[9:06] Gwyneth Llewelyn is going to add a notice...
[9:07] Jon Seattle: Hi Bells 
[9:07] Bells Semyorka: Hi Jon
[9:07] Bells Semyorka: Hi Gwyn
[9:07] Jon Seattle: Gwyn is sending a notice out
[9:07] Bells Semyorka: kk
[9:07] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hi there, Bells, thanks so much for coming!
[9:07] Bells Semyorka: I will be afk for a bit
[9:09] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok, if that doesn't do the trick... nothing else will 
[9:09] Jon Seattle: True we will see.
[9:10] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Soro is approaching...
[9:10] Gwyneth Llewelyn: welcome, Soro!
[9:10] Jon Seattle: Hi Soro
[9:10] Soro Dagostino: hello
[9:10] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and hi there, Lincoln!
[9:11] Lincoln Beck: hi
[9:11] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ah, there you are, Lincoln!
[9:11] Lincoln Beck: welcome everyone
[9:12] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, I guess we have enough people to start...
[9:12] Jon Seattle: Hi Lincoln
[9:12] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I should remind you that all these Election Comission Meetings will be transcripted, so if you disagree with that policy, it's time to say so
[9:12] Jon Seattle: Sounds good.
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I hope so, lol
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: All right,
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: as per Jon's suggestion, we should begin this series of discussions by establishing the principles first.
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: It's just common sense I guess,
[9:13] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but
[9:14] Gwyneth Llewelyn: as we can see with the +current* system
[9:14] Gwyneth Llewelyn: sometimes common sense just fails!
[9:14] Gwyneth Llewelyn: As probably some of you don't know, or haven't noticed,
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: our *current* system has a major flaw (and possibly many minor ones too!)
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Basically, the majority of votes does NOT elect a majority of representatives.
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Now I feel that's really something we should attempt to change.
[9:15] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ... while still making sure that minorities get fair representation!
[9:16] Gwyneth Llewelyn: It's not just saying that a system is "better" than another... but if we can find out a system that at least allows this principle (majority of votes implies a majority of representatives), I'd say this comission would have failed in pursuing their goals
[9:16] Gwyneth Llewelyn: What do you think? What is more important for you?
[9:17] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (and my double negatives on the previous sentence are wrong, lol — if we *cannot* find a system...)
[9:17] Jon Seattle: Well, it seems to me that the starting point of any democratic system is one vote for one person. That any system that gives some individuals more influence has to have a good reason for it.
[9:18] Gwyneth Llewelyn: That's certainly another basic principle.
[9:19] Jon Seattle: I tend to look at it from a contratarian viewpoint -- why would someone join an organization if they are not going to have an equal say? Only if they get something from joining I suppose.
[9:19] Gwyneth Llewelyn *nods*
[9:19] Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes, good point
[9:19] Soro Dagostino: I disagree
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Sure, go ahead, Soro!
[9:20] Soro Dagostino: I like the bicameral house arrangement.
[9:20] Soro Dagostino: A voice of the people
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah, so each person would have two votes?
[9:20] Soro Dagostino: and a voice of the land.
[9:20] Gwyneth Llewelyn: oooh
[9:20] Jon Seattle: Soro, why is that inconsistant with political equality?
[9:21] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Wait... what would be "the voice of the land"?
[9:21] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The more land, the more votes?
[9:21] Soro Dagostino: It calls for territory as well as direct vote.
[9:21] Soro Dagostino: not more land . . .
[9:22] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Or "regional elections" eg. representatives from an administrative area (example: per sim) getting elected into one chamber, and universal suffrage on another chamber?
[9:22] Soro Dagostino: Use the US System, as opposed to the parlimentary system.
[9:22] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (hello Arria, welcome!9
[9:22] Soro Dagostino: That is my point Gwyn
[9:22] Arria Perreault: Hi all
[9:22] Gwyneth Llewelyn: "more government"
[9:23] Jon Seattle: Soro, it seems to me if you allocate representation based on population, such a system (if good or bad I don't know) is consistant with political equality. As bte the SCOTUS has held.
[9:23] Jon Seattle: *btw
[9:23] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'm still a bit confused, Soro...
[9:23] Soro Dagostino: SCOTUS has not banned the senate.
[9:24] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So you propose to split up the community in several administrative regions, is that your idea?
[9:24] Jon Seattle: Soro, you are making my point. SCOTUS is not against poltical equality.
[9:24] Soro Dagostino: Your current system insists that one "chose a party."
[9:24] Soro Dagostino: Some may not be interested in that.
[9:24] Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes, it's a faction.based system,
[9:24] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but you know why?
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Imagine you elect a representative.
[9:25] Soro Dagostino: I do not have the history for CDS
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: directly, without factions.
