[Discussion] House of Commons

A failed experiment whereby board users were invited to advise the Senate, and instead attempted to replace the Senate.
User avatar
Hotfoot
Avatar of Confusion
Posts: 5835
Joined: 2002-10-12 04:38pm
Location: Peace River: Badlands, Terra Nova Winter 1936
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by Hotfoot » 2008-11-17 05:02pm

There's still several people left to vote, however. I'm simply stating my case again, just to be on the safe side. When I campaign for a bill, I want to make damn sure it passes. ;)
Do not meddle in the affairs of insomniacs, for they are cranky and can do things to you while you sleep.
Image
The Realm of Confusion
"Every time you talk about Teal'c, I keep imagining Thor's ass. Thank you very much for that, you fucking fucker." -Marcao
SG-14: Because in some cases, "Recon" means "Blow up a fucking planet or die trying."
SilCore Wiki! Come take a look!

User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by RedImperator » 2008-11-17 05:49pm

Assuming no further abstentions, the "Yes" side needs 3 more votes out of the 10 remaining to mathematically go over the top, while the "No" side needs 8. The "No" side would still need 6 even if there are no further "Yes" votes. So if we can wrangle up 3 yes votes, we'll be in good shape.
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues

User avatar
The Duchess of Zeon
Gözde
Posts: 14566
Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by The Duchess of Zeon » 2008-11-17 06:13pm

RedImperator wrote:Assuming no further abstentions, the "Yes" side needs 3 more votes out of the 10 remaining to mathematically go over the top, while the "No" side needs 8. The "No" side would still need 6 even if there are no further "Yes" votes. So if we can wrangle up 3 yes votes, we'll be in good shape.
The yes side is already over the top, Red, 26/12. Abstentions do not count toward the passage/failure of the proposal, only to the quorum, and the quorum has already been exceeded, as even for these votes it's only 50%.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.

In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.

User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by RedImperator » 2008-11-17 06:15pm

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
RedImperator wrote:Assuming no further abstentions, the "Yes" side needs 3 more votes out of the 10 remaining to mathematically go over the top, while the "No" side needs 8. The "No" side would still need 6 even if there are no further "Yes" votes. So if we can wrangle up 3 yes votes, we'll be in good shape.
The yes side is already over the top, Red, 26/12. Abstentions do not count toward the passage/failure of the proposal, only to the quorum, and the quorum has already been exceeded, as even for these votes it's only 50%.
According to Wilkens, this is a Category A vote, so a 60% supermajority is needed for passage.
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues

User avatar
The Duchess of Zeon
Gözde
Posts: 14566
Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by The Duchess of Zeon » 2008-11-17 06:34pm

RedImperator wrote:
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
RedImperator wrote:Assuming no further abstentions, the "Yes" side needs 3 more votes out of the 10 remaining to mathematically go over the top, while the "No" side needs 8. The "No" side would still need 6 even if there are no further "Yes" votes. So if we can wrangle up 3 yes votes, we'll be in good shape.
The yes side is already over the top, Red, 26/12. Abstentions do not count toward the passage/failure of the proposal, only to the quorum, and the quorum has already been exceeded, as even for these votes it's only 50%.
According to Wilkens, this is a Category A vote, so a 60% supermajority is needed for passage.
Correct, and it has one. 26 / 38 = 68%, that's what I've been saying all along.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.

In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.

User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by RedImperator » 2008-11-17 06:47pm

By over the top, I mean "mathematically impossible to lose". I should have made that clearer. The point is somewhat moot, because the "no" side needs 6 more votes just to get to 40%, assuming no more "yes" votes or abstentions, and to my knowledge, we haven't had 47 total votes in any decision since...well, ever.
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues

User avatar
CmdrWilkens
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9093
Joined: 2002-07-06 01:24am
Location: Land of the Crabcake
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by CmdrWilkens » 2008-11-17 10:05pm

There are 41 current votes and there are 51 active voters. Now that being said since I have no abiolity to remove access or posting ability any "inactive" Senator is still capable of voting. This means (and I'm discounting Wayne here) there are actually 55 available votes not counting Rob W (Innerbrat, Stravo, and Zaia are all currently listed as "inactive" on my records and Mike is listed as inactive for other housekeeping reasons).

Thus with 14 outstanding votes there could, theoretically, be a swing to a 26-26 tie and a fialure of passage. The measures passes mathmatical certainty at 31 yes votes based on the active Senator list. Any point up until then we could see the measure fail.
Image
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven

User avatar
Coyote
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 12464
Joined: 2002-08-23 01:20am
Location: The glorious Sun-Barge! Isis, Isis, Ra,Ra,Ra!
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by Coyote » 2008-11-18 09:57am

I'd like to take a moment to campaign on behalf of this bill, so that any Senators out there who've not yet voted can consider the merits of the proposal.

We are continually in a "reaction mode" when it comes to problems here-- as it stands, "problems" have the initiative, and we can only react to them. That means that problems on the board typically have already started to do their damage by the time we get around to doing something about them. By the time we identify a problem, convene to discuss, vote, and take action, it is up to two weeks past the time damage has already been done.

A House of Commons will allow people on the board a place to point out problems as they coalesce. So far, heirarchy here is top-down and while I think we do the best we can and are fair, there is room for improvement. There is complaint and satire of the Senate for being too slow to act, or acting based on our perceptions of what's wrong rather than basing reactions on what the affected people feel is wrong. Again, a House of Commons will not only make policy here more efficient, but improve morale and allow us something very valuable: perspective.

Giving a voice to the citizens gives them a stake in overall success. So far, we have to rely on Private Messages (which really only reflect the points of view of that individual who took the initiative to PM) or wading through threads of political lampoon to figure out what's going wrong. I say vote YES on a House of Commons.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."


In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around!

If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!!
Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!

User avatar
Coyote
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 12464
Joined: 2002-08-23 01:20am
Location: The glorious Sun-Barge! Isis, Isis, Ra,Ra,Ra!
Contact:

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by Coyote » 2008-11-18 12:04pm

Another thing we could do, as well-- allow a public referendum on the idea. Hold an open vote in Off-Topic to gauge the interest the Commons have in a House of Commons...
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."


In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around!

If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!!
Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!

User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22063
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: [Discussion] House of Commons

Post by Mr Bean » 2008-11-24 12:39pm

Moved to the House of Commons as historical record. Thread locked to prevent tampering.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton

Locked