Partisan restructuring proposal - Dissolution tracker

[Associate Justice PiT]

    We haven't been talking about this much.

Why not? When is the soonest the RPP could vote on it?

     I don't know. Lack of interest, maybe? February, probably, since that is when the next convention is.

[bgwah]

     We haven't been talking about this much.

Why not? When is the soonest the RPP could vote on it?

     I don't know. Lack of interest, maybe? February, probably, since that is when the next convention is.

I thought someone had said quite a few people were interested, it was mostly the leadership who wasn't.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We haven't been talking about this much.

Why not? When is the soonest the RPP could vote on it?

     I don't know. Lack of interest, maybe? February, probably, since that is when the next convention is.

I thought someone had said quite a few people were interested, it was mostly the leadership who wasn't.

     Well, that interest has been pretty invisible lately.

[bgwah]

I mentioned possibly replacing regional seats with districts earlier though nobody seemed to like the idea. Of course I also wanted to reduce the number of regions to 3...

If we did make it so Senators could also be cabinet members, maybe you could have 5 at-large, 5 district, and 3 regional for a total of 13. idk.

[Oakvale]

    We haven't been talking about this much.

Why not? When is the soonest the RPP could vote on it?

     I don't know. Lack of interest, maybe? February, probably, since that is when the next convention is.

I'd actually suggest both parties hold special conventions to deal with this issue. Debating dissolution at the regular conventions is infeasible since they're (obviously) held before elections, and no party is going to want to dissolve at that time for the fear of plunging their candidates into disarray and chaos.

[Napoleon]

The RPP doesn't care about this. If one wants something done they may need to do it solo.

[bgwah]

Bump!!!!!!!

Dissolution Tracker

Party	Yes	No	Abstain	# of members	% Voted	Quorum
JCP	14	6	0	50	40.00%	40%
RPP	11	9	4	39	61.44%	50%

Last JCP voter: winston
Last RPP voter: dereich

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Quorum for each party is 20 members. heh.

Thus a graph!



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Antonio the Sixth]

We might see the beginning of a new era in Atlasian politics.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

If the JCP dissolves, I plan on reviving it.

[Napoleon]

If the JCP dissolves, I plan on reviving it.

Im not sure I'd go that far.

[Cincinnatus]

If the JCP dissolves, I plan on reviving it.

That's to bad.  I might have enjoyed being in a party with you if dissolution occurred, but I won't join the reincarnation of the JCP.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I just don't see what problems we're solving here by dissolving the two parties.

[Napoleon]

I just don't see what problems we're solving here by dissolving the two parties.

I agree, but similarly I don't see what we gain from calling a party the JCP if it isn't what we have currently. It just wouldn't be the JCP anymore.

[Oakvale]

If the JCP dissolves, I plan on reviving it.

Im not sure I'd go that far.

Please don't do that, Scott.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Very well, then.  I won't.

[bgwah]

I've updated the numbers. It seems exceedingly likely this will pass in the JCP, with 76% voting in favor so far.

Passage is also looking probable in the RPP, though it's a bit closer, with only 60% voting in favor.

I don't think we'll have any problems with either party's quorum being met.

[Rowan]

If the JCP dissolves, I plan on reviving it.

I am doing the same thing with the RPP.

[Oakvale]

If the JCP dissolves, I plan on reviving it.

I am doing the same thing with the RPP.

Wonderful. By all means, go ahead and completely destroy all the work of people in both parties for the last few months and the prospect of a new, entertaining era in Atlasian politics.

[tpfkaw]

Looks like in order to pass the RPP needs 1 more voter in the affirmative or abstaining and the JCP needs 2 more voters voting in any way.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Looks like in order to pass the RPP needs 1 more voter in the affirmative or abstaining and the JCP needs 2 more voters voting in any way.

Hey!

[bgwah]

Updated again. Still easily passing the JCP, though it is now passing the RPP by only one vote. If someone is PMing people to vote nay (but nobody doing the same thing for the aye said), passage seems unlikely.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am fairly certain you will get what you want when it is all said an done. Look at this unexpected competativeness as a little entertainment.

Those who offer a blissfull and fun destination and insist upon an uneventfull journey to it, will yield neither the bliss and fun, nor the stated destination.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Updated again. Still easily passing the JCP, though it is now passing the RPP by only one vote. If someone is PMing people to vote nay (but nobody doing the same thing for the aye said), passage seems unlikely.

That indeed seems like it's the case. That was an awful lot of Suddenly Nay...

/sigh

[Associate Justice PiT]

     PMing people to vote nay would be a very dumb move, for obvious reasons.