By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Proposals for legislation and discussions of these

Moderator: SC Moderators

cleopatraxigalia
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 pm
Contact:

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by cleopatraxigalia »

Question:

How is quorum equal to THREE ? .. when its one half, plus one ? Do we round down, I am just asking, and am curious about why ? Where is that stated?
If one half of a person needs to be there. Then the entire person has to show for that to happen.

.......

Has it been the case that THREE people voting on something can change the law in CDS currently, no matter how large we get or are?
This is still too small to be properly representative in my opinion.

Cleo

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

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

cleopatraxigalia wrote:

Question:

How is quorum equal to THREE ? .. when its one half, plus one ? Do we round down, I am just asking, and am curious about why ? Where is that stated?
If one half of a person needs to be there. Then the entire person has to show for that to happen.

.......

Has it been the case that THREE people voting on something can change the law in CDS currently, no matter how large we get or are?
This is still too small to be properly representative in my opinion.

Cleo

I recollect that the SC ruled on this as the language in the Constitution is a bit ambiguous. If memory serves me correctly, the ruling was:

  • *Quorum for a 5 seat RA is 3 members in attendance.
    *Simple majority (needed to pass bills) is at least 3 seats to vote in favour
    *2/3 majority (needed for Constitutional Amendments) is at least 4 seats in favour.

Delia or Calli would probably know where the thread is on these forums.

As for three people changing our laws... that's the nature of representative democracy. We elect people to represent us and to take decisions on our behalf. The RA has five seats which is plenty to represent the diverse set of views in a community like ours. We have 650 representatives for 65 million people (approximately) in the UK House of Commons. If we use the same ratio, five members should be fine for us until we have a population of half a million! That looks like it might be a long way off.

If we disagree with the decisions our elected representative make we can protest, lobby for a change or reversal and, at the next election, pick people who will represent us better. I don't see any convincing argument that 7 or 11 or 13 is better just because more people have to agree to get anything passed at the RA. It just means we are more likely to have empty seats and no option for the electorate to choose their representatives.

This thread began with a discussion on how to handle vacancies; we don't seem to have settled on a solution to that problem. And now some are contemplating a change which will make the situation even worse!

Honi soit qui mal y pense
User avatar
Sudane Erato
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 8:44 am
Contact:

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Sudane Erato »

I agree completely with Pat's position here. 5 RA members for 60 to 90 people is plenty. The much bigger problem is elections which, because there are not enough candidates to fill the seats, results in no election at all. That is not democracy. If we do not end up voting for our representatives, but simply take everyone who volunteers, we might as well end the experiment.

Sudane...............................

*** Confirmed Grump ***
Profile: http://bit.ly/p9ASqg
User avatar
Shep
Sadly departed
Sadly departed
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 3:11 pm

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Shep »

Okay .. two questions .. first, increasing the RA membership .. I don't see any urgency here .. the number was tied to 5 as we stood no chance of anymore people standing .. but also as we don't operate as law makers without getting public views I don't see it as urgent ... a small increase would be ok ... but lets see if we keep the surge of interest we recently have or we'll increase the number to find no candidates! So I think it's a bear it in mind .. but not for this session .

Second .. By-elections ... I would take a simple approach ... Resignation to the LRA and the dean of the SC( as they have the election job)... by notecard ..no retraction of resignation .... then candidates called for .. election arranged with the booths but only one vote per person.. no matter how many are listed .. one vote only .. then its simply first passed the post .. The only time I would'nt use this would be near term end .. in which case we manage until the next full election ...

I am not a sheep ... I am the Shepherdess .. An it harm none .. so mote it be ..
User avatar
Rosie Gray
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:47 am

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Rosie Gray »

Yes, I agree that the important piece to action here is what the SC requested - addressing resignations. (While I do think that we could go to 7 members on the RA, I don't think that we need more than that at this time; and I agree it's not a priority.) Pat's analogy of RL representation is quite accurate and puts this into perspective.

Thus, I return to my original posting:

1) Within the first two months of an election, if there are candidates that ran but were not elected, that we accept the next-in-line candidate from the vote count. If there are no other candidates, that we hold a 'simple' (1 vote per citizen) by-election. That candidates be given 1 week to campaign, and citizens 1 week to vote from there.

2) From 3 months of an election to 5 months; hold a 'simple' (1 vote per citizen) by-election, parameters same as #2

3) The final (sixth) month before next election; that the RA function with the existing RA members.