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: After 2 weeks, that representative leaves SL (happens all the time).
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: What happens next?
[9:25] Soro Dagostino: A by election.
[9:25] Soro Dagostino: Or an appointment.
[9:25] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So we'll have by-elections, oh, 3-4 times per term.
[9:25] Arria Perreault: Justice is travelling
[9:26] Soro Dagostino: Could.
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Appointment?... by whom? And why should we have a non-elected representative in a chamber?
[9:26] Soro Dagostino: To fill the body.
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So... statistically (looking at past terms),
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: we'd have by the end of each term, on average,
[9:26] Soro Dagostino: Or, if you chose, have the body elect the substitute.
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: a majority of appointed representatives
[9:26] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and a minority of elected ones.
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Actually, that might be a very good political strategy 
[9:27] Soro Dagostino: You might have a few more stay . . .
[9:27] Arria Perreault: I have to go. Good work
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ie. making sure that everybody quits after a few weeks and just appoint the people you'd LIKE to have on the RA.
[9:27] Jon Seattle: Bye Arria
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: See you, Arria!
[9:27] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'm just talking statistically, Soro
[9:27] Bells Semyorka: bye Arria
[9:27] Soro Dagostino: I understand . . .
[9:28] Gwyneth Llewelyn: And like anything else... "past behaviour is not a guarantee of future behaviour", as the economists say.
[9:28] Soro Dagostino: I am talking what I would like to see.
[9:28] Jon Seattle: But Soro, you can vote without joining a faction.
[9:28] Gwyneth Llewelyn: So we MIGHT have a lot of people NOT dropping out of SL/RA/CDS in the next few years, and the argument would be moot.
[9:29] Soro Dagostino: One can vote.
[9:29] Soro Dagostino: but not run
[9:29] Gwyneth Llewelyn: There were some mixed proposals a few years back, mostly one by Moon,
[9:29] Gwyneth Llewelyn: where there would be a mixed RA, some people elected from factions, some independently
[9:29] Gwyneth Llewelyn: You can always run, Soro, just create a faction
[9:30] Soro Dagostino: Run?
[9:30] Soro Dagostino: Away!
[9:30] Gwyneth Llewelyn: LOL
[9:30] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Perhaps this is a good reason to explain the basic assumptions of the CDS...
[9:30] Gwyneth Llewelyn: They are not many, but... some have been crucial in defining our organisation.
[9:31] Soro Dagostino: I'd like to stay . . . but RL calls.
[9:31] Gwyneth Llewelyn: 1) It's a constitutional democracy, where there exists a social pact between "government" (basically: sim managers) and "citizens" (basically: land owners)
[9:31] Soro Dagostino: Gwyn, I would like to view the issue when I can.
[9:31] Gwyneth Llewelyn: 2) This is SL. Founders leave. People leave all the time. Institutions remain.
[9:32] Soro Dagostino: But, canot now.
[9:32] Gwyneth Llewelyn: 3) Rotativity in SL is MUCH higher than in RL (thus: short terms)
[9:32] Gwyneth Llewelyn: All right, Soro!
[9:32] Soro Dagostino: I'll come look at the transcript.
[9:32] Gwyneth Llewelyn: This will be published on the forums any way
[9:32] Jon Seattle: See you Soro
[9:32] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and feel free to discuss there!
[9:32] You decline Wisdom & Enlightenment Center, Pandara (160, 80, 28) from A group member named Hermes Kondor.
[9:32] Soro Dagostino: ciao all.
[9:32] Gwyneth Llewelyn: However, you see how fundamental this is:
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: we need, as basic principles
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: address *reality*
[9:33] Bells Semyorka: be Soro
[9:33] Gwyneth Llewelyn: We can obviously ask: have the fundamentals changed?
[9:34] Gwyneth Llewelyn: e.g. do people leave SL less?
[9:34] Jon Seattle: Hi FE
[9:34] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (or their appointed/elected roles?)
[9:34] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hiya Fem, welcome
[9:34] Feminist Expedition: hello all )
[9:34] Feminist Expedition: rezzing
[9:34] Gwyneth Llewelyn sees a lot of unanswered questions
[9:34] Feminist Expedition: thx for note, bells
[9:35] Bells Semyorka smiles, no problem hum
[9:35] Gwyneth Llewelyn: any comments?
[9:35] Gwyneth Llewelyn: It's a pity that Soro did not manage to stay...
[9:36] Gwyneth Llewelyn: the "faction" concept came actually as an experiment to see if we could elect "ideas" (ie. platforms, projects, manifestos) instead of "people", since people may leave, but a faction's project remains so long as members of that faction can sit on the RA.
[9:37] Jon Seattle: I have an intresting one -- in my experience change can be promoted or not by an organization. To be sure there are advantages and disadvantages on each side of that.
