The HAEV Cooling Off Period Act (Vetoed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The HAEV Cooling Off Period Act.

A) For thirty (30) days following enactment of this bill, and subject to any further extension of modification of this Act:

1) The HAEV may continue to meet and deliberate on the voting status of individuals as currently authorized by law.

2) No decision of that body, however, will have legal effect until the expiration of the above referenced 30 day period, and no voter shall be deregistered by HAEV ruling during that period.

B) Any voter disenfranchised by the HAEV prior to enactment of this legislation shall be restored to full voting rights during the above-referenced 30 day period.

Sponsor: Badger

[tmthforu94]

This has my support.

[Lief 🗽]

If you want the HAEV to be pointless, why don't you just put forward a bill to abolish it? Let's not strive for half measures.

[Fritz]

You know, Lief, I actually did that earlier today- then I decided I was being hasty, and deleted it.

I support this as an interim measure.  My plan is to introduce lgeislation abolishing the HAEV when the new Senate convenes.  But if the current Senate is as disillusioned with the HAEV as I am, I could support an amendment to this getting rid of it.

[Hash]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

[tmthforu94]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

[Hash]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

We've been over this a zillion times. Raising registration requirements will only result in more spam and won't do anything in the long run except delaying the time between registration and registration as a zombie voter.

The HAEV can be reformed, and I support the idea of having rather non-partisan experts such as bullmoose, Gustaf, Peter and so forth on it if it can stop some of its opponents from piling hate and false accusations upon it.

[tmthforu94]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

We've been over this a zillion times. Raising registration requirements will only result in more spam and won't do anything in the long run except delaying the time between registration and registration as a zombie voter.

The HAEV can be reformed, and I support the idea of having rather non-partisan experts such as bullmoose, Gustaf, Peter and so forth on it if it can stop some of its opponents from piling hate and false accusations upon it.

Well, that could pose as a problem, since I believe there are term limits on being in HAEV. What are we going to do when they have to retire from it? Because honestly, there are very few Atlasians I could trust doing a good job on HAEV. I honestly couldn't even trust myself.

[Hash]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

We've been over this a zillion times. Raising registration requirements will only result in more spam and won't do anything in the long run except delaying the time between registration and registration as a zombie voter.

The HAEV can be reformed, and I support the idea of having rather non-partisan experts such as bullmoose, Gustaf, Peter and so forth on it if it can stop some of its opponents from piling hate and false accusations upon it.

Well, that could pose as a problem, since I believe there are term limits on being in HAEV. What are we going to do when they have to retire from it? Because honestly, there are very few Atlasians I could trust doing a good job on HAEV. I honestly couldn't even trust myself.

If term limits is your only issue, the legislation can be altered easily.

I'm fed up of this bullsh**t about the politicization of the HAEV. It's only come about because certain members and certain parties have been intent on wrecking it by all means and have turned it into a partisan vendetta. Barnes, Meeker and Peter are honest and neutral members, despite the false accusations and hate piled upon them by the opponents of the HAEV who want to wreck it and the whole idea of zombie reform by all means necessary. Don't fall into the trap.

[tmthforu94]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

We've been over this a zillion times. Raising registration requirements will only result in more spam and won't do anything in the long run except delaying the time between registration and registration as a zombie voter.

The HAEV can be reformed, and I support the idea of having rather non-partisan experts such as bullmoose, Gustaf, Peter and so forth on it if it can stop some of its opponents from piling hate and false accusations upon it.

Well, that could pose as a problem, since I believe there are term limits on being in HAEV. What are we going to do when they have to retire from it? Because honestly, there are very few Atlasians I could trust doing a good job on HAEV. I honestly couldn't even trust myself.

If term limits is your only issue, the legislation can be altered easily.

I'm fed up of this bullsh**t about the politicization of the HAEV. It's only come about because certain members and certain parties have been intent on wrecking it by all means and have turned it into a partisan vendetta. Barnes, Meeker and Peter are honest and neutral members, despite the false accusations and hate piled upon them by the opponents of the HAEV who want to wreck it and the whole idea of zombie reform by all means necessary. Don't fall into the trap.

I just find it interesting when one HAEV member refuses to look over nominated citizens because it was politically motivated, yet had no probably looking over other nominated citizens, even though they were politically motivated too.

[Hash]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

We've been over this a zillion times. Raising registration requirements will only result in more spam and won't do anything in the long run except delaying the time between registration and registration as a zombie voter.

