|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 12, 2013 19:50:12 GMT -6
Magniloqueu: Thank you! I will check and make sure those are all errors (don't want to over-correct!) but that's awesome, a lot of stuff that definitely needs fixing.
Dien: You're right, it really should be wikified! The only reason I guess I didn't is that I want all legislators to be able to immediately see it, but I can still keep up an update log on this thread. Great idea!
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 12, 2013 19:53:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 9:32:35 GMT -6
I've started wikifying the text - already finished A. To be honest, it looks way better on the wiki than it does in Bboard code.
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Dec 14, 2013 9:42:15 GMT -6
I've started wikifying the text - already finished A. To be honest, it looks way better on the wiki than it does in Bboard code. Says the TalossaWiki administrator who is not at all biased. It does look better, though, I agree.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 9:44:50 GMT -6
It's the indenting and the headings - they're way easier to do and look prettier on a system that's designed for them!
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 10:28:42 GMT -6
All wikified! Now, to look at those corrections from the other day.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 10:37:38 GMT -6
I changed Seneschal and Cosa to their current spelling, but I am unwilling to make a ton of name changes. Someone with more expertise than I will have to hopper a language modernization bill later.
I also didn't change the confusing "and" in D.10, even though I agree it's weirdly phrased. Any change I make would be too drastic for the purposes of this bill. Someone will have to change it with a later bill.
But thanks so much! That was really helpful!
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 10:54:20 GMT -6
Added public buildings to culture. Added council of governors stuff to government, so it can resume being ignored. Added DSoS stuff to household.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 10:58:38 GMT -6
Added prospectives privacy to immigration. Added stupid sanctuary bill to crime.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Dec 14, 2013 14:26:23 GMT -6
"Stupid sanctuary bill"? What exactly is that? I'll have to have a look at it. I am really not contributive these days, I was behind my school work a bit. Maybe, I'll be a bit more helpful soon... My sincere apologies!
Sure, Alex. Maybe it was not clear, but all my proposals were made with an underlying question and have only shown what I perceived to be weirdly composed or wrong. I will get to drafting a bill to clear up language/unclear wordings and, if I should be so lucky as to hold seats, propose it in the Hopper (or have fellow MCs, with all due respect to others, from the MRPT propose it).
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 14:29:40 GMT -6
Added some explanation please to justice. Making a list of things still to do, to make it easier to plan.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 14:31:37 GMT -6
The sanctuary thing is a very old bill that recognizes the "right of sanctuary" in churches.
I'd wait to draft a corrections bill until we're done with this one, if I were you, since there will probably be numerous instances of unclear language that merit correction. But when you do start, I'd love to help.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 14:49:29 GMT -6
Ok, while doing this, I have come across numerous laws that are still in force technically, but have been later contradicted or are just completely irrelevant. I am going to just add an omnibus repeal of all of these to the code - clean everything up all at once.
I have also come across some other laws that may also be in this category, but that I'm not sure.
Because this code cannot relitigate every argument from thirty years, I'm going to follow a procedure as to whether or not we repeal these in the bill: if anyone objects, then we keep it. Even if it's crazy or stupid or contradictory. Then we can pass individual bills and clip away those we do decide to eliminate. So if you object to any of these being repealed, then just say so. Bear in mind that MANY of them are being repealed because they're redundant now (many predate the OrgLaw), and so they're being repealed for neatness' and sanity's sake, not because we disagree with their sentiment.
To be repealed (thus far): 12RC15, 13RC7, 13RC32, 13RC33, 14RC10, 14RC11, 14RC40, 15RC11, 17RC23, 17RC40, 19RC10, 22RZ15, 23RZ5 Unsure of whether to repeal: 15RC19 15RC18 18RC21 23RZ2
Let me know if you insist on saving any of these.
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Dec 14, 2013 15:04:52 GMT -6
I'm good with repeal of 15RC19 and 23RZ2. I like 15RC18, although I think it could be crafted better, and I also like 18RC21, again, if it could be crafted better.
Is there any way you could incorporate the goals of 15RC18 and 18RC21 into the Code?
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Dec 14, 2013 15:09:10 GMT -6
Per your request, we will retain 15RC18 and 18RC21.
|
|