(Moved to Vote)Divus Ammendment

[imb39]

Rationale:

I am not sure how this anomoly got through. It has always been an enshrined part of the legislative process here that abstaining votes do not count against a motion, they are simply ignored. By signifying a number (out of 16 voters) the effect is reversed. Abstainers are now counted against the motion. If the 2/3 majority is considered too low, then raise the percentage. I happen to think it is adequate already.

Divus

To achieve apotheosis and Curial vote, the nominee must be supported by twelve elected members of the Consilium de Civitate. The nominee must have served as a Council Officer (or previous equivalents), made a clear and distinquished contribution to the community and provided exceptional service to TWC in their capacity as an administrator. They cannot be nominated within three months of resigning their Officer Position.

Any Citizen can nominate a former Council Officer and does so by PMing a CdeC member. The CdeC will contact the nominee and ask if he or she will accept the nomination. If the nominee should decline, or fails to respond within one month, no further action need be taken and the nomination declared null and void.

If the nominee should accept, the CdeC will create a thread within the CdeC Forum to investigate the legitimacy of the nominee’s accolades. The CdeC has the right to request any and all relevant material from the Staff Officers to ascertain this, with the approval of the Council. The CdeC will discuss the nominee and his qualifications for at least a week before the vote is held.

Should the nominee receive the support of twelve three fourths of non abstaining CdeC members, the Curator shall create a discussion in the prothalamus lasting at least three days and then move the nomination to vote as per the procedure in Section 2 Article 3. The vote shall last one week and the nominee shall require a two-third majority of non-abstaining votes to become Divus. A nominee who fails the vote is not eligible to be nominated again for a six month period.

Proposer - imb39
Supporters - Cymera, Simetrical, Fabolous, Perikles

edits -

1 - changed proportion to 3/4 of CDC voters.
2 - changed wording to three fourths. (I was generally unsure).

[Cymera]

Support, if that means anything from a lowly Civitates....

[the Black Prince]

it was deliberate i think, from when the level for Divus was raised to 3/4... and carried over into the new constitution. A person has to have the support of 12 members of the CdeC for them to bring his case before the whole curia.


i can't recall what the rationale for it was, but i imagine it can be found in the debate on the 2nd from last divus amendment which i shall now go and find for you!

[the Black Prince]

having looked at previous divus amendments, the last one specified that 3/4 of the CdeC had to support, not 3/4 of non abstaining CdeC members. it appears to have been introduced by Spartan

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=80804
incidentally Ian, you were one of the supporters! lol

[Simetrical]

Well, keep it at 3/4, surely. One bill for one thing. This is just a typo, methinks, and can be safely interpreted to mean three-fourths support, not literally twelve-person support. But 12/16 = 3/4, not 2/3.

[imb39]

incidentally Ian, you were one of the supporters! lol

Am I not allowed to change my mind? I am not objecting, per se to the proportion, it was the fact that there was a specific number (12). That is what I objected to.

Well, keep it at 3/4, surely. One bill for one thing. This is just a typo, methinks, and can be safely interpreted to mean three-fourths support, not literally twelve-person support. But 12/16 = 3/4, not 2/3.

OK. Adjusted to match that.

[Fabolous]

Well, keep it at 3/4, surely. One bill for one thing. This is just a typo, methinks, and can be safely interpreted to mean three-fourths support, not literally twelve-person support. But 12/16 = 3/4, not 2/3.

Right. So in this case, I support.
(Though, I'd favor the wording to read three-fourths instead of three quaters, but that has no practical difference.)

[imb39]

I was unsire and considered three forths too. I'll go along with that. As you say, it is not of desperate importance.

[Perikles]

Supportification.

[Cymera]

Still support (that star next to my name makes my butt look big )

[Denny Crane!]

I support but object to the terrible grammer, three forths?

[imb39]

I support but object to the terrible grammer, three forths?

Spelling, actually...

Corrected.

Also, the word you were searching for was 'grammar'.

[Denny Crane!]

Damn you!

It now has my whole hearted support

Peter

[imb39]

Can this be put to a vote?

[selenius4tsd]

I support it.

[Aristophanes]

Support.

[Plutarch]

Support

[scottishranger]

Moved to vote

[Gaius Baltar]

Rationale:

I am not sure how this anomoly got through. It has always been an enshrined part of the legislative process here that abstaining votes do not count against a motion, they are simply ignored. By signifying a number (out of 16 voters) the effect is reversed. Abstainers are now counted against the motion. If the 2/3 majority is considered too low, then raise the percentage. I happen to think it is adequate already.

Divus

To achieve apotheosis and Curial vote, the nominee must be supported by twelve elected members of the Consilium de Civitate. The nominee must have served as a Council Officer (or previous equivalents), made a clear and distinquished contribution to the community and provided exceptional service to TWC in their capacity as an administrator. They cannot be nominated within three months of resigning their Officer Position.

Any Citizen can nominate a former Council Officer and does so by PMing a CdeC member. The CdeC will contact the nominee and ask if he or she will accept the nomination. If the nominee should decline, or fails to respond within one month, no further action need be taken and the nomination declared null and void.

If the nominee should accept, the CdeC will create a thread within the CdeC Forum to investigate the legitimacy of the nominee’s accolades. The CdeC has the right to request any and all relevant material from the Staff Officers to ascertain this, with the approval of the Council. The CdeC will discuss the nominee and his qualifications for at least a week before the vote is held.

Should the nominee receive the support of twelve three fourths of non abstaining CdeC members, the Curator shall create a discussion in the prothalamus lasting at least three days and then move the nomination to vote as per the procedure in Section 2 Article 3. The vote shall last one week and the nominee shall require a two-third majority of non-abstaining votes to become Divus. A nominee who fails the vote is not eligible to be nominated again for a six month period.

Proposer - imb39
Supporters - Cymera, Simetrical, Fabolous, Perikles

edits -

1 - changed proportion to 3/4 of CDC voters.
2 - changed wording to three fourths. (I was generally unsure).

Having already moved to vote, I noticed some potentially confusing wording here;

To achieve apotheosis and Curial vote, the nominee must be supported by twelve elected members of the Consilium de Civitate

and

Should the nominee receive the support of three fourths of non abstainingCdeC members

Well, its either gonna be one or the other, which is it?

[the Black Prince]

*sighs*