forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Here you might discuss basically everything.

Moderator: SC Moderators

User avatar
Bagheera
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:32 pm

forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Bagheera »

At the last RA meeting, the subject of affirming / revising / repealing the Responsible Estate Management Act was discussed and the RA decided to create a committee to review the issue and open up this discussion on the forums.

This post is to open up the discussion, please put your thoughts in this thread.

Summary of the discussion so far (found here: https://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8377)

New business: review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act
Coop said it would be good to keep a formal process to sell underperforming Sims in place.
Bagheera recommended to change the role of the Chancellor and extend the time frame for selling a Sim. She suggested an amended text.
Ranma wanted to have the role of the Chancellor changed as well and the CDS evaluated as a whole in the process. She suggested to repeal CDSL 24-01
Bagheera responded it would be better to refine the existing law instead of repealing it. She presented a second amended suggestion of the text.
Coop mentioned the reserves and stressed the point the option of getting rid of a sim should stay in place.
Bagheera proposed to create a committee to amend CDSL 24-01.
Rosie agreed the responsibility should be shifted away from the Chancellor.
Gaius remarked the decision was a political one and could not be regulated by law beforehand, but should be made by the RA as the final deciding organ. He moved to form the committee Bagheera had suggested. Bagheera seconded, motion carried unanimously at 10:34.

Bagheera, Ranma, Gaius and Tanoujin joined the committee at once. It was decided the work should continue on the forums and invite Citizens to join.

I made some suggested rewrites during the RA meeting but they are incomplete/being done on the fly, (which can be viewed in the transcript: https://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8375)

[10:02] Bagheera Kristan: Based on what Tan just said, I have amended my suggested changes to the following or similar (the percentages could be adjusted if they are not appropriate). This addresses the feeling that CDS as a whole should be considered and also extends the timeline....
[10:02] Bagheera Kristan: 1. If a region in the CDS fails to generate more than 75% of its monthly tier expense for more than three consecutive months AND if the CDS sims as a whole have fallen below 90% of covering monthly expenses for more than three consecutive months AND the Chancellor deems it in the best financial interests of the CDS, the Chancellor is to make a forum post immediately to alert the citizenry that this is an issue and this will be included on the agenda of the next RA meeting. The RA and Chancellor will review the situation at the RA meeting and if they determine it is in the best interests to divest CDS of the sim, the follow steps will be taken.

2. The Chancellor must give 90 days notice to all CDS citizens of the intention to sell a region both on the CDS forum and in an in-world CDS group notice.

3. The Chancellor must give 90 days notice of the sale to all citizens of the region via notecard. In the case of group owned land, the Chancellor will provide notice via notecard to the group owner.
[10:03] Bagheera Kristan: it changes 30 days to 90 days and addresses that this only gets triggered if the whole community - all six sims are falling below a certain percentage.

I am going to also refine my thoughts on them and post here, but please feel free to begin this discussion immediately (no need to wait on me).

Usually I Dislike a Cloud Sky
Tonight I Realize That a Cloud Sky
Makes Me Appreciate the Light of the Moon
- impromptu poem composed by Gen'i
as depicted in Yoshitoshi's 100 Aspects of the Moon
User avatar
Ranma Tardis
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Ranma Tardis »

I was thinking more that the RA committee formed under the authority of the RA would be used to review all CDS laws and then the constitution.

I left CDSL 24-01 under old business. It will be up to the RA to send it to committee, revise or repeal. It is a Act without purpose, again and again we are one CDS.

I wonder what needs to be discussed? The RA has a lot of work to accomplish this term.

User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 535
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

Ranma Tardis wrote: Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:24 pm

I was thinking more that the RA committee formed under the authority of the RA would be used to review all CDS laws and then the constitution.

I am afraid you are mistaken here, Ranma. Please consult the transcript again, timecode 10:25. In my understanding Bagheera suggested a committee dealing with the changes of CDSL 24-01 she was discussing right before - anyway she should know best what she proposed and we should not wrestle for the right interpretation of her intention.

