Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8442-8457
On 6/21/20 9:25 PM, Rebecca via agora-discussion wrote: > I vote like this (despite the large number of AGAINST votes, I am voting > genuinely) Said R. Lee, to the discussion forum. -- Jason Cobb
DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8442-8457
I vote like this (despite the large number of AGAINST votes, I am voting genuinely) ID Author(s)AITitle --- 8442e G. 1.0 Barrel Barrel Badger Barrel AGAINST 8443f G. 2.0 Term Limit AGAINST 8444f Aris 2.0 Sedate Officiation AGAINST 8445* Aris 3.0 Easier Retitling AGAINST 8446e G., nch 1.0 Victory Auction FOR 8447p CB 1.0 Rule Infancy AGAINST 8448* Aris, Alexis, Falsifian 3.0 Populist Administration AGAINST 8449p Aris, [1]1.5 Simpler Heraldry AGAINST 8450j G. 1.7 CFJ extensions AGAINST 8451p CB 1.0 HUMBLE AGORAN FARMER WINS THE GAME AGAINST 8452j P.S.S., Jason, Trigon1.0 Indictment Fixes FOR 8453p G. 1.0 win indirection FOR 8454j G., Jason, P.S.S.2.0 Judicial non-person fixes FOR 8455j G., Jason2.0 old judgements are good judgements FOR 8456p G. 1.0 namings aGAINST 8457f R. Lee, P.S.S. 2.0 CHILL BRO FOR -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8442-8457
On 6/21/2020 2:30 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > Like I said, I'm not upset, just... mildly frustrated. Could you attempt to > get your feedback in somewhat earlier in the process next time? I know the > lists have been really busy lately, but this has been up for discussion for > weeks, and you yourself have commented last time this was up for > distribution. I'm starting to feel slightly like I'm stuck in an infinite > loop. I'm sorry. There were a few different threads about this, and I thought I said very early on that officers' regulations shouldn't be binding on the next officer. It might have been in a different thread and for that I apologize. And with the plethora of proposals last week, I honestly lost track of what was in the proto stage versus proposal stage. I'd wholly forgotten this had actually been submitted until you published the draft. And to be clear, I promoted this for discussion so someone might change my mind before the voting period ends :). -G.
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8442-8457
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 2:16 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/21/2020 2:11 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > >> 8448* Aris, Alexis, Falsifian 3.0 Populist Administration > > AGAINST. I think it's very important that elections clear the regulatory > > slate for incoming officers (or at least let the incoming officer clear > > the slate). This current version could lead to an Officer basically > > making regulations that suit emself and lead to less willingness for > > people to compete for offices with added regulations. > > Just wanted to highlight this for discussion, because I want something > like this to work, but am quite concerned about the limited officer > discretion especially in office changeovers. I could almost vote for this > with a promise of later amendment, but am unsure now. Erm... Not that I disagree, or that I'm upset. But here's the process this proposal has been through. 1. Aris submits a proto and solicits comments. 2. Various people request changes. 3. Aris incorporates all requested changes and submits a final version. 4. The proposal goes up for voting. 5. G. requests a further change. 6. Aris submits a new version that has G.'s requested change, well in advance of the distribution. 7. The new version goes up for voting. 8. G. requests a yet further change. Like I said, I'm not upset, just... mildly frustrated. Could you attempt to get your feedback in somewhat earlier in the process next time? I know the lists have been really busy lately, but this has been up for discussion for weeks, and you yourself have commented last time this was up for distribution. I'm starting to feel slightly like I'm stuck in an infinite loop. As is, this is seeming like something that can be resolved by later amendment. -Aris
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8442-8457
On 6/21/20 5:14 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/21/2020 2:11 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> 8448* Aris, Alexis, Falsifian 3.0 Populist Administration >> AGAINST. I think it's very important that elections clear the regulatory >> slate for incoming officers (or at least let the incoming officer clear >> the slate). This current version could lead to an Officer basically >> making regulations that suit emself and lead to less willingness for >> people to compete for offices with added regulations. > > Just wanted to highlight this for discussion, because I want something > like this to work, but am quite concerned about the limited officer > discretion especially in office changeovers. I could almost vote for this > with a promise of later amendment, but am unsure now. > I'd be supportive of such a change, but I also think that we as the potential supporters and opposers should just be attentive to this in the meantime. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8442-8457
On 6/21/2020 2:11 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> 8448* Aris, Alexis, Falsifian 3.0 Populist Administration > AGAINST. I think it's very important that elections clear the regulatory > slate for incoming officers (or at least let the incoming officer clear > the slate). This current version could lead to an Officer basically > making regulations that suit emself and lead to less willingness for > people to compete for offices with added regulations. Just wanted to highlight this for discussion, because I want something like this to work, but am quite concerned about the limited officer discretion especially in office changeovers. I could almost vote for this with a promise of later amendment, but am unsure now.
