|
|
| Do you wish to enact the proposed constitution? (see first post for details) (You must post your vote at the end of this thread to prevent cheating) |
| Enact the Constitution |
|
100% |
[ 4 ] |
| Do not Enact the Constitution |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:48 pm
Instead of passing a blank constitution as some have suggested, I believe that it would be better to pass an almost blank one that contains information on how to make amendments. The proposed constitution will appear in the next post. Discussions and votes will (unless otherwise noted) occur as spelled out in the final constitution proposal. below. [Credits go to both Myslec and myself. And Ladyfriend for helping with revisions.]EDIT: The deadline for this discussion will be March 12, 2006. At that date there will be a vote in this thread, lasting one week, and with the options A) Enact the Constitution, and B) Do not Enact the Constitution. Edit: A simple majority will be sufficient to pass the constitution, regardless of number of participants. EDIT: This is the constitution that will be voted on: Quote: Any proposed revision to the constitution must first be submitted to the whole membership by petition of at least two members in good standing. At the completion of the petition, the proposed revision must be subject to a period of discussion and deliberation between thirty (30) and thirty-five (35) days in length and open to all members in good standing. At the end of the deliberation period, a vote must be held with the ability to either confirm or deny the enactment of the revision. All members in good standing must be given the opportunity to vote on the proposed revision over a period of fifteen (15) days, beginning within seven (7) days of the end of the deliberation period. All members in good standing must be notified of the proposed revision and the date of the vote at the start of the deliberation period and again, at the beginning of the voting period. In order for such a proposed revision to be enacted, at least three-fifths (3/5) of all voting members must vote in favor of enacting the proposed revision. If the proposition is denied enactment, the proposition must restart the above process with the petition. EDIT: Present Vote Results(Updated March 13, 2006)(Voters' names appear below the vote they chose) A) Enact the ConstitutionMyslec Aperium Ladyfriend Fenris Claiborne B) Do not Enact the ConstitutionEDIT: The vote has concluded and the Constitution has been enacted by a vote of 4 in favor and 0 against.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:38 pm
Original Proposition: Quote: Any proposed revision to the constitution must be subject to a period of discussion and deliberation at least 30 days in length and open to all members in good standing. At the end of the deliberation period, the proposed revision must be subject to a vote with the capacity to either confirm or deny the enactment of the revision. In order for such a proposed revision to be enacted, three quarters of all legitimate participants must vote in favor of enacting the proposed revision. Most Recent Proposition*: Quote: 1. Any proposed revision to the constitution must first be submitted to the whole membership by petition of at least two members /*Changed to prevent mathematical related confusion, can be amended later*/ in good standing.
2. At the completion of the petition, the proposed revision must be subject to a period of discussion and deliberation between thirty (30) and thirty-five (35) /*Changed to provide some time flexibility*/ days in length and open to all members in good standing.
3. At the end of the deliberation period a vote must be held within with the ability to either confirm or deny the enactment of the revision.
5. All members in good standing must be given the opportunity to vote on the proposed revision over a period of fifteen (15) days, beginning within seven (7) days of the end of the deliberation period. /*Changed to prevent an indefinitely delayed vote*/
4. All members in good standing must be notified of the proposed revision and the date of the vote at the start of the deliberation period /*Changed to prevent possible time conflicts*/ and again, at the beginning of the voting period./*Changed to simplify the process.*/
6. In order for such a proposed revision to be enacted, at least three-fifths (3/5) of all voting members must vote in favor of enacting the proposed revision.
7. If the proposition is denied enactment, the proposition must restart the above process with the petition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:26 pm
There needs to be a bit about extending the debate for unresolved issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:28 am
How debates are carried out can go else where, this just states what must happen before anything can be enacted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:55 am
In the original draft there was something like: "In the case that such a proposed revision is denied enactment, it shall again be subject to a period of discussion and deliberation at least 30 days in length and open to all members in good standing, followed by a vote to confirm or deny its enactment." The line was removed for the above reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:08 am
Should we also work an almost blank 'bylaws' that has only how to carry out discussion and decision add amendments?
