| Welcome to A World Power! Our forum acts as the hub of our community, and is where our Government, Citizens Assembly, and Regional Defence Force are coordinated. But it's not all serious business! The legendary Rucket Park is full of polls, spam games and nonsense chat, our Role Playing Pavilion is the place for all your roleplaying needs, and the A World Power Center is where we get to know each other. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. To sign-up for Citizenship and post on the forums, you'll need to register an account. This allows you to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Register now! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Amendments to the Senate Voting Guidelines | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 25 Mar 2010, 15:53 (161 Views) | |
| Turlmanistan | 25 Mar 2010, 15:53 Post #1 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So I am proposing 2 amendments to this bill, the first is:
Remove the existing language and change that back to the original language from the 2009 bill:
My reason for this change is, when the person represents the bill, a new forum of debate starts, and they may find that their position change isn't warranted through senate discussions. My second request is adding a provision to the end of the bill stating:
My resoning for that is because some bills require a great deal of thought and discussion, and it's pretty evident that for some people in this senate, they just can't make the time to daily talk about things. And it'll curb the "fast pass" attempts we've seen lately, where almost a day after a bill gets proposed, we're voting on that bill. I'd also like as part of this motion that we have a directive for the minister's of the senate to review the timeline's of the bill as it stands, and to make a reccomendation to the senate on changes. I personally think the 6 hours and 24 hours is no longer appropriate for those of us here in the senate. So, in summary, this is what I am proposing: - Change the language of provision 6 to what's suggested above - Amend the bill adding the provision qouted above - issue the directive task to the minister's of the region. |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 25 Mar 2010, 19:32 Post #2 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think we should remove clause 6 and allow changes of vote as long as it comes within the time limit of any bill, it is stupid to keep that in as it is just meaning it will take longer fr bills to be voted on and a bill could be restarted for no reason and it just wastes valuable time. I also don't think neas wants or needs the power to veto bills as it just seems stupid and doesn't really stop fast tracking, and it just lessens democracy if an unelected person who hasn't been decided to hold the position by the senate at all and is just ridiculous. |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 25 Mar 2010, 21:39 Post #3 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Please re-read these changes. I am not infavor of allowing people to change their votes. People flip flop too much as it is, and it makes it way too difficult to know when a vote ends. When you vote in Congress or in Parlament, you don't get to change your vote, so when you vote, do so carefully the first time around. Also, the suggested language does NOT give the founder power to veto a bill. It allows him and only him, to allow a piece of legislation to be voted on without the strict time constraints that currently exist. So if someone proposes a bill, that could potentially change things significantly around here, that it doesn't go to a vote within 24 hours like what currently happens. Such legislation could take weeks to sort out, and SHOULD take weeks to sort out, and should be exempt from the normal, lets have an arcade, or whatever. |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Ten Stars | 25 Mar 2010, 22:37 Post #4 |
![]()
The Man, The Myth, The Legend
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The first change seems reasonable, but the way I read the new clause, it seems like it could be exploited to ignore a law passed by the Senate. |
|
Most Posts In One Day: 156 (Oct 29, 2009) Best Newcomer 2009 | |
![]() |
|
| Numero Capitan | 25 Mar 2010, 23:53 Post #5 |
|
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I agree with the principles definitely. We need to stop people simply saying AYE as soon as people post new ideas up rather than discussing it too, thats really annoying! |
|
The Many Faced God, RDF Commander -- -- ---Awarded AWP Cross--254 RDF missions- | |
![]() |
|
| Ten Stars | 26 Mar 2010, 02:52 Post #6 |
![]()
The Man, The Myth, The Legend
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That I agree on Greek. |
|
Most Posts In One Day: 156 (Oct 29, 2009) Best Newcomer 2009 | |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 26 Mar 2010, 04:16 Post #7 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
the only reason I bring up the exemption, is because some future bills might require more than what the senate guidelines allow for a bill. That's why, the power to invoke those exemptions can only come from the founder. If it were any elected person, I'd agree with you, but its Neas, I think we can trust him... |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Numero Capitan | 26 Mar 2010, 17:12 Post #8 |
|
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think you're seeing ghosts... |
|
The Many Faced God, RDF Commander -- -- ---Awarded AWP Cross--254 RDF missions- | |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 30 Mar 2010, 15:46 Post #9 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Been a few days, so I'll start a vote on this, AYE, or NAY: AYE |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Liberty987 | 30 Mar 2010, 16:09 Post #10 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nay, first change can mean constant revoting, second gives more power to neas and he doesnt want that and I dont want that. |
![]() |
|
| Numero Capitan | 30 Mar 2010, 19:40 Post #11 |
|
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Aye |
|
The Many Faced God, RDF Commander -- -- ---Awarded AWP Cross--254 RDF missions- | |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 31 Mar 2010, 16:20 Post #12 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
lets keep the voting going here. |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| Ten Stars | 31 Mar 2010, 21:19 Post #13 |
![]()
The Man, The Myth, The Legend
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
AYE |
|
Most Posts In One Day: 156 (Oct 29, 2009) Best Newcomer 2009 | |
![]() |
|
| Wibblefeet | 1 Apr 2010, 21:47 Post #14 |
|
AWP Veteran
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
- bugger. I'm split on the two amendments proposed as one bill. Given that, and that the current form of the bill is as acceptable as the whole would be after this change, I vote Nay. |
|
AWP Citizen, Herald of Rucket Park, former TNI Agent-in-place. | |
![]() |
|
| Neanbear | 1 Apr 2010, 23:24 Post #15 |
![]()
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I would like the above amendments to be added. The current time frames for voting/debating are ridiculously short and at least the 12 hour time frames should be amended due to time differences. |
![]() ^This will be in my signature forever | |
![]() |
|
| Numero Capitan | 2 Apr 2010, 10:29 Post #16 |
|
AWP Stalwart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'd be happy for us to have a revote with these changes included, they seem decent. |
|
The Many Faced God, RDF Commander -- -- ---Awarded AWP Cross--254 RDF missions- | |
![]() |
|
| Turlmanistan | 2 Apr 2010, 16:20 Post #17 |
![]()
Supreme Dillhole
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
you do know that right now, as the current bill reads, you can't change your vote, even if the bill is brought to a second vote? And you also know that most senate members really only check this area for every 3 or 4 days, making it extremely difficult for a quorum? Case in point, that we never even got to hear your thoughts in this until 7 days after the bill was introduced. For certain, important legislation, that our founder, and ONLY our founder Neasmyrna can decide is warranted to be granted under that. I am a guy who tends to bring big decisions away from him, but I am kinda surprised at the lack of trust a few of you have in him... So this bill has been defeated. It's resubmitted with my original changes PLUS neanbear's new timing suggestions. This is another free vote exempt from provision 6 preventing from changing your vote. This bill is seriously flawed as written lets make a few things right here. BEFORE going to a new vote, is there any concern's among members about what's there? I want to make sure that we can help everyone understand EXACTLY what's going with these changes? IF every member of the senate could post their concerns, even if they have none, just posting that they have none would be great. I don't want to take this to a vote without everyone having their chance! |
![]() P.S. - This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated! | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| « Previous Topic · Government Archives · Next Topic » |










--
--


7:27 PM Jul 11