Determining regulations of Constitutional Convention. (FINAL VOTE)

[Clyde1998]

It's abundantly clear that this, the worst Senate in Atlasian history, should not have a hand in choosing the delegates to such an important convention. It is also astounding that people are arguing that political parties should be excluded from the process because of their ideology - RIP democracy.

I have to echo this - using Griffins seat distribution plan, you could have:

Fed - 36/5.25 = 3.13 * 2 = 6.26 = 6 representatives
Lab - 35/5.25 = 3.04 * 2 = 6.09 = 6 representatives
TPP - 15/5.25 = 1.30 * 2 = 2.61 = 3 representatives
CR - 10/5.25 = 0.87 * 2 = 1.74 = 2 representatives
ANS - 8/5.25 = 0.70 * 2 = 1.39 = 1 representative
DR - 7/5.25 = 0.61 * 2 = 1.22 = 1 representative
NNP - 4/5.25 = 0.35 * 2 = 0.70 = 1 representative

This brings the amount of people represented by a party involved to 78%, up from 65% - without your concern that two parties could bring down the proposals, as only two ANS/NNP members are involved. I should add that I know my party, the NNP, would want to work constructively with the Atlasian Senate to push through changes that would benefit the game.

[Clyde1998]

It's abundantly clear that this, the worst Senate in Atlasian history, should not have a hand in choosing the delegates to such an important convention. It is also astounding that people are arguing that political parties should be excluded from the process because of their ideology - RIP democracy.

I have to echo this - using Griffins seat distribution plan, you could have:

Fed - 36/5.25 = 3.13 * 2 = 6.26 = 6 representatives
Lab - 35/5.25 = 3.04 * 2 = 6.09 = 6 representatives
TPP - 15/5.25 = 1.30 * 2 = 2.61 = 3 representatives
CR - 10/5.25 = 0.87 * 2 = 1.74 = 2 representatives
ANS - 8/5.25 = 0.70 * 2 = 1.39 = 1 representative
DR - 7/5.25 = 0.61 * 2 = 1.22 = 1 representative
NNP - 4/5.25 = 0.35 * 2 = 0.70 = 1 representative

This brings the amount of people represented by a party involved to 78%, up from 65% - without your concern that two parties could bring down the proposals, as only two ANS/NNP members are involved. I should add that I know my party, the NNP, would want to work constructively with the Atlasian Senate to push through changes that would benefit the game.

This is exceedingly disturbing.  You cannot tell me that you are seriously considering apportioning seats by party to a Constitutional Convention.  Are you trying to run the game into the ground?!  What about independents?  What about minor parties?  Atlasia has long had a storied tradition of both.  This is a new constitution... the idea that partisan considerations should or would play a role in constructing a document that is supposed to be independent of and superordinate to day-to-day political considerations is repugnant.

I was responding to Griffin's proposal ("...using Griffins seat distribution plan, you could have...") - which clearly indicates a partisan plan:

Partisan affiliation within the game should play at least some role in how delegates are selected; otherwise, this will quickly end up being a right-wing circle jerk. I'd propose a 10-member minimum for major party status in this criteria, with 10/20 delegates being selected by the parties. There are 96 citizens belonging to parties with 10 or more members, making the math somewhat simple:

Fed: 36/9.6 = 3.75
Lab: 35/9.6 = 3.64
TPP: 15/9.6 = 1.56
CR: 10/9.6 = 1.04

Every party would need at least one representative, and since Fed & Lab each are the 2 parties closest to rounding up, you'd end up with:

Fed: 4
Lab: 4
TPP: 1
CR: 1


With the remaining 10, you could either allow each Governor to appoint 2 delegates, or you could allow the Senate to appoint 5 delegates and allow each Governor to appoint 1 delegate, for a total of 20 delegates.

It's a suggestion to take sure that no party is left out - if representatives are chosen based on party membership - with five independents/low member parties being appointed to make 25 representatives. (I missed that out - I was in a rush, as I needed to go somewhere). I simply used the RG's list as a quick guide on the matter.

This will ensure that the ConCon involves the views of all the people in the game - instead of being potentially lopsided towards a certain ideology.

However, I'm not advocating this exact plan - however I wouldn't be happy if a partisan model is used without including all parties.