Proposed tweak to Hopper rules

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

What if... we made a rule that every bill in the Hopper at the end of the month will get Clarked unless its sponsor(s) ask for it not to be? If everything in here could possibly be up for a vote in the next month, maybe people would take bills more seriously, and not just assume that if it's not being talked about it's on the trash bin.

[GV]

What if... we made a rule that every bill in the Hopper at the end of the month will get Clarked unless its sponsor(s) ask for it not to be? If everything in here could possibly be up for a vote in the next month, maybe people would take bills more seriously, and not just assume that if it's not being talked about it's on the trash bin.

The need for someone to physically come into the forum and specifically request a bill be clarked is an important one.  It puts the final onus of error-checking and purpose on the bill-writer(s) and leaves the SoS free of the prospect of "I wasn't finished with my bill yet.  Why did you Clark it?".

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

The question is how we get people involved more in debating bills (especially since the CRL isn't functioning, est. Mençéi :D ). The Regent says he just stopped responding to the first version of the Repatriation Bill because I stopped responding to him, and other people only discovered massive issues with it once it was Clarked. I've had other ideas on how to make sure bills are properly debated before - including a "multiple reading" system, or a system where the Cosă and Senäts vote separately - but no-one has ever been enthusiastic about them, and we still get under-debated bills with errors.

[GV]

The question is how we get people involved more in debating bills (especially since the CRL isn't functioning, est. Mençéi :D ). The Regent says he just stopped responding to the first version of the Repatriation Bill because I stopped responding to him, and other people only discovered massive issues with it once it was Clarked. I've had other ideas on how to make sure bills are properly debated before - including a "multiple reading" system, or a system where the Cosă and Senäts vote separately - but no-one has ever been enthusiastic about them, and we still get under-debated bills with errors.

We need more than one Hopper: one month in the '1st reading', one month in the 'second', and one month in the third.  Or just two weeks and a 1/3 Cosâ requirement (independent of the Clark) for advancement to each of the 2nd and 3rd readings...

[Eðo Grischun]

I think a multiple reading system would be highly beneficial.

Also, a "ping-pong" between the two Houses might be a good idea.