View Topic

I'll place this here for discussion:

Title
1. This bill shall be titled The Procedural Rules of the Underhusen Amendment XV.

Amendments
2. Section 4(a) shall be added to The Procedural Rules of the Underhusen Act and shall read:

Upon creation of a voting thread for any legislation in the Underhusen, all current Skrifa other than the Skrifa that opened the vote must be mentioned in the same post that opened the vote.

While Chanku is correct that it is the duty of every Skrifa to keep themselves up-to-date about the going-ons of Wintreath, this may still mean that legislative actions are delayed by a day or two, if not more, as some people check Wintreath more often than others. Mentioning users, while (as Chanku says) was not intended for the Underhusen, does serve the purpose of bringing things to people's attention.

Even active Skrifa cannot be expected to be on Wintreath 24/7, and making it procedure for people to be mentioned could facilitate the discussion and passage of laws. Though (assuming a very active Underhusen) this time could potentially only be in the scale of hours, this would still help streamline things.

Title
1. This bill shall be titled The Procedural Rules of the Underhusen Amendment XV.

Amendments
2. Section 4(a) shall be added to The Procedural Rules of the Underhusen Act and shall read:
4 (a) Upon creation of a voting thread for any legislation in the Underhusen, all current Skrifa other than the Speaker or Speaker pro tempore or the temporary Speaker pro tempore who posted the thread must be mentioned in the same post that opened the vote.

My current version of this legislation.

At the very least, mentioning the people who need to vote would be a nice thing to do.

Agreeing with Chanku here that an opt-out would be good. (I actually was about to suggest that, but thought that there would be no need, as I'd thought that there weren't any active Wintreans currently interested in the legislature that disliked being mentioned and that we could fix that if the situation arises.)

Does it have to be a law, or can it just be an unofficial customary practice? This is taking into consideration the "mention" function did not exist in the beginning, and may not necessarily exist in the future.

Does it have to be a law, or can it just be an unofficial customary practice? This is taking into consideration the "mention" function did not exist in the beginning, and may not necessarily exist in the future.

I think that this would be the best option. I don't think we need legislation but it would be polite if the speaker would mention Skifra that would like to be mentioned on votes.

I think that the creation of more laws, particularly when they regulate something that could just be done as a matter of custom, is kind of dumb. Laws which enforce politeness are dumb; laws which restrict criminality (insofar as you can actually be criminal in an internet community, which is to say, an immensely limited extent, particularly since it's not like we even have a military so we can't even get testy about espionage or treason or some other crime of that nature), limit malfeasance (insofar as its practical; again, Ainur PTSD rears its head as I observe that should Wintermoot decide to go power-mad (the probability of which, it should be noted, is infinitesimal), there's not a lot we can do about it), or provide regulation for everyday conduct (e.g. 'how do we protect the environment' - not especially likely to be an issue on an internet forum, but my ego demands I be exhaustive so I can show off to everyone I feel like I should point out that I don't think most laws are dumb) are the only ones which should be made.

But if the real issue is that y'all want to draft up documents so bad, just make a written log of all the unwritten rules of the skrifa. Then they can have all the public weight of law (largely limited to opprobrium), and none of the actual binding nature of the law (none of you will, idk, go to internet jail for failing to mention someone).

But if the real issue is that y'all want to draft up documents so bad, just make a written log of all the unwritten rules of the skrifa. Then they can have all the public weight of law (largely limited to opprobrium), and none of the actual binding nature of the law (none of you will, idk, go to internet jail for failing to mention someone).

Isn't that what the Procedural Rules are anyway? It's like the Standing Rules of the United States Senate: a codification of the practices of the Underhusen.

And regardless, breaking the Procedural Rules only leads to this:

15. If a Skrifa feels another Skrifa (including the Speaker) has made some violation of law or procedural rules, the Skrifa can appeal the action(s) by making an objection.  The objection must state the alleged violation of the law or Underhusen Procedural Rules.  The accused Skrifa is entitled to present their interpretation of the law before Section (a) comes into effect.
      (a) If the objection receives a second, each Skrifa shall declare themselves in support of or opposed to the accused Skrifa's action in question.  The accused Skrifa does not get a vote.  If the number of Skrifa declaring opposed exceeds the number declaring in favor, the Skrifa's action will be reversed and the Underhusen will be prohibited from using a similar interpretation of the relevant portion(s) of law for the remainder of the term.  If the vote is tied or fails, the action stands.