Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Proposals for legislation and discussions of these

Moderator: SC Moderators

Cindy Ecksol
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:37 pm

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Cindy Ecksol »

Rose's comments accurately reflect my feelings about Pat's proposal. As a member of the Simplicity Party I am interested in the simplest possible legislation that meets the RA's goals. Part of the problem here is that we have not yet clearly identified the problem we are trying to solve. I stated in response to an earlier draft of this bill that Sonja's explanation of why she did not support Jamie's version made sense to me: it was just not required. I'd challenge us all to go back and see if we can identify a problem that needs a legislative solution or (perhhaps) a constitutional amendment before writing or discussing more bills. If we can't identify the problem, we should not write a bill. And if we DO write a bill, every word should directly address the problem.

Cindy

User avatar
Patroklus Murakami
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:54 pm

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

Rose, Cindy

Thank you for your comments. Apologies for not discussing this further with you inworld (as would be my preference). I can't get inworld much this weekend so forum debate will have to do. :)

The problem I am trying to solve is that the RA will shortly be supplemented with a number of reps from AA when the merger takes place. They will be very welcome but, our Constitution does not cater for this. The RA is defined as a body of democratically elected factions. My understanding is that, without a Constitutional amendment the AA reps would not be able, legally, to join the RA. My proposed amendment is intended to correct that.

"Supplemented" in this context, means 'additional'. My intention is that they would be full, voting membrers of the RA - provided they are freely chosen :) I'm afraid the notion that they could just be chosen by an Estate Owner and foisted on both the CDS populace and imposed as reps for the incoming community is totally unacceptable - if we are still a democracy. (Just to be clear, I think the process described for choosing the AA reps will mean they are 'freely chosen'. I'm responding to Rose's suggestion that we should not insist on the RA remaining a democratic body).

Apologies for the brevity. This makes my comments sound a bit terse. (Currently tapping on an iPhone!)

Honi soit qui mal y pense
Rose Springvale
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:29 am

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Rose Springvale »

Pat, I completely disagree with your analysis, your language, and the timing of this conversation. I urge the RA to reject this line of thinking.

I am out of the country, and will be eager to see the conversation that ensues. PLEASE be aware that the AA community is reading this forum. Someone might want to take the position that they are welcome in CDS, and stop trying to make an entire community angry by suggesting that CDS might have made an illegal agreement.

There is still time to undo this merger, if that is what you really want.

User avatar
Patroklus Murakami
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:54 pm

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

Rose

It's not clear to me what your objection is to my analysis, language and timing. You haven't said why you disagree with me. Could you supply some reasons why you think this amendment is unnecessary or detrimental?

Honi soit qui mal y pense
Rose Springvale
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:29 am

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Rose Springvale »

I'm responding to Rose's suggestion that we should not insist on the RA remaining a democratic body).

Pat,
perhaps you should explain this statement.
Rose, extremely unhappy

User avatar
Patroklus Murakami
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:54 pm

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

Rose Springvale wrote:

"freely chosen by a community joining the CDS." tries again to write deals not yet made. "Freely chosen?" who makes that determination? "by the community?" implies that the owners of the estate are not allowed to make a deal. Maybe you think that all sims that join CDS must already be democratic before they join. Seems sort of short sighted in the reality of SL.

Rose

If some or most of the RA members are not 'freely chosen' but picked by the incoming Estate Owner, the RA is no longer a democratic body.

(This refers to future mergers, not Al Andalus. The process described for selecting AAs reps means they will be 'freely chosen').

Could I have an answer to my question now? What is wrong with my analysis, language and timing? Why do you think the amendment I proposed is unnecessary or detrimental?

Honi soit qui mal y pense
Rose Springvale
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:29 am

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Rose Springvale »

There is plenty of history where appointments for interrim positions are made to democratic bodies and the body remains democratic. You yourself are an example. You were an appointee, not an elected rep.

I already explained why i disagree with your analysis and language. Timing? Where was all this information, this desire, from your faction, when the actual vote was being taken? Wouldn't it have been approrpriate to bring up this glaring illegality before an offer was made and presented to Al Andalus? That is a rhetorical question. Please don't reply to me on the forums, this is my last post here.

Soro Dagostino
Sadly departed
Sadly departed
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:28 am

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Soro Dagostino »

Pat, I think your forgetting the critique provided by Jamie in the RA meeting. See the transcript. The amendment is unnecessary.

Bottle Washer
CDS SC
Brian Livingston
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:19 pm

Re: Al Andalus, electoral integration, further legislation

Post by Brian Livingston »

Good Morning:

After reviewing the transcript and proposed amendment, I don't believe that it is necessary at this juncture. As such, in regards to the proposed constitutional amendment, I vote nay.

Regards,

Brian Livingston

Post Reply

Return to “Legislative Discussion”