And I agree, let us keep it on topic - we have seen what happened to the last catch-it-all law review committee. Let us not bite off more than we can chew. I hope to see tangible results soon. We can set up a new committee to review another law when we are done with this one. As far as I see there is no majority for just repealing the law and be done with it.

---------

On Topic: Maybe there is a consensus the responsibility for the decision should be shifted from the Chancellor to the RA. I would go even further and make the role of the whistleblower accessible to any citizen. The issue could be brought to the RA as a concern in the corresponding section, so that any citizen with a (hopefully qualified) opinion can raise it. This way the Chancellor is left with the responsibility to perform the sale, if so decided in the end, but has the possibility to raise the concern as everyone else in case they feel the underperformance of a certain region should be dealt with.

Next, I would be relieved if we could get away from fixed percentages activating certain processes in an automated way. When a concern is raised, the LRA should set it on the agenda until there is a solution found. It should be enough to let the RA examine the facts in a case to case manner, asking the executive to give a report on the deficit of the region in question, CDS overall performance and status of the reserves, to mention a few. On this basis the RA could decide if they want to act at all, and if, in what way, accompanied by public discussion on the forums. For example did we downgrade and redesign Friedsee when it was underperforming instead of selling it - IMO we should leave all options open and try to make sure the final decision has the most public support possible.

That’s it for the moment. Thank you Bagheera, for starting this thread, well done! I am not ready to propose an amended text now, I hope this is okay in this early state of brainstorming.

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Ranma Tardis
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Ranma Tardis »

Alright, I will remove discussion under old business. Instead under new business we will pick members of the committee. This is formed under the RA and will not be some abstract committee. We have tried this before and it just does not work. It will be chaired by the LRA and will include interested RA members and citizens.

Oh by the bye, I do not like separating the "performance" of the different sims. Colonial Nova where the RA and SC meets will be in danger along with LA. One can argue if it does not meet its share of revenue generation. Yet it performs an important function all on its own. I can not support this plan.

Agenda for a meeting
of the 27th RA
20 January 2018
9 am SLT (pacific)

1) Administrative Business (10 minutes)

1a) Review and approval of the Agenda

1b) Review and approval of the Minutes

1c) Executive Report (if present)

1d) Report on the LUC

1e) Report on the Road Committee

2) Citizen Concerns (15-20 minutes)

3) RA members concerns (10 minutes)

4) Old Business

5) New Business

5a) Select members for RA committee to review laws

5b) vote on members as a group

6) General Announcements (5 minutes)

7) Next RA meeting (1 minute)

8) Adjourn (1 minute)

User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 535
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

Erm, excuse me? You want to "pick" members of the Committee and make yourself chair without election?

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
User avatar
Ranma Tardis
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Ranma Tardis »

The RA will elect them and then hold them responsible. We are not going to form another committee and then allow it to do nothing.

User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

Tanoujin Milestone wrote: Tue Jan 30, 2018 1:38 pm

Erm, excuse me? You want to "pick" members of the Committee and make yourself chair without election?

I thought the same thing, Tan.

I have no dog in this hunt, Ranma, but I think this is out of order. I thought the idea was that anyone who wanted to participate was welcome to do so.

User avatar
Ranma Tardis
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Ranma Tardis »

The last committee to review laws did not work out. The resolution pass was ambitious at best. At the very least goals and timelines need to be set and followed. Again I will not allow for a strictly arguing committee. If the RA can not get tougher, then it would be best to allow this subject to end.

User avatar
Sylvia Tamalyn
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 8:07 am

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Sylvia Tamalyn »

Maybe you should wait and allow the committee to actually meet and see how it goes instead of going straight into dictator mode and scaring off anyone who might otherwise like to participate. What happened in the past is not really relevant if we are looking at different people being on the committee now. Having such a negative attitude before a meeting is even held seems premature and, quite frankly, insulting to your fellow citizens.

