AMENDMENT: Quorum in Resolutions and Amendments

mapfi · April 16, 2003, 05:17

According to the discussion held here I'm proposing changes to the current constitution.

I have taken a quick look trough the posts and here's the at least-participating-in-some-discussion-memberlist, abbreviated (Gilg,Loc,HT,mapfi,huhahu,Frozzy,Dale,Pedrunn,Tame rlin,Zaphod,IW,Maq,Tur, DoT,coT,ískallin,Martin,Huang,Gamer Man,Solver). That makes 20. I kind of got convinced by Martin's arguement and therefore I'd prefer a absolut quorum. 7 yes votes sounds reasonable to me in this case.

I propose to change the following two paragraphs:

Quote:

Article IV:
3.
III. Resolutions
(e) If there are more votes in favour than against, and at least 1/6 of those citizens who do not abstain vote in favour, and the Court does not declare the poll invalid, then the resolution is considered passed. All Citizens must from that time on obey it.
IV. Ammendments
(e) If there are more votes in favour than against, and at least 1/6 of those citizens who do not abstain vote in favour, and the Court does not declare the poll invalid, then the Ammendent is considered passed. All Citizens must from that time on obey it.

to new:
Article IV,3.
III. Resolutions
(e) If there are more votes in favour than against, at least 7 votes in favour and the Court does not declare the poll invalid, then the resolution is considered passed. All Citizens must from that time on obey it.
IV. Ammendments
(e) If there are more votes in favour than against, at least 7 votes in favour and the Court does not declare the poll invalid, then the Ammendment is considered passed. All Citizens must from that time on obey it.

and also new:
Article III, 4. Rights and Responsibilities
(g) In case the number of active posters severly differs from 20 the court may change the quorum of 7 votes in favour for resolution and ammendment polls in a unanimous vote.

This poll will be open for 5 days till April 21st, somewhere at 9am GTM and unfortunately needs 10 votes in favor to pass - so please vote all!

edit: some typos

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 16, 2003, 05:51

well, i'd still prefer to kick those out who don't participate, but lets try if we reach the quorum.

oh, and btw, we don't need 10 votes, but 1/6 of the registered members, a number that may grow or drop

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 16, 2003, 05:54

just tested it, votes don't get lost if you quit the dg-group

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 16, 2003, 05:57

now i'm a citizen again, feels good

mapfi · April 16, 2003, 06:00

Quit spamming!

Quote:

Originally posted by Zaphod Beeblebrox
well, i'd still prefer to kick those out who don't participate, but lets try if we reach the quorum.

actually me too, but it doesn't look like Markos is likely to do such a thing soon and we need a solution now.

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 16, 2003, 06:05

i wasn't spamming, i was researching creative ways to reach the quorum

Tamerlin · April 16, 2003, 06:40

Dear citizens,

I have voted in favor of this amendment because any rule that can speed up or ease the game is welcomed but I don't like the article e.

As far as Amendments are concerned I understand the need for a qualified majority in favor of a yes as we are talking about the constitution of Lemuria, but as far as Resolutions are concerned a qualified majority in favor of a yes is IMO useless...

Martin Gühmann · April 16, 2003, 12:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Dear citizens,

I have voted in favor of this amendment because any rule that can speed up or ease the game is welcomed but I don't like the article e.

What e do you mean. The amendments or the resolutions. Of course we all prefer to restore the original quorum of 1/3 of the members, but that is an illusion. So on the one hand we have the court and on the other hand we can change it again if we like it. So hope this is now a stabil situation.

-Martin

Tamerlin · April 16, 2003, 18:52

The first e Martin...

I am simply writing that a qualified majority of yes is useless as far as Resolution polls are concerned.

Let's say the result of a poll is: 5 Yes and 2 No. I really don't see why the Resolution shall not be adopted because there are less than 7 Yes. The majority of the voters having expressed their will in favor of the Resolution it should be adopted.

Amendments are about changing the rules of the game and are thus far more important as they are affecting the whole game and the participation of the citizens to the game. A minimum of voters expressing their opinion in favor of the said Amendment is thus a good thing.

Am I more clear?

child of Thor · April 16, 2003, 19:50

i'm not very good at this constitution malarky(or spelling!), but i think having a set amount to pass a vote, rather than a percentage of members is a bit problamatic, as Tamerlin has highlighted. So i'm not sure on this one and will abstain for now.

