SENATE BILL: Deregistration Forgiveness Act (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AN ACT
To reduce the eligible time between re-registrations after voluntary deregistrations

Be it enacted by the Congress of the Republic of Atlasia assembled

Section 1. Title

This legislation may be cited as the Deregistration Forgiveness Act.

Section 2. Amendment to the Census Act of 2019

1. Section 5 of the Census Act of 2019 is hereby amended:

If a voter deregisters voluntarily, they may not register again until three hundred and thirty-six seventy-two hours have passed.

Sponsor: Falterin
Senate Designation: SB29:23

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Sponsor advocacy time etc.

[SevenEleven]

I can't say I'm a fan of this. This encourages the sort of rash decision making that makes more work for our elections administrators for absolutely no good reason. If someone deregistered by their own choice, that's fine, but I cannot support this policy change

[Left Wing]

Yes, so I introduced this bill under the assumption that Scott's status as a non citizen would prevent his civilian submitted bill from reaching congress. I now see that Speaker MB has chosen to bring it ahead any way so I will be monitoring the status in the house. Anyway, I do think the current deregistration cooldown is overly punitive and leaves very little room for people to come back once the circumstances causing them to deregister have changed. I do see the argument for the longer cooldown but I personally think, as we can see with the current situation, that it can overly complicate deregistrations closer to elections.

[SevenEleven]

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

[Sirius_]

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

Atlasia, the only game where people can say that leaving the game is against the game's rules and they think it makes sense.

[SevenEleven]

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

Atlasia, the only game where people can say that leaving the game is against the game's rules and they think it makes sense.

If you read my posts, you'd see that I'm fine with people deregistering. Leaving the game and coming back three days later is what makes no sense. Simply not participating will have you automatically removed after a period of time. Frankly I'd like to hear more from the proponents of this because I don't see any benefit to this change at the moment.

[Sirius_]

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

Atlasia, the only game where people can say that leaving the game is against the game's rules and they think it makes sense.

If you read my posts, you'd see that I'm fine with people deregistering. Leaving the game and coming back three days later is what makes no sense. Simply not participating will have you automatically removed after a period of time. Frankly I'd like to hear more from the proponents of this because I don't see any benefit to this change at the moment.

All this talk about ragequitting just seems to be creating a problem that didn't exist - we really don't have a crisis because of it. People get mad, it happens. It isn't a big deal, and it takes so much for people to actually ragequit that it doesn't happen that often.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

[SevenEleven]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

I'm still not sure what happened but thanks for speaking up. I also could clarify that my comments about rage quitting where not directed at you specifically, but more aimed at some of the stuff we saw during the Green Party implosion. You're certainly not the first person to leave and return shortly for various reasons, and I do think people who leave for whatever reason should be welcomed back.

My main thought here is that if we reduce the penalty we may see more situations occur and creating even more work for Peebs, who truly serves in two of the most thankless positions.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

I'm still not sure what happened but thanks for speaking up. I also could clarify that my comments about rage quitting where not directed at you specifically, but more aimed at some of the stuff we saw during the Green Party implosion. You're certainly not the first person to leave and return shortly for various reasons, and I do think people who leave for whatever reason should be welcomed back.

My main thought here is that if we reduce the penalty we may see more situations occur and creating even more work for Peebs, who truly serves in two of the most thankless positions.

Understood, Senator.

Once again, simply banning deregistration _{(and perhaps nullifying existing deregistrations as a bonus... *cough*)} should create less work for Peebs. My memory might be fuzzy, but I do believe we did ban deregistration for some time. I don't know why it would be reinstated. But I think that's the best solution for all parties involved.

[YE]

Not a Senator but IMO for zombies who don’t want to vote nor get bombarded with PM’s there should be a deregistration option.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

I'm still not sure what happened but thanks for speaking up. I also could clarify that my comments about rage quitting where not directed at you specifically, but more aimed at some of the stuff we saw during the Green Party implosion. You're certainly not the first person to leave and return shortly for various reasons, and I do think people who leave for whatever reason should be welcomed back.

