Agenda for the SC meeting of 27 November 2011

This forum is used for discussion by members of the SC
Post Reply
User avatar
Delia Lake
Dean of the SC
Dean of the SC
Posts: 608
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:12 pm
Contact:

Agenda for the SC meeting of 27 November 2011

Post by Delia Lake »

Colonia Nova Hearing Room
Delia Lake, Acting Dean of the SC
Check for Quorum. Quorum is when the Dean and one Chair is present
Time allotted for this meeting: 90 minutes. To the Chairs, please how much time do you have available for conducting this meeting today?
The discussion items on the agenda are classified in the following way, per the official procedure of the SC.
- No discussion (ND)
- Structured discussion (SD)
- Unstructured discussion (UD)
- Unstructured discussion, open submission (UDO)
Each item is introduced by the Dean or another SC member chosen by the Dean, who summarises what the item is about and outlines the alternative solutions or decisions that may be taken by the SC in regard to the item.
1. For a "no discussion" item members of the SC will only be asked for their preference in relation to the alternatives outlined and a brief justification for preferring this alternative. Members will be asked in an order chosen by the Dean and all statements and votes will be recorded into the journal of the meeting.

2. For a "structured discussion" item the process described under #1 will be preceded by two rounds of debate during which each member has equal amounts of time to make the case for their preference and in the second round of debate reply to arguments made by other members. The Dean will choose the order of the debate.

3. For an "unstructured discussion" item the process described will be preceded by a period of time during which any member of the SC may speak freely in relation to the agenda item under discussion. Cross-talk is allowed and any member may speak at any time.

4. For an "unstructured discussion, open submission" item the process described under D.3 will be preceded by a process as described under D.5 with the exception that anyone present at the meeting may contribute.
AGENDA
1. Gwyneth Llewelyn, request for finding by the SC regarding who “decided” that elections had to be suspended, 2011-11-15. The format for this Agenda Item is UD.
I urge the SC to make enquiries on who “decided” that the elections had to be suspended and hold a public trial.
Nobody in the CDS—except in the case of technical difficulties—has the power to suspend and postpone elections after the whole process has started—and they start with the announcement of the candidates. And I might even be very reluctant to admit that they can be suspended before the election process starts, but I’m willing to concede that this might be possible via Constitutional Amendments.
I also urge the SC to suspend any laws or Constitutional Amendments that try to change the election process while it is going on, no matter how well-intended they are. I encourage the SC members to diligently search through the forums and look up some well-hidden laws in the transcripts when we, in the past, established the principle that changes to the election process would only enter in effect on the subsequent term after they are approved by the RA and ratified by the SC (the precedent is the abolishment of factions, the original change of dates for the elections because of conflicting with the summer/winter holidays, the STV, and so forth; all only took place on subsequent terms, never on the term they were approved, and most certainly never during an election!).

I urge the RA to refrain from interfering or manipulating the election process after the list of candidates was announced, no matter how rightful those "corrections" are or how needed they were. Let the elections proceed; complain afterwards. That's how a democracy works. Let the SC enquire, if they feel the need to do so; and if the SC finds any anomaly in the process, they can certainly refuse to administer the oath to the newly elected members (or just to some of them), and potentially demand a new election or a by-election.
But to announce candidates and then stop the process just because someone committed a mistake is simply wrong. Ignoring the mistake is also wrong, of course, but everything is supposed to be handled in turn and proper sequence: if mistakes are found, let them handled with at the appropriate time, and if someone has to assume the responsibilities and consequences of those mistakes, let them also do that afterwards.
The argumentation for my petition can be read in full here: http://forums.slcds.info/viewtopic.php? ... 305#p18305

RELEVANT CITATIONS in the CDS Constitution and Code of Laws
ARTICLE I – The Representative Branch
Section 1 – The Representative Assembly
The Representative Assembly (RA) is a body of democratically elected legislators which represent the views of CDS citizens. Its governmental role is to pass laws and its service role is to promote the city and perform long-term planning.
Section 2 – The Representative Assembly Body
Representative seats are chosen by popular election, from among those candidates who qualify under the rules set forth here. Any citizen who is eligible to vote, at the time of nomination, may become a candidate by declaring themselves by a message to the Dean of the Scientific Council, within the time set by the Scientific Council for such nominations.
The number of representative seats in the RA is equal to the odd whole number nearest to 10% of the population, rounded down, with a minimum of five seats and a maximum of forty seats.
In each RA election, voters shall select from among the candidates using Single Transferable Voting (a ranked voting method).
Vacancies in RA positions will be filled by by-election administered on a schedule set by the Scientific Council consistent with other applicable CDS law.
The Representative Assembly shall serve for a term of six months. New RAs shall take office on 1 December* and 1 June.* Elections shall be held over a 168 hour period beginning at noon SLT on the Saturday before the 16th of the month prior to the new RAs taking office. In the event of a server outage which prevents citizens from casting ballots and which lasts more than 12 hours, the Dean of the SC has the authority to adjust or extend the election schedule.
* Dates recently changed by RA, and these take effect after the next general election. The first RA elections where candidates are not required to be a member of any faction will be for the term starting June 1, 2010.

