Senate: Defeated [WITHDRAWN] Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

[Wes]

Purpose: To prevent laws from being passed through sheer speed rather than merit.

Proposal:

1. Motions to close require two people to second them (instead of just one).

2. Motions to close can only be made in voting threads that do not feature automated vote counting (OOC: Forum polls).

 

[Fred]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

"I support this. Lightning-fast deliberations seem to be flaws in the current voting system, which speeds up what refinement could be applied to our laws.

We would all benefit from having more of a breather to ponder the considerations of each point instead of precipitously going forward with each of them. It is my concern that ever since the Senate was given power and the constitution was made that something of what Yamatai should be was lost.

Following this measure may mitigate that damage."

 

[Aendri]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

I vote no to this proposal.

As things stand a simple challenge can hold any motion, so there is no speed to worry about, and a vote is a vote, as the current laws hold. Why should the form of voting alter the manner in which we handle them?

 

[Wes]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

To answer your question, the problem with the current system is that people are assuming that if the challenge to a motion doesn't come immediately, it passes. That means any two people can pass an arbitrary motion to change at any time just by posting in rapid succession. This is a huge problem. Imagine if you made a bill that was to create a new government agency and some people randomly added "and we're declaring war on Lor" in into the bill through an eleventh hour motion to change at 3am and you weren't there to challenge it.

 

[Aendri]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

My question did not pertain to motions to alter or end voting in any way.

 

[Fred]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

"I feel that in essence the previous bills today made mountains out of molehills of what were an administrarive mistakes.

I would move that we all acknowledge that bill 94 was mishandled for the timing its votes were instated. I would claim that bill 95's voting shared the same mishandling, though this has been adjusted. Bill 96 and 97 are both in reaction to each other and should both be voided, as they are based on bureaucratic mistakes.

Bill 94 may need to be reexamined if any member of the senate feels that the resolution is grossly unappealing. Bills 96 and 97 should be closed and archived, as they are not respectable representation of the work this body is capable of doing.

I would also point out that Imperial Premier Yuumi has better things to do in serving her nation than babysitting senators whom are letting issues blow out of proportions for thier egos. As her aide, I personally took offense at any perception that not having been available on short notice to 'baby' the senate is any slight on the determination of her competency."

 

[Gallant]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

I vote no to this proposal.

I also challenge the above motion.

 

[OsakanOne]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

I vote no to this proposal.

 

[Wes]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

I vote no to this proposal.

Get out of here, you don't have a Yamataian character!

 

[OsakanOne]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure



And she has been since I got here, being my very first character.

 

[OsakanOne]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

I vote no to this proposal.

Get out of here, you don't have a Yamataian character!

And she has been since I got here, being my very first character.

My vote of 'no' remains.

 

[Revolver]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

To answer your question, the problem with the current system is that people are assuming that if the challenge to a motion doesn't come immediately, it passes. That means any two people can pass an arbitrary motion to change at any time just by posting in rapid succession. This is a huge problem. Imagine if you made a bill that was to create a new government agency and some people randomly added "and we're declaring war on Lor" in into the bill through an eleventh hour motion to change at 3am and you weren't there to challenge it.

Isn't this still possible with this current proposal, except now a cadre of three people can do it?

 

[Wes]

Re: Proposal 97: Amendment of Voting Procedure

You're right. We need a better solution. In light of this, I withdraw this proposal and urge you to vote YES on Proposal 99.