What's new
  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 May and June 2024 are YE 46.4 in the RP.

Senate: Defeated [DEFEATED] Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

Wes

Wes

Founder & Admin
Staff Member
🌸 FM of Yamatai
🎖️ Game Master
🎨 Media Gallery
To: Senate
From: Shosho Hanako

I propose the following changes be made to the senate procedure:

1. Remove the MOTION TO CHANGE option.

2. All proposed laws must first be posted as a [DRAFT] topic where changes are discussed PRIOR to posting a voting topic. Debates over definitions and the wording of laws should be handled in the [DRAFT] thread only, and excluded from the voting thread.

3. Posts in the voting topic may only be votes or debates for or against the proposal; changing the bill is not allowed.

4. The author of the bill determines when the [DRAFT] discussion should be closed.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

I vote NO. The system as it is works just fine, and the final revision of a draft must be agreed on by the group as a whole. At the minimum, this must be amended to state:

4. The author of the bill has the right to withdraw the bill from contention.
Click to expand...

The author is presumably content with the definitions as they were originally defined, so leaving the discussion up to the author is moot. The only question is whether others find issue with the definitions and other portions.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

Suggest, that the change be, that once a Proposal has been put to a vote, voting must conclude. If the proposal fails, then it can go back to modification.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

The voting as a bill is not in question, at the moment. Only the procedure for getting the [DRAFT] idea resolved. Instituting a draft system that operates at the will of the original proposer is redundant in the extreme, and serves only to take more control away from the Senate as a whole.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

Lately all the votes have become mired with change motions. We need to replace motions to change with draft threads to prevent this or all our bills are going be clusterfracks like in the last few bills.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

I vote NO, for the same reason as given by Aendri.

The current system works just fine. A change to the system like you are suggesting would just lengthen the process with unnecessary fluff.

If people do not agree with a bill, but wish to suggest changes to that bill, it seems perfectly logical that they should be able to motion for a change after the bill has been drafted and posted as opposed to simply voting 'No' and then creating their own draft of the bill - because the way this is written, the drafter doesn't have to change their bill if they don't want to, and it's going to clutter this forum immensely if we have three or four versions of the same bill on the table.

As it stands, a motion to change has to be carried - and if it is carried, that means that it's more people than just that individual have found a problem with the bill as-is, and a change might just be needed.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

The current system works just fine.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you were asleep during the last few bills as the discussion fell apart resulting in train wrecks like 89 and 92.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

Both of which had Senators with legitimate issues requesting changes. I fail to see how that fulfills your designation of "derailed". If requesting changes, or clarification on a bill that a Senator has a problem with is "derailing", I question your understanding of the senatorial process in the first place.

My vote remains NO. I feel this can be easily addressed with much less invasive modifications than the removal of our rights as voters.

-Itto Hei Gunshin
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

"It does not remove your right to vote." said Gunther the Senator from Daichi. "The proposal would actually assist it. Because it would allow a clear and concise document to be presented so that you can vote with conviction.

A Senator who submits a proposal should not have to keep changing it once it is presented to the Senate. The working out of the verbage should be handled by a committee outside of the voting process.

Then if a proposal should fail to pass, the submitter can take it back to the committee to discuss the issues raised, and see if they can rework it, then bring it back. "
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

If a fellow voter feels a bill has merit, but still needs work, what then? The [DRAFT] procedure continues only as long as the original author wishes, meaning they can close it at any time if they dislike the direction it is headed, even if the voters at large are making progress towards an acceptable bill. It removes the power of the voters as a group, in exchange for giving more power to the author of bills, which is counterproductive to a group voting system such as ours.

Once a bill has been submitted to the Senate, it MUST remain viable to the group as a whole. If an author wishes to withdraw it from contention, so be it, but they should not be permitted to simply reject all suggestions and bull their way through.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

If a fellow voter feels a bill has merit, but still needs work, what then?
Click to expand...
Vote NO and make a better version.

It removes the power of the voters as a group
Click to expand...
The power is still there; now it's in the form of being able to influence bills as they are created.

they should not be permitted to simply reject all suggestions and bull their way through.
Click to expand...
If they do, the system is naturally self-balanced and the consequences are that a poorly-critiqued bill will do poorly in getting votes whereas a bill that's well written based on a healthy DRAFT discussion will get votes more easily.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

All of those options are already present. It's permissible to vote against an amendment, the voters all have potential to directly impact the bill at any point, and a well drafted bill will have few problems to begin with. I fail to see how this bill adds anything meaningful to the process.

All it does is permit groups to more easily force bills through despite the objections of a minority, regardless of the relevance of those disputes. If a minority raises an issue with the bill, than the author must respond, not simply ignore them and call a vote in.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

The current system allows your vote to count for versions of a bill that you didn't actually vote for.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

Only if a voter does not pay attention to a bill. They are free to change their vote at any time, and therefore can remove their vote in favor entirely, or even change to a vote against if they would prefer. If the voter cannot be bothered to stay up to date with the laws they vote for, others cannot be held responsible for their failure.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

(OOC: Perhaps we could use the UIL/NFL student congress method of motions and votes? I helped to judge a couple of events earlier this year; basically, you have to resolve seconded motions before new ones take place -- which would cut down on confusion. Objections have to come before a second.

Also, this "I, the author, withdraw the bill" business is ridiculous. You presented a bill for discussion in a political setting, it's only natural it becomes subject for debate.

I recommend looking to actual Parlaiment/Congress/Senate procedures, instead of trying to centralize power in an IC-debate forum.)

"I vote NO. You are attempting to take away the debate that is the fundamental core of our legislative procedure," Hamatsuki growled.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

There is nothing against debate during voting. It only moves discussion of changes to the draft thread.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

I am very fond of the Robert's Rules of Order, if we're looking to adopt a new senate system, although it would require the person who submitted the bill to stand in as a moderator.
 
Re: Proposal 94: Amendment to Voting Procedure

I, personally, am against such a system. It requires the person submitting the bill to act impartially, and I have little faith in fellow voters to be able to be impartial when it is their own work at stake.

My vote remains NO on this bill.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top