SB 28-23: Increasing Requirements Act (Passed)

[Sestak]

Increasing Requirements Act

1. Section 3, Part 8, of the Census Act of 2019 is amended as follows:

Section 3. Registration
8.In order to be eligible to register, a poster’s Atlas Forum account must have been registered for at least one hundred and sixty-eight hours and must have accumulated at least forty posts.

Section 4, Part 2, of the Federal Electoral Act of 2019 is amended as follows

Section 4. Voter Eligibility.
2. A registered voter shall only be eligible to vote in a federal election if they have made at least eight posts from their account in the fifty six days (eight weeks) immediately prior to the commencement of the election and if their account is at least thirty (30) days old.

2. Nothing in the above change shall be construed as permitting the census administrator to remove the registrations of any voter who has already been registered due to not meeting these requirements.

3. Upon passage of this amendment, a new page entitled "Census Act" shall be created on the wiki. It shall contain the most up to date text, with amendments, of the Census Act as active in law. The page for "Census Act of 2019" shall continue to contain the original text. Both pages shall contain disclaimers at the top of the page explaining this and linking to the other page.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well clearly the President has endorsed option two.

I will sponsor it for the administration and give 24 hours to object.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

uh...bump? Amendment has passed and I hope the Senate can do a final vote soon.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment is adopted.

I have one more amendment I would like to offer, but I am late for work now.

uh...bump? Amendment has passed and I hope the Senate can do a final vote soon.

I was building a computer yesterday and ran into problems. I expect this to be at vote and maybe even passed by the weekend.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Increasing Requirements Act

1. Section 3, Part 8, of the Census Act of 2019 is amended as follows:

Section 3. Registration
8.In order to be eligible to register, a poster’s Atlas Forum account must have been registered for at least one hundred and sixty-eight hours and must have accumulated at least forty thirty posts.

2. Nothing in the above change shall be construed as permitting the census administrator to remove the registrations of any voter who has already been registered due to not meeting these requirements.

3. Upon passage of this amendment, a new page entitled "Census Act" shall be created on the wiki. It shall contain the most up to date text, with amendments, of the Census Act as active in law. The page for "Census Act of 2019" shall continue to contain the original text. Both pages shall contain disclaimers at the top of the page explaining this and linking to the other page.

[/quote]

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I really don't feel comfortable with anything outside of the 25-30 range be it on the low side or the high side at this point. I get YE's point about it being 40 being less than the 50 in 2010, but considering how 50 did turn out, I would worry that 40 is still too high.

I might be wrong about this, but I seem to recall 25 being the requirement for a number of years.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators have 24 hours to object to the sponsor originated amendment.

[SevenEleven]

I object, I think this change merits a vote. I don't think 40 is an objectionable number, and if we are going lower I'd like to see some concrete evidence as to the amendment being superior to the current text.

[Pericles]

I also oppose the amendment. The offsite recruitment problem requires a serious response, it is disappointing that preserving game norms has become a partisan issue. 30 posts isn't good enough, we need the extra layer of protection so that the game remains playable and some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

[Dr. MB]

30 is much more reasonable. 40 is absurdly high. I'd rather go with 25 but 30 is acceptable.

[Left Wing]

I don’t see much of a meaningful difference between 40 and 30 posts to justify the change. If we’re going to curb offsite recruitment I don’t see what reason there is to make it that little bit easier. I don’t 40 is really too much of an absurd requirement to ask of people, considering how quickly people can rack up posts if they really want to.

[Harvey Updyke Jr🌹]

It won't pass the House with such a weak threshold. Pericles is right.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It won't pass the House with such a weak threshold. Pericles is right.

Will it pass the house with it?

This is literally your Speaker, that you elected:
https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=244860.msg7991064#msg7991064

30 is much more reasonable. 40 is absurdly high. I'd rather go with 25 but 30 is acceptable.

If the house fails the Senate version with Sestak's amendment, the original version with the constitutionally questionable provision (opposed by the administration) gets sent back to us for an up or down vote.

MB has vowed to vote down 40 but is open to 30.

I am trying to get this bill to Sestak with his amendment in the text and it would really help if you guys in the house could get on the same page, and if not, work out some kind of an agreement.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I also oppose the amendment. The offsite recruitment problem requires a serious response, it is disappointing that preserving game norms has become a partisan issue. 30 posts isn't good enough, we need the extra layer of protection so that the game remains playable and some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

Read my latest post.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would like feedback on my previous post on the situation in the house.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My plan is to start the amendment vote when I get home. Unusual for us to have amendment debate like this reminds me of the good old times.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

I also miss when persuasion could win elections.

But I also miss when persuasion existed in Congress, along with with engagement, coordination, communication, cooperation and dare I say compromise.

[Dr. MB]

I would like feedback on my previous post on the situation in the house.

I'm against this bill. That being said, I'd vote for a watered-down version (assuming one passes the senate) in the house because the alternative would be the original version passed by the senate. And really I don't have a huge problem at all with a 30 post requirement. It's the rest of the bill (which thankfully has already been amended out) that's a bigger issue.

[Continential]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

[Continential]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

Who is a discord zombie and who isn't? Do they where different color hats?

[YE]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

How will all parties on the commission even know who is and isn’t a Discord voter considering many Discord Atlas servers are basically invite only cliques?

[Continential]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

How will all parties on the commission even know who is and isn’t a Discord voter considering many Discord Atlas servers are basically invite only cliques?

I guess by people who look like they do enough posts to get valid on a single day.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

some level of persuasion is still necessary to win elections.

When was the last time before this election which persuasion was needed to win elections, the only example in my head was last August, and before that was probably June 2019. There are only like 5 swing voters in the game, and with a game with over 200 voters, their votes don't amount for much.

Edit: Zombie voting also has an impact on reducing the impact persuasion, and unless we have a commission to purge zombies, persuasion will be more useless as time goes on.

You really want that HAEV?

At the very least a commission to remove discord zombies from all parties ideally.

How will all parties on the commission even know who is and isn’t a Discord voter considering many Discord Atlas servers are basically invite only cliques?

I guess by people who look like they do enough posts to get valid on a single day.

So we going to boot voters based on how things "look".