The Constitutional Convention (Completed)

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye.

If I may make a suggestion, would it be possible to address the issue where ILV needed 75% to vote against him for him to lose? Not that we don't all love our dearest Verin, but it seems kind of anti-democratic and harmful to the game... I think we should add something that would prohibit such practices. What do you guys think? I admittedly may have waited to long to suggest it, if so, not a big deal.

The condorcet voting system?

[bgwah]

Aye.

If I may make a suggestion, would it be possible to address the issue where ILV needed 75% to vote against him for him to lose? Not that we don't all love our dearest Verin, but it seems kind of anti-democratic and harmful to the game... I think we should add something that would prohibit such practices. What do you guys think? I admittedly may have waited to long to suggest it, if so, not a big deal.

The condorcet voting system?

No, they had a system for a while where 75% had to vote against the incumbent for there to be a run-off or something.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye.

If I may make a suggestion, would it be possible to address the issue where ILV needed 75% to vote against him for him to lose? Not that we don't all love our dearest Verin, but it seems kind of anti-democratic and harmful to the game... I think we should add something that would prohibit such practices. What do you guys think? I admittedly may have waited to long to suggest it, if so, not a big deal.

The condorcet voting system?

No, they had a system for a while where 75% had to vote against the incumbent for there to be a run-off or something.

Good lord.

How about an amendment to the effect of "No voting system in the Republic of Atlasia may be be used that is biased towards incumbents."? Though, that in itself is a bit too vague.

[ilikeverin]

If I may make a suggestion, would it be possible to address the issue where ILV needed 75% to vote against him for him to lose? Not that we don't all love our dearest Verin, but it seems kind of anti-democratic and harmful to the game... I think we should add something that would prohibit such practices. What do you guys think? I admittedly may have waited to long to suggest it, if so, not a big deal.

Hey, now, I was just enforcing the sovereign will of the Midwestern people!

But, seriously, I'm not too sure how we could craft a way of doing that without making it rather... open to interpretation.  Just as the amendment is now, of course!  Perhaps the question is between whether arbitrarily oppressive central governments or arbitrary faux-elections are more fun.  (Actually, the former would probably be more fun if it were executed right, but the problem is that all Atlasian governments are rather ho-hum, so it would probably never work right in practice.)

I vote on Article IV and the amendments to Article V.  Article VI amendments forthcoming...

[ilikeverin]

Oh, dear.  Article VI is long... and there's so much Constitutionspeak... please, please, please combine these amendments together procedurally in some way.  I'll get back to work on these tomorrow.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

Given quorum has not been reached, the voting will be extended for an additional 24 hours. Let's finish strong.

If I may make a suggestion, would it be possible to address the issue where ILV needed 75% to vote against him for him to lose? Not that we don't all love our dearest Verin, but it seems kind of anti-democratic and harmful to the game... I think we should add something that would prohibit such practices. What do you guys think? I admittedly may have waited to long to suggest it, if so, not a big deal.

It's quirky, but it seems difficult to write something up to address this. I would say vote on Article IV (and on the other votes) and then we can come back to this if you think of suitable language.

[bgwah]

If you say so, Mr. President.

AYE!

[Purple State]

Actually, reading over the Rules of Order and Procedure we have no quorum requirement.

A majority of all delegates having voted, Article IV and the amendments to Article V are approved with 3 ayes, 0 nays and 0 abstentions. Article IV may be revisited pending language by bgwah.

I now bring the below amended version of Article V up for a final vote. Please vote aye, nay, abstain, etc. This vote shall last for 48 hours, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

ILV, do you really think those amendments to Article VI are worthwhile? The clauses they would replace are all from the US Constitution and are fairly well known. It also adds another dimension for the game if people can carry over (and refight) issues that the may grapple with in real life. I'd like to hear other delegates on this.

[Bacon King]

Aye

[afleitch]

Aye

[ilikeverin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree that I'd like to hear other delegates on this, but they seem to be silent on the matter

Personally, I don't really see us as losing anything if we turn 18th century English into 21st century English, but I understand that it would help promote continuity.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree that I'd like to hear other delegates on this, but they seem to be silent on the matter

Personally, I don't really see us as losing anything if we turn 18th century English into 21st century English, but I understand that it would help promote continuity.

Well, what if we changed...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to

You must be logged in to read this quote.

?

[Purple State]

A majority of delegates having voted in the affirmative, Article V is approved with 4 ayes, 0 nays and 0 abstentions.

ILV, if more delegates don't chime in we can simply put them up for a vote and see what people prefer. I just don't want to give the Supreme Court too much of a headache.

And Dallasfan, I think at that point we might as well keep the original version.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

A majority of delegates having voted in the affirmative, Article V is approved with 4 ayes, 0 nays and 0 abstentions.

ILV, if more delegates don't chime in we can simply put them up for a vote and see what people prefer. I just don't want to give the Supreme Court too much of a headache.

And Dallasfan, I think at that point we might as well keep the original version.

Well, I would be supportive of that too.

[Purple State]

I plan to bring ILV's amendments to Article VI to a vote tomorrow afternoon unless there is continued substantive debate or they are withdrawn before that time.

[Purple State]

Alright I bring the following amendments to Article VI a vote. Aye, nay, abstain, etc. 48 hours, etc.

For review of the debate on these amendments, see my comments at the bottom of this post and ILV's comments here.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Old:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

New:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Once this vote is finished I plan to bring Article VI to a final vote and bring forward Articles VII and VIII up at the same time.

Following the completion of those two articles we will move to a 72-96 hour general debate on the entire package, including an opportunity for spot amendments to any part of the new Constitution. I will also tolerate re-votes on controversial amendments, within reason.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye.

[Ebowed]

aye

[ilikeverin]

Though, once again... (tumbleweed)

[bgwah]

[Purple State]

Does Dyson = Aye?


With a majority of all delegates voting in the affirmative, the amendments to Article VI are approved.

I know open up a final vote on Article VI, as seen below. Please vote aye, nay, abstain, etc. 48 hours, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I also present Articles VII and VIII for debate and non-controversial amendments. A preliminary vote on these will be opened at the conclusion of voting on Article VI.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Ebowed]

aye

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Aye.

[Purple State]

I would rather not close this vote until a third delegate votes, but I will be closing the vote tonight.

In addition, I will be opening up a vote on the preliminary Article VII and VIII tonight.

[Purple State]

Alright, with two votes in the affirmative and no other votes, the final version of Article VI is passed.


Seeing as there has been no debate and no changes to Article VII and VIII in the intervening period and we are pressed for time, I will simply accept them as preliminarily adopted without objection. Any delegate may choose to overrule the chair by the proper procedure.

I now open the floor to amendments to Article VII and VIII. This period will last for at least 24 hours.

Just to outline the final 6 days of the Convention:

The current period for offering amendments will be followed by a 48 hour vote, either on the amendments or, if none are offered, on the final Article VII and VIII. While that vote is on-going, delegates will be invited to offer amendments regarding any part of the document, from start to finish. After that vote is complete, there will be a 48 hour vote on any amendments to the document (and possibly on Articles VII and VIII, depending on how things play out), followed by a final vote on the entire document.

EDIT: I realized I made a mistake back on Article V. I never brought up ILV's amendment to strike the dual-office holding clause. This will be brought up with the batch of amendments that may address any part of the document. My apologies.