News:

Welcome to Wittenberg!

Main Menu

Recent posts

#81
It's two.
#82
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: The Vacant Throne (We Real...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - April 27, 2024, 05:42:23 PM
Guidance from @Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB please - do we have to Clark this as one amendment or two?
#83
El Viestül/The Lobby / Re: [Cantzelerïă/Chancery] Cal...
Last post by Glüc da Dhi S.H. - April 27, 2024, 05:30:24 PM
I would like to submit
The 9 to 5 Amendment
to be included on the next clark.
#84
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: The Vacant Throne (We Real...
Last post by Sir Lüc - April 27, 2024, 04:32:59 PM
Sure, go forth and Clark.
#85
Wittenberg / Re: Poker 2024
Last post by þerxh Sant-Enogat - April 27, 2024, 03:38:38 PM
Ok for me ! Give me some time to learn the rules
#86
Wittenberg / Re: Let's Talk Realignment: US...
Last post by Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP - April 27, 2024, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: Zilect Uómbat Firă on April 26, 2024, 02:48:19 PMWhat would the population distribution be if we used the US Census regions? (note: I left Wisconsin as-is)


As it turns out, not quite so even.
#87
The purpose of the Hopper is to debate bills and make changes. As SoS, the only time I would refuse a bill is if the bill in the Hopper in its final, debated form is substantially different from what came out of the CRL. The CRL shouldn't be able to say "hey this bill changed a lot, start over." That isn't really its function.
#88
El Funal/The Hopper / What is "a bill"? (serious que...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - April 26, 2024, 10:50:24 PM
El Lexhatx H.2.1 repeats, over and over again, that the necessary requirement for any bill to be Clarked (or to be submitted to the CRL) is that it has "spent 10 days in the Hopper".

The problem is - as we found in the Succession Amendment thread - at least one member of the CRL thinks that if a bill's language changes fundamentally (like, from a new draft), it's no longer the same bill and has to start again.

El Lexh H.2.1.7.4 gives the SoS authority not to Clark a bill which is totally different from what went to the CRL. If we want the CRL to have the authority to do the same to a bill whose language has changed either totally or significantly over its 10 days, we should do so explicitly.

But I disagree. My preferred amendment would be to change the language

QuoteA bill has passed the Hopper if it has spent at least 10 days in the Hopper

wherever it appears to be something like:

QuoteA legislative proposal has passed the Hopper if the substantive text of the bill has been debated in the Hopper for at least 10 days and its proposer is satisfied with its form.

Which way do we want to shift it? The current ambiguity is not ideal.
#89
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: The Vacant Throne (We Real...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN - April 26, 2024, 10:36:29 PM
@Sir Lüc it's been 10 days since AD dropped his first draft, can this get the nod now?
#90
El Funal/The Hopper / Re: The Vacant Throne (We Real...
Last post by Ian Plätschisch - April 26, 2024, 06:08:17 PM
Looks good