The HAEV can be reformed, and I support the idea of having rather non-partisan experts such as bullmoose, Gustaf, Peter and so forth on it if it can stop some of its opponents from piling hate and false accusations upon it.

Well, that could pose as a problem, since I believe there are term limits on being in HAEV. What are we going to do when they have to retire from it? Because honestly, there are very few Atlasians I could trust doing a good job on HAEV. I honestly couldn't even trust myself.

If term limits is your only issue, the legislation can be altered easily.

I'm fed up of this bullsh**t about the politicization of the HAEV. It's only come about because certain members and certain parties have been intent on wrecking it by all means and have turned it into a partisan vendetta. Barnes, Meeker and Peter are honest and neutral members, despite the false accusations and hate piled upon them by the opponents of the HAEV who want to wreck it and the whole idea of zombie reform by all means necessary. Don't fall into the trap.

I just find it interesting when one HAEV member refuses to look over nominated citizens because it was politically motivated, yet had no probably looking over other nominated citizens, even though they were politically motivated too.

If you have beef with one member, then take it to him, not me, for flip's sake. If you oppose this because you find that one member is using the HAEV as a political vendetta, attempt to have him remove instead of using him as a piss-poor example to support your claim that the HAEV is an evil political machine of the elite.

Which brings me again to the question which nobody has really bothered answering seriously and realistically: what do you propose to do vis-a-vis zombies?

[tmthforu94]

Can I ask the JCP and other supporters of this measure what they propose to do vis-a-vis zombies? Or do they still believe that it isn't an issue?

I strongly believe that the zombies are an issue. I'd like to be able to up the requirements to register once again, to be honest. Possibly moving it to where you have to be registered 25 days? I just don't think HAEV will work as a non-partisan solution, and it has a lot of opposition, it seems.

We've been over this a zillion times. Raising registration requirements will only result in more spam and won't do anything in the long run except delaying the time between registration and registration as a zombie voter.

The HAEV can be reformed, and I support the idea of having rather non-partisan experts such as bullmoose, Gustaf, Peter and so forth on it if it can stop some of its opponents from piling hate and false accusations upon it.

Well, that could pose as a problem, since I believe there are term limits on being in HAEV. What are we going to do when they have to retire from it? Because honestly, there are very few Atlasians I could trust doing a good job on HAEV. I honestly couldn't even trust myself.

If term limits is your only issue, the legislation can be altered easily.

I'm fed up of this bullsh**t about the politicization of the HAEV. It's only come about because certain members and certain parties have been intent on wrecking it by all means and have turned it into a partisan vendetta. Barnes, Meeker and Peter are honest and neutral members, despite the false accusations and hate piled upon them by the opponents of the HAEV who want to wreck it and the whole idea of zombie reform by all means necessary. Don't fall into the trap.

I just find it interesting when one HAEV member refuses to look over nominated citizens because it was politically motivated, yet had no probably looking over other nominated citizens, even though they were politically motivated too.

If you have beef with one member, then take it to him, not me, for flip's sake. If you oppose this because you find that one member is using the HAEV as a political vendetta, attempt to have him remove instead of using him as a piss-poor example to support your claim that the HAEV is an evil political machine of the elite.

Which brings me again to the question which nobody has really bothered answering seriously and realistically: what do you propose to do vis-a-vis zombies?

I've already spoken with him, but that doesn't mean I still can't use it as a reason to my opposition to HAEV.

How about having to wait longer than the current amount to register? Maybe 30 days after your account was created?

[tmthforu94]

Another idea, is making guidelines like...
If a person does not make at least 3 (or another number, whatever floats y'alls boats) posts in Atlasia, other than the voting booth, in the past 4 months, they will be removed from the voter roll?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Damn it, sometimes I fail to understand how all of you can be so foolish.

The HAEV has been established for the precise goal of fighting against zombie voting. It took 2 months for it to start working, and now all of you already start whining about how it is unefficient and partisan, etc. You know how many voters have been removed by the HAEV : 0. When the act was voted on there were plenty of good intention, and everybody repeating that it was necessary to do something about zombies.
Now the truth clearly appears : nobody wants zombie reforms. All those who once were telling us that something needed to be done have already started whining. They are dissatisfied about something in the HAEV's work, so they decide to empty it the more possible. You all make me think to the Congress Republicans/Blue dog. Yeah, when interviewed, they all agree saying that "something need to be done". But as soon as someone try to do something, no matter how moderate the reform is, they all reject it as something scandalous, etc. Your cowardice is sickening, and I have more repsect for people like Fritz, who opposed it since the beginning and never pretended to be open to zombie reform ideas.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Another idea, is making guidelines like...
If a person does not make at least 3 (or another number, whatever floats y'alls boats) posts in Atlasia, other than the voting booth, in the past 4 months, they will be removed from the voter roll?

