SENATE BILL: Atlasian Currency Act (Law'd)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:15:46 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SENATE BILL: Atlasian Currency Act (Law'd)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
Author Topic: SENATE BILL: Atlasian Currency Act (Law'd)  (Read 8352 times)
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: August 23, 2011, 09:15:44 PM »

Oh, you're right... I looked at the first post and saw it was recently edited, so I figured that was the updated version. Yankee must have just changed the title. My bad. Tongue

I don't really care about the two dollar bill either way. If one doesn't like tmth, then at least he's on the bill nobody ever sees or uses... Tongue

GRRR!!!

Don't you people ever listen when I say " I DON'T UPDATE OP TEXT" and that "I NEVER HAVE".

If you didn't notice this, I wonder how many incorrect texts were placed in the wiki? 

When I update the Wiki I almost always start at the end of the thread to make sure I add the most recent version of the legislation. Not that it's my job to edit the Wiki, though I often do it anyway...
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: August 23, 2011, 09:18:50 PM »

To avoid confusing the amendment that just finished, I plan to open the vote on the next amendment (44:30 by Mr. bgwah) tomorrow. (I have classes from 8 till 12 so I might not be on till afternoonish, if BK is on I encourage him to go ahead and start it).

If you guys want to go ahead an start it now, I'll gladly risk some confusion in order to save time, as you guys know. Tongue


I leave the matter in your hands.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: August 23, 2011, 09:24:08 PM »

Oh, you're right... I looked at the first post and saw it was recently edited, so I figured that was the updated version. Yankee must have just changed the title. My bad. Tongue

I don't really care about the two dollar bill either way. If one doesn't like tmth, then at least he's on the bill nobody ever sees or uses... Tongue

GRRR!!!

Don't you people ever listen when I say " I DON'T UPDATE OP TEXT" and that "I NEVER HAVE".

If you didn't notice this, I wonder how many incorrect texts were placed in the wiki?  

When I update the Wiki I almost always start at the end of the thread to make sure I add the most recent version of the legislation. Not that it's my job to edit the Wiki, though I often do it anyway...

Which is why, seeing you confused about the OP mistake sent all kinds of "oh sh**t" emotions through my head. I mean some other Senator, it isn't as consequential.

I always thought the AG was suppose to handle the wiki pages for legislation.

While we are on this subject, how do you create a wiki page from scratch?  
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: August 23, 2011, 09:24:57 PM »

How is Bgwah's bill different than it's current form?
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: August 24, 2011, 02:41:59 AM »

Amendment: As the two dollar bill is rarely used and printed, they shall no longer be printed and issued as currency in Atlasia.

I object.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: August 24, 2011, 12:07:13 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The above amendment is now at vote, please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: August 24, 2011, 12:07:59 PM »

Aye
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: August 24, 2011, 12:14:06 PM »

Now that we have incorporated PS and not thrown anyone else off the train to do it, I think we should preserve the current text (Can be viewed on the previous page) as is.


So Nay.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,663
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: August 24, 2011, 01:06:35 PM »

How is Bgwah's bill different than it's current form?
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: August 24, 2011, 02:10:32 PM »

It says portrait instead of photo... Tongue

Aye.
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: August 24, 2011, 02:17:08 PM »

aye
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: August 24, 2011, 02:54:20 PM »

There is one hell of a controversy that could be created here.

The lack of a clause in an amendment doesn't necessarily remove it from the text when it is passed.

My amendment for instance had only two clauses listed, and it of course didn't remove the other 9, from the bill.

If bgwah desired to remove clause 11, the clearest way to do it, was to include it with a strikethrough across it. Or say "clause 11 is removed". Of course, and here we have a limitation of our process, because this was the introduced as a change to the current text at that time (no 11), after another amendment had previously been introduced (With 11). The passage of said amendment then alters the text. In such situation I think it is appropriate to give the amendment's sponsor, time to update their text. Unfortunately, I didn't think of this possible problem before I started the vote.   Tongue

Since their has been an issue raised about the PPT making some bold assumptions (A certain final vote in the CSS), I don't feel comfortable deciding this one way or the other.

There are avenues to clarify this.
1. Have the presiding officer interpet it (I'd prefer not to), possibly using stated intent of amendment sponsor as a guide (I am fine with this, but others might disapprove).
2. Upon passage, introduce another amendment to either replace photo with portrait in clause 11, or remove clause 11.
3. Stop the vote, update the text and start another vote.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: August 24, 2011, 02:59:41 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This amendment produced this text:
Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: August 24, 2011, 03:03:49 PM »

Amendment to clause 11: change Tmthforu to Fritz.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: August 24, 2011, 03:04:42 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Remaining consistent, wouldn't this amendment produce this text if passed:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nice mess, we need amendment introduction standards to avoid this me thinks. Tongue
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: August 24, 2011, 03:07:03 PM »
« Edited: August 24, 2011, 07:52:35 PM by Senator North Carolina Yankee »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.


Sponsor Feedback: Invalid Address
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: August 24, 2011, 08:29:01 PM »

Ruling from the chair (or my two cents, anyway):

Bgwah's amendment, if passed, would indeed remove clause 11 from the bill.

Amendments that only quote the section(s) they modify, even when it's not made explicit, still implicitly modify the relevant sections without removing the other parts from the bill. Note in the amendment you quoted earlier today, Yankee: it's obvious you don't want to strike sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 from the bill, because you kept 7 and 10 numbered the same and made no mention of renumbering or striking anything.