[9:37] Gwyneth Llewelyn: We could obviously have a different model with different organisations...
[9:37] Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes, Jon, I agree with you!
[9:37] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Also, I think that there should be a balance between both,
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn: in fact, with our model of "Chancellor" (Executive) and faction-based RA, we tend a bit to balance out the faction vs. individual question.
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (alas, discussing the Chancellor will be on another day!)
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn: We're still on the basic principles
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and I guess we're already disagreeing on some hehe
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well, Soro did — the rest of you are soooooo silent!
[9:38] Gwyneth Llewelyn *giggles*
[9:39] Jon Seattle: Here is my wish list: political equality, accessability, transparency.
[9:39] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes!
[9:39] Feminist Expedition is listening...
[9:39] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I would say these are the minimum issues
[9:40] Feminist Expedition: excuse me for my ignorance... but is there any agenda for today, or a note?
[9:40] Feminist Expedition: or i can just listen
[9:40] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'd also like to have something that reflects a *realistic* system (one that takes into account how people relate to the CDS; how SL influences what we can do and cannot do), and not an *idealistic* one (ie. a good idea with strong support but that is unfeasible, either because SL/CDS are different or the people in it relate to their citizenship differently)
[9:40] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah Fem
[9:41] Feminist Expedition: so... viability is important critera... given constraints of linden law
[9:41] Jon Seattle: Okay, so as a working list I propose: political equality, accessability, transparency, and realism. Anyone want to change or add an item?
[9:41] Gwyneth Llewelyn: The agenda is just one point, Fem: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2078
[9:41] Feminist Expedition: thx gwyneth
[9:42] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'm assuming, Jon, that concepts like "fairness" would be split between equality and accessibility?
[9:42] Jon Seattle: (I take viability to be part of realism, or is it more?)
[9:42] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, that's it!
[9:42] Jon Seattle: yes
[9:42] Gwyneth Llewelyn: You can use the word "viability" instead if you wish
[9:42] Gwyneth Llewelyn: it might underline the idea that the system should be possible to implement in SL
[9:43] Feminist Expedition: agree jon, just noting that "realism" is tricky concept in virtual world... as an aside
[9:43] Gwyneth Llewelyn: It has some consequences, for instance: we can spell out things like: "NO ALTS CAN VOTE" but how is that actually implemented? Do we have the resources to do so?... etc
[9:43] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok, let's cross realism out
[9:43] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and put viability instead!
[9:43] Jon Seattle: Sure
[9:43] Feminist Expedition: yes, my overall question today would be implementation or procedures...
[9:44] Feminist Expedition: but maybe i'm ahead of myself, sorry
[9:44] Gwyneth Llewelyn: All right, if we all agree with Jon's basic principles, Fem, the point is — we'd be recommending the RA those procedures
[9:44] Jon Seattle: FE, it is useful to have agreed on principles with wich to evaluate procedures.
[9:44] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, much better put, Jon
[9:44] Feminist Expedition: sure, thx
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: "accountability" would be under "transparency", right?
[9:45] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ie. the ability for each and any citizen being able, somehow, to make sure that the system works as intended?
[9:45] Jon Seattle: yes, that seems right.
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Well...
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'd like to suggest some obvious things like "democracy" on the principles
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I know, I know
[9:46] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but this might be part of a preamble in the COnstitution,
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: and it would be important to have it say: "The CDS follows the political principles of democracy, political equality, accessibility, transparency, and viability"
[9:47] Jon Seattle: How is democracy different from our list so far?
[9:47] Feminist Expedition: seems we are stating overall principles... and some criteria for the principles...
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah... well, imagine a model where organisations appoint individuals for government
[9:47] Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes, Fem, that's it
[9:47] Feminist Expedition: so democracy is met by the criteria of transparency, equalisty, etc
[9:48] Feminist Expedition: sorry, typoese...sigh
[9:48] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Democracy is also making sure that people vote for government
[9:48] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (accesibility will include that any citizen can be elected, of course)
[9:48] Feminist Expedition: accessibilty as criteria, gyyn...
[9:48] Feminist Expedition: arrgh typoese
[9:48] Jon Seattle: Well, poltical equality would only be met by such a system Gwyn I think.
[9:48] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Not really!... a system does not require to be democratic, but can still be accessible
[9:48] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Mmmh
[9:49] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'm afraid that RL systems don't have many examples where you DO have political equality AND accessibility,
[9:49] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but they're not democracies
[9:49] Jon Seattle: yes I would be really surprised if there were
[9:50] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Hmm ok
[9:50] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'm fine with the list excluding the word 'democracy' if it's the view of this comission,
[9:50] Gwyneth Llewelyn: that only a democracy can adhere to these principles and no other form of Government
[9:50] Gwyneth Llewelyn: (which might be the case!)
