Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 1, 2015 23:04:39 GMT -6
I also want to ensure that we put time constraints on voting matters... let's say, seven days? That's only half as long as the national election, and we're drawing from a smaller population. I say 14 days. Unless you meant for matters within the assembly, in which case a week is fine
|
|
|
Post by M.T. Patritz da Biondeu on Jul 1, 2015 23:27:08 GMT -6
Matters within the Assembly. Asking for provincial legislators to check in once a week shouldn't be too difficult to ask.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 2, 2015 5:47:15 GMT -6
Wow, abandoning elected representation in the province?
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 2, 2015 6:28:02 GMT -6
Wow, abandoning elected representation in the province? Not quite. Voting for a specific candidate (which may happen to be yourself) is probably motivated at least partially by their political party. What's more, we could have an option where a voter could just vote for a party, and the proxy determined by the provincial party leader. Of course. We would have to make sure that proxies appointed by the voters are active enough to participate, perhaps that all prospective members must "check in" no later than a week after the election, or else lose the seat. The seat would then either go to the provincial party leader for reassignment, or the seat would be lost if the candidate was an independent
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 2, 2015 6:47:24 GMT -6
What would I do during this term, for instance? I'm the only active RUMPer in the province, yet another RUMPer has voted for the party to represent him locally.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 2, 2015 6:51:58 GMT -6
What would I do during this term, for instance? I'm the only active RUMPer in the province, yet another RUMPer has voted for the party to represent him locally. You would have two seats; 1st - You would have voted for yourself 2nd - You are the provincial party leader, so the party vote would be yours to delegate (to yourself)
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 2, 2015 9:24:20 GMT -6
Ah, I see what you're suggesting. So essentially do away with elections altogether. My worry is that this will affect our response rate, which is typically quite higher when it comes to Chancery-run elections than provincial ones (looking at our own historical record and that of other provinces). But that might not be a big issue.
|
|
|
Post by M.T. Patritz da Biondeu on Jul 2, 2015 9:27:44 GMT -6
In my idea, you would be voting for an individual instead of a party. You can either give your vote to yourself, or you can appoint someone your proxy. If you decide to become more active in a given session, you can revoke your proxy and resume your seat.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 2, 2015 17:06:30 GMT -6
In my idea, you would be voting for an individual instead of a party. You can either give your vote to yourself, or you can appoint someone your proxy. If you decide to become more active in a given session, you can revoke your proxy and resume your seat. The issue here is that a proxy may be appointed who cannot or does not want to be in the assembly Also, some voters may not know enough about individual people to vote for individuals Of course, proxies would still be an option for voters, as would voting for themselves
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 2, 2015 17:09:21 GMT -6
Ah, I see what you're suggesting. So essentially do away with elections altogether. My worry is that this will affect our response rate, which is typically quite higher when it comes to Chancery-run elections than provincial ones (looking at our own historical record and that of other provinces). But that might not be a big issue. I don't see how this is doing away with elections. This is not the Maricopa Cabana we are talking about here, because no proxies/parties can be chosen for the Cabana, but they could be under this system.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 8, 2015 8:30:22 GMT -6
Ok.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 11, 2015 13:32:21 GMT -6
While we're on the topic, why don't we just redo the election law for M-M? I don't understand why the 3 amendments are listed seperate from the original electoral law on the wiki page, where all our laws are stored.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 11, 2015 13:36:48 GMT -6
There's a list of all bills passed and a separate body of electoral law that is amended and kept up to date. But the new GSU or whoever can do it however they want.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 11, 2015 13:43:27 GMT -6
I would say to keep one comprehensive body of election law, which is amended without another bill being put on the wiki
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Jul 11, 2015 17:37:43 GMT -6
On second thought...
I know I'm not the GSU, but how about doing it so election bills go onto the main law page, but the election law tab remains a single, comprehensive body.
|
|