Bgwah's amendment, in contrast, lists sections 1 through 10 just to change a single word on each line (when it's often standard protocol to say something to the effect of, "amend the bill to replace all occurrences of the word "photo" to "portrait") and it seems to intentionally list off number 11. Regardless of the intent, however, in offering the amendment bgwah said, "I would to amend it to read as follows" where it can only reasonably mean the bill as a whole.

How's that for some analysis? Yankee, with all the confusion over everything this session I'm beginning to think you intentionally look for gray areas in the OSPR just to test me Tongue
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: August 24, 2011, 08:44:34 PM »

Ruling from the chair (or my two cents, anyway):

Bgwah's amendment, if passed, would indeed remove clause 11 from the bill.

Amendments that only quote the section(s) they modify, even when it's not made explicit, still implicitly modify the relevant sections without removing the other parts from the bill. Note in the amendment you quoted earlier today, Yankee: it's obvious you don't want to strike sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 from the bill, because you kept 7 and 10 numbered the same and made no mention of renumbering or striking anything.

Bgwah's amendment, in contrast, lists sections 1 through 10 just to change a single word on each line (when it's often standard protocol to say something to the effect of, "amend the bill to replace all occurrences of the word "photo" to "portrait") and it seems to intentionally list off number 11. Regardless of the intent, however, in offering the amendment bgwah said, "I would to amend it to read as follows" where it can only reasonably mean the bill as a whole.

How's that for some analysis? Yankee, with all the confusion over everything this session I'm beginning to think you intentionally look for gray areas in the OSPR just to test me Tongue

No, the last thing I want to do is to find these things on purpose. But when the concern did occur to me earlier, and considering the potential for an alleged personal basis for the motivation on either side of this amendment, I figured it was best to get this resolved now, rather then have it brought up afterwards by one side or the other in an attempt to question the results of the vote.

I completely missed bgwah's line about "seeking to amend the bill as follows" because it was back on page 2 where he had introduced it and I was using the collection of amendments I made as a reference instead. If I had thought to check for that, I wouldn't have needed to bother you. Tongue

But hey, your the first really actively engage in the Senate's operation VP in years. Wink
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: August 24, 2011, 09:33:03 PM »

Honestly, I could care less if I'm on the currency, so I'm okay with being removed. I just really didn't want this to look like a Napoleon victory on his fight to derail me every chance he gets, which has been his obvious goal this entire debate.

I think an amendment should be considered, however, keeping recent President's off the list so that it's pretty much just old-timers. Wink
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: August 24, 2011, 10:08:10 PM »

Honestly, I could care less if I'm on the currency, so I'm okay with being removed. I just really didn't want this to look like a Napoleon victory on his fight to derail me every chance he gets, which has been his obvious goal this entire debate.

I think an amendment should be considered, however, keeping recent President's off the list so that it's pretty much just old-timers. Wink

Not a bad idea. Putting modern politicians on currency would seem controversial. I wouldn't like it a whole lot if the US decided to put President Obama on money and liberals wouldn't like it the US put George W. Bush on currency. But Andrew Jackson...meh...no outrage.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,663
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: August 24, 2011, 10:17:13 PM »

I'm generally against having living people on currency.  So zombies only.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: August 24, 2011, 10:19:21 PM »

Well that wasn't my intention, but whatever... Tongue
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: August 24, 2011, 10:29:41 PM »

Honestly, I could care less if I'm on the currency, so I'm okay with being removed. I just really didn't want this to look like a Napoleon victory on his fight to derail me every chance he gets, which has been his obvious goal this entire debate.

I think an amendment should be considered, however, keeping recent President's off the list so that it's pretty much just old-timers. Wink

Not a bad idea. Putting modern politicians on currency would seem controversial. I wouldn't like it a whole lot if the US decided to put President Obama on money and liberals wouldn't like it the US put George W. Bush on currency. But Andrew Jackson...meh...no outrage.

I find Andrew Jackson's presence on currency an outrage.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: August 24, 2011, 10:31:49 PM »

Honestly, I could care less if I'm on the currency, so I'm okay with being removed. I just really didn't want this to look like a Napoleon victory on his fight to derail me every chance he gets, which has been his obvious goal this entire debate.

I think an amendment should be considered, however, keeping recent President's off the list so that it's pretty much just old-timers. Wink

Not a bad idea. Putting modern politicians on currency would seem controversial. I wouldn't like it a whole lot if the US decided to put President Obama on money and liberals wouldn't like it the US put George W. Bush on currency. But Andrew Jackson...meh...no outrage.

I find Andrew Jackson's presence on currency an outrage.

You must spend all of life protesting then Tongue
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: August 24, 2011, 10:35:42 PM »

Honestly, I could care less if I'm on the currency, so I'm okay with being removed. I just really didn't want this to look like a Napoleon victory on his fight to derail me every chance he gets, which has been his obvious goal this entire debate.

I think an amendment should be considered, however, keeping recent President's off the list so that it's pretty much just old-timers. Wink

Not a bad idea. Putting modern politicians on currency would seem controversial. I wouldn't like it a whole lot if the US decided to put President Obama on money and liberals wouldn't like it the US put George W. Bush on currency. But Andrew Jackson...meh...no outrage.

I find Andrew Jackson's presence on currency an outrage.

You must spend all of life protesting then Tongue

It is important to me that only those who deserve to be honored receive honors.  If that means keeping a disgraced President off of currency to legitimize the honor bestowed upon the other listed Presidents, then that is what I feel I must do. I have no ability to change US Currency so I ignore it but here I have an opportunity to make a difference.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 13 queries.