I can totally support that.

[Hash]

Another idea, is making guidelines like...
If a person does not make at least 3 (or another number, whatever floats y'alls boats) posts in Atlasia, other than the voting booth, in the past 4 months, they will be removed from the voter roll?

It's easy to make 3 or more spam posts.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

Another idea, is making guidelines like...
If a person does not make at least 3 (or another number, whatever floats y'alls boats) posts in Atlasia, other than the voting booth, in the past 4 months, they will be removed from the voter roll?

It's easy to make 3 or more spam posts.

with that logic lets just get rid of the wait with registering but keep the HAEV.

[afleitch]

How I hate the HAEV.

[Badger]

If you want the HAEV to be pointless, why don't you just put forward a bill to abolish it? Let's not strive for half measures.

An excellent question, Mr. President, which I likewise considered. Simply put I want to give the HAEV another chance to see if it can function in the forum--or more accurately put to see if the Atlasian forum can live with the HAEV without chronically using it as a political cudgel against other parties.

This gives the HAEV the opportunity to function in open forum for the forum to see if and how this body can actually function, but without immediately disenfranchising voters and creating other havoc if it proves to be a disaster in practice (again, despite the best efforts of the people running it. I'm beginning to think it's like appointing a phenomenally qualified team to manage Guantanemo Prison; no matter how good the people are, the job by definition can't be and shouldn't be done).

If the HAEV can function well, we can let the 30 day period end which would automatically ratify it's decisions made during that period. If it turns out to be a mess, we can review amending it as needed or even just pull the plug. IMHO, this is a reasonable intermediate step.

[Purple State]

I urge the Senate to vote this down and I urge Lief to veto this if it passes.

I will state my position as simply as possible: the people politicizing the HAEV and using it as a "cudgel" are a few members of one party and their stream of recruits. These are the same people that yelled bloody murder when it was first under consideration and what I find shocking is the Senate's apparent expectation that this group wouldn't continue to oppose it once the HAEV started operating.

It would thoroughly confuse me if all it takes to turn this body's opinion against a group of prestigious and respected Atlasians is Libertas, Winston, Giovanni and a stream of obviously recruited trolls.

C'mon guys. Represent the people, not just the loudest people.

[segwaystyle2012]

I urge the Senate to vote this down and I urge Lief to veto this if it passes.

I will state my position as simply as possible: the people politicizing the HAEV and using it as a "cudgel" are a few members of one party and their stream of recruits. These are the same people that yelled bloody murder when it was first under consideration and what I find shocking is the Senate's apparent expectation that this group wouldn't continue to oppose it once the HAEV started operating.

It would thoroughly confuse me if all it takes to turn this body's opinion against a group of prestigious and respected Atlasians is Libertas, Winston, Giovanni and a stream of obviously recruited trolls.

C'mon guys. Represent the people, not just the loudest people.

You have just crossed the line. These claims are false and defamatory. You don't deserve the respect of any Atlasians after this post.

My first issue is that you refer to the HAEV as "group of prestigious and respected Atlasians." It is not. I don't care which individuals the HAEV is composed of. It is institutionally biased and you can put fucking God on the HAEV and that won't make it any better. The only HAEV member I actually have an issue with is Meeker, whose philosophy is "oh, he makes good posts so he can stay, but he doesn't and was obviously recruited just to vote", which is basically a skewed and subjective mindset that is biased against political dissent. He has no way to determine who was "trucked in just to vote."

