Filibuster Bill

Crushing Our Enemies

Crushing Our Enemies

TNPer
-
-
Discord
COE#7110
Filibuster Bill:
1. Section 1 of the Rules of the Regional Assembly shall be amended as follows:
Section 1. Proposals

1. Any citizen may bring a proposal for discussion before the Regional Assembly.

2. The Speaker may schedule a vote on any proposal being discussed by the Regional Assembly as permitted by law.

3. If, before a vote on a proposal begins, at least three citizens object to the decision of the Speaker to schedule it, the Speaker must cancel the scheduled vote.

4. If a number of citizens equal to or exceeding one third of the number of votes required to achieve quorum for any legislative vote, including the citizen that introduced the proposal to the Regional Assembly, motion that a vote should be held on a proposal before the Regional Assembly, then the Speaker must schedule a vote on that proposal to begin as soon as permitted by law.

5. Any citizen may begin a Filibuster of any proposal by declaring that they are doing so in the thread that contains the proposal, and any other citizen may join an ongoing Filibuster by making a similar declaration.

6. While a Filibuster of a proposal is ongoing, no vote on that proposal may begin. Any vote scheduled to begin on that proposal during an ongoing Filibuster must be postponed.

7. A Filibuster ends when the citizen or group of citizens Filibustering a proposal fail to collectively make at least five posts per hour of time elapsed since the beginning of the Filibuster. Posts which are not made in the thread containing the proposal do not count, nor do any posts that duplicate a previous post in the thread or contain fewer than 100 words.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Filibuster Bill:
1. Section 1 of the Rules of the Regional Assembly shall be amended as follows:
Section 1. Proposals

1. Any citizen may bring a proposal for discussion before the Regional Assembly.

2. The Speaker may schedule a vote on any proposal being discussed by the Regional Assembly as permitted by law.

3. If, before a vote on a proposal begins, at least three citizens object to the decision of the Speaker to schedule it, the Speaker must cancel the scheduled vote.[/out]

4. If a number of citizens equal to or exceeding one third of the number of votes required to achieve quorum for any legislative vote, including the citizen that introduced the proposal to the Regional Assembly, motion that a vote should be held on a proposal before the Regional Assembly, then the Speaker must schedule a vote on that proposal to begin as soon as permitted by law.

5. Any citizen may begin a Filibuster of any proposal by declaring that they are doing so in the thread that contains the proposal, and any other citizen may join an ongoing Filibuster by making a similar declaration.

6. While a Filibuster of a proposal is ongoing, no vote on that proposal may begin. Any vote scheduled to begin on that proposal during an ongoing Filibuster must be postponed.

7. A Filibuster ends when the citizen or group of citizens Filibustering a proposal fail to collectively make at least five posts per hour of time elapsed since the beginning of the Filibuster. Posts which are not made in the thread containing the proposal do not count, nor do any posts that duplicate a previous post in the thread or contain fewer than 100 words.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

This proposal would allow ardent opponents of a bill to delay, or ultimately prevent, a vote. Thoughts?
 
This is not a joke proposal. I think the difficulty of keeping a filibuster going would result in it being a rarely used tactic, only coming into play when a group of citizens felt very strongly that a bill should not come to vote. Ultimately, it is too difficult to keep up indefinitely, so in most cases it would probably just delay a vote. The busters could use the spectacle of the filibuster, along with the extra time it gave them, to make the case that the bill should not pass.
 
I know, I know, I'm sorry. I just... Oh man I just can't stop giggling.

I actually don't think this is the worst idea ever. It has a kind of appeal!
 
SillyString:
I know, I know, I'm sorry. I just... Oh man I just can't stop giggling.

I actually don't think this is the worst idea ever. It has a kind of charm!
Click to expand...
This idea will cripple the ability of TNP to pass laws. It will encourage meaningless spam to be shoveled onto the forum. It will give countless ne'er-do-wells the opportunity to screw with TNP when they're bored.

tl;dr full support!
 
I defy anyone to keep up five posts per hour indefinitely. I can't imagine even the most successful filibuster lasting longer than a couple days.
 