"Courage, my friend, it's not too late to make the world a better place."
~ Tommy Douglas
cleopatraxigalia
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 pm
Contact:

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by cleopatraxigalia »

I would like to see the notification be non reversible also, as well as at least one public notice. by public I mean either a NOTICE to the group inworld or a forum post.
And what about someone who just disappears. How long without logging in before the seat is declared vacant?

Notecard to LRA or SC is ok .. but my recollection is when Nolligan and or Ranma tried to do this, they were talked out of resigning even though they both made it clear they wanted to and or felt they needed to. So, lets also make it so they have to tell everyone at one time not be given a chance for the Notecard to be "held " as it was ( I believe this is what happened) if it didn't happen exactly that way, relax, it could in the future. And I think it should be prevented from happening.

So lets make it a inworld or forum public notice in one of two ways also. Group notice or forums. Not just a notecard, we can make it even more transparent and universal.

If the SC dean or the LRA was happy to see the person go they would take it and post it right away, if they are not they could just beg and plead for the them to stay on and give them some time to think about, hold the notecard and not share it, take this out of the equation and make the notice be public and transparent. Notice to the group .. irreversible.. forum post irreversible.

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

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

cleopatraxigalia wrote:

I would like to see the notification be non reversible also, as well as at least one public notice. by public I mean either a NOTICE to the group inworld or a forum post.
And what about someone who just disappears. How long without logging in before the seat is declared vacant?

Notecard to LRA or SC is ok .. but my recollection is when Nolligan and or Ranma tried to do this, they were talked out of resigning even though they both made it clear they wanted to and or felt they needed to. So, lets also make it so they have to tell everyone at one time not be given a chance for the Notecard to be "held " as it was ( I believe this is what happened) if it didn't happen exactly that way, relax, it could in the future. And I think it should be prevented from happening.

So lets make it a inworld or forum public notice in one of two ways also. Group notice or forums. Not just a notecard, we can make it even more transparent and universal.

If the SC dean or the LRA was happy to see the person go they would take it and post it right away, if they are not they could just beg and plead for the them to stay on and give them some time to think about, hold the notecard and not share it, take this out of the equation and make the notice be public and transparent. Notice to the group .. irreversible.. forum post irreversible.

It might help the search for a solution if RA members refrain from making evidence-free accusations against other people.

The problem with forum posts is they can be edited after the fact (I've edited this post to make what I'm saying clearer) so we need some way which is not reversible. The RA Procedures could be edited so that a notecard has to be given to the Dean of the SC and LRA at the same time with a formal notification. They could then be obliged by law to immediately post this on the forums immediately with no discussion.

This would not preclude the LRA or Dean from advising RA members not to resign when they say they are thinking about it; in a free society they should surely have that right? It would be odd if we could not admit that sometimes we find serving on the RA difficult and talk about it with our peers. Many of us have felt, at times, that we have been harassed or even persecuted by other RA members and sometimes you need to talk to someone else about it.

But we need to have a formal procedure which is irreversible and which means unambiguously "I have resigned" with no comeback.

Honi soit qui mal y pense
Callipygian
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 782
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Callipygian »

Rosie Gray wrote:

Yes, I agree that the important piece to action here is what the SC requested - addressing resignations. (While I do think that we could go to 7 members on the RA, I don't think that we need more than that at this time; and I agree it's not a priority.) Pat's analogy of RL representation is quite accurate and puts this into perspective.

Thus, I return to my original posting:

1) Within the first two months of an election, if there are candidates that ran but were not elected, that we accept the next-in-line candidate from the vote count. If there are no other candidates, that we hold a 'simple' (1 vote per citizen) by-election. That candidates be given 1 week to campaign, and citizens 1 week to vote from there.

2) From 3 months of an election to 5 months; hold a 'simple' (1 vote per citizen) by-election, parameters same as #2

3) The final (sixth) month before next election; that the RA function with the existing RA members.

Responding to Rosie because her post encompasses things mentioned by others.

Number 3 is no problem at all - the last month of a term might mean one meeting having an empty seat.

Number 1 and 2 still pose the timeframe challenge that was part of the reason for the SC request. *Any* election, no matter whether it is STV or 'simple' vote tally must take 28 days, plus the length of time the polls are open, as a minimum. This is the law from which all election dates, regular or by-election are calculated - 28 days of land ownership to qualify to vote or to run for office. If a holiday falls during this time or the census is delayed etc, it could well be 40 days.

