Maintaining the credibility of the RA

[Patroklus Murakami]

[quote="Beathan":1ix7czm1]I understand that Patroklus is, ironically, going to be using the issue of the lack of decorum in RA procedure, a problem for which he is singularly responsible, as an election point against us. [/quote:1ix7czm1] This quote is from a thread in the Simplicity Party forums which I cannot respond to there. I'm quoting it here to invite Beathan to explain what he means by this. I don't know what 'lack of decorum' would mean in terms of RA procedure or why I would be singularly responsible for its lack.

I do think there is an issue regarding RA [b:1ix7czm1][i:1ix7czm1]credibility[/i:1ix7czm1][/b:1ix7czm1] in the discussion about the Judiciary Act. The RA passed the Judiciary Act three times, unanimously, after a debate that played out on these forums and inworld over several months. To repeal it (as Beathan wants) or gut it (as Justice wants) would make the RA look ridiculous in my opinion. It's one thing to reexamine a decision when it has had time to bed in and we can observe how a system operates in practice, it is quite another to reverse a decision before that decision has even been implemented. For that reason the RA was quite right, at a recent meeting, to put down a marker to Ash about progress on recruiting more judges. But it would be harmful to our virtual democracy if the impression were to be given that our legislature, after full consideration of all the issues involved in a complex undertaking, could reverse its decision in a heartbeat because a small number of people (and yes, you are a small number of people) decide to raise hell on the forums.

[Beathan]

Pat --

I was simply referring to your statement at the last CDSF meeting that the inclusion of the Simplicity Party in government would make the rancor you observed in previous governmental deliberation (I assume RA deliberation) look like a cakewalk -- and that you proposed to make this an election point.

If I misunderstood you, as I apparently misunderstood what was going on behind the whitelist shield around the house in NF, I apologize. However, I will wait to see the CSDF's campaign tactics before making final judgment.

Beathan

[Patroklus Murakami]

Aah, now I understand you.

My point was, that in trying to enact your 'Simplicity' agenda you would need to make one or more Constitutional Amendments. In the highly likely result that your new party does not win 4 out of 5 seats on the RA (which is what you would need to enact such a programme) this would mean that as I said: [quote="Patroklus Murakami":2d4lka8l]but to enact 'simplicity' would mean constitutional wrangling that woudl make the last term look like a walk in the park![/quote:2d4lka8l]I'm not sure what that has to do with lack of decorum in the RA or why you would think that I am primarily responsible for it.

I would be interested to hear your views though on whether, if the RA were to reverse its decision to unanimously pass the Judiciary Act three times, it would be undermining its credibility. Furthermore, whether you expect that any citizen would be prepared to invest time and effort in enacting a decision of the RA given that it could, capriciously and in craven response to a vocal minority, turn on a dime and reverse its position in a matter of weeks.

[Aliasi Stonebender]

[quote="Patroklus Murakami":m1n7vllw]
I would be interested to hear your views though on whether, if the RA were to reverse its decision to unanimously pass the Judiciary Act three times, it would be undermining its credibility. Furthermore, whether you expect that any citizen would be prepared to invest time and effort in enacting a decision of the RA given that it could, capriciously and in craven response to a vocal minority, turn on a dime and reverse its position in a matter of weeks.[/quote:m1n7vllw]

The RA unanimously passes a lot of things the individual members aren't fully confident in as it tends to reach decisions through consensus, amending what is put forth. I would also add the apparent reason it passed three times was because the SC threatened impeachment if the RA abandoned it.

I regret, at this time, that I did not make you pass it a fourth.