Egalitarian principles violated by post-count titles?

[Delfos]

In favor. All against rise:

[Bustos]

rises

I object. 

[Delfos]

I push the abolition of post count ranks or titles to a vote.

[Bustos]

Wait, is it titles or post count or both?

I thought it was agreed on title only. 

[Khem]

We need legislation created before we can vote on such.

[Bustos]

Unless there's an objection within a reasonable amount of time (let's say a week) I suggest an admin (i.e. me) just remove the postcount titles.

If there is an objection, we can have a formal vote on a proposal to end post count titles on the regional forum.

Implied legislation wasn't needed.

[Khem]

With objection to the action we will need a formal vote. Which requires at least a basic sentence describing what the matter at hand is that is being put into law.

[Bustos]

Oh, I just looked at this as "technical" issue, rather than a "legal, gotta draft a law" issue.



VERY*LATE*EDIT (I hadnt refreshed to see al'Khem's post):  For example...

http://forum.taijitu.org/legislative-and-treaty-votes/new-world-factbook-entry/

[Khem]

rises

I object. 

I was basing the need to be legislative on the above.

[Bustos]

Oh, I just looked at this as "technical" issue, rather than a "legal, gotta draft a law" issue.



EDIT:  For example...

http://forum.taijitu.org/legislative-and-treaty-votes/new-world-factbook-entry/

Don't know if u caught my example.  But I was using this as a precedent for a technical issue not needing specific  legislation.  But, hey, if someone wants to make the proposal, potentially, into a law, knock yourself out and do a draft.

[Khem]

I had not! The question becomes is it worth legislating vs just happening?

[Allama]

Oh, I just looked at this as "technical" issue, rather than a "legal, gotta draft a law" issue.



EDIT:  For example...

http://forum.taijitu.org/legislative-and-treaty-votes/new-world-factbook-entry/

Don't know if u caught my example.  But I was using this as a precedent for a technical issue not needing specific  legislation.  But, hey, if someone wants to make the proposal, potentially, into a law, knock yourself out and do a draft.

Unless there's an objection within a reasonable amount of time (let's say a week) I suggest an admin (i.e. me) just remove the postcount titles.

If there is an objection, we can have a formal vote on a proposal to end post count titles on the regional forum.

Implied legislation wasn't needed.

That did imply legislation wasn't needed, absolutely... unless someone objects.

You objected. Legislation is therefore required.

If you want to switch this back over to a technical issue requiring no legal changes, you could probably withdraw your objection (should that suit you).

[Bustos]

I guess, I am not following how having a vote requires legislation.  As a precedent has already been set where a technical issue did not require legislation for a vote.  I am just confused why the "need" for legislation, rather than a simple vote.  But, as long as a vote happens, I don't care how it comes about.  Just a matter of curiosity, on my part.

 

So, back to an earlier question which needs to be decided upon in any case, are we voting on removal of post titles or post counts or both?

[Khem]

Just titles...

[Bustos]

I push the abolition of post count ranks or titles to a vote.

After re-reading this a few times, I see he didn't mean post count as a separate thing but pertaining to titles/ranks.

I second this motion.