Determining regulations of Constitutional Convention. (FINAL VOTE)

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We should probably start by specifying regulations concerning delegates. This would include methods of selection, qualifications, activity requirements, &c.

[Associate Justice PiT]

You guys should also address regions like the Pacific and the Midwest since they're low on activity and we need delegates from there. I like Griffins idea also but we should try to equal spilt them up between every region.

     We could try to address both concerns at once and count people two-fer. For example, Griffin would be counted as both a Labor delegate and a Southern delegate. We'll have some extras so we don't have to pigeonhole people and select them just for the right combo of party and region, but it would put less strain on the less active regions to staff the convention.

[Associate Justice PiT]

With regards to my partisan affiliation proposal: there has likely never been a time in which the game's officeholders and, to a lesser extent, even the Census, has been more out of line with what the long-term and aggregate ideological nature of the game tend to be. In order for the ConCon reforms to pass when they come up for a vote, ideological balance that is at least somewhat similar to the composition of the game's citizens will be needed in order to ensure that the proposals that emerge are not ideologically-slanted or that entire segments of the game feel left out of the process. Furthermore, there are so relatively few active people in the game right now that I am more or less confident that the delegates will constitute roughly the same individuals with or without the provision - this is merely a backstop/guarantee that that is the case. 

     In pure candidness, the Senate being out of step with the public is a longstanding problem in Atlasia. I also favor a system that privileges a diversity of views, lest the Convention just produce some unworkable proposal that is soundly voted down.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     A good amendment, though 25 delegates is kind of a lot. Along with a quorum requirement, this could spell trouble.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I agree with Simfan. Elections would take a long time, and would somewhat of a mess. I do think that it's best to delegate the choosing of regional delegates to their respective governments, which have the benefits of being filled with newer players, and are less skewed from a partisan perspective than the Senate.

     On the timescale of a convention, I doubt that the time needed to hold an election will be that big of a deal. At the same time, I do like the idea of giving the regional governments power in selecting delegates. Decisions, decisions.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I understand Evergreen's position, but we're including the Senate in the selection of delegates in order to ensure representation to sectors that may not be elected, but whose input will be very important.

This is basically my position exactly.

I think that we need to ensure that no one slips through the cracks, and if we only have one form of selection (e.g. only appointment or only voting) this has a higher chance of happening than if we have a variety of methods.

The key is balance--ideological balance, regional balance, and method-of-selection balance. Since the number of active people who would want to do this probably isn't much greater than 25, it shouldn't be too hard to find people.

     I would suggest that the Senate is a different subculture from the rest of Atlasia, and it should have its interests represented in the convention for that very reason. This is a very important step, and we should try to represent as many different interests as possible.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I would like to see a list of reasons why the Senate should be completely excluded from the selection of any delegates, beyond just vague criticisms about it being the worst ever.

The selection of delegates to the Constitutional Convention has always been the unique provenance of the people, as reflected through region-based elections.  The idea that delegates should be selected based on the whims of the elites is a new development.

Who ever said whims? One could just as easily discredit popular vote by saying "whims of the people."

The "elites" consist of some of the most active Atlasians, who best understand the issues and know who will do best in the ConCon. Having delegates selected by popular vote is obviously a good idea too, and I'd be against any plan that didn't have that (earlier in this thread I defended the concept of electing delegates when Simfan said it would take too long) but I think Senatorial appointments are important, too, and it's unfair to characterize it as "whims of the elites."

Now, if they go and make stupid picks, I'll be harmonizing with you on the "whim" chorus; but that seems like a rash assessment as of now.

     I agree with this, for reasons I explained above. A vision of Atlasia that excludes the opinions of Senators will be one that is unrepresentative of a large segment of its current userbase and alienate many long-time players.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Glory to the Senate!