Article V – Election, Term, and Office
Section 3
No citizen shall be eligible to vote in any election for public office in the Confederation of Democratic Simulators unless he or she has been a citizen for not less than 28 consecutive days immediately before any such election.

http://portal.slcds.info/index.php/cds- ... stitution/

NL 8-5 CDS Code Reorganization Act
The R.A. Archivist or appointee shall maintain an up-to-date working archive of all Active code, as well as a separate historical archive of all code, regardless of classification.

Other relevant documentation and conversations

The SC received the “tentative” and non-validated list of CDS citizens from the CDS Treasurer on 30 October 2011.
From Sudane Erato, Treasurer, to Delia Lake via email dated 5 November 2011. “Delia re your request (for a list of people who are citizens in good standing as of 15 October 2011). What you ask is difficult. … I'll prepare the best I can a list of candidates with their dates of first owning land. As for Guillaume, if he had a hiatus of ownership, I probably can't detect it.” (fyi, Guillaume volunteered that he should be removed from the list of citizens eligible to vote as he had not been a citizen continuously during the 28 days previous to the Election.) Sudane’s comments reflect not on her capabilities but on the inadequacy of current systems (2 different ones are used) to account land ownership, payment of tier, and therefore citizenship in a way that makes clear all citizens eligible to vote.
The SC received the land ownership accounting data on the morning of 14 Nov 2011 and certified the list of citizens eligible to vote that same night and immediately posted the list and forwarded it to Jon Seattle for programming the voter list into the voting software on the server.

RESPONSE for Discussion by the SC
1. It is impossible to commence voting without a valid list of voters being programmed into the voting software on the server.
2. A posting in the Forum from anyone, citizen, RA, Chancellor, or SC does not override or invalidate any part of the CDS Constitution or Code of Laws
3. By declaring 5 November as the cutoff date for nominations/declarations of candidacies, the Dean of the SC was performing his duty as specified in Article I, Section 2 of the CDS Constitution.
4. The Dean of the SC has the authority via the Constitution to extend the election schedule, but not to postpone the start of elections, even when it is impossible to begin them because essential information is not yet available.
5. Only the RA can amend the election dates specified in the Constitution, other than extending for server outages.
6. The RA voted an amendment to the Constitution at a meeting
7. Although it is highly advisable that all SC will have read the archives of RA Meetings going back to the formation of the CDS, it is critical to the functioning of our democracy that no applicable laws be easily findable and in plain view. No applicable laws of the CDS should be “well-hidden laws in the transcripts.” It is one of the duties of the RA to engage an RA Archivist to maintain an up-to-date list of current laws.
8. Findings by the SC as follows…..

2. Filing with the SC by CLEOPATRA Xigalia on 2011-11-20. The CLAIM is that Kellie Wellesley,named as a partner of Anna Toussaint on the Treasurer’s citizens list, is ineligible to vote as she has never paid and that Jia53 Resident, not named on the citizens list, is eligible to vote. The format for this Agenda Item is ND.