As an example: If a resignation were received on Sept 15th -the middle of the 4th month of a term - a census would be requested for the 16th. All being well, and Sudane able to conduct it on such short notice, it would be done on the 16th ( possibly resulting in complaints from people that they were disenfranchised by having no warning to set their land to privately owned, instead of group, for the census taking or to check that they were not in arrears on tier). If the census is done on the 16th, the earliest the polls can open would be Oct 14th. Even shortening the time allowed to vote to 72 hours the earliest a new RA member would be announced would be Oct 16th; roughly 5 weeks before the end of the term.

To add a little confusion to the pot, the census to qualify to run for office, the call for candidates and the census to qualify to vote in the next *regular* election would occur during this time - e.g, the relevant dates for the election of the 20th RA were:
Qualification deadline to run for office : 12 noon SLT October 1 (census generated on this date by Sudane)
Qualification deadline for right to vote: 12 noon SLT October 11 (census generated on this date by Sudane)
Deadline for declaration to run: 12 noon SLT November 1

and the call for candidates went out on October 7th. While the call for candidates *could* be delayed, I do not believe that is desirable - shortening the timeframe to encourage potential candidates to 14 days, when we often struggle to have enough running to fill the seats, seems unproductive.

If the decision about by-elections includes an actual election in any form, here is a possible solution:

1) A census done monthly and byelections designated to use the most recent. The 28 days would then count forward from the census date, and could mean a new RA member was announced as quickly as 12 days and with a maximum delay of 31 days. This means adding adding a substantial amount of work for Sudane, although hopefully that work could be done by someone she designates. It might also be beneficial to include specific timeframes :" the most recent census will be used, challenges to the list must be received within 4 days, the call for candidates will be 4 days, there will be 3 days of campaigning, the polls will be open for 72 hours." along with a reminder that staying aware of government activity through the Forums or inworld notices is the responsibility of each citizen.

Calli

People often say that, in a democracy, decisions are made by a majority of the people. Of course, that is not true. Decisions are made by a majority of those who make themselves heard and who vote -- a very different thing.

Walter H. Judd
cleopatraxigalia
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 pm
Contact:

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by cleopatraxigalia »

1. TOR SAID:

Perhaps by-elections could be held unless more then two thirds of the term has expired. If less than a third of the term is left, I think we could probably manage without the missing member.

2.. TOR SAID:
If the RA were larger, loss of a single member would not be so critical.

CLEO SAYS:
I agree with what you say in statement 1. Tor, let's look first at increasing our RA size per the population size by simply striking the new law made that insisted the RA always be 5, no matter what. If this happens then I think that perhaps 2. might then make sense but I'd want to perhaps give more clear direction on what we need to do enforcing more details of the By election laws. This is a constitutional change and atm I think that we need to wait until we have the laws all categorized and collated before we go about messing with these sorts of things. It probably needs a complete look at in context of other relevant laws.

I also stand by my statement in the last RA meeting that until we have discussed this, or any other constitutional change, LIVE , with all members present, including Gwyn, not on a forum thread, that I will not entertain voting aye on a constitutional change. unless.. and only unless, the full bodied proposal written as it will be voted on with absolutely no changes, is Published on the Forums and commented on by all RA members and plenty of citizens for an RA meeting cycle ( RA meeting to RA meeting).

Cleo
User avatar
Pip Torok
Sadly departed
Sadly departed
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:52 am

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Pip Torok »

Sudane Erato wrote:

I agree completely with Pat's position here. 5 RA members for 60 to 90 people is plenty. The much bigger problem is elections which, because there are not enough candidates to fill the seats, results in no election at all. That is not democracy. If we do not end up voting for our representatives, but simply take everyone who volunteers, we might as well end the experiment.

Sudane...............................

.
.

... and I agree with Sudane's agreement ...

Though with two caveats, one of which we should all be taking for granted.

First, and most obvious, is that each candidate should know that they have the time, energy, enthusiasm, and commitment to act as one of our Representatives for the whole of the six months' term.

Second, something I believe hasn't been pointed out before :

In my opinion, it is vital that each representative not only get along with the other four, but that they should each develop an innate trust that long acquaintance and some sympathy with another's point of view can bring. Common sense should tell us what the opposite can and does bring. One or more reps then push their own competing view and feels that any compromise is an unacceptable loss of face.

