Proposed RA rule change

[Beathan]

Resolved:

Whenever any member of the RA is allowed a seven day vote, all members of the RA shall be allowed a seven day vote, regardless of whether the RA member is present or absent at the inworld meeting where the vote is taken. However, no member of the RA shall be prevented from voting inworld at any meeting where a vote is taken, and no RA member who has voted inworld, or on the forum, can change their vote after making an official vote.

Further, all proceedings of the RA shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 10th Ed. (2000), with the Leader of the RA acting as parliamentarian unless he or she appoints another RA member to serve as parliamentarian, in which case the appointed parliamentarian shall serve at the will and pleasure of the Leader of the RA.

Beathan

[Patroklus Murakami]

Beathan

My understanding is that the first paragraph describes the current situation. The RA Proceduresstate: "If all present concur, the vote may occur at the in-world meeting. Otherwise, or if one of the members not present has made a public request to do so prior to the meeting, the members vote before the next in world meeting. The results are published in the forum, along with how each member voted." In the meeting back in September which ThePrincess has recently complained about, I made a mistake in my interpretation of the meeting procedures which I acknowledged as soon as I had realised my mistake.

On the second paragraph, I agree that RA meetings need to be run in an orderly fashion and that's why we have a set of procedures we have developed for our meetings. I'd prefer not to adopt the full 164 pages of Robert's Rules as our guide though! If there is a need for greater clarification of procedure, perhaps we could focus on those issues and consult Robert's Rules (or some other meeting procedures guide) for some appropriate language? Otherwise I can see meetings grinding to a halt pretty frequently as the Chair goes to consult his copy of RR and RA members then discuss whether his interpretation of the rules is correct!

[cleopatraxigalia]

I agree with Beathan the rule should be clarified

As I understood the whole last session that if i was at a meeting i had to vote during the meetin from what you guys told me.
It was told to me in several sessions if you want me to pull those too.

I didnt complain about having to vote, Pat, I was pointing out that you said that whether or not i had to vote depended on whether I agreed with you or not.

[Patroklus Murakami]

I didnt complain about having to vote, Pat, I was pointing out that you said that whether or not i had to vote depended on whether I agreed with you or not.

I didn't say that. You misunderstood what I meant in a meeting.

[Beathan]

Because I am still receiving comments on this proposed rule change and will not be able to resubmit a version that reflects these comments in time for the Sunday RA meeting, I have asked the LRA to continue consideration of this proposal for an additional week. I still intend to pursue this proposal -- but I want to receive comments and ideas from all interested (and even some uninterested -- nudge nudge) citizens.

Beathan

[Beathan]

Final version (as of Thursday before the meeting). I think I incorporated all comments. If I missed one, please IM me.

Resolved:

1. Whenever any member of the RA is allowed a seven day vote, all members of the RA shall be allowed a seven day vote, regardless of whether the RA member is present or absent at the inworld meeting where the vote is taken. However, no member of the RA shall be prevented from voting inworld at any meeting where a vote is taken, and no RA member who has voted inworld, or on the forum, can change their vote after making an official vote.

Alternative 1. Seven day votes shall only be allowed for RA members with an exused absence (recognized as such by majority vote of the RA). Otherwise, all RA members shall vote inworld at the session or shall not vote. However, no member of the RA shall be prevented from voting inworld at any meeting where a vote is taken, and no RA member who has voted inworld, or on the forum, can change their vote after making an official vote.

2. To ensure that all RA members have debated and considered regular legislation, every proposed bill (other than emergency bills) shall be read and debated at a meeting at which no vote is taken and shall be reread and debated at a later meeting, at which a vote may be taken. Other than emergency legislation, no legislation that has not received both a first and second reading in the RA shall be voted on by the RA.

