AMENDMENT (as previously proposed) - Page 2

Tamerlin · January 30, 2003, 12:41

Quote:

Originally posted by child of Thor
Excuse my ignorance Tamerlin, but what is a Quorum exactly and just what level of height is it set to at present...

A quorum is the minimum number of members needed for a meeting (example : in a company's executive board of directors) to be held or the minimum of votes needed for a law or a decision to be passed. In the CtP2 DG this quorum is a percentage of the total number of members of the DG (tell me if I am wrong) which is currently asking for a minimum of 15 or so votes. This quorum is actually too high in the CtP2 DG and is threatening to bog down the game as it is difficult to enact a law or approve a decision.

Quote:

...or to put it another way if 15:1 for the motion isn't enough to get it through then i vote for dictatorship ovr democracy!!!

The problem was (I use the past tense because the minimum number of votes has been registered) actually to reach the quorum which will be reduced thanks to the amendment.

child of Thor · January 30, 2003, 15:11

Ok thanks

I didn't know we had one

And i agree that maybe 15 is too much for this DG. I had no time really over the last 2 weeks to spend alot of time here.....it can happen to anyone.Maybe we should go down to 10 to allow for a little drift?

Tamerlin · January 30, 2003, 19:05

Quote:

Originally posted by child of Thor
And i agree that maybe 15 is too much for this DG. I had no time really over the last 2 weeks to spend alot of time here.....it can happen to anyone.Maybe we should go down to 10 to allow for a little drift?

MrBaggins has already computed the new Quorum which should be around 8 if we consider the current number of members.

Gilgamensch · January 31, 2003, 04:42

This Amendment has been passed as the current constitution is saying that 1/3 of the members need to vote.

With 44 (members) / 3 makes 15 votes complete needed. As we have 16 votes (time I am writing), this amendment has been passed.

In the future the voting will be:

Do pass 'whatever', 1/6th of the members (44/6=7.333 makes 8) need to vote in favour of the 'whatever', if this number is not reached the 'whatever' has failed.

The connie will be updated once we reached the closing time of this poll.

Tamerlin · January 31, 2003, 07:46

These are excellent news, is the amendment immediately effective at the closing of the poll or do we have to wait until it is published?

mapfi · January 31, 2003, 07:51

Immediately, of course.

Gilgamensch · January 31, 2003, 08:10

Mapfi,

we (the court) just have to keep in mind to update the thread.....

mapfi · January 31, 2003, 08:12

It's either Pedrunn or Locutus who will have to do it - but I'll look after it.

Tamerlin · January 31, 2003, 08:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Gilgamensch
The connie will be updated once we reached the closing time of this poll.

Wait, we can not apply this amendment while the citizens can still vote for or against it.

We must wait for the end of the poll.

Gilgamensch · January 31, 2003, 08:21

Tamerlin,

The connie will be update once we reached the closing time of the poll..........

this will be at

Quote:

1st of February at about 15:30 GMT.

before this time the old connie is still the actual one.

Martin Gühmann · January 31, 2003, 11:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Tamerlin
Wait, we can not apply this amendment while the citizens can still vote for or against it.

We must wait for the end of the poll.

Yes this is one rhule of a poll don't close it if we have enough votes. Close it when we reach the time out that was previously set. Otherwise the poll would be biased. So that makes 17.

-Martin

Gilgamensch · January 31, 2003, 11:34

Looks like that for this one, it wouldn't be an issue, but in case it would be a tie call, any single vote might count.

By now 18 voters (high......

) and 17 Yes. It seems to be a quite clear one..........

Martin Gühmann · January 31, 2003, 11:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Gilgamensch
Looks like that for this one, it wouldn't be an issue, but in case it would be a tie call, any single vote might count.

Actual not, because only 18 of 44 citiziens voted, so there are still 26 who could suddenly decide that the amendment should be rejected. Well that is not very likely but it possible and it is the right of ech citizien vote until the initial set time limit is expired. You can't change the rhules afterwards.

-Martin

J Bytheway · February 2, 2003, 08:09

So, any chance of this amendment being enacted?

Tamerlin · February 2, 2003, 08:35

Without a massive (though very unlikely) vote of the remaining DG members against this amendment, this revision will be approved as soon as the end date of the poll is reached.

J Bytheway · February 2, 2003, 09:12

But that was yesterday, that's what I'm talking about...

Zaphod Beeblebrox · February 2, 2003, 09:16

in that case the amendment is already enacted

mapfi · February 2, 2003, 13:30

As has been said - this amendment is now effective - the constitution thread will be update soon...