Posted by: Detjen
« on: June 04, 2011, 05:11:53 AM »OOC: right, law sounds good to me.
Posted by: areyoua
« on: June 03, 2011, 02:48:39 PM »[ooc]This, I believe, should just be a law not an amendment as it really doesn't change much that is too important, and the Titles should wait until we get more laws into effect as currently we have but one.[/ooc]
Posted by: ardem
« on: June 03, 2011, 08:54:44 AM »[ooc] good question, here is a bit I found on US bills, I think the australian system which I know is about the same.
U.S. statutory law is organized into 50 books, known as titles. Each title should contain only those laws that have to do with a discrete subject area. In addition, it should only contain general and permanent laws — excluding provisions that apply only for a limited time (e.g., an annual appropriations law) or to a small number of people (e.g., a private law). For example, Title 7 should only contain permanent laws having to do with agriculture. Title 28 should only concern the judiciary and judicial procedure.
[/ooc]
U.S. statutory law is organized into 50 books, known as titles. Each title should contain only those laws that have to do with a discrete subject area. In addition, it should only contain general and permanent laws — excluding provisions that apply only for a limited time (e.g., an annual appropriations law) or to a small number of people (e.g., a private law). For example, Title 7 should only contain permanent laws having to do with agriculture. Title 28 should only concern the judiciary and judicial procedure.
[/ooc]
Posted by: Detjen
« on: June 03, 2011, 03:22:37 AM »OOC: actually I think this brings up a new question. should this be added into the charter directly or instead passed as a resolution and instead of added into the charter, be put in a separate line below it. I believe if we look at real life, does this become an Amendment to the constitution or in this charter, or is it a law that should go into the law books?
Posted by: ardem
« on: June 03, 2011, 12:35:57 AM »[ooc]All we need now is Detjen to write in the Charter, although i think some of the concerns could be stripped out, they are not very charter minded, but then again that might ba a bad precedent too. I leave it to Detjen to decide.[/ooc]
Posted by: areyoua
« on: June 02, 2011, 03:25:55 PM »I do believe that the bill has passed, and quite easily I might add at a 5-0 vote when polls closed, so I have edited the title and I would like to congratulate everyone who had a hand in getting this momentous act to its final copy and also those who helped get this act passed.
George Payne
Infrastructure Minister
George Payne
Infrastructure Minister
Posted by: areyoua
« on: May 31, 2011, 06:50:40 PM »No offense is taken, Senator Winston, and your concerns are real. Therefore, I will refrain from posting a poll, and request that the Speaker make the call to vote with a copy of the bill in the poll.
George Payne
Infrastructure Minister
George Payne
Infrastructure Minister
Posted by: ardem
« on: May 31, 2011, 05:38:52 PM »Senator Payne, I believe it should be the speakers (Detjen) right to call the vote, this way, and I mean no offence when I say this, no funny business goes on while the vote is in progress, a slight edit here a slight edit there, by the author.
I say this to show the people we have a legitimate and legal way with proceeding, with fear their may be corruption.
Senator Winston
I say this to show the people we have a legitimate and legal way with proceeding, with fear their may be corruption.
Senator Winston
Posted by: areyoua
« on: May 31, 2011, 02:56:19 PM »OOC: I would agree with the two board idea. A thread should be posted in the board for voting when the debate time has ended by the original writer of the bill and a 24 hour voting time seems right as most people would will be on once a day. The changes have been made to the bill, this time in italics (running out of new ideas though), and if no one has any objections I'll post a poll for this tomorrow as that would when 72 hours is over in the second board if there is one or just in the Senate board if there isn't.
Posted by: ardem
« on: May 31, 2011, 09:15:35 AM »OOC: Detjen the bill calls for a separate post, created by you, this way there can be no last minute changes while the bill is in progress, you need to add "bill vote" to the end of the subject with the same subject name
Posted by: Sheb
« on: May 31, 2011, 08:52:25 AM »I'd suggest 24 hours of voting time, and a separate board for the polls.
Posted by: Detjen
« on: May 31, 2011, 02:34:36 AM »OOC Note and question. I dont seem to be able to modify a current thread into a poll. are polls start able by other players or only the moderators? should we suggest that all resolutions start as a poll but with the poll options locked for the debate period or should we simply start another thread for the actual vote. should I then make two more sub boards within the senate to avoid the clutter of discussion and then voting. one final thing I just caught, how long will the voting period last we have a 24-72 debate period but no lenght of time on voting.