User avatar
Bagheera
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Bagheera »

Ranma Tardis wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:34 am

The last committee to review laws did not work out. The resolution pass was ambitious at best. At the very least goals and timelines need to be set and followed. Again I will not allow for a strictly arguing committee. If the RA can not get tougher, then it would be best to allow this subject to end.

Entering where angels fear to tread now....

Ranma Tardis wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:34 am

... Again I will not allow for a strictly arguing committee....

I was not aware that the LRA held the power to autocratically make a ruling like this. It would not be fair to the LRA to give them that level of burden. I believe we - the RA as a body made a vote at the last meeting to create a committee. I do not believe the LRA has the power to overrule the outcome of a majority vote. If I am mistaken, someone please correct me.

One of the flaws of this law - at least from my perspective - was that it put too much of a decision-making burden on one individual - the Chancellor. Putting a similar burden on the LRA would be a mistake, imho.

Ranma Tardis wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:34 am

The last committee to review laws did not work out.

As Tan pointed out, and I intended by starting this post, the vote by the RA was to review a single law and invite the citizens to participate here on the forums.

Ranma Tardis wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:34 am

If the RA can not get tougher, then it would be best to allow this subject to end.

Since this is just starting, there is nothing to compare it to. As for "allowing this subject to end," the unanimous conscensus was that we have a flawed law on the books. It is the responsibility of the RA to manage lawmaking and so allowing a flawed law to stay on the books without addressing it would be abdicating our duty as RA members.

Ranma Tardis wrote: Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:40 pm

Alright, I will remove discussion under old business. Instead under new business we will pick members of the committee. This is formed under the RA and will not be some abstract committee. We have tried this before and it just does not work. It will be chaired by the LRA and will include interested RA members and citizens.

The committee was already beginning formation at the last RA meeting with every RA member in attendance wanting to be on the committee. No chair was picked. I imagine that could happen in any number of ways but the most sensible way would be for the members of the committee to choose their chair by vote. I imagine anyone on the committee could call and coordinate a meeting.

My concern now is that only Tan has weighed in on changing the law in this thread that was designed for that purpose because it has gone off course into a discussion about who has authority to do what. I'd like to get this back on track to discuss the law on the forums.

Usually I Dislike a Cloud Sky
Tonight I Realize That a Cloud Sky
Makes Me Appreciate the Light of the Moon
- impromptu poem composed by Gen'i
as depicted in Yoshitoshi's 100 Aspects of the Moon
User avatar
Bagheera
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Bagheera »

Ranma Tardis wrote: Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:40 pm

I do not like separating the "performance" of the different sims. Colonial Nova where the RA and SC meets will be in danger along with LA. One can argue if it does not meet its share of revenue generation. Yet it performs an important function all on its own. I can not support this plan.

I believe many who weighed in on this at the last RA meeting held a similar view/concern. That is why I believe you and others raised this law as something to review - because, in its current form, it is rather draconian. However, it still makes sense to have a framework for what to do if CDS needs to tighten the belt on expenses and the best time to create such a framework is before such a crisis occurs.

Personally, I believe it is possible to create such a framework that does not have draconian action items, but instead has benchmarks for identifying a need for discussion.

Tanoujin Milestone wrote: Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:21 am

Next, I would be relieved if we could get away from fixed percentages activating certain processes in an automated way. When a concern is raised, the LRA should set it on the agenda until there is a solution found. It should be enough to let the RA examine the facts in a case to case manner, asking the executive to give a report on the deficit of the region in question, CDS overall performance and status of the reserves, to mention a few. On this basis the RA could decide if they want to act at all, and if, in what way, accompanied by public discussion on the forums. For example did we downgrade and redesign Friedsee when it was underperforming instead of selling it - IMO we should leave all options open and try to make sure the final decision has the most public support possible.

