View Topic

[Phase 2: Move to an Open Assembly, or stick with the current system?]

Phase 2: Move to an Open Assembly, or stick with the current system?

Stick with the UH

Move to an Open Assembly

Changes to the sorting won't make the Sorting more active*

Yeah, I am not necessarily going for activity. If anything, I aim to remove the temptation to have activity for the sake of having activity. Of course, elected officials look bad when they don't do a lot, so they nitpick stuff and and this sometimes causes fights.

While I agree we should not have activity for the sake of activity, I don't think moving to an open system right now would really benefit the region much. If anything I feel it would make us more resistant to change. Before we change anything we really need to get people interested in what is going on. Otherwise the older voices will keep things as they are and we really wouldn't get anywhere.

So in the future, this could work. But now, I think we have a bit more groundwork to lay.

I don't think any changes will actually help the Sorting be more active. I think the old joke was that the Sorting only ever really governs itself?

There have been a few instances where the sorting's choices have affected more than the sorting itself. Not particularly many come to mind. Maybe if the Sorting affected the lives of our members more then it would be more active? Possibly having political parties? That might be an interesting approach. Public approval poles and things.

I'm just spitballing, what do you guys think?

I don't know how much political parties would do either. Either way, I oppose political parties in Wintreath. I think the open assembly idea is a good one, and if we want to affect the lives of our members then perhaps the Storting should have more power, as I've been saying.

While I agree we should not have activity for the sake of activity, I don't think moving to an open system right now would really benefit the region much. If anything I feel it would make us more resistant to change. Before we change anything we really need to get people interested in what is going on. Otherwise the older voices will keep things as they are and we really wouldn't get anywhere.

So in the future, this could work. But now, I think we have a bit more groundwork to lay.

I get you, but I'd argue people don't much care what's going on because they don't really have much say in it, and actually running for the UH against incredibly experienced candidates prevents a lot of new voices from being heard, as their odds of winning the election are quite low.

Also, trader, I'll be honest, I have a fairly severe bias against parties, both in the real world and in NS. I've seen it happen countless times where parties become incredibly uncooperative towards each other, just because they don't want to hear anything the other party has to say any more. "Us vs Them" is, in my opinion, a big part of why we see such huge divisions in society.

I'm not attacking the idea, of course, but I am laying out my fears for it..

I get you, but I'd argue people don't much care what's going on because they don't really have much say in it, and actually running for the UH against incredibly experienced candidates prevents a lot of new voices from being heard, as their odds of winning the election are quite low.

I am totally in favor now of an open assembly-type system. I feel that it would make citizens care a bit more about what happens. Additionally, I think we should give the UH more power so that the citizens involved don't see it as a useless thing.

The Storting has a lot of power already, actually. Most of the power it does have it does not actually exercise, or has delegated it away. Loosely speaking, if the Storting can pass it, then the Storting can do it.

I would argue that with a bigger region, political parties isnt a terrible idea.  10KI has them, and they've been doing pretty fine with no real issues.  There's never been a big issue with one being more preferred, as they're mainly parties in title only....as opposed to the level of say, the US political parties.

That being said, I dont think Wintreath could realistically sustain functional and active parties to warrant their existence.  We can barely keep houses active enough, with really only a small handful with more than a single active member.

Once we've grown both in member count and activity to where we can sustain even the houses, then we could start realistically discussing the implications of implementing political parties.

I'm ambivalent about the reworked proposal as a whole...I don't think it'll have a particularly good or particularly bad effect on the region, it's just something that's different to what we're doing now. At the end of the day, I suspect that how people view it will depend on how they view open assemblies...which in terms of Wintreath I'm also ambivalent about.

I do agree with Katie that the roles of Speaker PT and Officer of Information seem a bit blurred. Originally the purpose of the Officer of Information was to inform Citizens of current legislation up for consideration, and by her own initiative Katie has expanded that role to include mentioning passed legislation, keeping historical records of the UH, and getting the attention of the OH as needed. If we really feel the Speaker PT needs an enhanced role, perhaps they could serve more as a parliamentarian, perhaps as part of the adopting a process of "determining parliamentary points of order, including the ability to appeal the ruling of the Speaker to the full Underhusen", as was suggested by the judicial panel in Chanku vs. Pengu.

I think it would be best to continue to avoid political parties. I think they usually create an us vs them mentality that would create division and drift us away from consensus and cooperative-based politics. Maybe they work in some places, but they don't in just as many, and as heated as some of our political debates have been from time to time I fear that parties would stoke those flames.

Please not political parties, especially in Wintreath...

There are other regions for that sort of party politics.

The only parties I'm for the formation of in Wintreath are the "Righteous and True Potatoe Party" and the "Evil Heretic Tomato Party" 

Plus parties attract ideologues, which we probably want to avoid

uh hello you are all forgetting the existence of Wintreath's single and greatest political party, the Burn It Down Party

I've always been in favor of an open assembly. I believe I was a Skrifa during that fateful constitutional convention when the open assembly bill was shot down (making it unsurprisingly my only term in the UH).

An open assembly with 3 UH officers sounds about right (can't remember exactly what the old bill said, but it sounds similar) -- still gives the opportunity for advancement but isn't bloated. And the roles for the officers sound good, too.

On no overruling the OH: I'm not sure how I feel about that. I think a 75% supermajority has enough weight to have merit. Perhaps the Monarch can have the power to final veto that one, though, if it's really necessary. But I highly doubt a 75% supermajority would be that wrong -- so many veteran Wintreans would have to be on board at that number.

Going back to the tiered system: I'm not against the idea; however, what's the legal difference between a "new citizen" who gets one vote and an "established citizen" who gets 2? Who decides when a citizen goes from new to established?

I've always been in favor of an open assembly. I believe I was a Skrifa during that fateful constitutional convention when the open assembly bill was shot down (making it unsurprisingly my only term in the UH).

An open assembly with 3 UH officers sounds about right (can't remember exactly what the old bill said, but it sounds similar) -- still gives the opportunity for advancement but isn't bloated. And the roles for the officers sound good, too.

On no overruling the OH: I'm not sure how I feel about that. I think a 75% supermajority has enough weight to have merit. Perhaps the Monarch can have the power to final veto that one, though, if it's really necessary. But I highly doubt a 75% supermajority would be that wrong -- so many veteran Wintreans would have to be on board at that number.

Going back to the tiered system: I'm not against the idea; however, what's the legal difference between a "new citizen" who gets one vote and an "established citizen" who gets 2? Who decides when a citizen goes from new to established?

On the tiered system, I was still unsure whether to make it a number of months (say, 6) a number of posts in the Citizen's Platform (or whatever would replace it). I was probably going to go for a mimimum of both, like at mimimum, you have to be here for two months even if you hit the 100 post requirement. The rationale would have been that we at least get an idea of your dedication and get to know you.