AMENDMENT: Shall we increase the nomination period?

[Pedrunn]

This amendment basicly increses the nomination period from 3 days to 5 days. Changing the section 1-e of the Article V.

Below is the change in the Constitution.

From:


"(e) 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:

"(e) 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 five days."

This poll expires in Five days (12/04/2003)

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

3 days is very short, not to say too short

[H Tower]

i like the change

[Tamerlin]

I agree, 5 days seems a good compromise as it is neither too short neither too long.

[Gilgamensch]

I must say:

I voted abstain. The idea sounds good, but will it really change the outcome?

We would need to get more people involved, but for any reason it is just a few of those 'registers', which really participate........

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

i rather think we should clean the registry of those who have been inactive more than 2 months.

[Frozzy]

Here here!

[mapfi]

yep we should - i mentioned the idea a while ago, but markos seems not to have time for us demogamers... pity that this amendment failed!

[Pedrunn]

i rather think we should clean the registry of those who have been inactive more than 2 months.

Thats an excellent idea. Lets strike to have this feature added.

[Martin Gühmann]

Well I was very busy during this week. A Java course for all day. So 4 hours to late and only one vote is missing if we use the formula and round down otherwise two votes are missing. Maybe you should keep such a poll open for 5 days instaed of 3 days from my interpretation the 3 days are just a suggestion.

-Martin

[mapfi]

Thge poll was open five days, and no that's not a suggestion - it is required with amendments.

[H Tower]

correct me if I'm wrong, but this amendment didn't receive the support neccesary to pass

[Gilgamensch]

H Tower and other's:

We need 1/6 of the members, meaning 55/6=9.166666 so in other words 10 votes.

I don't think we'll ever get anymore those 10 votes..............

[Pedrunn]

We need 1/6 of the members, meaning 55/6=9.166666 so in other words 10 votes.

Dont you think it is 9 votes?

The amendment didnt pass

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

no 9*6=54<55