AMENDMENT: Increasing the nomination period

mapfi · April 21, 2003, 11:23

Pedrunn has suggested this one two weeks ago and it failed because of the then valid quorum. I'm also adding a word to make the meaning clearer - the nomination has to be done by oneself.

Change:
"At the start of the election process, the Court must start a nomination thread. All citizens who wish to be candidates for an office must publicly express their nomination in this thread. For this they have three days."

to new:
"At the start of the election process, the Court must start a nomination thread. All citizens who wish to be candidates for an office must themselves publicly express their nomination in this thread. For this they have five days."

This amendment needs 7 votes in favour and more in favour than against in order to pass. The poll will be open till April 26th 1630GMT.

Martin Gühmann · April 21, 2003, 12:53

This one is clear and I aggree to both little changes. The first word is a clarification, but it is always better if noone has to guess and the second one does make sense as we can see.

-Martin

Zaphod Beeblebrox · April 24, 2003, 04:02

why 5? if we change it lets make it 7.

Gilgamensch · April 24, 2003, 04:15

I voted no.

And before people are starting to

at me, I shortly explain why:

1.) Will it increase the number of nominations? Doubtfull
2.) Will it change anything for the problem we are having? Doubtfull

I know it sounds to pessimistic, but I don't think that changing the period will change the outcome............

Plus as Zaphod mentioned, then we should make it one week/7days........

Martin Gühmann · April 26, 2003, 12:14

Originally posted by Gilgamensch
I voted no.

And before people are starting to

at me, I shortly explain why:

Well it is no problem if you don't share the opinion of the others, you have the right on free speech.

Unfortunatly this AMENDMENT failed, not because of more No then Yes Votes, but because of the lack of voters.

-Martin