The Proposed Change to The Constitution
•
by Releasethe Krakken
Ok WHS has identified an issue when an impeachment vote basically is proposed to late in a current congress term the position was never discussed in the constitution.
Indeed WHS deliberately proposed the Impeachment vote too late. to complicate matters his proposal faced imminent defeat and had a total counted vote of 12 v 1 against it.
There is several issues :
1. There is a set discussion period in which the person proposing the proposal can discuss why he wants to impeach and detractors can discuss as well.
2. We get to do with different sets of congressman. Some finish their term some start it and some repeat it.
3. The congress men indeed leave their posts at a certain time and new congressman start their term at that time.
4. Indeed new congressman is not privy to the discussion. And according to the consitition the matter cannot be discussed anymore. So new congressman cannot just continue on the vote as they have missed the discussion.
5. Old congressmen that leave cannot vote anymore on the decision.
So the new proposed system will cover this : old congressman will not be burdened past their term and new congressman will not be faced with an impeachment proposal on day 1 of their term.
The Proposal
Adde
😛
Time periods for proposals:
1. Normal proposals may not be proposed within the last 24 hours of the seated congress's sitting.
2. Impeachment proposals may not be proposed within the last 48 hours of the seated congress's sitting.
3.[OPTIONAL Time Periods will apply RETROSPECTIVELY*]
Motivation and WHS proposal
The motivation is that no other system would be legitimate as a proposal is made in a certain congress for the decision of that congress but at some time they lose their position. No other congress can decide on these proposals as proposals must be term based and as stated a proposal is made for the decision of the congress seated.
How we will deal with WHS proposal:
Either WHS withdraws the proposal and the new congress start with a new slate and he can get someone to repeat the proposal within a week.
The WHS proposal will be made after changes to the constitution was discussed and voted. Furthermore as we are now in their hands . They will discuss and vote whether to end WHS 's proposal.
b. To postpone it for a later stage and whether the previous congress will have an opportunity to lay submissions before it. and finally whether to follow my proposal.
Also we should vote if we want to apply the changes retrospectively meaning it applies backwards as if introduced from the start. All laws is usually not to apply recursively except if you add it specifically.
I propose
After the new congress start a further 24 hour discussion period will follow whereupon the exiting congressman can copy paste their existing discussions into an article. They can then discuss the vote . New congressman can also discuss it. That will constitute sufficient discussion:
Old votes will be carried over to the new congress and all congressman can then vote again that have not voted previously. The same percentages will count.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Well would you look at that... 😃
Krakken all day told me I was wrong but the first sentence here tell you all how right I was ...Yes I proposed it late, yes it was always going to be defeated, but yes Krakken miscounted the voted deliberately because the result was inconvenient (closer)
He set aside the actual terms of the constitution exactly as I predicted.
Still trying to work out the actual vote but my point was proved and far easier than I expected.
As well as issues Krakken admits too above he fails to admit to counting invalid votes posted prior to the voting period.
And I fully accept that new congresspeople can vote on any proposal on the table whether privy to the discussion or not. This is the system written in the constitution flawed as it is.
It's been fun 😃
Guys you should have seen post and post where Krakken swung between abuse and trying to reason his way out of it, while I calmly rebutted him each time to finally he had to admit defeat and post this article.
I had a wonderful time in my last day in Congress (for a bit ...)
oh voted the article 😛
eIreland created another Constitution, and in less than a week Winston manipulated a technical flaw in it to forward a personal agenda (literally, he was the single Yes vote).
Since, in my experience, generating meaningless political conflict and thread activity is what eConstitutions are *really* for, I guess everything is working as intended.
I pointed out flaws prior to this been voted in, but was ignored/abused for doing so. I think I am justified to show how flaws can be used. I also proved that the rules will be set aside when not convenient to that certain clique here. All in all a good few days work.
Everyone alway feels justified to their actions by the circumstances winston, and this case you opposition includes the entirety of Congress (literally, you were the single Yes vote).
Do you deny the democracy has been observed by ignoring you?
Absolutely not, I accepted the vote...
whatever WHS I assume you withdraw your proposal then?
absolutely not...actually I cannot as only Congressmen can and I'm not one. 😃
read the proposal better as your not serious on the proposal we will make the changes retrospective. if voted in.
Dude make up the rules as you go along as you are doing now 😛 My point was made and won
whatever WHS you identified a minute oversight. I never said anyone was wrong but on a technical legal aspect your elaborate plan did show something we did not consider.. It just makes you look even more crazy that you would deliberately get people to comment on my articles then leave your party and place an article that you left them make a fake proposal just to show the constitution has a tiny oversight in it.
but shine on you crazy diamond. i will suggest we call teh amendment a winston and every further bug as well..
Its just a small fly in the ointment. We can fix it now or forever have people like WHS exploiting this uncertainty.
WHS you always want to bend something your way. the Constitution is not wrong its just mute on this point. It will be changed some more. I was giving you several options. But none suited you as this proposal was just a way to attack the constitution. Therefore I will ask for the amendments to be retrospective meaning your proposal will be considered invalid.
Listening to people who annoy you is great trait. Good on you RK.
ah the coward who gets others to fight his battles and leaved them take the flak