RPP December Christmas/Holiday Ball (Voting on Dissolution)

[bgwah]

When would the dissolution go into effect? Immediately? Feb 1? March?

some details we should figure out

[bgwah]

I don't see a purpose in Section 3. Even if a particular caucus decided to be a party, they'd all still have to reregister in the "New Register Thread."

Actually, we wrote the law to allow caucuses to become parties upon the parent party's dissolution.

[bgwah]

So when do you guys wanna vote on this? Now?

[bgwah]

So when do you guys wanna vote on this? Now?

I would imagine it would take place during our tri-annual convention, a few weeks from now.

Does the bylaw say it has to be done then? It would just making the February elections kind of confusing if we had the parties dissolve during it.

[bgwah]

We've been talking about this forever now. Just do it already!

[bgwah]

We've been talking about this forever now. Just do it already!

Would you rather we rush it, mess it up, and thus cause it to fail because it was messed up.


Hey, now that's an idea.

It's been like two months... That's hardly rushing. I've read the bylaw you guys passed. It looks like one of you just needs to introduce a motion.

[bgwah]

The JCP's can go into effect as soon as February 1st, if you guys also dissolve by then. So allowing enough time for that to happen (and avoiding a ton of February election confusion if this passes) would be awesome.

[bgwah]

I'm not operating on incorrect information.

[bgwah]

I'm not operating on incorrect information.

Maybe, maybe not, but others clearly are in this process and your constant suggestions "someone just introduce this" or "someone just do that" as if trying to encourage someone to do this as a rogue agent aren't going to work. I can assure you such an endeavour will be more likely to fail. For this reason and the the bylaw's singular use, your encouragement of such sends shivers down my spine at the thought that someone could introduce a malformed text. Lets say it lacked the clause that makes our dissolution conditional on the JCP dissolution or maybe some other issue is present that has been expressed as a concern, and thus it were to fail while waisting the bylaw in the process. My responses are just as much aimed at informing those ignorant of these important details why caution is necessary in response to your constant and annoying demands. You'll get what you get, when you get it.

Just do it yourself if you're so concerned about getting it right. And I find this whole "singular use" thing, and your assertion that any motion can destroy the entire process, very stupid. Why would anyone put in such a silly clause in the first place?

[bgwah]

Ask whatever you want. This involves both parties and I'm tired of waiting forever.

[bgwah]

OKAY, BUT WHY REVIEW? WHY NOT AMEND?

Well, contrary to what the gentleman from WA may think, I do have a time frame that I am going by, and while I wouldn't have a problem with doing it that way, the clock does.

Mind sharing?

[bgwah]

OKAY, BUT WHY REVIEW? WHY NOT AMEND?

Well, contrary to what the gentleman from WA may think, I do have a time frame that I am going by, and while I wouldn't have a problem with doing it that way, the clock does.

It'll be done when it's done.

When does the JCP vote?

Mind sharing?

I can start it now, actually. I thought it would be cool to do it simultaneously, though.

OKAY, BUT WHY REVIEW? WHY NOT AMEND?

Well, contrary to what the gentleman from WA may think, I do have a time frame that I am going by, and while I wouldn't have a problem with doing it that way, the clock does.

Mind sharing?

No I don't, but I am not going to just the same.

Just share the time frame. We've put up with two months of your procrastinating. I understand the RPP is your baby and it's hard to let go, but it's time.