We've moved, ! Update your bookmarks to https://thesouthpacific.org! These forums are being archived.

Dismiss this notice
See LegComm's announcement to make sure you're still a legislator on the new forums!

Assembly Amendment Procedure
#11

Rebel, I see that as a separate thing (that I'm all in favor of)

Second!

Gesendet von meinem Xtouch mit Tapatalk
[Image: XXPV74Y.png?1]
#12

I don't see that as a separate issue, though. If we're going to make rules on how you need to present a bill or revision in the Assembly, then that set of rules should include ALL formatting, not just half of the formatting.

Let's keep like subjects together, and not in 3785629473926 places.

Sent from my phone using Tapatalk. So typos may be a'plenty...
"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011


One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels 
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium
#13

Do you have some suggested formats, RT? This is something I definitely plan on doing. We can probably a just one big law on formats.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#14

(02-17-2017, 10:06 AM)sandaoguo Wrote: Do you have some suggested formats, RT? This is something I definitely plan on doing. We can probably a just one big law on formats.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm at work, atm. But general article/number/cap letter/number formatting should be followed, as well as titling and, from what we have in the Charter now, small descriptions.

I can probably draft something rough up this evening/tomorrow am.

Sent from my phone using Tapatalk. So typos may be a'plenty...
"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011


One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels 
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium
#15

Actually, just so we're clear, is this a resolution not a law? Or a resolution and a law?

While I think Glen can do what he wants (and this proposal has some major advantages), I'm slightly concerned about forcing future CoA's into a specific format for the future. I think as this job gets more structured and obviously administrative, we're going to find less people interested in it.

All said, I guess I'm specifically asking how we would/could change the procedure in the future?
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
#16

(02-18-2017, 10:07 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Actually, just so we're clear, is this a resolution not a law? Or a resolution and a law?

While I think Glen can do what he wants (and this proposal has some major advantages), I'm slightly concerned about forcing future CoA's into a specific format for the future. I think as this job gets more structured and obviously administrative, we're going to find less people interested in it.

All said, I guess I'm specifically asking how we would/could change the procedure in the future?
By a vote, same way as we're deciding on this, so ....

Gesendet von meinem Xtouch mit Tapatalk
[Image: XXPV74Y.png?1]
#17

(02-18-2017, 10:21 AM)Roavin Wrote:
(02-18-2017, 10:07 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Actually, just so we're clear, is this a resolution not a law? Or a resolution and a law?

While I think Glen can do what he wants (and this proposal has some major advantages), I'm slightly concerned about forcing future CoA's into a specific format for the future. I think as this job gets more structured and obviously administrative, we're going to find less people interested in it.

All said, I guess I'm specifically asking how we would/could change the procedure in the future?
By a vote, same way as we're deciding on this, so ....

Gesendet von meinem Xtouch mit Tapatalk

That doesn't really answer my question. What's the threshold we're looking at?

And/or is it better to vote on something that Glen would be within his right decreeing?
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
#18

Oh I see what you mean.

I suppose it depends. This is something we can agree to do as standard and something that, for the most part, we have done that way in the past, so it's been proven. So might as well! If this was an experiment, we could try it simply as CoA decree.

As for the threshold, I'd say since it's not constitutional, it would be regular plurality.

Gesendet von meinem Xtouch mit Tapatalk
[Image: XXPV74Y.png?1]
#19

Forcing everybody to use the same format is the whole point, really. Our formats shouldn't be changing just because new Chairs come in.

As for resolutions, they're binding just like laws. It's just a matter of format, I suppose. Previous resolutions have just been a "sense of the Assembly" type thing. The threshold is set in the charter as a simple majority.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#20

I agree with Rebel about adding the "formatting" rules and Tsu, I think the larger issue here is that it is hard to navigate the laws currently as they seem to be highly nonstandard.

Our goal should be that everyone who wants to amend or add to our laws follows standard formatting and is not accidentally using old drafts or texts of laws.

Sometimes I feel overwhelmed when trying to find specific things or even make sense of the overall structure of the laws and I wonder how newer players might feel the same way.

Escade

~ Positions Held in TSP ~
Delegate | Vice Delegate 
Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | 
Minister of Military Affairs
~ The Sparkly One ~


My Pinterest




 




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)





Theme © iAndrew 2018 Forum software by © MyBB .