One old priest, one young priest. 

Here’s the thing. There’s a reason why Proposal 3 combines term limits with a new requirement that “Borough Presidents…seek out persons of diverse backgrounds in making appointments to community boards.” 

Right now, NYC Community Board members aren’t very representative – they’re older, whiter, and wealthier than the communities they serve. And while lifetime terms might give them some independence, they’re still patronage appointments and tend to go to people who are tight with the Borough Presidents. 

Novices might be more open to lobbies, but they’d also be more open to new voices from communities which have changed dramatically over the last few decades. 

Would you mind talking a bit more about the ballot initiatives in NYC?  I’m voting tonight and am definitely voting yes on campaign finance (proposal one), and am leaning towards yes on proposal three (term limits for community boards), but I’m having trouble wrapping my head around proposal two (Civic Engagement Commission) especially because the main counter argument seems to be “it creates extra bureaucracy” , which I just don’t know enough about to verify.

I don’t know if I’m necessarily the best source, but I’ll give it a go. 

I don’t find arguments that “it creates extra bureaucracy” to be persuasive. For the public sector to do *anything* requires them to hire people to do it, which can technically be described as “extra bureaucracy” by those who’ve never bothered to read Weber’s work on the benefits of bureaucratic organization. 

Proposal 2 creates a Civic Engagement Commission of 15 people, who can hire a staff to help them do their job. Given what the Commission is meant to do (more on which in a second), that staff is going to be pretty small. 

What does this Civic Engagement Commission do? It’s supposed to help people be more engaged in local politics by establishing citywide participatory budgeting, by providing translators at poll sites so that all New Yorkers can participate in politics, by working with NGOs and community groups to help them with their work in their communities. 

It is the mildest of good government proposals and is entirely inoffensive. 

If not tied for second, a close third. 

I mean, we never see them interact, so we don’t know what their relationship was like. It could be that they got along well, it could be that Robert’s ableism was something of a bar to a relationship forming, we really don’t know. 

There isn’t one, but if you go to the wordpress blog, click on the end of the URL bar and then type something, it should allow you to search through the blog. Alternatively, you can go to google and search racefortheironthrone.wordpress.com + whatever you’re looking for. 

Yes on all three. 

I think the Manderlys are more powerful than the Boltons.

Crakehalls? Maybe, it’s hard to tell, post-Rains of Castamere.

House Frey? Textually yes, although there should be other equally or more powerful houses in the Riverlands. given geography and history.

Florents? Not with 2,000 swords they’re not. The Hightowers are almost certainly the number two house in the Reach and are many times more powerful than the Florents.

Dondarrions? No. Even among the Marcher Lords, the Swanns and Carons are more powerful. 

Yronwoods, probably. 

Harlaws, seems so. 

I don’t think those things are necessarily connected.

No. She’s worth way more as a hostage.