Users browsing this thread:

***Roavin*** · 09-28-2017, 08:02 PM

Nobody knows about it, nobody actually cares about it, but the LPA provides a restrictive check on the CoA and doesn't allow any reasonable discretionary powers. Honestly, the CoA isn't a glorified secretary, even though the law currently treats the position as such, otherwise we wouldn't make a big deal out of who ends up being the CoA. Rather, it's a position that should have discretionary powers to optimize the flow of debate, ensure sane scheduling of votes, etc.

I'm not going to try to edit in my suggested changes into the existing text. Rather, I'm proposing repeal-and-replace. Here's my new proposed text:

Quote:
Legislative Procedure Act
An Act to define the procedural rules of the Assembly

1. Legislative Rules
(1) Any legislator may propose a bill, resolution, or appointment, which will be debated and refined collectively in the assembly under the guidance of the Chair.

(2) To be brought to a vote, a specific draft of a bill, resolution, or appointment must
a. receive a motion to vote by a legislator,
b. receive a second by another legislator,
c. be either affirmed to be in proper formatting by the Chair, and
d. have been at debate for a minimum period of time equivalent to the length of its voting period.

(3) General laws, amendments, resolutions, and appointments will remain at vote for three days. Constitutional laws, constitutional amendments, resolutions dealing with matters of constitutional law, and treaties will remain at vote for five days.

(4) General laws, amendments, resolutions, and treaties require a simple majority of those voting to pass. Appointments, unless otherwise specified, require a simple majority of those voting to pass. Constitutional laws, constitutional amendments, and resolutions dealing with matters of constitutional law require a three-fifths supermajority of those voting to pass.

(5) Should a debate lead to multiple competing bills or resolutions on the same matter, the Chair will separately and simultaneously bring the competing bills or resolutions to vote, in the same manner as regular business is done. The bill or resolution that receives the most votes in favor and meets minimum threshold requirements for passage will become law.

2. Powers and Responsibilities of the Chair

(1) The Chair is responsible for creating voting threads and recording votes. In the event that the Chair does not perform these duties in a reasonable time frame, any legislator may create voting threads and record votes.

(2) The legislative history of each law will be recorded by the Chair. Legislative history will include reference to debate threads, voting results, and amendment history.

(3) The Chair must document the use of their discretionary powers including a rationale for using those powers in the relevant debate thread.

(4) The Chair may correct typographical errors or formatting inconsistencies at any time. Any such corrections must be recorded with the legislative history of each law.

(5) The Chair may delay votes for a reasonable time frame if done for the purposes of vote scheduling or to avoid preemption of active debate by a vote.

(6) The Chair may freely appoint any number of deputies, who will be authorized to perform those legislative duties of the Chair that the Chair permits. Any changes in the roster of deputies must be posted publicly.

3. Constitutional Law

(1) The Legislative Procedure Act is a constitutional law, and further amendments to it must meet constitutional amendment requirements.

(This post was last modified: 10-12-2017, 06:05 PM by Roavin. Edit Reason: Title )

rolandarmstrong · 09-28-2017, 08:07 PM

Full support

Signed,

Positions:
Legislator of The South Pacific
King of Machina, Defence Realm of Illuminati Alliance
Citizen of The East Pacific

Former Positions:

Overlord of Masterz
Seargant of HYDRA
Talon of Firehehlm
Munifiex of The Roman Empire

[Image: rv43j5bZ3p1Rs0A01odvThXy-TLzgwlhUTl_mY9E...66-h654-rw]

Techganet · 09-29-2017, 01:52 AM

Full support.

Sent from my F5122 using Tapatalk

Sam111 · 09-29-2017, 04:58 AM

I'd like to see the chair be able to waive the minimum debate time once debate has been exhausted, rather than leave uncontroversial or important amendments sitting there unnecessarily for days.

Hello

**Griffindor** · 09-29-2017, 09:18 AM

I agree with that, Sam.

