I have some thoughts.

First, the bill needs to define who appoints members. Appointments are mentioned in the vacancy clause, but not independently.

Second, I don’t think it’s wise to legislate the application questions. We’d have to vote every time we want to change them. We’ve never done this, and there have been some times where application questions needed to be changed quickly in response to some security issue. Also, something like this will tend to get missed when legislating other security/COI things.

Third, I generally remain opposed to opening applications during elections. It’s something we never should’ve allowed in the first place, in retrospect. I think it’s more trouble than it’s worth to for the EC to have to cross-check when people became legislators. If we’re that concerned about elections hampering activity, then we can shorten elections so that consecutive elections don’t block out a month of application time.

Lastly, I’m not sure if this committee should have a role in removing disruptive people. The Chair is in charge of moderating the Assembly, not this committee. So it doesn’t make sense to me that the Chair has this moderation responsibility but then has to get people not involved in moderation to sign off on booting a disruptive player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk