| Welcome to the NDU's forums. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll not only be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls, but you'll be able to enjoy the rights as citizens, such as voting on the RMB. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| The Typhlochactas Reform Act (Part II) Discussion | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 15 2012, 05:20 AM (258 Views) | |
| Birkinghamia | Aug 15 2012, 05:20 AM Post #1 |
|
Founder
|
Edited by Birkinghamia, Aug 15 2012, 05:34 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 15 2012, 05:31 AM Post #2 |
|
Deleted User
|
I meant WFE, not RMB. |
|
|
| Birkinghamia | Aug 15 2012, 05:34 AM Post #3 |
|
Founder
|
Fixed. |
![]() |
|
| Minecraftia | Aug 15 2012, 04:07 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Former Title-Bearer of Terronia
|
I'm kinda critical on Section I and IV. First of all, what kind of a motto is "Allons-Y!"? And what if they can't get on for two weeks cuz they had surgery, like Wiggle? |
![]() |
|
| Commonwealth | Aug 15 2012, 04:22 PM Post #5 |
|
I completely agree with minecraftia about section IV. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 15 2012, 04:55 PM Post #6 |
|
Deleted User
|
|
|
|
| Welsh Cowboy | Aug 15 2012, 07:23 PM Post #7 |
|
President of DUAN
|
Here's my problem with Section IV: Firstly, if voters don't like an inactive Senator, vote them out, or recall them following the current procedures. I mean, think about it. Today, we have five proposals up for vote... If I didn't get on today, I'm recalled. That's not very equitable. Even if we exclude embassy proposals, it's entirely reasonable to have three bills in two days. And I'm sure some people might have a situation where they're inactive for two days, but people still approve of them. Again, let the voters decide what a Senator needs to do and how active he needs to be. That aside though. Say I tell the Speaker I'll be inactive. I'm not on for a week. During that time, one proposal is voted upon. Then I come back. I am now ineligible for the next two proposals. That's not fair at all. So for being inactive, I don't get to vote when I'm there? I think it should just be you're ineligible for the period you'll be inactive... Although I think the whole section should be removed. But if the first remains, I would have to see the second clause modifies. |
|
Current President of DUAN Please telegram me with questions! | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 15 2012, 09:12 PM Post #8 |
|
Deleted User
|
This isn't about the popularity of a Senator. It's about Senators not voting on bills.
Rare, isn't it? We actually only have three things to vote on, presently. One of them is an embassy request, the other two are bills. The Military Creation Act has been on the table for two months, so it doesn't count. It should have been voted on a long time ago. The other two are being voted on now, but they've been up for about a week since I wrote up up the Reform Act. I'm failing to see how any of these bills would come as a surprise to a Senator.
That's just factually incorrect. You have more than one day to vote on a bill. That's something we've had for a while, as a courtesy. Birkinghamia already said he would extend the time for voting anyways, so I don't see where you get the impression that you have to vote on a bill the day it's proposed.
It's not about the voters. It's about making sure that our Senators are actually voting on bills, which is their job. It's efficiency.
The point of forcing them to abstain is to prevent a loophole from being used. If we didn't include it, any Senator could just say they're inactive and wouldn't have to vote, even if they truly are active. It would basically allow every Senator to claim inactivity and the entire point of the law would be destroyed. Now, if we force abstanation for the next three bills, then you can't just fake inactivity to prevent a recall. It's stopping you from claiming inactivity and then voting anyways, because you don't get to vote the way you want to for the next three bills. We have to make sure our Senators are truly inactive.
This means that I can just tell Birk I'm inactive, and I won't have to vote at all, even if I truly am active. It can be very easily abused. I have to observe that Welsh seems fine with taking the most absurd situations and then uses it to justify a general principle. |
|
|
| Minecraftia | Aug 15 2012, 09:20 PM Post #9 |
![]()
Former Title-Bearer of Terronia
|
Yep. But what if there's more than three bills/proposals? The section only said to abstain on the next three proposals. |
![]() |
|
| Welsh Cowboy | Aug 15 2012, 09:53 PM Post #10 |
|
President of DUAN
|
Leiurus, there's actually four embassy Requests. So there's five things up for a vote.... And a Senator's job isn't to vote on bills,it's to represent DUAN's people. And I'm saying that if voters don't like a Senator's job, they vote them out or recall them. Take a scenario (which isn't truly that outlandish): I haven't voted for three bills. So I get recalled, when no one in the region supports it? That's not democracy at all. Let the voters decide what a Senator needs to be doing. Actually, there might not be more than one day to vote on a bill. Once 3 yea or nay votes are reached, voting concludes. Or, alternatively, are you saying that if I come in a week later and state my opinion, that counts as voting? If we adopt the latter, the law is pointless. If it's the former, then it's possible not to have a day of voting. |
|
Current President of DUAN Please telegram me with questions! | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 15 2012, 10:35 PM Post #11 |
|
Deleted User
|
. They're voted on at once, so it's extremely unfair to count them all as bills.
And how well are the people being represented when the representative is doing nothing?
I answered this already.
You do understand what a recall is, right? If the voters want the Senators to stay, then they'll vote for him in the recall election. Your claim that is it against democracy has no grounding in fact.
As I said, Birkinghamia already said he wouldn't close the vote after a majority passes/strikes down a bill, like he does now.
Your question is ill-formed and I really don't know what you're trying to find out. |
|
|
| Welsh Cowboy | Aug 15 2012, 11:00 PM Post #12 |
|
President of DUAN
|
I must apologize, I forgot there's an actual election, they're not automatically out of office. That's my fault. However, I still oppose the bill. You asked how well are people being represented when Senators don't vote. Unfortunately I can't answer that, only the voters can. I don't think the government should decide what is good representation. Also, a recall election is not impossible to get, and if not voting is as egregious as you seem to suggest (Note: You seem to suggest this) then I think the voters would rise up and recall them. We don't need to force an election upon the voters, in almost every case it would be superfluous. My question about late voting is this: If a bill passes, and then I walk in a month later and say I supported it, does that count as a vote? I think it's pretty important. |
|
Current President of DUAN Please telegram me with questions! | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 16 2012, 01:15 AM Post #13 |
|
Deleted User
|
You asked how well are people being represented when Senators don't vote. Unfortunately I can't answer that, only the voters can. I don't think the government should decide what is good representation. Not voting on bill is inherently unrepresentative, no matter how many times you repeat the mantra.
This bill isn't supposed to make recall elections easier, so I don't care.
|
|
|
| Birkinghamia | Aug 16 2012, 03:10 AM Post #14 |
|
Founder
|
Welsh, I don't think it'll be as bad as you make it out to be. Minecraftia, Commonwealth and I consistently vote on almost every bill - while Aaraya rarely votes, and I can't even remember when Zaharawi voted the last time and it counted towards anything. Not only does that mean that the voters are being misrepresentated, but it also means that controversial bills could stall, when we might actually need four or five votes to settle the outcome. Besides, as Typhlo said, the person isn't automatically removed from office, they have to go through an election. That would weed out inactive Senators, and people who accidentally miss three votes or usually vote will be fine (as long as they are still supported on the grounds of their ideology). |
![]() |
|
| Welsh Cowboy | Aug 16 2012, 08:43 PM Post #15 |
|
President of DUAN
|
Birk, and Leiurus for that matter, do you feel Aaraya and Zaharawi are being bad representatives? If so, Get a recall election. That's what I'm advocating. If people don't like representatives' actions, they vote them out. That's what recall elections are for, representatives who are publicly opposed by the voters. Seriously, when would mandating a recall do anything that voters couldn't do by calling for a recall themselves? |
|
Current President of DUAN Please telegram me with questions! | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 16 2012, 11:38 PM Post #16 |
|
Deleted User
|
Welsh, you really are missing the point of this whole thing. |
|
|
| Welsh Cowboy | Aug 17 2012, 10:28 AM Post #17 |
|
President of DUAN
|
Which is? I think I'm being perfectly being logical. These mandated recalls and such are unnecessary because there is already a system in place for handling recall elections that people want. |
|
Current President of DUAN Please telegram me with questions! | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2012, 07:02 PM Post #18 |
|
Deleted User
|
You are failing to recognize the fundamental point of the bill. We have recalls for a while now, and representatives are still missing votes a lot. This shows that the threat that they may be recalled one day isn't enough. When we have mandatory recalls, then the threat of being recalled for missing a vote is absolute. There's no vagueness or getting around it. |
|
|
| Welsh Cowboy | Aug 19 2012, 07:33 PM Post #19 |
|
President of DUAN
|
Obviously no one thinks missing votes is bad enough to be recalled. Again, if you're so upset or annoyed about that, recall some people. I haven't heard much of an outcry about missing votes... |
|
Current President of DUAN Please telegram me with questions! | |
![]() |
|
| Birkinghamia | Aug 20 2012, 04:03 AM Post #20 |
|
Founder
|
It's not necessarily upsetting, but it's dumb to have inactive Senators in office. Plus, automatic recalls are easier than organizing a petition. Also, I haven't said anything because the three of us have covered the vote so nothing stalls, but that only lasts as long as there's nothing controversial... |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Proposal Creation/Discussion Thread · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:25 PM Jul 11
|
edge created by tiptopolive of ifsz







2:25 PM Jul 11