Furthermore, your blatant lie that "the people politicizing the HAEV and using it as a "cudgel" are a few members of one party and their stream of recruits" is just wrong and misleading and offensive. The main "creator" of the HAEV introduced an initial list of nominations. You'd have to be the stupidest man alive to not think this entire organization was politically motivated. If Antonio believed there was a legitimate zombie problem, why not weed out the left wing zombies as well? Not that this is just about him, because Meeker doesn't care to assess the qualifications of JCP voters (zombies) anyways. I'd like to point out that the Popular Party had more convention participants than any other single party in Atlasia. We have, hands down, the most active party. It's not about who has zombies or not. It's about the quality of the game. Eliminating people who don't participate regularly is dangerous, not only because it can be used to manipulate elections, but because when only the officeholders and a few others are voting, the coalitions are so tight that elections are foregone conclusions and it eliminates the exciting parts of the game: turnout competition and intense legislative debate. It will be harder to "offend" and even disagree and it will make most elections even more pointless. I also would like to point out that the noise being made is not tied to our party. Our party opposes it but so does the JCP, many Senators who supported it like NC Yankee and tmthforu94 (which is why I voted to endorse him) and even Presiding Officer of the HAEV, Peter Bell. Don't give the Senate your crap.

The idea you offer is that opposition is simply "Libertas, Winston, Giovanni and a stream of obviously recruited trolls." Winfield was registered here in the year 2004. He is an obviously recruited troll? Jamespol is recruited? Badger and Fritz were recruited by the Popular Party?

The HAEV has already started operating. The people don't like what they see. Polls and public debate offer us proof. Of course, the party that comes in a distant 4th may benefit from the HAEV eliminating voters, especially those of conservative leanings. But you don't happen to be a member, do you? Oh wait...

[Purple State]

<SNIP>

<SNIP>

That post seemed to be full of blind rage, but generally lacking in logical flow.

I do think you had one pretty decent argument in there, which I see as the meat of your post:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is, I would imagine, as good of a point as you can make against the HAEV as it exists in laboratory conditions. In other words, it is the only argument I have seen that says that the stated goal of the HAEV, on the merits, is actually wrong. I'm happy that someone was finally able to communicate something of a legitimate point here. But I think that it misses the point of the HAEV.

As I have said numerous times (and as the members of the HAEV have said and acted on numerous times), the body is not there to purge the lists as some (like Antonio V) would like. It is there to remove the most blatant examples of zombie voting. Period. It is meant to trim the edges. That is what it has done. You're getting in a huff because you think it's there to pare down the rolls when that is not the case. If it were, I wouldn't support it. But it isn't meant to do that, hasn't done that, and if it does do that it will be challenged in court.


Okay, so now let me address all the blind rage stuff.

You fail to explain how the HAEV is "institutionally biased" and readily admit that its members are basically fine (aside from Meerker) and what makes it biased is the lists that people propose.  Well, that means it is institutionally objective. What "biases" the HAEV are overly partisan citizens proposing politicized lists, which the HAEV has managed pretty successfully so far. Let me ask, has anyone been removed that you believe should not have been removed on the merits?

Next you throw around how pro-JCP Meeker has been, but again, who has he removed that should not have been removed on the merits? Bear in mind that a removal takes a unanimous vote by the HAEV, in addition to passing muster before the Supreme Court based on the guidelines approved by two-thirds of the Senate. Checks and balances are key here and they seem to be working just fine.

I'm not sure why your party's activity level is relevant to this discussion, so I'll just acknowledge it as a random bit you felt necessary to include, but which has no bearing on your arguments.

As for the nature of the opposition, it cannot be denied that the level of hysteria over the body was not initiated by Jamespol or Winfield. It is you, Libertas, Winston and Giovanni (and a few others) constantly berating the body in their own thread and picking fights in every thread in which the topic is mentioned. Rational opposition is fine, but the nearly constant blind outrage and flaming by a very small group is what has turned this legitimate debate into a circus.

Finally, you accuse me of political motivations and try to get in a "zinger" about the DA. Honestly, if you see political motivation to undermine the competition in every aspect of the game, you are playing it wrong. Game reforms, such as the HAEV, are not here to change the political dynamics of the game. Anyone who reads my occasional political science-ish oriented posts here would know that I would not want to artificially adjust the game. It ruins the game and so renders it obsolete to me. What game reform is meant to do is make the running of the game more fluid, more realistic and more active. That is what I do as GM, that is what SoEA reform was meant to do, and that is what the HAEV is meant to do. Again, let me pose the question: Has the HAEV eliminated voters in a way that you find unsatisfactory so far?

Feel free to PM me if you wish to continue this discussion. I find at least some of your points legitimate, but I don't want to disrupt the Senate's business. They now know where we both stand, but I welcome you to debate me privately if you so choose.