I saw the percentages posed as minimums - meaning that IF CDS is not below these thresholds, then those in charge can focus on other matters and not continually worry about whether the sky is falling.

Usually I Dislike a Cloud Sky
Tonight I Realize That a Cloud Sky
Makes Me Appreciate the Light of the Moon
- impromptu poem composed by Gen'i
as depicted in Yoshitoshi's 100 Aspects of the Moon
User avatar
Ranma Tardis
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Ranma Tardis »

I will not stand in the way of the forming of a responsible committee. Yet it is within my powers to decided what gets voted upon, the power of making the agenda. Again and again I will not stand in the way of the formation of a responsible committee. I understand Bags you would like to be the chair?

If I understand Rosie and Sudane right the CDS is not in any danger. We are making our obligations and are running a small surplus. If you want to regard me as a "dictator" it is up to you. I am just determined not to allow this to fail through indifference.

User avatar
Bagheera
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Bagheera »

Ranma Tardis wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:56 pm

I will not stand in the way of the forming of a responsible committee. Yet it is within my powers to decided what gets voted upon, the power of making the agenda. Again and again I will not stand in the way of the formation of a responsible committee. I understand Bags you would like to be the chair?

If I understand Rosie and Sudane right the CDS is not in any danger. We are making our obligations and are running a small surplus. If you want to regard me as a "dictator" it is up to you. I am just determined not to allow this to fail through indifference.

It appears there need to be a number of areas to get some definitions on here. Some of this should really be started in a different thread but they seem so entangled now with the topic at hand, it seems the best way to retain clarity and continuity is to just keep it here.

Let's start with the statement made:

"I understand Bags you would like to be the chair?"

In my post, I stated that my understanding of how things worked was that the committee would choose their own Chair. I then stated that, in my opinion, the best way to do that would be by a vote of the committee members. In no way did I presume to be Chair. It would be presumptuous for me to declare myself so, or for you and I to declare me Chair-by-fiat without the ratification of the committee. That is my opinion. I am just trying to move this forward.

In my opinion, the motion forward is to engage the citizenry in discussion about the bill at hand - CDSL 24-01 - and let those who were not at the RA meeting know there is a committee to review it and they are all invited to participate either here on the forums and/or by joining the committee. I do not believe one needs to be a Chair to start that discussion, but something anyone could do - as in discussing anything on the forums. Someone needed to do it, so I did it. THAT is my understanding of the issue at hand.

As for me being Chair; if nominated, I would accept the nomination - however it does seem to me that you - Ranma - were the one who initially put forth that this law needed to be changed and two other members of the RA - Gaius and Tan - voted for the original law, so there you have three people on the committee so far who have shown at least an equal interest, if not more, about the outcome of this review than me.

The other part that needs to be clarified is, you wrote:

Yet it is within my powers to decided what gets voted upon, the power of making the agenda.

It is my understanding that the role of the LRA is to maintain orderly meetings. As part of that duty, the LRA requests input on what should be on the Agenda and compiles the Agenda based on that input. In addition, at the beginning of the RA meeting, the Agenda is reviewed by the RA and modifications made based on motions and seconds within the RA body as a whole.

In voting on any item by the RA body, the LRA administers the vote but any RA member may make a motion for a vote and any RA member may second that motion. The item is next put up for a vote administered by the LRA - but the LRA may not unilaterally say "I don't want to vote on that," and override the motion and second for a vote.

That is my understanding of roles, responsibilities, powers and procedure. If you want to discuss this further, we should start a new thread, please.

The RA voted at the last meeting that the citizenry should be invited to weigh in on the review of CDSL 24-01 in the forums. I created this thread to move that discussion forward. I hear you say you want to move things forward too. What do you propose should be done to fix this law?

Ranma Tardis wrote: Wed Jan 31, 2018 9:56 pm

If I understand Rosie and Sudane right the CDS is not in any danger. We are making our obligations and are running a small surplus.

