S1, third time's a charm: Restoration of the IDS (Tabled)

[Wisconsin+17]

Tough, the motion to vote on the amendment was the active motion, fhtagn. It was seconded and so takes precedence over the 'tabling'.

Anyways, I call the question on the vote on the amendment since I started the motion vote on the amended bill and Celtic seconded it.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, yeah it was.

Sorry, you can't just dismiss a seconded motion, fhtagn by pretending that it wasn't seconded.

[fhtagn]

Tough, the motion to vote on the amendment was the active motion, fhtagn. It was seconded and so takes precedence over the 'tabling'.

Anyways, I call the question on the vote on the amendment since I started the motion vote on the amended bill and Celtic seconded it.

He seconded it AFTER Cuber's motion, and AFTER voting has started.
It does not take precedence.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And you failed to close the active motion, rendering Cuber's motion to table out of order.

Motions don't fail until you close them, fhtagn. You did not close my motion, and so it remained the active motion.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And you failed to close the active motion, rendering Cuber's motion to table out of order.

Motions don't fail until you close them, fhtagn. You did not close my motion, and so it remained the active motion.

If my motion to table had failed, your motion would have been in order. My motion was duly moved and seconded before yours was, so there is no reason yours should override, let alone stop the voting on, mine.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fhtagn is the only one who can fail a motion, Cuber. Until she does, the motion was active. You can't pass a tabling motion until Fhtagn closes the motion for amendment, which she did not, before my motion was seconded.

Look back when I was speaker, I took the motions up and closed them if they failed.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Fhtagn is the only one who can fail a motion, Cuber. Until she does, the motion was active. You can't pass a tabling motion until Fhtagn closes the motion for amendment, which she did not, before my motion was seconded.

Look back when I was speaker, I took the motions up and closed them if they failed.

That's not true. If less than a majority of voting delegates vote to table, the motion fails. That's how voting and democracy work, which I'm sure you have strong support for, after all, you wouldn't dream of filibustering every action of a democratically elected government you happen to disagree with.

Back when you were Speaker, NeverAgain and Spenstar had the decency not to inhibit any activity they could.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We have two votes for amending the bill and voting on the amendment and 2 votes for tabling. I'm not sure why you're arguing for majority rule here.

Why not let the bill come up for a vote, Cuber? You argued that I should amend it and I amended it in accordance to your requests.

Obviously I am listening to your criticisms in improving my bill.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We have two votes for amending the bill and voting on the amendment and 2 votes for tabling. I'm not sure why you're arguing for majority rule here.

Why not let the bill come up for a vote, Cuber? You argued that I should amend it and I amended it in accordance to your requests.

Obviously I am listening to your criticisms in improving my bill.

You could have voted against my motion to table while the vote was going on. You didn't.

Also, I'm sure I don't have to say this, because I'm sure you are a mathematical wizard, but 1 is a majority of a group of size 1.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, I brought up a point of order regarding the active motions. That wasn't addressed until after my motion was seconded.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, I brought up a point of order regarding the active motions. That wasn't addressed until after my motion was seconded.

Oh, well I apologize that you were allowed to decide that your logic was automatically correct without waiting for verdict of the Speaker, and as such assumed that voting on the motion to table your own legislation was unnecessary.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Normal people don't see the connection there.

[Wisconsin+17]

Are we gonna get a chance to vote on the amendment that you suggested?

[JustinTimeCuber]

Are we gonna get a chance to vote on the amendment that you suggested?

I don't think you understand. This legislation was tabled.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We can't table until after we've held the vote on the amendment.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We can't table until after we've held the vote on the amendment.

The vote to table began after your amendment was seconded.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And was out of order, as it wasn't the active motion.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And was out of order, as it wasn't the active motion.

But your motion required a second which it did not have.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At the time you posted, no. But later it got a seconder. Had fhtagn closed it, it would be different but she did not. Therefore the motion for amendment was seconded and your motion was also seconded.

Meaning that the order they are taken up would be amendment first, which we'd vote on , and then the motion for tabling. Had it been closed you'd be right that it wasn't the active motion but it was.

Anyways, what is the harm with this coming to a vote? It's not like it's gonna pass.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At the time you posted, no. But later it got a seconder. Had fhtagn closed it, it would be different but she did not. Therefore the motion for amendment was seconded and your motion was also seconded.

Meaning that the order they are taken up would be amendment first, which we'd vote on , and then the motion for tabling. Had it been closed you'd be right that it wasn't the active motion but it was.

Anyways, what is the harm with this coming to a vote? It's not like it's gonna pass.

Motions aren't valid until they are seconded, so the time of the original motion is irrelevant, it's the time the motion is seconded.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If there's two motions where both have been seconded, the motion issued first has precedence.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If there's two motions where both have been seconded, the motion issued first has precedence.

According to whom? To you? RONR doesn't make any reference to internet forums. In real life, motions are supposed to be seconded immediately after being issued, so this isn't a problem.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We've been doing it this way for awhile. Motion A, Motion B. If motion A gets seconded, motion A goes first.

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We've been doing it this way for awhile. Motion A, Motion B. If motion A gets seconded, motion A goes first.

1. That's a silly precedent to be honest
2. Precedents aren't supreme law
3. It took you over 100 hours to find a second.
4. We were already voting on the motion to table.
5. You took part in discussing the motion to table.
6. Therefore, it's ridiculous to keep crying about this, it clearly wouldn't pass anyway, besides.

I'm done arguing, this is stupid as I'm sure you know. Go ahead and introduce a real version on the order paper, it's not like we'll get to it >:L