View Topic

I think we need to define abstain votes. I don't know if this should be an act or a procedural amendment. Probably the latter. I think that the definition of an abstain vote should be a vote that is neither Aye or Nay and does not effect the final vote count either way. Even in the case of a supermajority. There is precedent for doing it this way.

For example, if there are 7 UH members and 3 vote aye and 1 votes Nay and the rest abstain then it passes. If a supermajority is needed then it still passes because 75% of votes are aye.

Your thoughts?

I think this could easily be an amendment to the Procedural Rules Section 6

6. Underhusen representatives may cast one of the following votes on proposals before the Underhusen:
(a) Aye, indicating that the representative is voting in favor of the proposal;
(b) Nay, indicating that the representative is voting against the proposal;
(c) Abstain, indicating that the representative is voting neither in favor of or against the proposal but wishes his or her vote to be recorded

And similar changes to the Overhusrn Procedural Rules Section 4 (though that's a little tricker.)

If sub-section C was changed to read

(c) Abstain, indicating that the representative is voting neither in favor of or against the proposal but and wishes his or her vote to be recorded but not counted or contributing towards any majority.

I think a simple addition like that might clear all this up. As it would clarify that by abstaining your vote is not being counted. Basically changing the definition of abstain to reflect that, instead of changing the definitions of majorities.

Even if this was just changed here. The changed definition sort of sets a precedent for Abstain to be treated like this, instead of being more vauge.

Just to say I am fine with adding an "or against" if some description or perhaps changing the word "majority" to "total". Making the line "not counted or contributing to any total".

Either way, as long as it gets the point across without much ambiguity, I'm okay.

I think this could easily be an amendment to the Procedural Rules Section 6

6. Underhusen representatives may cast one of the following votes on proposals before the Underhusen:
(a) Aye, indicating that the representative is voting in favor of the proposal;
(b) Nay, indicating that the representative is voting against the proposal;
(c) Abstain, indicating that the representative is voting neither in favor of or against the proposal but wishes his or her vote to be recorded

I believe that this is not the latest version of the Act. The current Act reads:

6. Underhusen representatives may cast one of the following votes on proposals before the Underhusen:
      (a) Aye, indicating that the representative is voting in favor of the proposal;
      (b) Nay, indicating that the representative is voting against the proposal;
      (c) Abstain, indicating that the representative is voting neither in favor of or against the proposal but wishes his or her vote to be recorded.
      (d)  "Abstain" votes shall not be considered when determining whether a bill has passed, tied, or failed.  Only "Aye" and "Nay" votes shall be considered.

The change was made in Amendment IX.

I think this could easily be an amendment to the Procedural Rules Section 6

6. Underhusen representatives may cast one of the following votes on proposals before the Underhusen:
(a) Aye, indicating that the representative is voting in favor of the proposal;
(b) Nay, indicating that the representative is voting against the proposal;
(c) Abstain, indicating that the representative is voting neither in favor of or against the proposal but wishes his or her vote to be recorded

I believe that this is not the latest version of the Act. The current Act reads:

6. Underhusen representatives may cast one of the following votes on proposals before the Underhusen:
      (a) Aye, indicating that the representative is voting in favor of the proposal;
      (b) Nay, indicating that the representative is voting against the proposal;
      (c) Abstain, indicating that the representative is voting neither in favor of or against the proposal but wishes his or her vote to be recorded.
      (d)  "Abstain" votes shall not be considered when determining whether a bill has passed, tied, or failed.  Only "Aye" and "Nay" votes shall be considered.

The change was made in Amendment IX.

God damn Laws page 

Thanks. I'll update it promptly like I said I would at the beginning of my term, along with everything else we've passed. @Wintermoot, how does the Speaker have access to edit the Laws page?

As far as I recall, only the Chairman and Monarch have access to it.

Wintermoot himself said that the Speaker can.

Yeah, when I was speaker I had acess to it, although it did glitch and I had a lot of trouble editing it.

I do have issues with this. Personally Supermajority votes are designed to have a MUCH higher threshold of passing, so to me it makes no sense as to why even have a Supermajority vote if it isn't going to be a higher threshold. (Note: I am only arguing for Abstains counting for Supermajorities, for simple ones I don't really care...)

People can and should vote nay, since for all intents and purposes, that's what an abstention would mean in such a case. Practicality, people.

I fully disagree. Abstain is a vote (Otherwise one could just avoid voting in the first place). However the nature of casting a vote is entirely different from not voting in the first place, so it should be counted differently. (I do like Tatte's ideas on that though)

Well, that's your opinion.

And it's your opinion that it should not be that way.

And a majority of other people's.