SENATE BILL: The On Second Thought, We Do Have Expectations Amendment (STR)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Napoleon
Cosponsor: Senator Nix

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This looked appealing to me for the PPT slot.


The Sponsor has 24 hours to commence an advocacy here.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I like the idea, but "federal official" is disturbingly broad. If the President doesn't post on this board in a week, the elected President is just totally removed from office? I also think the cabinet shouldn't be put under this, as they have no real need to be posting on this board at all. To be honest, this should only be targeted at the Senate.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

An amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In which case, this is pointless as the Senate has its own provisions in the rules concerning expulsion (in accordance with Constitutional Requirements) that could be beefed up if so desired. I opposed the Senators amendment, as it is an inneffective way to up the requirements for the Senate.

Why shouldn't the cabinet be put under this? If anybody has a more severe activity problem that such a standard would effect, it is the cabinet and Supreme Court. The Senators would meet this standard and still not impact the lack of substantive debate and participation.

[Sopranos Republican]

I agree with Yankee. I don't believe there is much of an excuse for any Senator, the President, the Vice President, or any cabinet member to not post for 7 days, without notifying everyone about it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Unknown
Status: Needs Feedback.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Why shouldn't the cabinet be put under this? If anybody has a more severe activity problem that such a standard would effect, it is the cabinet and Supreme Court. The Senators would meet this standard and still not impact the lack of substantive debate and participation.

Because even setting aside the fact that cabinet members just simply don't have to post on this board specifically to conduct their business, in many cases there's just not anything worthy of being done for 7 days time. If the SoFE didn't post for a week on either of the Atlasia boards, should he be removed? No. Because the SoFE doesn't have to constantly post just for everyone's amusement, there just often not work to be done for an SoFE for most of a month. The AG, too, doesn't always have court work to do.

Hell, even if the SoEA or GM didn't post for a single week's worth of time, it doesn't mean they're inactive and should be kicked out of office. This Amendment is just asking for trouble. It's great to sit here and beat our chests over activity until the moment that someone who's doing a good job just happens to not post for a week and then gets kicked out, no questions asked.

And aside from bringing forward a grand total of two pieces of legislation into the Senate que and opening the Senate sessions, what responsibilities does the Vice President have around here? You can't just sit here and sh** all over people who aren't constantly posting on these boards when a lot of the time there's no reason for them to be constantly posting on these boards. The Supreme Court is the perfect example of that; what right do you guys have to force people who don't actually have any work to do most of the time to just sit here and spam these boards once a week just to abide by a pointless requirement?

The idea that we should just forcibly remove from office a President who decides not to post here for a week, is IN. SANE. If any body of individuals around here has a chronic activity problem, it's the Senate. You're the ones with a constant work load, you're the ones with no excuse for skipping out on posting on these boards for a week, you're the ones that can't keep your members on the job and have a ridiculously high turn-over rate. If any group should be targeted by a strict activity requirement Amendment, it's the Senate, but it's the only group you don't want to touch.

[homelycooking]

This would presumably apply to me, no? My official DoFE and Census Bureau threads are located in "Atlas Fantasy Elections", not "Atlas Fantasy Government".

[Napoleon]

I oppose Ben's amendment, but would be open to changing the language to work around the specifics of this particular board.

Here's how we do things in the Northeast:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think requiring a leave of absence of some kind is too much to ask of the President.

[Napoleon]

This would presumably apply to me, no? My official DoFE and Census Bureau threads are located in "Atlas Fantasy Elections", not "Atlas Fantasy Government".

I don't think it should apply to you. Even though you update the Census weekly, I can't be sure future RGs will be so consistent. And with regards to your SoFE duties, well, we don't ehave elections every week. I'm inclined to give you a pass.

[Napoleon]

If any group should be targeted by a strict activity requirement Amendment, it's the Senate, but it's the only group you don't want to touch.

What? This would apply to the Senate, as it very well should. Maybe the President, Vice President, and Senate are the only ones this ought to apply to.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Why not extend this to Atlas Fantasy Elections?

[Napoleon]

Does anyone remember when Wormyguy went inactive and it took 21 days to boot him? And then there was about that much left in his term, but it wasn't enough to elect someone new?

[Marokai Backbeat]

If any group should be targeted by a strict activity requirement Amendment, it's the Senate, but it's the only group you don't want to touch.

What? This would apply to the Senate, as it very well should. Maybe the President, Vice President, and Senate are the only ones this ought to apply to.

Was responding specifically to Yankee there. My apologies for not making that clear.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The bulk of what Marokai said is faux outrage bs stemming from the narrow application of the bill and a circle the wagons approach. Fine, expand it to the AFE board then. The point here isn't to encourage spamming, it is to get inactives to work. As for the seven days, this isn't my bill Dude. If seven is too low, then how about ten?

As for the absolution of your inactive cabinet, Marokai, and throwing all the blame on us, I must say that is bullsh**t. What the hell has your SoIA done except run for the Senate and comment on a bill or two? Your SoIA has plenty of work to be done that would occupy him every week for a year if he choose to actually do his job. We have problems with individual Senators slowing us down and many not contributing to the debate (NO ACTIVITY STANDARD WILL MAKE SENATORS DEBATE WTIH SUBSTANCE, WHICH WAS I SAID "THAT THIS WILL EFFECT"), but we are functional. The same can't be said of each of the Departments in your cabinet at this point. Take your outrage and stick it sideways, Marokai.

If a VP is managing even a single bill, the procedural stuff would ensure that he is posting more then once a week in said threads. Of course you have to keep those slots filled, and lets see was that the lack of a Senator doing his job, or a cabinet member that left the VP's slots all vacant with a 25-30 bill queue for the past several weeks?

As for the Senate, my point was that if you are going to apply this only to the Senate, you might as well scratch this whole thing and replaced it with an OSPR amendment reducing the number of days necessary to be inactive in order to expell a member. I never said I don't want to touch want to touch the Senate, Marokai. If you insist on putting words in my mouth, thne I will tell you right you can stick them too.

I went through four Blue Screens to get on here, for this kind of treatment? WTF?!!!!

[Kaine for Senate '18]

When will my amendment be voted on, Yank?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Easy Ben, remember there is a 24 hour rule on these babies. And I have been trying to get on here since 11:00 AM this morning nad only finally succeeded thirty minutes ago.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: A vote is now open on the above amendment, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY!!!

If this passes, I am offering an amendment to turn this into an OSPR amendment. There is no sense duplicating a process, if it is only for the SEnate, whne we already have such a procedure in place and can simply reduce the day requirement if such is desired.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Yank, I forgot the 24 hour rule.  I was actually curious, not prodding you or anything

Aye on the amendment.

[Napoleon]

NAY!!!

If this passes, I am offering an amendment to turn this into an OSPR amendment. There is no sense duplicating a process, if it is only for the SEnate, whne we already have such a procedure in place and can simply reduce the day requirement if such is desired.

[Sopranos Republican]

NAY

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, the option of utilizing a different activity standard for different offices in question, is also a possibility if a blanket one is innefficient for some of them to achieve the desired ends.

[Napoleon]

The President and Vice President disappearing is much worse than a single Senator being absent.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Is it an unreasonable imposition to inquire as to why we should pursue this matter in this fashion, in light of what I said previously, if it is so desired to be restricted only to the Senate?