No Roomates?

[Moonrise Azalee]

I was just wondering if someone could explain this thing to me. My understanding is that if one purchases a parcel/home in the CDS, their partner can not move in with them, or roomate whatever, unless they pay an additional 250L/month.
If this is correct, why?

Now, don't get me wrong, I know I come off as complaining alot, but I really feel like I didn't know what I was getting into when 'buying' in the CDS.

I bought a parcel of land, then found out that not only was this parcel going to cost me 7500 to buy for 468 prims and 1024 sqm, but that also, right away, I had to come up with the first month's tier (which was kind of embarassing because I didn't have it, I had to get my husband to let me use his paypal account because I didnt realize I would have to pay all that up front.. my stupidity, I realize), but then, I found out that my roomate that lives in all my places with me to help me pay tier, couldn't just move in with me. I expected maybe his name would have to go on a list, or an agreement, like in a Lease or Strata, but my understanding was that regardless, he had to pay his own 250L above and beyond what the actual tier was.

So, I'm here, I'm happy, but I am without a roomate and I feel like that sort of rule is kind of strict especially when these are supposed to be land Sales and not rentals. If I own my property, and am keeping my build within the theme, why on earth can I not have a roomate? If I am wrong, then I apologize. There was alot of information to take in those first few days, but if I am correct, then to me, it feels as though these purchases are way more like simple 'land use rental' and not actual ownership, if that makes sense, and I think that also should be taken into consideration when sticking our Sale Sign on the property as far as price goes.

[Beathan]

I personally have always thought that this is a silly rule. I think that the better rule is to have a minimum land ownership amount required for citizenship and then have any given parcel potentially support the citizenship of multiple avatars based on the minimum percentage subject to the ordinary rules about payment of tier. This would not seem to harm the CDS at all (tier would still be paid, perhaps more reliably paid); the citizen body could expand (which is a good thing; generous citizens could support the citizenship of worthy avatars who would be valuable additions to the CDS community but who cannot otherwise afford to join; and it would allow the CDS to provide some formal recognition to real human relationships such as marriage.

The concern is always that the voter roles could be stuffed with alts. I am not sure how to deal with the "thousand friends and alts" problem, but that problem is certainly not unique to more this proposal.

[Rosie Gray]

Moonrise I'm glad you brought this up again - I think there is a misunderstanding here. You can have your roommate move in and he/she does not have to pay anything. The only reason they would have to pay something is if they wanted to have the right to vote. If that person doesn't care if they have citizenship rights - the right to vote or run for office - then it doesn't matter at all. Your friend can move in. Sorry I saw you mention this awhile ago and meant to clarify it.

[Rosie Gray]

One more thing - your friend can join the CDS group as a "Friend of the CDS", and still get the announcements, and be a part of this forum.

[Sudane Erato]

Let me expand on Rosie's comments. She's described the options which occur *IF* the "roommate" is not concerned to be a voting citizen. But what if the "roommate" DOES wish to be a voting citizen?

My understanding of the current law (and please correct me if I'm wrong), is that anyone may form a group for the purpose of multiple citizens having joint ownership of land, which is exactly the same thing that you request here. At one time, it was law that each citizen member of the group had to be a separate landowner first, before joining the group, but I'm not sure if that part of the rule is still in effect. But the key detail is that each member of the group who wished to be a voting citizen *needed to contribute part of the tier*. That's the important point. You can have all the roommates you want, but any roommate who wishes to be a voting member of the community must contribute part of the tier of the land they occupy.

Originally, the RA set the minimum contribution at L$100/month, and that's what it is at this time. By more recent law, that is set to rise in December to $250/month.

Now, ideally, the group (composed of 2 or more roommates) would own more than one parcel, and each member would pay for one. The problem arises when the group owns only one. In theory, the roommates should split the tier of the parcel some way, with each paying at least L$100. But with our current tier payment system, I have no way to set that up. So, instead, on the assumption that L$100 is really a tiny sum (US$0.40), I've simply set up a virtual parcel for the roommate costing L$100/month and assigned the full tier of the actual parcel to the other person.

This system does have the benefit of continuing the structure of one payment box per citizen. We know exactly who is citizen and who is not, and all are required to pay their share.

If we go over to the Hippo system, the split tier issue will no longer be a problem. Any owner can designate a partner to help pay the tier. What we will not know, however, is if they do. So using the Hippo system will make the L$250/month minimum quite unenforceable, since either roommate can pay in tier, or not pay in tier, for any period of time they wish. I suspect that in that case we will have to modify the law to allow voting citizenship to every landowner and every designated partner, without regard to amount of contribution. I do think (again, not totally sure) that any given parcel can have only one owner and one partner.

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

[Tor Karlsvalt]

Thanks Sudane for the info you provided. Just a few things.

The tier for group members is $250.00 per month. However, citizens at the time the law was amended, had the $100.00 rate grandfathered through the end of the current term. Even their tier will increase to $250.00 per months beginning December.

It is also my understanding that the current law removed the requirement that group members have had owned land in their own name prior retaining citizenship via a group membership.

I do feel that the $250.00 rate is very little. I should add that citizenship does allow access to all the resources of CDS. For instance public buildings like the, Kirche, amphitheater, Roman baths and Schloss, could be used by any citizen.

All that said, anyone could be a group member on land and receive access rights on parcels owned by the group. The amount of access to group owned land is really under the authority of the parcel owner. The issue here is really only full citizenship in CDS.

For more information, refer to the law, CDSL 13-10. http://portal.slcds.info/index.php?id=425

[Aliasi Stonebender]

But as for non-voting roommates - you just want to have your friend or partner be able to set home and set the movie stream - there's nothing against 'em. Better not be, considering how many I've had over time.