In line with typographical errors, I would also like to see the Chair be able to fix minor word errors, so long as they word fix doesn't alter the original intent of the text.

-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions
-Legislator 2/24/20-
-High Court Justice 6/7/20-
-South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20-
-Minister of Engagement 6/17/22-

-Past Roles/Positions
-Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18
-Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21
-Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17
-Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18
-Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17
-Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and 2/26/16-7/3/2016

**Seraph** · 09-29-2017, 01:24 PM

I think this is a great start to a law and you've put in some great details to make the discretionary powers given easier to audit and hold to account if they are abused. I think Sam's suggestion is a good addition also and I suspect if I think about it for a while I might have some other ideas myself.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

***Roavin*** · 09-29-2017, 02:09 PM

(09-29-2017, 04:58 AM)Sam111 Wrote: I'd like to see the chair be able to waive the minimum debate time once debate has been exhausted, rather than leave uncontroversial or important amendments sitting there unnecessarily for days.

I like that in principle - see the Seashell Accords for an example where that would have been nice. On the other hand, sometimes somebody can't be around for 2 days and then brings up a point that nobody else thought of but then leads to additional substantive discussion. The Chair, even if infinitely wise, cannot predict that, and I can't think of a way to do this without undermining that.

(Yes, you can argue that the same could happen if somebody isn't around for 5 days and it's already at vote, but as it is, there is a guaranteed time and therefore an upper limit that each legislator knows to how seldom they can afford to check in if they're RL a bit busier)

(09-29-2017, 09:18 AM)Griffindor13 Wrote: In line with typographical errors, I would also like to see the Chair be able to fix minor word errors, so long as they word fix doesn't alter the original intent of the text.

That could be a good addition. How's this wording:

Quote:(4) The Chair may correct typographical errors, grammatical errors, or formatting inconsistencies at any time, as long as these corrections do not alter the original intent of the law. Any such corrections must be recorded with the legislative history of each law.

**Belschaft** · 09-29-2017, 03:08 PM

I've also been concerned about allowing the chair to make "corrections" beyond typos/mispellings, as the wording of the law can sometimes be intentionally precise; meaning also varies by country, with the English and American versions of "tabling" a matter being the literal opposite of each other; don't put it to vote vs. put it to vote.

What one chair views as an "error" might have been an integral part of the wording.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Roavin*** · 09-29-2017, 03:54 PM

(09-29-2017, 03:08 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I've also been concerned about allowing the chair to make "corrections" beyond typos/mispellings, as the wording of the law can sometimes be intentionally precise; meaning also varies by country, with the English and American versions of "tabling" a matter being the literal opposite of each other; don't put it to vote vs. put it to vote.

What one chair views as an "error" might have been an integral part of the wording.

Note that in my suggestion to Griff, I restricted it to "grammatical" errors for that reason.

A related point: Another thing I had considered when writing this was to say that TSP laws shall be written in american-english+merriam-webster/british-english+oxford-dictionary. I honestly don't care which it is. The reason I didn't suggest it is because I figured that discussion would get heated and distract from the main point, so I "tabled" it (muahaha) until this went through our legislative process.

**Belschaft** · 09-29-2017, 03:59 PM

Heh.

I tend to write in Queen's, others sometimes use the accursed dialect known as "American 'English'" - in the past, this has caused problems.

Edit: Also, grammar is important; if I use a semi-colon, rather than a comma, I do so for a reason. Replacing one with the other can alter the entire meaning of a sentence; for this reason I would consider "grammatical" corrections as big a problem as allowing the chair to change the wording itself.

Edit-the-second: Also, some of our Chairs have had decidedly 'average' command of grammar and the English language; no offence is meant, but we can't be certain that what the Chair sees as an "error" actually is an error - we do, after all, have members for whom English is a second language, or who are dyslexic; myself included in regards to the second part.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

(This post was last modified: 09-29-2017, 04:05 PM by Belschaft.)