Could the proposer demonstrate to me some of the harms this proposal would remedy? Few proposals are objected to (and I presume that it is unlikely someone would use the filibuster but not the objection on account of the relative ease of the objection and its relative longevity) and, of those, not all are moved for immediate vote, and, of those, not all pass. It would appear to me that the proposed mechanism does not serve much of a need and, in relation to those proposals which it could successfully deter, would actually deter, or slow down, good legislation.

If the proposer could find for me some example of bad legislation which was moved to an immediate vote over objections and passed, that might assuage my concern.
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
I defy anyone to keep up five posts per hour indefinitely. I can't imagine even the most successful filibuster lasting longer than a couple days.
Click to expand...
As a user who once skipped an exam so that I could maintain control over The South Pacific for an extra two days, I think your defiance is misguided. Never underestimate my kind.
 
flemingovia:
Why bother? Just find a tame delegate to veto it.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, we only have one delegate at a time, so that is not always an option.

Zyvetskistaahn:
Could the proposer demonstrate to me some of the harms this proposal would remedy? Few proposals are objected to (and I presume that it is unlikely someone would use the filibuster but not the objection on account of the relative ease of the objection and its relative longevity) and, of those, not all are moved for immediate vote, and, of those, not all pass. It would appear to me that the proposed mechanism does not serve much of a need and, in relation to those proposals which it could successfully deter, would actually deter, or slow down, good legislation.

If the proposer could find for me some example of bad legislation which was moved to an immediate vote over objections and passed, that might assuage my concern.
Click to expand...
This proposal does not set out to fix some problem, but rather to enrich our parliamentary procedure.

Mall:
As a user who once skipped an exam so that I could maintain control over The South Pacific for an extra two days, I think your defiance is misguided. Never underestimate my kind.
Click to expand...
Mall:
As a user who once skipped an exam so that I could maintain control over The South Pacific for an extra two days
Click to expand...
Mall:
skipped an exam
Click to expand...
:blink:
OK, maybe a week then.
 
Most people can't go all that long without having to step away from their computer for at least an hour, and even the most dedicated person can't go more than a few days without sleep. This is really only sustainable if you have a group of people who are all firmly committed to stopping the vote... and if someone can muster enough support to maintain that kind of posting pace every hour, without stop, because they care just that much? More power to 'em, I say.
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
Mall:
As a user who once skipped an exam so that I could maintain control over The South Pacific for an extra two days, I think your defiance is misguided. Never underestimate my kind.
Click to expand...
Mall:
As a user who once skipped an exam so that I could maintain control over The South Pacific for an extra two days
Click to expand...
Mall:
skipped an exam
Click to expand...
:blink:
OK, maybe a week then.
Click to expand...
Gator don't play no shit.
 
Filibusters are dearly loved across the Atlantic, but in the UK they are generally regarded as poor form. We already have quite enough mechanisms for the will of the Regional Assembly to be thwarted, and i do not see the value in adding another one to our laws.
 
So if 40 people support a bill passing and 10 people don't, the 10 people who don't support can just begin a filibuster and prevent the obviously supported bill from going to vote?
 
What exactly is the implication of this bill for the governance of TNP?
 
Secretary, it opens up to people a new way to take the piss, and another avenue to stop the RA being effective, or to slow the passage of legislation.
 
flemingovia:
Secretary, it opens up to people a new way to take the piss, and another avenue to stop the RA being effective, or to slow the passage of legislation.
Click to expand...
In otherwords, it's a waste of time. If we were dealing with legislation in real time, filibustering could be a valid tactic, but we're dealing with forum posts where it could be hours or days in between posts. Who wants to sit there spamming every 10-12 minutes to make the minimum post requirement for this?
 
Sil Dorsett:
flemingovia:
Secretary, it opens up to people a new way to take the piss, and another avenue to stop the RA being effective, or to slow the passage of legislation.
Click to expand...
In otherwords, it's a waste of time. If we were dealing with legislation in real time, filibustering could be a valid tactic, but we're dealing with forum posts where it could be hours or days in between posts. Who wants to sit there spamming every 10-12 minutes to make the minimum post requirement for this?
Click to expand...
That is the nail. And Sil Dorsett hit it on the head.
 
You want to encourage filibustering...? There's a reason people want to get rid of it in places, it's annoying!! One pissy person could prevent something from going to vote when 60 other people want it. This is just a bad idea.
 