We need something on how to carry out discussion on the constitution and another for the bylaws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:59 am
Myslec Should we also work an almost blank 'bylaws' that has only how to carry out discussion and decision add amendments? We need something on how to carry out discussion on the constitution and another for the bylaws. I think that we should focus on getting the nearly blank constitution passed. After that, we can work on other things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:23 pm
Aperium Myslec Should we also work an almost blank 'bylaws' that has only how to carry out discussion and decision add amendments? We need something on how to carry out discussion on the constitution and another for the bylaws. I think that we should focus on getting the nearly blank constitution passed. After that, we can work on other things. Yes, but my point remains. I think we should set a deadline of a month from tomorrow (31 days, so: March 12, 2006) so we can finish this. At the end a month a vote will be held to pass or continue discussion on the constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:32 pm
I propose that we pass a 'bylaws' and the constitution at the same time. Both will be empty except for criteria relating to the creation, discussion, and voting upon the new amendments.
Both documents shall share regulations on amendment making, the constitution, for what must happen. The bylaws, for how it will happen.
For the love of democracy, let us begin!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:38 pm
Myslec I propose that we pass a 'bylaws' and the constitution at the same time. Both will be empty except for criteria relating to the creation, discussion, and voting upon the new amendments. Both documents shall share regulations on amendment making, the constitution, for what must happen. The bylaws, for how it will happen. For the love of democracy, let us begin! In order to pass such a Bylaw, we need to see it typed out. Would you do that for us?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:40 pm
Aperium Myslec I propose that we pass a 'bylaws' and the constitution at the same time. Both will be empty except for criteria relating to the creation, discussion, and voting upon the new amendments. Both documents shall share regulations on amendment making, the constitution, for what must happen. The bylaws, for how it will happen. For the love of democracy, let us begin! In order to pass such a Bylaw, we need to see it typed out. Would you do that for us? I might, but it will be for the discussion, NOT this pre-discussion period!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:22 pm
I think that all articles to be added to the constitution should be discussed with their corresponding bylaws articles. Early in the discussion, it isn't very important to separate the constitutional amendments from those of the bylaws, but they must be separated by the end.
I don't know if they should be voted in together or separately; I tend towards 'together'.
(I was going to say something else but, due to a half-hour interruption, I forgot.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:00 pm
Myslec Aperium Myslec Should we also work an almost blank 'bylaws' that has only how to carry out discussion and decision add amendments? We need something on how to carry out discussion on the constitution and another for the bylaws. I think that we should focus on getting the nearly blank constitution passed. After that, we can work on other things. Yes, but my point remains. I think we should set a deadline of a month from tomorrow (31 days, so: March 12, 2006) so we can finish this. At the end a month a vote will be held to pass or continue discussion on the constitution. My response didn't submit, and now I don't remember everything I said. crying OK, the deadline for this discussion will be March 12, 2006. At that date there will be a vote in this thread, lasting one week, and with the options A) Enact the Constitution, and B) Do not Enact the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:04 pm
Myslec Aperium Myslec I propose that we pass a 'bylaws' and the constitution at the same time. Both will be empty except for criteria relating to the creation, discussion, and voting upon the new amendments. Both documents shall share regulations on amendment making, the constitution, for what must happen. The bylaws, for how it will happen. For the love of democracy, let us begin! In order to pass such a Bylaw, we need to see it typed out. Would you do that for us? I might, but it will be for the discussion, NOT this pre-discussion period! I do not understand. This is the discussion. Just because it is still two days before the necessary 30 discussion period begins, does not mean that this is not part of the discussion period. The only requirement is that the period is at least 30 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:19 pm
Myslec I think that all articles to be added to the constitution should be discussed with their corresponding bylaws articles. Early in the discussion, it isn't very important to separate the constitutional amendments from those of the bylaws, but they must be separated by the end. I don't know if they should be voted in together or separately; I tend towards 'together'. (I was going to say something else but, due to a half-hour interruption, I forgot.)Due to some grammatical error within the red text, I am unable to grasp the full meaning of your suggestion. However, I disagree on the part I do understand. (error has since been corrected) Definition
bylaw, bye-law
noun [C]
1 a law made by local government that only relates to its particular region
2 US a rule which governs the members of an organization
(from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)The Constitution and the Bylaws are different documents with different purposes and will not always correlate directly with one another, nor is it necessary that they do. The Constitution will set the standards and the the Bylaws will support and enforce what is said in the constitution. I say, make the article for the constitution, then work on the bylaws that will enforce that article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
