top Three Officials of the Lateral Branch itself.


Votes on all decisions by the Lateral Branch are tabulated by taking the majority vote among each of these three groups first, and then ultimately taking the tally. Each of these groups are considered equal when voting, so that means that each group of three gets one total vote for the ultimate decision.
Votes on all decisions by the Lateral Branch are tabulated by taking the majority vote among each of these three groups first, and then taking the final tally. Each of these groups are considered equal when voting, so that means that each group of three gets one total vote towards the ultimate decision.


For example, if Group A votes (yes, no, yes) = YES, and Group B votes (yes, no, yes) = YES, and Group C votes (no, no, no) = NO, then the final vote is YES. This method of tabulation is critical because if the total votes had been simply tabulated, it would have resulted in 4 votes for yes and 5 votes for no, with the final vote being NO, which is not accurate.
For example, if Group A votes (yes, no, yes) = YES, and Group B votes (yes, no, yes) = YES, and Group C votes (no, no, no) = NO, then the final vote is YES. This method of tabulation is critical because if the total votes had been simply tabulated, it would have resulted in 4 votes for yes and 5 votes for no, with the final vote being NO, which is not accurate.


For a practical example of the need for and functioning of a Lateral Branch, consider the intersection of interests between the Defense and Justice branches. The intermediary would be the Defense-Justice Lateral Branch and would have experts in Liminal State and international law, as well as military procedures, procurement, etc. A decision for this Lateral Branch might be the question regarding the legality of blowing up an alleged drug runner's boat in international waters. The three delegates from the Defense Branch would likely not vote in favor of this action, but even if they would the Justice Branch delegates would not. That would leave the tie-breaker up to the Top Three Lateral Branch Officials vote.
For a practical example of the need for and functioning of a Lateral Branch, consider the intersection of interests between the Defense and Justice branches. The intermediary would be the Defense-Justice Lateral Branch and would have experts in Liminal State and international law, as well as military procedures, procurement, etc. A decision for this Lateral Branch might be the question regarding the legality of blowing up an alleged drug runner's boat in international waters. The three delegates from the Defense Branch would likely not vote in favor of this action, but even if they did the Justice Branch delegates would not, as the action is not justifiable under Liminal State or international law. That would leave the tie-breaker up to the vote from the Top Three Officials of the Lateral Branch.


Between all Intrinsic Branches there is a Lateral Branch, and the personnel of each Lateral Branch are experts in the matters that intersect at the two Intrinsic Branches' areas of interest. Out of these personnel, three would be appointed as delegates to one Intrinsic Branch and three to the other. It is through these six delegates and the other Lateral Branch staff that all peripheral work would be done.
Because of this structure, there will be many more Lateral Branches than Intrinsic Branches, which means the Intrinsic Branches only make decisions on those issues or regulations that fall exactly and unquestionably into their area of expertise, with the actual majority of decisions and regulations being decided in cooperation with the Lateral Branches.


These three delegates to each Intrinsic Branch would make minor decisions by majority vote. If there is a question to be resolved that requires the six delegates from each Primary Branch to make a decision, then the three Lateral Branch top officials will serve as the tie breaker.
The purpose of this structure is to provide independence to each branch to make the best choices using their unique expertise, while forcing the majority of decisions to go through Lateral Branches, which check each Intrinsic Branch's power against the mutual interest of other Intrinsic Branches and the expertise of that Lateral Branch. This puts the decision making into the hands of those experts best equipped to make tough decisions based on complicated matters, which is the majority of government work.
 
For example, between the Defense and Justice branch would be the Defense-Justice Lateral Branch. This lateral branch would have experts in Liminal State and international law, as well as military procedures, procurement, etc. If, for example, the Defense Branch were to have legal questions, implement new rules, or change or implement new procedures, the delegates from Defense-Justice Lateral Branch would be consulted. In the rare case where there might be issues beyond the expertise of the lateral branch, then the lateral branch would know exactly which departments within each branch to loop in.
 