3. In the current session, the RA shall meet on Sunday. All legislation shall be proposed no later than noon SL-time Thursday. The LRA shall publish a proposed agenda by posting it in the RA announcement forum by noon SL-time on Saturday. Further, while the LRA shall set the initial agenda, the agenda may be adjusted by procedural motion from the RA. However, the LRA shall put matters continued from previous sessions of the RA first on the agenda and shall put matters posted on the forums, but not delivered to the LRA, last on the agenda. Further, no non-emergency bills may be added to the agenda unless they were published timely. In future sessions, the LRA shall set the meeting day, shall publish the agenda twenty-four hours prior to the meeting, and shall set a submission deadline not more than four days before the meeting.

4. Further, all proceedings of the RA shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (in brief), 10th Ed. (2000), with the Leader of the RA acting as parliamentarian unless he or she appoints another RA member to serve as parliamentarian, in which case the appointed parliamentarian shall serve at the will and pleasure of the Leader of the RA.

Alternative 4. The RA shall follow the following procedural process for running its meetings: (i) the LRA introduces the agenda item including any proposal and asks for a proposer and seconder
(ii) the LRA gives the floor to the proposer and asks him/her to recommend the proposal to the RA
(iii) the LRA invites comments from the other RA members present
(iv) RA members must request the floor formally
(v) the LRA will say 'X has the floor'
(vi) when the member has finished the speaking s/he will hand the floor back to the LRA by saying 'Thank you Chair'
(vii) the LRA will give precedence to those members who have not spoken before over those who have
(viii) the LRA will give precedence to RA members over other citizens present but will endeavour to ensure all voices are heard
(ix) the LRA is responsible for maintaining order and preventing anyone from interrupting the speaker who has the floor
(x) as the LRA is responsible for keeping order and ensuring that the RAs business is transacted in a timely fashion, RA members must concede the floor to the LRA when s/he requests.

5. Any citizen may propose legislation to the RA by: 1. emailing the proposal to the LRA; 2. giving the LRA a proposal inworld on notecard; or 3. posting specifically proposed text in the "legislative discussion" forum in a post that specifically requests that the LRA add the proposal to the agenda.

Alternative 5. Only members of the RA may propose legislation to the RA by: 1. emailing the proposal to the LRA; 2. giving the LRA a proposal inworld on notecard; or 3. posting specifically proposed text in the "legislative discussion" forum in a post that specifically requests that the LRA add the proposal to the agenda. Citizens are encouraged to participate and to propose legislation, but should do so by contacting a member of the RA to act as a sponsor of citizen-proposed legislation. Legislation shall be considerd in the order received by the LRA, with matters continued from previous sessions considered first and matters proposed on the forums considered last (because the LRA may not read the forums until right prior to the session).

6. Finally, every session shall include, at the end of the agenda, a "for the good of the CDS discussion period" at which items not on the agenda can be introduced and discussed, but at which no votes may be taken. First readings (if such a process exists) of proposed legislation shall occur at this time. After first readings, any member of the RA may propose topics of discussion. After RA proposed discussions have completed, any citizen in attendance my propose a topic of discussion. The open discussion period shall not exceed 30 minutes in total, and no item of discussion shall exceed longer than five minutes, unless the period for overall or specific discussion is extended by procedural vote of the RA.

Beathan

[Patroklus Murakami]

Beathan

As I outlined in my post on this topic in 'Legislative Discussion', I would like to handle alterations to the agenda rather differently so I'm presenting my alternative text as an amendment here. I'm also presenting a number of other alternatives to your text as amendments here. It was fairly difficult to find the right place to post given that this discussion has cut across several sub-forums; I think you've proved my point for me that insisting on the forums as a place to initiate legislation is unreasonable and unworkable as the LRA will have to scour them to put together the agenda and mistakes are highly likely that way.

Amendment One
Delete 1 in its original and alternative versions i.e. the paragraphs starting "1. Whenever any member of the RA is allowed...." and "Alternative 1. Seven day votes shall only be allowed for RA members with an exused absence...".

Rationale: The original formulation is equivalent to the current situation and is therefore redundant and unnecessary. The alternative version introduces a new and unwelcome addition to our procedures; it allows RA members to decide that an absence is 'unauthorised' and deprive RA members who are absent of their vote. This is open to abuse. If RA members cannot attend a meeting, their vote should not depend on the generosity of their political rivals.

