Ecclesia Improvement Act [Discussion]

[AwesomeSaucer]

So, uhh what in the actual fuck is this guild thing?

Khem, Pyradania, and I will explain in much detail tomorrow! 

[Sovereign Dixie]

So, uhh what in the actual fuck is this guild thing?

Khem, Pyradania, and I will explain in much detail tomorrow! 

OT Knows. It was explained to him on Skype, he just wasn't paying attention because: FO4.

[Delfos]

November 2015
Thread Award for:
9 pages of posts in 4 days including some impressively large wall texts

-
I'm also very curious about that guilds thing, a final document and a vote, bc frankly, there's little more to discuss besides patting each other in the back and say "you did good, sir, now let's see if it runs, break a leg!"

[AwesomeSaucer]

So, uhh what in the actual fuck is this guild thing?

Khem, Pyradania, and I will explain in much detail tomorrow! 

OT Knows. It was explained to him on Skype, he just wasn't paying attention because: FO4.

Did you just say...Skype?

OMFG IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED DEAR GOD JESUS ZEUS FSM HOLY CRAP

(Lol, was it private, or on an actual chat room for Taijitu?  I'll PM you my username if it is the latter.  )

[Gulliver]

If we're not going to tear down the government without a replacement, is a vote even necessary? We could begin discussing and polling opinions on specific grievances and alternatives right now.

[Sovereign Dixie]

If we're not going to tear down the government without a replacement, is a vote even necessary? We could begin discussing and polling opinions on specific grievances and alternatives right now.

I see no reason for it to not go to a vote. In fact the vote should have started over 12 hours ago.

[Wast]

There *is* a vote. If it's not the proposal you were looking to vote on (which might be the case), you can post a new vote and I'll sort it out.

[Gulliver]

I see no reason for it to not go to a vote. In fact the vote should have started over 12 hours ago.

It will just delay making actual concrete proposals (instead of some unnamed people being vaguely concerned) by another week. We already have the full power to discussion legal and constitutional changes.

[AwesomeSaucer]

I see no reason for it to not go to a vote. In fact the vote should have started over 12 hours ago.

It will just delay making actual concrete proposals (instead of some unnamed people being vaguely concerned) by another week. We already have the full power to discussion legal and constitutional changes.

We should at least delay it until the weekend, so we all can be at the convention on our own time.  A vote may not be necessary, but why not? 

[Gulliver]

Any serious discussion is not going to fit into a single weekend. It could very well be a multiweek process.

[Sovereign Dixie]

The actual vote for the proposal is here. http://forum.taijitu.org/legislative-and-treaty-votes/(vote)-ecclesia-improvement-act/

In the meantime I see no reason why we can not discuss our ideas for going forward as this is voted on.

[Gulliver]

In the meantime I see no reason why we can not discuss our ideas for going forward as this is voted on.

I agree. If it is okay with people, I'd like to do what I've done in other successful constitutional debates and solicit proposals for specific things to change, followed by brief consultation polls of them, with the winning specific proposals then combined into a complete one.

EDIT: Changed "proposals" to "proposals for specific things to change" for clarity.

[Khem]

In the meantime I see no reason why we can not discuss our ideas for going forward as this is voted on.

I agree. If it is okay with people, I'd like to do what I've done in other successful constitutional debates and solicit proposals for specific things to change, followed by brief consultation polls of them, with the winning specific proposals then combined into a complete one.

EDIT: Changed "proposals" to "proposals for specific things to change" for clarity.

Should we create multiple frameworks from which to vote on building upon?

[Gulliver]

Should we create multiple frameworks from which to vote on building upon?

I don't understand, could you explain in more detail?

[Khem]

Should we create multiple frameworks from which to vote on building upon?

I don't understand, could you explain in more detail?

Have individuals and groups propose new legal architecture of a large spanning variety such as Republic/Democracy, executive structure, judicial structures, etc. Voting between multiple basic framework constitutions on which to add the votes for minutia. Is this making more sense? Sorry if my communication skills are off today, my brain feels like porridge after a long day of caring for a toddler.