Amendment to Official Senate Rules and Procedures (Debating)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well, I can say that I much prefer the new idea of a Speaker. Just to clarify this office would replace that of the PPT, correct?

That's correct. I am proposing a name change so that it is clear that the position is distinct from the President of the Senate, and involves not just "filling in," but an entirely seperate set of responsibilities. The office would remain non-partisan.

IIRC this is a change that Yankee disagrees with, so we'll need to see what can be done about his objections.

I don't think it is a necessary change to achieve the stated objective. You could just as easily fix the cross-responsibility/confusion that presently exists simply by redesigning the top two sections of the OSPR, which has never been done and both your text and the one I designed, heavily alters the said section. If we can, I would prefer to keep the PPT name.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Those rules look very good, and much simpler (they sort of remind me of the SOAP in terms of usability)

I'd want to make a few changes to the legislation introduction part, maybe creating an executive slot or two, a change to this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

to make clear that posts have to be relevant, a clipping of amendment times, and all dates and times just in hour form (although that's just personal preference)

Yes, we need some of the executive slots back at least two and more responsibility for the VP either in that or some other capacity.

As for the times I have concerns about Nix moving us back to five days for Amendment votes, yet final votes are cut to three. I would like this to be explained as it seems rather arbitrary.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My biggest concerns are:

1. Expulsion is a blank check in Nix's text and should be limited to activity/competence like it is now. Also, it makes no sense to then include such a limitation nad then keep an unlimited override clause at the very bottom of the rules text, Expulsion should be excluded from being overridden.

2. I love you Nixy baby for keeping my precious in order slots. But they have to have a clogging rule of some sorts otherwise we will have a crowding effect, or filling the tree as it is called in real life. Likewise said clogging rule should be exempt from the rule override clause as well.

3. Aside from the concerns mentioned regarding the override capabilities, there is also the slot rules we might want to consider excluding from override capability, along with debating rules (which usually have their own processes for such), and the expulsion and clogging/introduction rules mentioned above of course.

4. Vote succession, even Justice Bgwah messed this up back in August impeached for Torie and after the supreme court ruling, it is essential that we not over or undercount "A seat". We need a clause handling vote changes by successors.


As a quick aside, I don't recall if this was fixed or not in Nix's text, but there is no reason for us to be held up waiting for the President. As soon as we pass a bill and the PPT/Speaker informs the Prez, the slot should come open for more legislation. Overrides and Redrafts can simply be handled off slot as there usually aren't that many anyway.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nix, why are the vote times as they are?

Yankee, would you like to introduce an amendment to that end?

Did you ever compose a reduced text for the expulsion section?

I got this reduced version of the current OSPR's text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Of course the PPT references would need to be changed.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess I will start with this. It is small and should be non-controversial.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This removes the problem of slots being occupied for seven days waiting for the President to act.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators, you have 24 hours from the time of TNF's post to object to Amendment 50.20.

PPT Lumine, would you mind verifying if that amendment number is correct?

Of course! By my count it's incorrect, the number should be 60:20.

Thanks, Lumine, it has been corrected.

It is not March. 63:20?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yankee, here is my go at a simplified text for expulsion procedure:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It seems longer but maybe that is just the presence of the strikethrough text.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this change intentional or am I just misreading it? Seems weird to say must be continuous and then say an LOA can form non continuous, continuous period.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Like not having any internet access?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I won't have time to follow this debate closely, so please don't wait for me to comment on anything. I reviewed Yankee's points a month ago and approved of most of them. Just keep things clear and simple, and for God's sake keep it free of grammar and usage errors. If something minor requires hundreds of words (like those byzantine succession rules), it probably needs rethinking.

A single sentence is byzantine? The current OSPR has a full section on the matter in fairness though.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My point was that of consistency yes, but I am still preferring to keep the title PPT. So I will hold off on the other one text he posted for now. 

As for slots and threads, you have a point there, but if we are also concerned about moving stuff quickly so as to get people on the floor, this is one area where a lot of time could be saved and ensure that people get their stuff on the floor quicker though. And yes it is a time for advocacy, but on the other hand there is no reason why its presence on or off the officially sanctioned debate floor means that advocacy should in anyway be limited, if anything it is freed up once it is out of the constrains of the procedures of the floor. It is one of the reasons I like to float amendments before official offering them, though my present limitations make that less than practical unfortunately. It would certainly be helpful here if I could though.

Sometimes what is the simplest approach on the surface is not so when it gets down to the nitty gritty of running this place and say what you will about the trade off between complexity and simplicity of text, the time wasted in numerous confrontations over situations the rules did not account or allow for costs weeks and months thus why they were added and usually in many cases those items have a very little impact on the text. The difference afterall between my ideal text ande Nit picky Nixy's, is just 11% size wise.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What about 63:25 Tyrion?

And then we should take care of expulsion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is still the clogging rule and the override section that need to be fixed at the very least.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Tyrion did you process 63:25 yet?

I think it is in my post from the 28th of September.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This was a Nix improvement on my previous amendment on the matter.

We should do the clogging rule next before we forget.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You said you would be fine with four Tyrion?

This is in the legislation introduction section, I forget to include th

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We also cannot forget to deal with Article IX.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am barely keeping track myself, bore.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I am fine with four, Yankee, although my opinion hardly matters any more

Don't give me that El Senor Coffeebeans.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I still think you should have been PPT.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

3.4 Clogging
3.6 Don't remember why I included this one.
4.3 Continued debate (otherwise it is redundant to have a cloture procedure.
8  - Expulsion


You have some rather demanding text criteria, so perhaps you might want to incorporate the descriptors in a way that suits your fancy.

I would point out that numbers is hardly the most confusing means to find anything, particularly if the format is correct on the wiki, in which case merely clicking the appropriate section/Article title will lead one to what they need. Finding 3.4 is hardly asking too much of people.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It would be my preference to avoid procedure until an amendment was solid as you well know Nix, but my present limitations demand for the next twelve days at least that I offer them when I can. Once this two and ahalf month nightmare ends, I can regain my flexibility.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Article 4 skips from clause 5 to 7.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I with withdraw my previous amendment and offer Nix's recommendation in its place.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I thought the text had a standalone cloture rule, am I wrong about that?