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 16, 2003, 19:55

please don't abstain!
we have to get rid of that 1/6 of a large mass of folks who don't even read this before we get even more inactive "citizens". once that is done, we can begin to argue about details.

Gilgamensch · April 17, 2003, 04:09

I voted YES.

Espacially the part with the court I agree with.

Quote:

unanimous vote

This should make sure that it is in the best interrest of the game!

I must say, I never expected that people would try to 'harm' our nice DG. (OK, except those CIV3'ers..........

)

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 17, 2003, 04:16

i don't think anybody is trying to harm us, the people just don't care, like in rl-politics. unless you prove me wrong of course.

Gilgamensch · April 17, 2003, 04:50

I kind of seeing it as a harm to us:

They are kind of spoiling our interrest.....

In RL the situation is different, there we, the people, don't really have anything to say........it doesn't really matter how you vote, those politicians are anyway damned layers.......

But here in our DG, it isn't (I hope

)..........

And people subscribing, but not bothering about the DG, is a harm to us..........

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 17, 2003, 04:55

well, offtopic, but in rl its also harmful not to vote. gives more power to extremists like me

Devil of Truth · April 17, 2003, 08:00

I voted yes

Good call mapfi.

Adjusting the quorum to a fixed number as opposed to a percentage will, IMHO, be beneficial to our DG. Like boy-bands, we don’t really need inactive citizens to spoil our fun

.

mapfi · April 17, 2003, 08:22

One more yes-vote and we got rid of a slow-down-mechanism. I've got a few amendments up my sleeve already...

Pedrunn · April 17, 2003, 10:14

I voted 'yes'. But i still want to keep the 1/6 mechanism but only for the past 2 months posters. A fixed number do something i dont want! Remove the universality of out constitution. But the way it is written is a problem so i voted yes.
But in the future i will try to change that.

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 17, 2003, 10:27

could someone responsible please declare this poll as successfull before some other people who don't care but like the ctp2-dg button near their name appear

Martin Gühmann · April 17, 2003, 10:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Zaphod Beeblebrox
could someone responsible please declare this poll as successfull before some other people who don't care but like the ctp2-dg button near their name appear

Well that would be the job of the proposer of the amendmet - mapfi, but first he has to wait until the poll is closed, before that the amendment can't be considered as passed. Still another 11 people could vote against it. So again the amendment is passed once the this poll is closed and no one can vote against it. And I doubt that we will see 6 new people in the next few days.

-Martin

H Tower · April 17, 2003, 11:03

Quote:

Originally posted by mapfi
I have taken a quick look trough the posts and here's the at least-participating-in-some-discussion-memberlist, abbreviated (Gilg,Loc,HT,mapfi,huhahu,Frozzy,Dale,Pedrunn,Tamerlin,Zaphod, IW,Maq,Tur, DoT,coT,ískallin,Martin,Huang,Gamer Man,Solver). That makes 20.

I don't partcipate in game discussion threads since i don't own the game. but i do vote in the amendment polls and the like

child of Thor · April 19, 2003, 14:16

Opps! sorry ZB.
After my last post i forgot to actualy vote - so i did it now without reading what has been going on since. One question - who are these [evil] Civ3ers[BooHiss

] that are trying to ruin the DG? If the above proposal is just to stop these villains then i would of course vote yes.
I was also thinking of my situation, in that i'm not getting the time to visit as much as i would like too, but i do care about Lemuria and the DG and would like to participate when i can. So i don't want to vote myself out of being involved!
What has been decided on the numbers that vote for a proposal - will it be 7 total OR 7 infavour of, to pass it?

Martin Gühmann · April 19, 2003, 16:27

CoT you should read mapfi's initial post again, there he stated clearly that we need 7 posts in favour for anmendments and resolutions, as long as there are more Yes then No votes.

-Martin

child of Thor · April 19, 2003, 17:40

Thanks Martin,
Ok i see how it all works now

Only official yes/no Polls will be run like this and all that would be needed is 7 out of the current(15ish?) regular posters to vote in favour for it to be passed, rather than the 1/6 rule.
[If this isn't right - don't worry, i wont have time to notice the difference!]

mapfi · April 21, 2003, 11:13

Very good! This amendment passed - Pedrunn could you please adjust the constitution text? Thanks

Pedrunn · April 21, 2003, 12:52

The constitution is updated