Determining regulations of Constitutional Convention. (FINAL VOTE)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I actually sympathize with Griffin's concern. If the delegates do not include a number of Laborite and other leftist voices, then this convention will surely fail. I also think Griffin should be one of the delegates himself obviously.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well Griffin, your thoughts on Lumine's proposal?

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.

Definately. Any convention that lacked you and Cris would be a travesty as well.

Also two from each region would make it more practical since the Pacific and Midwest might struggled to find 4 people people each.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Indeed we are not yet wetted to a single approach at this juncture. It is merely that most agree that it is necessary that the left have a seat at the table, lest they be left out and likely drift away from the game. How we acheive that is still up for debate for right now.

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 know why you think this is the worst senate beacuse a its a conservative senate, b they won't dissolve Atlasia and come over to the great Mock Parliament.

I'm a proud member of the Conservative Party in South America, have been a rather conservative Supreme Court judge here, and more often than not voted with the right while in the Senate. Don't be silly.

Except for those two times when you voted Labor in at least two elections that decided the balance of power at time when TNF was dominating the agenda.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What's needed is radical reform: dissolution of the present legislature, the election of a two-month, caretaker administration, a complete legislative reset, and a completely new and streamlined constitution at the minimum providing for regional consolidation, strong game simulation, and a focus on legislative flexibility and efficiency. Chuck everything out the window and start over-- no mucking about.

Why should throw the future of the country in hands of a unitary executive, however temporary it may be promoted under the notions of caretaker? The Senate, whilst not the operating at its utmost potential, has at various points curbed the excesses and until a successor is elected after the ratification of a new constitution/series of amendments, I must oppose any attempt to dissolve the present government. Such will merely open the door to rogue agents and if this summer has not been a lesson on the need for divided power, I know not what will. This Senate has no power to destroy the game, a rogue caretaker disatisified with the Convention's pace or product can.

Also if one is truly concerned for the welfare of the product of the convention, then it should be of the utmost importance to ensure that the delegates are representative enough to ensure it can garner the necessary support to be ratified. Nothing hinders that more then hasty crafting of selection processes to be sure.

Here we see the very necessity in this debate for this to be ironed out as opposed to being stampeded through.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My most general idea would be to have delegates selected from all the means possible (by party, by region, by vote, etc.).

Indeed, some form of this seems to be the only realistic path. The need for party representation is to ensure that the left isn't left out of the final bargain. For this to work all need to be represented at the table, right left and center. Should anyone of them be missing then one should have no delusions about the success of the reforms, nor even the ratification of what the Convention might produce in such event.

At the same time, we must make sure that indeed that independents have a chance to be represented as well, to be sure.

Random selection poses a great risk for the future of the convention. There are some figures like Griffin, Kalwejt, Classic Conservative, Leinad, Cris, Truman, Duke, etc that should be in attendence simply because they are such leading figures in the reform movement that their absence would be like James Madison or George Washington or Ben Franklin being absent from the Philadelphia convention in 1787. Using a post count has a its limits obviously and opens the door to easy manipulation of whatever standard is set.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

this senate should not be picking nearly half the delegates. terrible amendment.

Nobody even likes your idea about random selection and the majority of active posters like this idea and if you didn't like this Admendment maybe you should tried harder to get elected.

go back to your neonazi rally or whatever kthx

I'm the neonazi here, look who's talking you commie.

Easy gentleman, lets not strangle each other before the convention even starts.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I support the amendment and would likewise extent a welcome to Truman on finally joining the Senate.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Truman's amendment looks great, but are you sure September 21st is the earliest we can have it? It should be tied to the passing of the bill, shouldn't it? As in, X days after the bill's passing?

this senate should not be picking nearly half the delegates. terrible amendment.

Nobody even likes your idea about random selection and the majority of active posters like this idea and if you didn't like this Admendment maybe you should tried harder to get elected.

go back to your neonazi rally or whatever kthx

I'm the neonazi here, look who's talking you commie.

Neo-Nazi? Commie? Now now, Speakers, you two are better than that. And to clarify, it's not the name-calling, per se, it's the fact those are groan-inducingly cheap insults. Seriously, be more clever. "Neo-Nazi" and "Commie" are so lame I can't walk after reading them.

By the way, I'm not for nominating the delegates via post-count, I just think it's a better last-resort idea than random selection.

What length of time would  you suggest? A week maybe after passage?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I object to Evergreen's amendment. It is important, in constituting the Convention, to ensure that every national interest - not just the Regions - is represented. The current bill allows for delegates from the Regions, the electorate at-large (the 5 party delegates), and the national government: this balances  the competing concerns of these constituencies against each other, ensuring that the resulting Constitution will be fair for everyone.

are you implying that the senate and regions are competing against the interests of the people...?

No merely that the interests of a majority of the citizens of the Northeast may differ from that of a majority of the citizens nationwide and keeping a degree of balance between the two is critical to ensuring both interests receive some degree of attention.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

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.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE FTR