304 (DRAFT): Additional Debating Time

[quintopia]

lord high poomba casualsax really wants a filibuster rule.  luckily, if you put the majority vote thing in, it's not a true filibuster, and further, filibustering doesn't do any good in an online environment anyway.

[CasualSax]

I do not want a filibuster rule that allows the majority to filibuster a minority.  A filibuster is a check on the majority, not the minority.

Furthermore, it would do a ton of "good" to the filibusters.  If a party had a majority/near majority..not only could they shelve controversial proposals, but they could pass their own while keeping them locked up.

Also, I never said I wanted a filibuster rule.  I pointed out a way to include such a thing in a proposal, yes - but at that time I had not thought about the implications of such a device..not to mention that this proposal is perhaps the absolute worst way to impose filibustering.

And, lastly, you should not go pointing fingers about how "useless" it is when you have specifically implicated thinking about implimenting it yourself.  I am not the "evil manipulator" here - if anyone falls in that catagory, you do.

[quintopia]

i never actually laid out a proposal on how to implement it, because i never intended to implement it.  I just wondered how it could be done.  However, as I pointed out, filibustering for 48 hours does no good in an online environment where it takes 24 hours for some to make a single post anyway.  Why is this the absolute worst way of implementing it praytell?

And you can call me an "evil manipulator" if you want (notice I never did call you that), but in any governmental system, it's important to figure out ways to force important issues.  I don't care if things don't turn out in my favor, but if I see something that needs to be addressed, I am going to bring attention to it where possible.

[SuperusSophia]

Look, there is no reason to start attacking each other over this.  If limits are placed on the extensions, that effectively limits filibustering.  If we throw in the clause I stated earlier, that continues to limit filibustering.

While I don't see it actually coming into play anytime in the near future, it should be there just in case a serious need arises.

[CasualSax]

You did firmly state you were discussing it, and I never submitted a proposal - I was merely tossing the idea around.  Filibustering for any amount of time that could offset the order of proposals past is a horrible, horrible idea.  Proposals could be passed that change the number of votes that are required before an item comes to vote, for example.

A majority extention is also kind of crazy - it could be proposed right before the 48 hour mark, and only one vote - yes - would appear, and so it would be extended.



ON another note:

I want to add that my primary goal at the moment is to fix the ability to abuse judgments (I have several in agreeance) and to add to the actual 'game' elements.  I don't want this to simply be a game where all the points are decided by how many passed proposals one has.  The kingdom concept would have helped start us down one of the several paths that would fix that problem - but, it doesn't really matter what it is.  If someone wants to make us all surfers, and have stat points and the like..anything, random or not.


FINALLY:

The debate time for this proposal as over, and this thread should have already been locked.

[quintopia]

oops, i'm breaking the rules by posting this then, i guess, but if this proposal passes, i wouldn't be.

but by majority extension, it should be 50% of eligible voters.

and really it should be 2/3 anyway.

or maybe just universally extend debate time by allowing debate periods to overlap. . .this is probably something for future porposals, but it seems we go over the allowed time on almost everything.  these time restrictions are just that: too restricting.