Proposal: Electoral Roll Bill

[Ranma Tardis]

[quote="Claude Desmoulins":lsqqjp06] An interesting thought. I think the primary problem with such a model would be participation. In antic Athens, they had to drag a painted rope through the streets to get citizens to come to assemblies. In the CDS, we have no painted rope. As TOP pointed out, we have problem finding enough politically interested people to keep our representative institutions vibrant. How would you create the level of civic involvement necessary for direct democracy to work?[/quote:lsqqjp06]
I will point out that there is not a lot for an "interested" citizen to do. We have no direct say in the goverment. We are limited to what we can say in the RA meetings and the members can ingore what we say. The agenda is determined by the head of the RA and even if we introduce legistration most likely it will never be heard nevermind get voted on. Can write messages in the forum but it does not make the slightest difference.
So what is there for an "interested" citizen to do?

[Patroklus Murakami]

[quote="Ranma Tardis":8wlf5ovm]I will point out that there is not a lot for an "interested" citizen to do. We have no direct say in the goverment. We are limited to what we can say in the RA meetings and the members can ingore what we say. The agenda is determined by the head of the RA and even if we introduce legistration most likely it will never be heard nevermind get voted on. Can write messages in the forum but it does not make the slightest difference.
So what is there for an "interested" citizen to do?[/quote:8wlf5ovm]Here are some ways that "interested" CDS citizens can participate in our political system:

[list:8wlf5ovm]Propose legislation. It's a good idea to get one or more RA members on side but, having done that, you can propose new bills or constitutional amendments.

Attend and participate in RA meetings. You can attend (virtually) any meeting of the RA, speak on the agenda items and argue your corner. It is rare for meetings to go into closed session (and only under limited circumstances) or to restrict discussion to RA members first.

Work with a like-minded group of individuals to effect political change. This is how all the current parties represented in the RA came into being. None of the factions from the start of the 'Neualtenburg Project' still exist. The grassroots have organised to reform the political system and to bring in new ideas.

Vote. You get to choose your representatives every six months; much more frequently than in RL (though time does seem to pass quicker in SL I will grant you).[/list:u:8wlf5ovm]

Now none of this guarantees that you will be successful; that's the thing with democracy - you have to convince people of the validity of your point of view and the benefit of your propsals. Our democratic system isn't perfect (none of the RL ones are either) but it does the job reasonably effectively and I've yet to see a better model emerge in SL.

[Sleazy_Writer]

[quote="Sudane Erato":9e1ux1v7][quote="TOPGenosse":9e1ux1v7]Sudane, can I safely assume that you, right now, are upholding the Group Land Ownership Act literally and rigidly like it is written?[/quote:9e1ux1v7]Is this hearing? Might there not be better procedures for that?[/quote:9e1ux1v7] For a moment I thought that your refusal to answer a simple yes/no question about an important topic meant that you don't feel accountable to the ordinary citizen but only to your government bosses, and that you don't give a rat's ass about transparency. I thought that it meant, that you have contempt for the active citizen, who is trying to figure out what the current situation is, contempt being a politer way of giving the finger.

[quote="Sudane Erato":9e1ux1v7]Might we possibly convert this obsessive concern to exclude certain members of the community because of a technical non-compliance with a flawed clause in our body of law[/quote:9e1ux1v7]Also, for a moment I thought you were accusing me of trying to kick out or keep out members of the community, while in the same weekend I was having a welcoming chat with new citizens Justus Yiyuan and Gelf Yalin and showing them around a bit.

But the NL 5-9 discussion is looking very productive, so of course I must be mistaken in thinking the above. --TOP.

[Sudane Erato]

[quote="TOPGenosse":1pvyfbhn]Also, for a moment I thought you were accusing me of trying to kick out or keep out members of the community, while in the same weekend I was having a welcoming chat with new citizens Justus Yiyuan and Gelf Yalin and showing them around a bit. [/quote:1pvyfbhn] TOP, please. I have repeatedly and publically and emphatically said that I believe that every person who currently holds citizenship in the CDS does so for valid reasons and within the intent of the citizenship rules which we have laid down.

The only further place to take this particular line of discourse is in an appropriate setting, where the case of each individual admitted to citizenship over the last six months (or whatever) be discussed and analyzed as to their probable appropriate intent. In such a fashion, it would be entirely appropriate to analyze *my* judgment as well, and to question it thoroughly.

Until such a procedure is established, i will continue to pursue the process of land sale to new people which I have pursued in the past, with the slight twist that individuals joining as members of groups will be subject to my focussed consideration. As an "administrator", working within the "executive" branch of government, it is my job to administer the law as I best see fit.

I say again, ad nauseum.... Remove the foolish clause and develop a criteria of citizenship which is in keeping with the admirable goals of our community. In the interim, you can be *very* sure that I am not about to admit into land ownership numbers of people whose appearance seems only there to "pack a faction".

Sudane.....

[Sleazy_Writer]

[quote="Sudane Erato":2dektu8q]I am not about to admit into land ownership numbers of people whose appearance seems only there to "pack a faction".[/quote:2dektu8q]Thank you.

[quote="Sudane Erato":2dektu8q]individuals joining as members of groups will be subject to my [i:2dektu8q]focussed consideration[/i:2dektu8q][/quote:2dektu8q]So much for transparency. Good luck with the [i:2dektu8q]creative process.[/i:2dektu8q]

If anything, the quote above means that you're indeed letting people join a land owning group as citizens, right away, before a more convenient and 'safe' amended version of NL 5-9 is in place. What you seem to be doing is in conflict with the clause and therefore in conflict with the law. A very nice situation. Cheerio.

[size=75:2dektu8q](note: I don't want to keep active people out, it's great when people are active. I just don't like to see citizenship being given away like candy = in a wrong way. I think we should wait with 'group joiners' until the reformed 5-9 is in place.)[/size:2dektu8q]