My main thought here is that if we reduce the penalty we may see more situations occur and creating even more work for Peebs, who truly serves in two of the most thankless positions.

Understood, Senator.

Once again, simply banning deregistration _{(and perhaps nullifying existing deregistrations as a bonus... *cough*)} should create less work for Peebs. My memory might be fuzzy, but I do believe we did ban deregistration for some time. I don't know why it would be reinstated. But I think that's the best solution for all parties involved.

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

We did, yes. The 4th constitution didn't include any direct right to deregister, nor did any statute. However, no one realized this for some time, and deregistrations were still largely processed, though a few people resorted to purposely losing duels to ensure their deregistration was valid.

Eventually, the matter was brought before the Supreme Court, which ruled in AZ vs Peebs II that there is a natural right to deregister. https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=298676.0

So therefore if you want to ban deregistration, you'd need a constitutional amendment to do so.

[Sirius_]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

I'm still not sure what happened but thanks for speaking up. I also could clarify that my comments about rage quitting where not directed at you specifically, but more aimed at some of the stuff we saw during the Green Party implosion. You're certainly not the first person to leave and return shortly for various reasons, and I do think people who leave for whatever reason should be welcomed back.

My main thought here is that if we reduce the penalty we may see more situations occur and creating even more work for Peebs, who truly serves in two of the most thankless positions.

Understood, Senator.

Once again, simply banning deregistration _{(and perhaps nullifying existing deregistrations as a bonus... *cough*)} should create less work for Peebs. My memory might be fuzzy, but I do believe we did ban deregistration for some time. I don't know why it would be reinstated. But I think that's the best solution for all parties involved.

It wasn't banned, it was forgotten to be included when we did the legislative reset, and we reinstated it because it created a dumb crisis.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

Atlasia, the only game where people can say that leaving the game is against the game's rules and they think it makes sense.

From 2008 to 2013 deregistration was not allowed and opposition to its reinstatement was mainstream.

Even without deregistration, you can always "check out anytime you like".

Plenty of people managed to leave during that time, just like any other.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

I'm still not sure what happened but thanks for speaking up. I also could clarify that my comments about rage quitting where not directed at you specifically, but more aimed at some of the stuff we saw during the Green Party implosion. You're certainly not the first person to leave and return shortly for various reasons, and I do think people who leave for whatever reason should be welcomed back.

My main thought here is that if we reduce the penalty we may see more situations occur and creating even more work for Peebs, who truly serves in two of the most thankless positions.

Understood, Senator.

Once again, simply banning deregistration _{(and perhaps nullifying existing deregistrations as a bonus... *cough*)} should create less work for Peebs. My memory might be fuzzy, but I do believe we did ban deregistration for some time. I don't know why it would be reinstated. But I think that's the best solution for all parties involved.

It wasn't banned, it was forgotten to be included when we did the legislative reset, and we reinstated it because it created a dumb crisis.

2016 was an oversight, 2008-2013 was a ban on its practice. The first two years of Scott's presence fall into that period of time.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

FWIW I quit less out of rage and more out of hurt over... things. Not that I expect that to be relevant to this debate, but I'm far from the first person to leave out of temporary frustration, and I won't be the last.

But yes, perhaps eliminating deregistration altogether would be the best idea. If you don't want to participate in the game, don't play and you will be auto-deregistered for inactivity. That will reduce the burden on the GM and let people do as they wish.

The only reason Congress should be intervening is to eliminate strategic registration. Restrictions on changing regions makes sense, but punishing people who leave in the heat of the moment just seems mean to me.

I'm still not sure what happened but thanks for speaking up. I also could clarify that my comments about rage quitting where not directed at you specifically, but more aimed at some of the stuff we saw during the Green Party implosion. You're certainly not the first person to leave and return shortly for various reasons, and I do think people who leave for whatever reason should be welcomed back.

