Official: Should we structure the way amendments are added into the CoL?

[Timeline]

This is not an amendment, but rather a standard by which all President’s must follow when adding an amendment into our Code of Laws. Also, should this option win, our CoL will be restructured to fit this layout. Since it is official, it requires 2/3 to pass.

Question:
Should we accept this as the standard for adding amendments into the CoL?

Options:
Yes
No

Standard:
“Any amendment placed into the Code of Laws should be summarized at the bottom of the CoL document in the “Amendments” section. This summery should contain (but is not limited to) the following information:

*Name of Amendment
*Date of inception
*Link to poll of validity
*Document location of amendment

If the amendment replaces or removes any existing text in the Code of Laws, this original text should be preserved in the amendment’’s "summery".”


Expires in 5 days

[UnOrthOdOx]

oooo, nice and general.

[Captain]

FYI, according to the COL, there is no requirement for 2/3 support. In fact, if it doesn't concern an amendment or an impeachment or a Judge approval/confirmation, there is no percentage % requirement for any poll. The only rule given in the COL is that the poll option with the largest # of votes wins. (Now that I think of that, that *might* be the solution to the abstain issue as well... ).

However, our tradition is that polls concerning new rules, whether procedural or policy (ex. Plan Eagle, Mapmaking trade, Embassies, etc...), requires 50% plus 1 vote for ratification (the same as most votes wins in a 2 option poll). This is not enshrined in any law, it is simply the generally accepted customary way we have done things for the last few months.

But if you think this is vague and could lead to confusion, or does lead to confusion, start a discussion thread for a future amendment about polling.


However, since Timeline wrote 2/3 is required to pass in the poll description, that may overrule the customary tradition of using 50% plus 1.

[Aggie]

I have looked at the col and I quote
ARTICLE II: Government Policy

Amendments:
Amendments to this Constitution can be submitted by any member of our nation. An amendment is passed and made official by a 2/3 or greater vote on the amendment's inclusion.

so on amendments it does give a 2/3 vote.
or am I misinterpriting this discussion.
Aggie

[Captain]

No, you're right Aggie. But Timeline's proposal isn't an Amendment. It won't be added to the COL. Therefore, the 2/3 requirement *may* not apply.

But in case I wasn't clear, I'll bold what I said earlier:

In fact, if it doesn't concern an amendment or an impeachment or a Judge approval/confirmation, there is no percentage % requirement for any poll.

which is why I'd like the polling standards revisited. better to clear this sort of thing up than rely on unstated convention (esp as more new citizens join and aren't familiar with the existing conventions).

[Kramerman]

Lets just keep this simple, and do a 2/3 vote. we can debate a possible amendmento clarify the CoL, which in recent light, seems to need A LOT of clarifictaion (abstain votes, etc..). I personally dont see why this shouldn't be an ammendment, it seems like it should be, but in my rare and present spirt of agreeability, I'll just shut up and vote yes.

[Aggie]

I miss read what was written, its late and my eyes must be tired, I thought it said there were no % define, ooops
Aggie

[kring]

Since Timeline mentioned 2/3 in the beginning, I don't see where there is a problem. Unless less than 2/3 vote to approve it, in which case it could be an issue for the justices. I voted yes. Amd currently it is 9 yes, 1 no.

[Timeline]

President Ninot requested this require 2/3. I'm merely respecting that wish.

[civman2000]

No rules on the requirements of polls are in teh constitution. However, because it is not an amendmment or anything else explicitly mentioned, we can assume only 50% is needed (though i don't think it makes a difference the way the results are going).

[Proserpine]

I voted yes, as this will result in a consolidated text, as I proposed elsewhere.

I agree that T/L proposal, as formulated, is not an amendment to the CoL. However, it clearly needs to be part of the CoL as it bears on the fomat and content of same. Therefore, can we either change this poll to a CoL amendment or agree now that if passed by 2/3 maj., T/L's proposal will be added to the CoL.

[Apocalypse]

Nearly everyone is voting yes. 2/3s doesn't matter.

[Spiffor]

Proserpine :
Actually, this poll is not about implementing these rules in the constitution, because the official implementation of such rules is a hefty debate here.
This poll not being about an amendment is a compromise (and a relatively tough-to-get one).

[Proserpine]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Proserpine :
Actually, this poll is not about implementing these rules in the constitution, because the official implementation of such rules is a hefty debate here.
This poll not being about an amendment is a compromise (and a relatively tough-to-get one).

Spiff, my point is that in order for this proposal to be official, i.e. part of our structure which has to be followed, it needs to be in the CoL. If the CoL isn't amended, then this proposal means nothing. E.g. in the US Constitution there is a provision for the voting requirements to amend the constitution - by definition it is a constitutional provision.

The discussion you refer deals with different issues.

I therefore believe that the compromise was incorrect in law, and a CoL amendment poll is needed.

[Timeline]

You can't please everyone.

I did what I thought the majority would approve of.

btw Spiffor, we made it over 20 votes .