Posted by: areyoua
« on: May 30, 2011, 06:39:15 AM »President Casey, your concerns about a debate going on for too long is a very valid concern. However, I believe I accounted for that when I limited a discussion to 72 hours at the maximum.
OOC: I originally had planned to include a clause mandating that a poll be started at the same time the bill was introduced with two options: extend or do not extend. This didn't occur as I couldn't think of a way to get that IC, and I actually forgot to put that in to this bill.
Your concern about the lack of an allowence for a multi vote bill is noted, but with a bill format similar to the one I have introduced, I see no real way to let there be more than two options, but I will change the word "must" in the clause to "recommend"
Senator Winston, I really had written the format of the Bill as a format that should be followed not one that must be held to in all aspects, hence my use of "recommend" rather than must, but I see the point that bills should have consistency and a clear structure so your edits will be made.
All changes this time around be underlined
Senator Payne
OOC: I originally had planned to include a clause mandating that a poll be started at the same time the bill was introduced with two options: extend or do not extend. This didn't occur as I couldn't think of a way to get that IC, and I actually forgot to put that in to this bill.
Your concern about the lack of an allowence for a multi vote bill is noted, but with a bill format similar to the one I have introduced, I see no real way to let there be more than two options, but I will change the word "must" in the clause to "recommend"
Senator Winston, I really had written the format of the Bill as a format that should be followed not one that must be held to in all aspects, hence my use of "recommend" rather than must, but I see the point that bills should have consistency and a clear structure so your edits will be made.
All changes this time around be underlined
Senator Payne
Posted by: ardem
« on: May 30, 2011, 04:05:08 AM »Here Here
President Casey makes a valid point about standards. The Senate should be held to a high account for the people's sakes, a bill and voting should have a consistency from one bill to the next.
I recommend some slight changes to your Bill Senator Payne,
- A Subject similar to your Bill, mentioning the word 'Bill' at the end.
-Within the Bill,
-the body of the bill,
- the writer,
- a person who will second the bill, a bill must be seconded before going to voting stage.
- When the bill going to voting stage,the subject line exact the same as the bill with a (vote) in brackets, included is the body of the final text which cannot be change during the voting stages.
Senator Winston
President Casey makes a valid point about standards. The Senate should be held to a high account for the people's sakes, a bill and voting should have a consistency from one bill to the next.
I recommend some slight changes to your Bill Senator Payne,
- A Subject similar to your Bill, mentioning the word 'Bill' at the end.
-Within the Bill,
-the body of the bill,
- the writer,
- a person who will second the bill, a bill must be seconded before going to voting stage.
- When the bill going to voting stage,the subject line exact the same as the bill with a (vote) in brackets, included is the body of the final text which cannot be change during the voting stages.
Senator Winston
Posted by: Detjen
« on: May 30, 2011, 03:01:51 AM »OOC: bah I need to work out some way to Icly mention the passage of time so youll have to excuse my lack of character in this part, but I wish to remind everyone that the current format of the game will see a turn pass each Monday, the average time of a turn is intended to be a month, more or less depending on activity in the game.
So for time sensitive issues if you wait too long to post your Resolution you may end up missing the window, just keep that in mind.
IC: I believe there will be no issues with the proposed resolution, though I do worry some about potential gridlock in constant debates being extended, but this is a concern that is unfounded until tested. perhaps a standard format for presenting Proposals should be drafted as well, to ensure uniform understanding of the person making the statement the subject concerned and the proposal that this resolution aims to pass. my final concern is that some resolutions may not be as simple as a yay or nay. 90% of all resolutions maybe but there will come a time where allowing a multi vote resultion may be the best option
away from the subject on the resolution and responding to a comment about a Code of Laws, our charter will be posted shortly with our initial rules and settings. as amendments change the body of this Charter they will be updated
So for time sensitive issues if you wait too long to post your Resolution you may end up missing the window, just keep that in mind.
IC: I believe there will be no issues with the proposed resolution, though I do worry some about potential gridlock in constant debates being extended, but this is a concern that is unfounded until tested. perhaps a standard format for presenting Proposals should be drafted as well, to ensure uniform understanding of the person making the statement the subject concerned and the proposal that this resolution aims to pass. my final concern is that some resolutions may not be as simple as a yay or nay. 90% of all resolutions maybe but there will come a time where allowing a multi vote resultion may be the best option
away from the subject on the resolution and responding to a comment about a Code of Laws, our charter will be posted shortly with our initial rules and settings. as amendments change the body of this Charter they will be updated