Amendment Two
Delete paragraph 2.

Rationale: There is no definition of what constitutes 'emergency legislation'. The lack of such a definition renders this requirement to have a first and second reading useless as anything could be defined as 'emergency legislation' (and who gets to decide in any case?) In addition, this takes no account of the potential for radical changes to legislation between the first and second reading and there is no guidance on how to handle this. If the entire text changes between readings does it have to be given another 'first reading'? What if is amended in the meeting in such a way that it differs from when it was first presented? This proposal has not been properly thought through and adds further bureaucracy for no benefit. The RA is able to handle this perfectly well at the moment - most bills get two or three considerations before a vote and the RA is able to decide for itself whether to vote or consider a matter further.

Amendment Three
Delete paragraph 3 and the following section from the RA Meeting Procedures:
"The Leader of the RA (LRA) will determine the agenda for each meeting, and publish it on a notecard before each meeting." and "The LRA at all times determines the order of the agenda."
and add this to the start of paragraph 1 of the RA Meeting Procedures:
"The LRA will publish the draft agenda for RA meetings at least 24 hours in advance on the CDS forums. RA members may request alterations to the agenda before the meeting by contacting the LRA inworld, through IM or email. If an RA member wants to make an alteration to the order of the agenda when the final version is presented to the meeting they may do so by proposing a procedural motion at the start of the meeting before the first item is discussed. Any alteration to the order of the agenda requires a 2/3 majority of the members present."

Rationale: This is about giving the RA more say in setting the agenda for meetings while recognising that the LRA should have a pre-eminent role in setting the agenda for meetings as the leader of the faction most strongly supported by the electorate.

Amendment Four
I'm happy with your alternative version so we'll take that as amendment four when we come to do the vote where a vote for my alternative version means:
Delete paragraph 4 and replace with the alternative: "The RA shall follow the following procedural process ...when s/he requests."

Rationale: I've explained my objections to Robert's Rules; I've never seen them despite several attempts to at least look at them. You're asking us to vote for a 160 page rule book we've never seen. This makes no sense and is unreasonable. I note your offer to pay for copies for the RA but I think the CDS should pay for this if this part of your bill is passed and you should properly cost this proposal before putting it forward.

Amendment Five
Delete paragraph 5 and the alternative version.

Rationale: We already have procedures for submission of bills. The various additions here are unreasonable and unworkable. It is unreasonable to expect the LRA to scour the forums to find legislation to copy and paste when making up the agenda - this proposal has appeared in at least two threads in different sub-forums in different versions. It's unfair to add to an already hefty workload and more reasonable to expect that someone who posts a proposal could take the time to copy and paste the text into a notecard themselves and hand it to the LRA inworld. Proposals should be submitted to the LRA on a notecard by default; it saves the LRA an unnecessary task when preparing for meetings. We provide the alternative of sending in proposals by email because SL sometimes breaks down and there needs to be a back up route. I've made this point several times now and I don't understand why people are so keen to add a requirement that makes the LRAs job even more difficult. It's just not reasonable to expect someone to comply with this.

The complex ordering requirements are also a recipe for chaos. The LRA will have no way of working out which bill is supposed to come first under the complicated system outlined here. I think the LRA should determine the order of items on the agenda with an option as outlined in my amendment three for the RA to make changes. Of course items held over from a previous week should be considered earlier - unless there are other more urgent matters to attend to. Saddling the RA with these kind of inflexible rules swaps one phantom menace - the possibility that the LRA will abuse their agenda-setting powers - with a far worse legalistic straitjacket.

Amendment Six
Delete paragraph 6.

Rationale: If an item is worth discussing it's worth submitting in advance. Having 'Any other business' as a regular agenda item is a license to ambush the chair as we've already seen in previous meetings.

[cleopatraxigalia]

I think yesterday's meeting was a testament to how important it is to the community and our effectiveness and efficiency ........that we vote in world.............I see no reason why people should be able have a seven day vote if they are in the meeting. I want us to vote while we are in the meeting.