In my opinion, these circumstances make this the best time to review this law. One doesn't want to wait to hold a fire drill until during the middle of an actual fire.

Off topic: This reminds me of a sad but funny story told to me recently. As some of you know, I live in Sonoma County where we had a serious firestorm last October. I was talking with someone from one of the neighborhoods that was utterly destroyed. The fire happened so fast, people didn't know what was coming on them. He said he heard there was a fire and they needed to get out. He assumed this was just going to be a situation where they would go out in the street until there was an all clear, so he grabbed a bottle of wine and a couple glasses, thinking it was going to be an impromptu block party at 1 AM in the street. In just the few moments he got outside his front door and saw the fire coming down upon them, he realized there was no going back inside, so he lost everything but that bottle of wine and two glasses (also his family and pets were safely evacuated, since they had all practiced fire drills many times before - which is what made me think of this story now).

Usually I Dislike a Cloud Sky
Tonight I Realize That a Cloud Sky
Makes Me Appreciate the Light of the Moon
- impromptu poem composed by Gen'i
as depicted in Yoshitoshi's 100 Aspects of the Moon
User avatar
Tanoujin Milestone
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 535
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:42 pm

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Tanoujin Milestone »

I saw the percentages posed as minimums - meaning that IF CDS is not below these thresholds, then those in charge can focus on other matters and not continually worry about whether the sky is falling.

But still I can imagine scenarios when the individual regions are above 75% and the CDS as a whole above 90% but nevertheless running out of money within - say - 12 months or so. To me it seems to be the wrong approach to fix the numbers.
I would like to see the RA consider the facts and make a decision without being restricted in any way. We want them to decide according to the situation, in a sensible way, based on facts we can not foresee now, right?

As Gaius said during the last RA meeting:

First let me express my agreement with the proposed numbers which Bagheera and Tanoujin have made regarding deficits and durations of sale and so forth. However, I do not think this law or any law should take into considerations [what] some of you have suggested. The law cannot regulate a rogue chancellor like the Xigalias, it cannot regulate people's good intentioned ideas to sell one region or another to save the whole (as Coop has suggested). These are political decisions. Constitutionally, this assembly is meant to be a check on any Chancellor's rash power. This law should enshrine this constitutional principle and make it so that the RA is the final deciding organ to sell or not to sell.

This in mind I am trying to reformulate the following:

1. If a region in the CDS fails to generate more than 75% of its monthly tier expense for more than three consecutive months AND if the CDS sims as a whole have fallen below 90% of covering monthly expenses for more than three consecutive months AND the Chancellor deems it in the best financial interests of the CDS, the Chancellor is to make a forum post immediately to alert the citizenry that this is an issue and this will be included on the agenda of the next RA meeting. The RA and Chancellor will review the situation at the RA meeting and if they determine it is in the best interests to divest CDS of the sim, the follow steps will be taken.

I would change that to something like:

If the issue of a loss-making region and/or a deficient CDS as a whole is brought to the RA by a concerned citizen, the RA will examine the facts and keep the issue on the agenda until a decision is made.
In case the RA decides to sell a region after thorough discussion both at RA meetings and on the forums, the following steps will be taken.

And so on. Sorry for being a bit superficial, I am awfully distracted by RL atm and the Meds make my brain very slow. But you see, we can get rid of a baseless concern very quickly this way, *by looking at the facts* and declaring the reserves will last 5 more years if we go on like this, and other means should be taken to make a region more attractive. I hope you see my point.

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Ian Maclaren
Soro Dagostino
Sadly departed
Sadly departed
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:28 am

Re: forum discussion re: Review of CDSL 24-01 Responsible Estate Management Act Discussion

Post by Soro Dagostino »

Been away for a time, listening. I'll spend some time gathering precepts and information.

Bottle Washer
CDS SC
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”