Each lateral branch works directly between and with these two Intrinsic Branches only, and would have three delegates that interact with one branch and three that interact with the other. There would be the Top Three Officials of these lateral branches which also report directly to the Executive Group.
 
 
These three delegates of the Lateral Branch that serve each Intrinsic Branch would make minor decisions by majority vote. If there is a question to be resolved that requires the six delegates from each Primary Branch to make a decision, then the three Lateral Branch top officials will serve as the tie breaker.
 
For any decisions uniquely affecting the two intrinsic branches, there will be a vote comprised of the three Top Lateral Branch officials plus the three delegates that work directly with each of the two intrinsic branches. The vote outcome of the Top Lateral Branch officials and each set of three delegates to each branch equal one vote each, for a total of three votes to decide the outcome. Otherwise most decisions that affect the lateral branch alone will be decided by the Top Three Lateral Branch Officials. Decisions concerning the specific project or purpose of the lateral branch delegates will be decided by those three delegates.
 
These three delegates of the Lateral Branch that serve each Intrinsic Branch would make minor decisions by majority vote. If there is a question to be resolved that requires the six delegates from each Primary Branch to make a decision, then the three Lateral Branch top officials will serve as the tie breaker.


[[Special Branches|Special Branches →]]
[[Special Branches|Special Branches →]]

Revision as of 18:06, 22 July 2026

For issues and regulations that overlap with another Intrinsic Branch's expertise, both branches work through a Lateral Branch, whose personnel are experts in the area where the jurisdictions of these two Intrinsic Branches intersect.

Each Lateral Branch procedurally functions like any other branch, with the addition that each Intrinsic Branch appoints three delegates to represent their interests to the Lateral Branch. Decisions made by the Lateral Branch are decided by a vote among the three delegates from each of the two represented Intrinsic Branches and the Top Three Officials of the Lateral Branch itself.

Votes on all decisions by the Lateral Branch are tabulated by taking the majority vote among each of these three groups first, and then taking the final tally. Each of these groups are considered equal when voting, so that means that each group of three gets one total vote towards the ultimate decision.

For example, if Group A votes (yes, no, yes) = YES, and Group B votes (yes, no, yes) = YES, and Group C votes (no, no, no) = NO, then the final vote is YES. This method of tabulation is critical because if the total votes had been simply tabulated, it would have resulted in 4 votes for yes and 5 votes for no, with the final vote being NO, which is not accurate.

For a practical example of the need for and functioning of a Lateral Branch, consider the intersection of interests between the Defense and Justice branches. The intermediary would be the Defense-Justice Lateral Branch and would have experts in Liminal State and international law, as well as military procedures, procurement, etc. A decision for this Lateral Branch might be the question regarding the legality of blowing up an alleged drug runner's boat in international waters. The three delegates from the Defense Branch would likely not vote in favor of this action, but even if they did the Justice Branch delegates would not, as the action is not justifiable under Liminal State or international law. That would leave the tie-breaker up to the vote from the Top Three Officials of the Lateral Branch.

Because of this structure, there will be many more Lateral Branches than Intrinsic Branches, which means the Intrinsic Branches only make decisions on those issues or regulations that fall exactly and unquestionably into their area of expertise, with the actual majority of decisions and regulations being decided in cooperation with the Lateral Branches.

The purpose of this structure is to provide independence to each branch to make the best choices using their unique expertise, while forcing the majority of decisions to go through Lateral Branches, which check each Intrinsic Branch's power against the mutual interest of other Intrinsic Branches and the expertise of that Lateral Branch. This puts the decision making into the hands of those experts best equipped to make tough decisions based on complicated matters, which is the majority of government work.

Special Branches →

LS Framework
Miscellaneous
Structure
Retrieved from "https://liminalstate.wiki/index.php?title=Lateral_Branches&oldid=43"