My main thought here is that if we reduce the penalty we may see more situations occur and creating even more work for Peebs, who truly serves in two of the most thankless positions.

Understood, Senator.

Once again, simply banning deregistration _{(and perhaps nullifying existing deregistrations as a bonus... *cough*)} should create less work for Peebs. My memory might be fuzzy, but I do believe we did ban deregistration for some time. I don't know why it would be reinstated. But I think that's the best solution for all parties involved.

I'd rather eliminate deregistration entirely than to enable people to rage-quit with impunity. Pretty much everyone I've seen deregister has returned after not too long of a time period.

We did, yes. The 4th constitution didn't include any direct right to deregister, nor did any statute. However, no one realized this for some time, and deregistrations were still largely processed, though a few people resorted to purposely losing duels to ensure their deregistration was valid.

Eventually, the matter was brought before the Supreme Court, which ruled in AZ vs Peebs II that there is a natural right to deregister. https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=298676.0

So therefore if you want to ban deregistration, you'd need a constitutional amendment to do so.

The present text still only includes a duration change, but if someone were to offer an amendment to go in the direction of removing deregistration, then it would need to take that case into consideration.

[Pericles]

I wouldn't support getting rid of deregistration. If you're a registered voter, someone is going to get the idea to PM you., and if you don't want to be involved in the game that would be very annoying and frustrating without a way to stop the spam. I didn't think it was appropriate to rush this bill for political purposes, despite my strong respect for Scott. I don't have a firm view on how long the cooldown should be-three days seems too short but two weeks seems too long, maybe a week would be sensible?

[Senator-elect Spark]

I think it is a good idea to be forgiving for those who choose to deregister and that there does not appear to be a penalty for a longer wait period to rejoin the game.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I wouldn't support getting rid of deregistration. If you're a registered voter, someone is going to get the idea to PM you., and if you don't want to be involved in the game that would be very annoying and frustrating without a way to stop the spam. I didn't think it was appropriate to rush this bill for political purposes, despite my strong respect for Scott. I don't have a firm view on how long the cooldown should be-three days seems too short but two weeks seems too long, maybe a week would be sensible?

I have long been concerned that while deregistration is openly embraced for the sake of minimizing the nuisance and freedom to choose, such is then seemingly deprioritized when the process is used to justify in previous situations some rather excessive restrictions on the ability to rejoin as part of the whole "deregistration must have consequences" mantra, which is itself just bandaid and a restrictive one at that for the underlying issues deregistration comes with.

That said you are right, and attempts at Do Not PM Lists are an object failure historically, mainly because not everyone reads them or even knew they exist.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We have spent a good number of posts debating an intangible text that is very unlikely to make it to passage as a result of it needing an amendment and the unlikelihood of achieving the support necessary to make it all the way through.

As it stands though, where is the support for the current text?

Falterin - support
Sev - opposed
Pericles - More than three days but less than two weeks?
Myself - open to the current text/flexible
Spark - ?
Blair - ?

[Senator-elect Spark]

We have spent a good number of posts debating an intangible text that is very unlikely to make it to passage as a result of it needing an amendment and the unlikelihood of achieving the support necessary to make it all the way through.

As it stands though, where is the support for the current text?

Falterin - support
Sev - opposed
Pericles - More than three days but less than two weeks?
Myself - open to the current text/flexible
Spark - ?
Blair - ?

To clarify, I support the bill's text as it stands.

[OBD]

Weighing in as VP, I believe that a week is the best time period for this bill. I'm not a fan of the three-day requirement (far too short).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

OBD - Supports 1 week

Falterin - support
Sev - opposed/supports 1 week
Pericles - More than three days but less than two weeks?
Myself - open to the current text/flexible
Spark - Support
Blair - unsure

[SevenEleven]

I'd say a week at minimum. Though two weeks is also fine, even if it might catch people in a way that is unfortunate. Realistically a deregistration should last for at least one election cycle.