[Congress] Definition of Congress sections
Day 4,211, 10:31
•
Published in Netherlands 
•
by
•
by UNL Congress
Greetings citizens of Netherlands,
A new debate has been requested by Janty F:
For a long time, we use combination of UNL Binnenhof articles and in-game messages as debating and private sections of Congress. However, unlike in-game voting, these two methods are still not solidified in the Law. However, these methods have been used for a long time by several chairmans from several different parties, and at this moment, all parties seem to accept them without any problem. That's why I believe we should solidify the in-game debating and private Congress section into the Law, to avoid potential problems in the future.
Hence I propose to change Chapter II, Article 6 (Debating procedure) to this:
1. Debates will be opened in the debating or private section of Congress.
2. The debating section of Congress consists of "UNL Binnenhof" newspaper articles.
3. The private section of Congress consists of in-game messages including all Congress and Government Members.
4. The article or first message will detail the reason for the debate.
5. After a minimum of 24 hours of debating, Congress Members can open a vote in the voting section of Congress, as laid down in Article 7.
6. If no vote on the topic has been started after 168 hours, and 48 hours have passed since the last comment, the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress may choose to close the debate.
7. The classified information in the private section of Congress can be disclosed by the (Deputy) Chairman of Congress or by a majority vote in Congress.
(changes noted in bold letters for you
😉)
Final vote count:
Yes/Ja: 12
No/Nee: 14
Neutral/Neutraal: 2
Proposal rejected
djirtsdew and Shawtyl0w
CoC Team
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
congress recently voted on this. and rejected it.
do you intend to keep pushing your proposals till congress gets tired of them and just accepts them?
Are you by chance describing yourself? None of your proposals have been accepted for over a year now, whilst Janty F just got one accepted with a resounding unanimous 'yes'.
Anyway, this is not the same proposal as the one you allured too. This one only formalizes what we are doing so far (in-game voting), whilst the other proposal included (a vague) guarantee as well to ensure original author starts the vote. Try to read better!
have i put proposals up for a vote less than a week after it was rejected by congress?
and that vote needs the addendum that many just voted yes because it was an increase. but wanted it to be more of an increase.
Some people can find a compromise, some people are too stubborn to try for that.'
Guess which one do better service for our nation 😉 .
Describes your charade about bills, motions and monetary policies very well - but please stick to my proposal, thank you.
Either way, I merely want our current Congress methods, which are universally agreed upon by all parties (yes, even yours) written down, so that Congress cannot be hijacked legally on other platforms.
So... any comment on the proposal, or just general negativity on my person? Learn to debate, odan, please...
have i put them up for a vote again days after getting voted down?
don't agree with limiting it to 1 org. since an org can be banned/compromised/deleted/etc.
leaving it open is just better.
Let me see: Yes, you did!
https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-congress-monetary-policies-2696289/1/20
https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-congress-monetary-policies-2-2697156/1/20
Now, onto the serious proposal:
Can you please give me statistics of the number of Dutch orgs being deleted/banned in the past few years? Seems it is a widespread problem in your opinion, but I do not know of any case. So it only seems like pointless fearmongering - which you did against in-game voting as well, claiming it will never work for obscure reasons as well. Game can also be deleted one day - does it mean, we should just delete all accounts and laws and give up? Same logic.
Thank you, if you manage to present the data - doubt you will do that though!
no i didn't. the first debate was never voted upon.
just because something hasn't happened in a long time doesn't mean it can't happen again.
and an org being compromised is also something you just brush past. cp hijacking orgs. dictator getting in control etc.
leaving it open to just debating section means we can easily switch legally to another option if required.
So you are just scaremongering without any actual data to back up your claims that Congress can be in danger, if this proposal gets accepted. Once again - by your logic, we should just cancel all laws (for example laws about EZ, because that faces the same danger... or SCI, because that has no meaning with ill dictator at charge)
Typical, when you run out of arguments. And I hoped you will actually show me that orgs are getting banned and removed from the game on monthly basis here. Also... did you know, that there is a 0,000001% chance you will die today, because you will get hit by a falling plane? Better ban all planes to keep you safe, amirite?
It's fine to formalize what we are already going, but I have my questions about whether or not we need to fix it down like this. A National Feed post could be a 'debate' too, or a private article by CM in some cases. I also have my doubts if we even need 'private section'. We have Congress PMs yes, but what does adding it to Law matter?
In-game voting is fixed, and it works quite well - so i believe the general basics of "Where we can find and debate Congress" should be put down as well. Else we might find Congress hijacked on other platforms one day - which would not be the first time in our history.
As for Feed and Private articles - I am not generally convinced by either of those .Feed due to the inability to make large comments (which are necessary, as your comment above proofs), private articles due to the fact Chairman has no access to them. Sure both of these options can be utilized to improve our Congress debates (for example used to inform our citizens better on them), but they should not be primary means of debating.
And private section is still necessary, and I believe it is vital to make those Congress PMs "officially legal" as well - if only due to the fact I have seen some Chairmans lately, who could abuse holes in our laws like this one to cause harm. If there are articles in our Law referring to private sections (and there are some), the private section needs to be defined. Otherwise you refer to something uncertain, and prone to being "interpreted in whatever way is necessary".
Now, private articles of course could be a perfect way for regular citizens or even CMs to make their proposal known publicly and gather premature opinion, before submitting it to official debate (and the officil debate can even link to them, why not) - in fact I would advise people to do so, in case of larger and more complex proposals, which require more than 24 hours of thought 🙂 . But even though I like Law to clarify everything, even I understand details like that do not need to be part of the Law, and I certainly do not want private articles of citizens subjected to legal matter, as that could cause issues on their own.
In order to moderate Congress debates, Chairman needs an in-game platform, which he can control in a way - hence UNL Binnenhof newspapers are the best official choice for me!