View Topic

I posted that before seeing your edit.

However, you left the "on a more personal note" question unedited. What am I supposed to make of that? Because that question still implies I don't think there's a need for a legislature.

I posted that before seeing your edit.

However, you left the "on a more personal note" question unedited. What am I supposed to make of that? Because that question still implies I don't think there's a need for a legislature.

I guess I worded it badly, in that case I'll score it through as well

I was simply trying to see why you are sure we won't be passing laws very often and that the legal area will maintain its level of inactivity I wasn't trying to suggest anything, only asking how your thought process worked. I am so sorry for the confusion.

Edit: Rereading I see what it was: I actually I thought I had said "need for such legislation" but I actually said "need for legislation" not sure how that happened :-/ either me not paying attention while I write or my phone messing up.

Don't worry about it, I shouldn't have expected the worst either. I apologise. Seeing someone take something I've said out of context simply rubs me wrong in a way almost nothing else does, aside from maybe questioning my honour.

Anyway, with clarification on your question, I can now answer it.

The UH has passed nothing in months, apart from that repeal of the Citizenship in the NPO and NLO (RIP NLO) Act.

Many of the other laws discussed before that had to do with the UH's own procedure, and not much of meaning to anyone outside the UH, which would kinda support Reon's claim that the UH doesn't do much but keep itself alive. And then the way it does that, with all the bickering and hostility, leaves people completely drained of enthusiasm for weeks.

In an open assembly, things could be done like temporarily locking certain members out of discussion until things grow less charged, and members who obviously don't contribute anything of value but instead use the legislature as an avenue to throw their shit at each other could also more easily get locked out because there's no shortage of people to contribute on a discussion at hand either if they do get locked out.

It also just irks me less than people who get elected and have sole power to pass laws, but then don't do so often.

Yeah, with clarification it makes more sense, thanks.

I actually quite like your new proposal, though I'll be posting my thoughts on it momentarily.