RELEVANT LAWS
NL 5-9 Group Land Ownership Act - amended by NL 7-7 21 October 2007
This extends the option of land ownership in Neufreistadt to couples and groups of citizens. Among others, this allows joint ownership of land by people in committed relationships, social, educational, and religious organizations.
1. Plots of land in Neufreistadt may be owned by couples or groups of citizens. All members must be citizens before joining the group.
2. Residents of SL receive citizenship in the CDS by owning land in one of the territories administered by the CDS, and by agreeing to comply with the laws and covenants of the community. The citizen, who shall be a RL person presenting themself as a single SL avatar, may hold land either through individual ownership (in which their name is displayed on the "About Land" page of their parcel), or through membership in a group (in which the group name is displayed as "owner" on the "About Land" page of their parcel). The group shall own, compliant with the covenants regarding maximum ownership by any single citizen, at least 128 sq meters of land for each individual whose citizenship is qualified by that land.
3. Furthermore, each citizen shall be required to pay their monthly fee for land ownership, in person, each month, at the sim location established for this purpose. Individual owners shall pay the entire cost of their parcels in this manner. Group members shall allocate among themselves each member's share of the fee for land owned by their group, with the minimum amount of L$100 allocated to any one person. A group representative shall provide to the Treasurer, in a timely fashion, the list of citizen members, and their respective allocations.
4. In the course of time, should it happen that an individual does not pay their monthly fee (according to schedules established by the Chancellor and the Treasurer), that person shall be liable to lose their citizenship. Should that citizen be a citizen by virtue of membership in a land owning group, other group members will NOT risk losing their parcel and thus their citizenship. Rather, at the point that the Chancellor/Treasurer shall determine that person to be delinquent, and thus ineligible for further citizenship, the remaining members of that group shall be required to re-allocate their monthly amounts in order that 100% of the monthly fee be paid. If the resulting reduction in membership should cause the group to exceed its maximum land-owning allowance (as per the covenants), the group will be required to divest excess land.
5. If the citizen leaves a land holding group they have two months to reestablish their holdings to meet the above criteria.
________________________________________
passed October 7, 2006 and amended by NL 7-7 21 October 2007
Amendment to NL5-9 Group Land Ownership Act
Replace 2 with the following and renumber:
Residents of SL receive citizenship in the CDS by owning land in one of the territories administered by the CDS, and by agreeing to comply with the laws and covenants of the community. The citizen, who shall be a RL person presenting themself as a single SL avatar, may hold land either through individual ownership (in which their name is displayed on the "About Land" page of their parcel), or through membership in a group (in which the group name is displayed as "owner" on the "About Land" page of their parcel). The group shall own, compliant with the covenants regarding maximum ownership by any single citizen, at least 128 sq meters of land for each individual whose citizenship is qualified by that land.

Furthermore, each citizen shall be required to pay their monthly fee for land ownership, in person, each month, at the sim location established for this purpose. Individual owners shall pay the entire cost of their parcels in this manner. Group members shall allocate among themselves each member's share of the fee for land owned by their group, with the minimum amount of L$100 allocated to any one person. A group representative shall provide to the Treasurer, in a timely fashion, the list of citizen members, and their respective allocations.

In the course of time, should it happen that an individual does not pay their monthly fee (according to schedules established by the Chancellor and the Treasurer), that person shall be liable to lose their citizenship. Should that citizen be a citizen by virtue of membership in a land owning group, other group members will NOT risk losing their parcel and thus their citizenship. Rather, at the point that the Chancellor/Treasurer shall determine that person to be delinquent, and thus ineligible for further citizenship, the remaining members of that group shall be required to re-allocate their monthly amounts in order that 100% of the monthly fee be paid. If the resulting reduction in membership should cause the group to exceed its maximum land-owning allowance (as per the covenants), the group will be required to divest excess land.
Additional documentation and conversation
Sudane Erato, Treasurer, to Delia Lake +,

And, from Timo Guffler who wrote the tracking software via Sudane in email, “that while he could detect the transfer of a parcel to an individual, if the parcel transferred to a group, all he could retrieve was the group's "key", the universal SL identification number that everything in SL has. So when you see a number like that, it's a group.”
Additional input from the SC ?
Resolution: Yes or no vote. A landowner plus the group member who have given notecards to the Treasurer and are subsequently listed on the Treasurer’s list of citizens in good standing are eligible to vote in elections.

3. Addressing those who sent notecards declaring desire to run for office in this election and were not listed on the ballot. The format for this Agenda Item is ND.
a. CLEOPATRA Xigalia (declared her candidacy for 16th RA on 12 November 2011, and Bromo Ivory (declared his candidacy for RA on October, withdrew via notecard on 9 November and then subsequently also on 11 November sent a notecard to reconfirm his intention to run. Declaration, or re-declaration of candidacy of each of these CDS citizens was beyond the 5 November cutoff date for declarations and therefore neither was included on the list of Candidates for the 16th RA.
b. Cacilia McMasters (25 October 2011), Vespasian Cortes (citizenship date 24 October 2011), Kim Rongyu (29 October 2011) had not been citizen for requisite 28 days before nomination. See above Article I, Section 2 of the CDS Constitution
Yes or no votes:
a. the date of declaration of candidacy, 5 November 2011 stands as valid for this election.
b. the requirement that every candidate be qualified as voters (28 days of continuous citizenship and in good standing) at the time of nomination.
Point of information
The SC is currently entertaining a number of nominations for SC Chairs. We will schedule a separate meeting to address only new SC Chairs.

Post Reply

Return to “SC Discussion”