[segwaystyle2012]

Sorry, I'm not letting you get away with that. You can't just disregard the majority of my post and then act like providing legitimate arguments and counter-arguments is somehow disruptive. It's not like this Senate is active at all anyways so I'm happy to strut in and spice it up.

The 'intent' of the HAEV, as I said before, is irrelevant. Trimming edges is unnecessary. Why? Well, because giving the tools to alter voter rolls in such a strident manner is dangerous from the get-go. I can understand previous requirements like, for example, having made a certain number of posts on the Atlas forum between each election. That shows that someone is committed tot he forum itself and not just here to make a vote and leave, as someone like Meeker would wrongly interpret. I don't want to see voters from ANY party eliminated, even if I disagree with them or plainly don't like them.

You say I fail to claim how the HAEV is institutionally biased, but... I ask how is it not? It was created when our party began to establish itself, or around that time, at least, and was quickly filled by the majority party (coalition, whatever, it's all JCP/DA doing). Simple- eliminate voters and maintain power. It doesn't matter if it actually does that or not. It can. Potentially, it WILL.

Your accusations of blind rage are simply stunning. You flat-out lied about my party. Am I supposed to put on a big happy face for you after that? You insulted Libertas and Winston and Gio. You referred to members as "obviously recruited trolls." Blind outrage? What?

And back to Meeker. I dgaf what he's done or who he's removed. He's been open about his vision for the HAEV and I think it's dangerous and more. Others agree, such as tmthforu94. And the JCP dominated Supreme Court sounds like a great check. I should really put my faith in Marokai Blue and opebo, right? Okay...

The unanimous clause can actually bias the institution further. Meeker can single handedly block JCP zombies. Unless Peter or Barnes (or his replacement) decides not to vote for the right-wing "zombies" unless Meeker votes off the left-wing ones, only right-wing zombies would be eliminated. And this is just a possibility. What happens (especially now, since it's still early) doesn't matter because the possibility is still there.

The reference to my party's activity levels was made to offer a rebuttal of accusations that my only concern is protecting zombies for my party. I think Libertas Giovanni and Winston are with me in truly believing that this is wrong regardless of it's political beneficiaries. Our party is undoubtedly active but I wouldn't support the elimination of inactive JCP members except as retaliation for getting rid of the right-wing voters of either party. The left has always dominated this game and likely always will and it seems this was actually created to weaken the right-wing even more. It's frustrating.

I'm not PMing you. I don't care to debate in private. The people need to be able to see the arguments for themselves.

[Purple State]

Alright, let's bother NCY.

You're a total conspiracy theorist Segway. Apparently "the system" is out to get your party. It's a game man. Seriously, calm down.

You blow off the checks and balances of the HAEV because the forum happens to be more liberal in general and, of course, the liberals are out to knee-cap anyone who disagrees with them (conspiracy). You criticize Meeker relentlessly even though neither he nor the HAEV have actually acted in a way that you should object to based on your comments. They have been sparing in their removals, as you seem to be advocating (conspiracy again).

It is also clear you don't truly know the history of the game. Meeker wasn't always a member of the JCP and Peter is not even close to JCP. While it seems popular to claim that the JCP and DA are somehow in cahoots (conspiracy yet again), a few months ago people were saying that the DA was dealing exclusively with the RPP. As far as I can see, there are no formal alliances in this game. DA members are free to vote as they wish.

Nor did I lie about the Populares. Massive recruitment drives hurt the game. In my time here I have never seen a party grow substantially through a flood of 50-post new members and not bring issues to the game. The evidence right now is the the "foaming at the mouth" attitude you and many of the Populares bring to the game. The stream of insults and rants are just a spectacle to behold. But while I may find them amusing, it is turning people who enjoy this game away. At the end of the day, this is a game meant to simulate real political dynamics, but you don't seem to realize this.

I honestly think that if you all played the game like a group of civil people who just want to participate, then the HAEV would not be an issue because it wouldn't affect you. Instead, you seem intent on bringing in floods of soon-to-be inactive supporters that water down the game while fomenting false rage to advance your political goals.

[Marokai Backbeat]

And the JCP dominated Supreme Court sounds like a great check. I should really put my faith in Marokai Blue and opebo, right? Okay...

Oh yeah. Opebo and I are in such lock-step that we took opposing sides in the internal court debate over accepting or rejecting Al's suit against Vane.