Barbarossistan:
I'd like to see someone do this. Having more parliamentary procedure raises the game element of the RA, that;s good.
Click to expand...
It raises the encouragement of annoying people with no contributions to give to this region to come onto the forum and start blabbering away on the Regional Assembly forum.
 
JayDee:
I hope you're joking, because if you are, that was not hilarious at all. If you aren't, that's just short-sighted.
Click to expand...
I really don't see the need for vitriol. I actually think it would be pretty funny to see someone attempt that because I don't think it would end successfully. However now that this bill has had some sort of notoriety, if it passes I'm sure someone is going to filibuster every single bill to prove a point and it's all going to be repealed.
 
Sorry, I don't find people being annoying to be all that hilarious, but I see where you're coming from. I'd rather not have this get off the ground at all
 
A filibuster was recently used in the UK House of Commons by a Conservative MP to stop a bill that would have provided vital support for women who are victims of domestic violence.

I don't like filibusters, because they tend to be used for things like the dickwad I mentioned above done.
 
I don't see the need to deny a vote on issues following debate. The requirements for formal debate are sufficient for that.

I also think that the high post requirement would lead to the debate thread making a bit of a mockery of the RA. We are very serious people, after all. :P
 
Although I am coming around on this particular bill. UNlike in the UK parliament, a filibuster in TNP could not be used to kill a bill just to delay it. Am i correct?
 
flemingovia:
Although I am coming around on this particular bill. UNlike in the UK parliament, a filibuster in TNP could not be used to kill a bill just to delay it. Am i correct?
Click to expand...
It could indefinitely delay it, so long as the filibuster is kept up.
 
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the Zetaboard Terms of Use/Service do not prohibit using a script to access the forums or post on them. Since TNP's forum rules are, as fair as I can tell, just copies of those Terms, one could simply script a filibuster into infinity. No bill would ever pass again.
 
The possibility of a filibuster does seem to have amusement value. As far as I know in RL they're never succesful in ultimately derailing legislation that has strong support and that would likely be the case here.

If Mall is correct that current terms permit posting by script this would need to be barred lest automated spamming, of little amusement value, be used to slow legislation.
 
Barbarossistan:
The possibility of a filibuster does seem to have amusement value. As far as I know in RL they're never succesful in ultimately derailing legislation that has strong support and that would likely be the case here.

If Mall is correct that current terms permit posting by script this would need to be barred lest automated spamming, of little amusement value, be used to slow legislation.
Click to expand...
We would need admin input on this for a number of reasons. Would such posts be exempt from normal spam rules? If not then such filibusters would truly be impossible, so the bill is pointless.
 
I can adjust the language so that scripted posts don't count. The trouble is still that you wouldn't necessarily be able to tell when a script was being used. Can someone with technical expertise comment on whether there are any ways to prove that a script is being used to post?
 
In real world legislatures, it is necessary to ensure that the rights of the minority are not trampled by the will of the majority. However, in a forum where people make posts 30 minutes apart from each other, it isn't really necessary in that it only will unnecessarily extend the length of bill debate. Opposed.
 
Sil Dorsett:
flemingovia:
Secretary, it opens up to people a new way to take the piss, and another avenue to stop the RA being effective, or to slow the passage of legislation.
Click to expand...
In otherwords, it's a waste of time. If we were dealing with legislation in real time, filibustering could be a valid tactic, but we're dealing with forum posts where it could be hours or days in between posts. Who wants to sit there spamming every 10-12 minutes to make the minimum post requirement for this?

Also no one has the time to sit there for that time. Most people dont have the time to sit there and spam. This is a forum and ultimately a hobby/game, most people wont ant to spend to much time on just spamming a thread.
Click to expand...
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
I can adjust the language so that scripted posts don't count. The trouble is still that you wouldn't necessarily be able to tell when a script was being used. Can someone with technical expertise comment on whether there are any ways to prove that a script is being used to post?
Click to expand...
Only our admins here would have an answer to that, I'm afraid. I don't know what level of insight Zeta gives its admins, but I sincerely doubt they'd be able to tell the difference between a user manually posting and a semi-clever script.
 
I think the only way admins would be able to detect script use would be to look at patterns of posting and making an educated guess. and then we would be getting into "oh yes you did" "Oh no I didn't" "Oh yeah? Prove it!" territory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top