[Discussion] Premature Transfer to vote

[Lysimachus]

I was just thinking, if a proposal has complete unanimous support then shouldn't there be a clause in the Constitution to allow it to be put to vote early? There's no point having to wait the required three days if massive support is displayed in the proposal thread. I haven't drawn up the precise proposal, but maybe if a clause was added saying that if X number of individuals support a proposal then it can be pushed to vote? Maybe further add to that that no opposition has been expressed in the proposal thread or something of the like. if this passes, overall I think it'll improve the Curia's efficiency as things like GED for Novus won't have to stand in limbo for three days just because of formality.

[Astaroth]

Sometimes it takes a day or two until people figure out the downsides of a proposal. Also, some people don't visit the Curia daily so those that don't wouldn't be able to voice their thoughts before the bill is moved to vote. Sure, there are some cases in which it's unlikely that anyone will oppose anyway (such as medals for people who really deserve them) but I don't think that moving them to vote one or two days earlier is really necessary.

[Lysimachus]

How about a requirement of say, ten supporters then? The OP has to explain their justification for their proposal, so members can gauge the merits of it on the spot.

[Squid]

Oppose, three days from 3 supporters is not that long. Patience is a virtue people should practice it more.

[Lysimachus]

Oppose, three days from 3 supporters is not that long. Patience is a virtue people should practice it more.

Waiting for three days is pointless if there is unanimous support for a proposal. Using the same example again, in GED's Novus nomination not a single person voted no. I think one person abstained, and i'm guessing that was him. The way I see it, if there's no competition to a proposal then it might as well be put forward and done with which would in itself improve the efficiency of the Curia, unless there's some mysterious reason why things working quicker in the Curia is a bad thing.

[Squid]

It's three days, be patient. There's nothing the curia does that can't wait three days. Using the GED example, you couldn't know before the vote concluded whether anybody had voted no. So using information you can't possibly know before a vote to decide when a vote should be held does not make sense. I know for a fact that there have been proposals that failed even though no opposition was given in thread.

[irishron]

Three days is not the end of the world. Oppose.

[the Black Prince]

Just because lots of people support doesn't mean that the opposition should be prevented from having their say before a vote commences.

Oppose

[Lysimachus]

guise

srsly

[karamazovmm]

I have to oppose too.

this is not the way to create a good fast track.

If you want we can join heads and try to think a fast track system

[Lysimachus]

I have to oppose too.

this is not the way to create a good fast track.

If you want we can join heads and try to think a fast track system

LETS DO IT



curse you guys for opposing my proposal, i will get my revenge

[Bokks]

Hehehe, Oppose, Premature.. Hehehhe

Hmm... and with a comment like that, who here is "premature"?

curse you guys for opposing my proposal, i will get my revenge

Well it's not so much that, but in the grand scheme of things three days isn't that long at all. For one thing it allows for a chance to--as Astaroth said--think of the bad sides of a potential recommendation/proposal, but for another thing it gives a better chance for citizens to get revved up to vote on something. If you know that something your really want to pass (or you would really like to vote on giving someone a metal that they think they deserve) but you might not have been online otherwise, then knowing it's coming up in a few days time and therefore making sure you can get online at some point for the voting itself is better than coming back online the day after the voting closes.

It also gives a chance to--not necessarily oppose--but improve upon a proposal going through. If you just throw things into vote immediately then something that may actually be used against it by the voting masses may be overlooked.

[M D]

Hehehe, Oppose, Premature.. Hehehhe

[Hotspur]

I am disappointed that there isn't more sympathy for Lysi and his premature transfers. I have been told it can be rather embarrassing.

[Lysimachus]

I am disappointed that there isn't more sympathy for Lysi and his premature transfers. I have been told it can be rather embarrassing.

[Nanny de Bodemloze]

I hear what you are saying Lys - you are just trying to go for efficiency, and that's a good sentiment - and shouldn't be mocked by anyone. I can just see too many instances where people's RLs prevent them from logging in every single day.

Besides...how often is it that we have a medal emergency?

Oppose.

[Hotspur]

Think about baseball. I've heard that helps.

[Rolanbek]

Oppose. Non-issue

I do not see anything which would have benifitted from the time saved. I can see ways for this to be abused.

R

[Capt. Fozdike]

Oppose. Is three days really gonna kill you?

[Lysimachus]

i like how you oppose even after i've abandoned my proposal