And there is a loss ... on the part of the electorate who had chosen them in good faith.

'Incompatibility, n.: In matrimony a similarity of tastes, particularly
the taste for domination.

-- Ambrose Bierce
(The Devil's Dictionary)'

Pip Torok

cleopatraxigalia
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 pm
Contact:

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by cleopatraxigalia »

Pip. I am trying to understand what you mean here.
The ra should be supporting and bringing forward the opinions of the electors and current citizens. That is the representative part of ra. Not the Consensus of the few citizens who speak loudest or have the longest history but to do their best to represent the citizens with the least power to have their voices heard as well.

Can u clarify what u mean I'm not sure I understood. Cleo

Cleo
cleopatraxigalia
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 pm
Contact:

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by cleopatraxigalia »

Pip. I am trying to understand what you mean here.
The ra should be supporting and bringing forward the opinions of the electors and current citizens. That is the representative part of ra. Not the Consensus of the few citizens who speak loudest or have the longest history but to do their best to represent the citizens with the least power to have their voices heard as well.

Can u clarify what u mean I'm not sure I understood.

Now as far as what SuDane said I agree also but the lack of people who can serve in the RA means that we have got 2 work harder to expand.with an Ra. Of 5 and a working SC a chancellor a PIO a guild and people to populate the land it's obvious that the need for growth in order to fill the slots without conflict of interest keeping checks and balances in place means Having the people to participate.is imperative Size does matter. So how do we grow. ?? The most obvious way with many advantages is to decrease the total number if square meters each avatar can hold. This Will allow us not only to increase citizen count but spread the risk of losing huge chunks of tier when one person leaves or is in arrears. The other way is to buy a new sim. I'd propose we do both

Cleo
User avatar
Pip Torok
Sadly departed
Sadly departed
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:52 am

Re: By-elections .. the best way to chose?

Post by Pip Torok »

cleopatraxigalia wrote:

Pip. I am trying to understand what you mean here.
The ra should be supporting and bringing forward the opinions of the electors and current citizens. That is the representative part of ra. Not the Consensus of the few citizens who speak loudest or have the longest history but to do their best to represent the citizens with the least power to have their voices heard as well.

Can u clarify what u mean I'm not sure I understood. Cleo

Try trying rather harder, CLEOPATRA. If you have a problem with mental laziness, only you can deal with it, no one else.

All citizens have equal power in a democracy, CLEOPATRA, and equal opportunity to voice their opinions here and in-world. And your job as a representative is to represent every citizen impartially. You're a lamentable failure at impartiality towards voters, as a glance at every "About Land (Access)" of yours so clearly shows.

"The louder he talked of his honour,
the faster we counted our spoons.

-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
(Conduct of Life, 'Worship')"

Pip Torok

cleopatraxigalia
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 pm
Contact:

Post by cleopatraxigalia »

Try trying rather harder, CLEOPATRA. If you have a problem with mental laziness, only you can deal with it, no one else.

All citizens have equal power in a democracy, CLEOPATRA, and equal opportunity to voice their opinions here and in-world. And your job as a representative is to represent every citizen impartially. You're a lamentable failure at impartiality towards voters, as a glance at every "About Land (Access)" of yours so clearly shows.

Pip

I am sorry I do not understand still what you meant earlier. forgive me.

I do represent the citizens of CDS to the best of my ability, the thing is, when some of the citizens want plan A and some want plan B, it is impossible with an aye or nay vote to represent them all at the same time. I will represent the ones who voted for me because they and I both thought plan B was the best for everyone.

I am perfectly capable and do put personal protection issues aside when I am doing my job as an elected official. I would appreciate if you bring up your issues with banning if you have them, at an RA meeting. You know exactly why you are banned from my personal property. It is not vindictive nor does it make me less capable of doing what is best for CDS. It is the only way I can feel protected from you and the other name on the "about land" tab on my properties. I have tried to discuss the issue with you many, many, many times but you refuse to speak to me. I am always willing to have a conversation about it again if you are willing. shrugs

Pip, I continue to pray for your well being and do wish you well. I appreciate very much the passion you have for CDS and how you go to such great lengths to make it the kind of place you wish it to be, you pay much tier to the community and stay informed about what is going on. I do hope you Pip will participate in the CDS ART Festival 2014 by doing some of your poetry readings. Everyone always seems to enjoy them.

Cleo
Post Reply

Return to “Legislative Discussion”