[9:51] Feminist Expedition: i thought the founding principle of cds is democratic participation?
[9:51] Jon Seattle: The only reason I am eyeing it with suspiciton (and I think it is the right name for the whole project!) is that unless you define it further its hard to use to evaluate procedures.
[9:51] Feminist Expedition: hmmm
[9:51] Jon Seattle: And our list to this point comes pretty close to breaking democracy down into the necessary ingreedients.
[9:52] Feminist Expedition: seems to me we start with: founded on principle of democratic self-governance...
[9:52] Feminist Expedition: following the principles of (etc)
[9:52] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Yes, that's how it starts
[9:52] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ok Fem
[9:52] Gwyneth Llewelyn: with that I'm totally in agreement
[9:52] Jon Seattle: sure
[9:53] Gwyneth Llewelyn: "The CDS is founded on principle of democratic self-governance, following the principles of political equality, accessibility, transparency, and viability."
[9:53] Jon Seattle: sounds good
[9:53] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Do you think we can vote on that as a recommendation from this Commission?
[9:53] Feminist Expedition: yes... and accountability?
[9:53] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Ah, Jon understands "accountability" as being under transparency.
[9:54] Jon Seattle: we can add it if wanted
[9:54] Feminist Expedition: i think it's important to add... as it's a really loss in virtual space...
[9:54] Feminist Expedition: personally
[9:54] Gwyneth Llewelyn: in the sense that all political participation has to produce clear information on what it's doing, and any citizen can follow what is being discussed/decided
[9:54] Jon Seattle: Lets add it then. I won't hurt the list to say it.
[9:55] Feminist Expedition: don't hurt the list jon
[9:55] Jon Seattle: lol
[9:55] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Unless, Fem, you also think that accountability will mean that politicians are to be responsible for the mistakes they make... thus, they're "accountable" for what they decide
[9:55] Feminist Expedition: well...gosh... that was a simple meeting...
[9:55] Gwyneth Llewelyn: In tha case, I'd add that to the list!
[9:55] Feminist Expedition: ah, gwyneth... that is dependent on procedures...
[9:55] Gwyneth Llewelyn: And not principles?
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: well, breaking the principles... is a matter of law and consequence
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: whatever that is in cds
[9:56] Gwyneth Llewelyn: aaah I see!
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: for example... right now,
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: do we have transparency,
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: if we have 2 constitutions?
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: i think... we aren't there yet...
[9:56] Feminist Expedition: but i still think the principle is valid for us
[9:56] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Sadly not as a principle in the CDS, although some factions are strongly in favour of it
[9:57] Gwyneth Llewelyn: ("it" being transparency, of course!9
[9:57] Jon Seattle: Yes, FE, Gwyn often complains about the two consititions situation.
[9:57] Gwyneth Llewelyn: hehe
[9:57] Feminist Expedition: well, there is work to do
[9:57] Feminist Expedition: yes, pet peeve for me too,
[9:57] Gwyneth Llewelyn: actually it's a bit better now, Publius is working on it again
[9:57] Feminist Expedition: as ignorant newbie
[9:57] Feminist Expedition: yay
[9:57] Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes, at least out of three constitutions we managed to eliminate an outdated one hehe
[9:58] Feminist Expedition: yay
[9:58] Gwyneth Llewelyn: But we digress, and our hour is over
[9:58] Gwyneth Llewelyn: only 4 of us remain, so
[9:58] Feminist Expedition: well... very nice to be included, thx
[9:58] Gwyneth Llewelyn: should we add accountability to the list of principles then?
[9:58] Feminist Expedition votes aye
[9:58] Bells Semyorka votes Aye
[9:58] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I agree that it doesn't hurt, so I'll vote "aye" too
[9:58] Jon Seattle: Sure, I am fine with it.
[9:58] Feminist Expedition: do we have more work; are we missing anything?
[9:59] Feminist Expedition: or have we completed this task?
[9:59] Gwyneth Llewelyn: I'd say, we could have discussed it for another 500 hours lol
[9:59] Feminist Expedition: lol
[10:00] Gwyneth Llewelyn: but we'll at least send one recommendation to the RA today: that we incorporate the following in the Constitution: "The CDS is founded on principle of democratic self-governance, following the principles of political equality, accessibility, transparency, accountability, and viability."
[10:00] Feminist Expedition: *the ... *principles
[10:00] Gwyneth Llewelyn: Perhaps expanding next on each of the five points, or delegate it to another text, or to the Preamble, or something like that
[10:01] Jon Seattle: Well, now we have this tool, the next step is to use these to examine our system and see how it falls down. We will remember, I hope, that we are an electoral commission, and not a comprehensive CDS re-write.
