We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: A rationalisation of Parliament
Details
Submitted by[?]: Dolgarian Imperial Revivalists
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2135
Description[?]:
| We support the new larger size for Parliament, however it is a rather odd size, making bill calculations rather difficuilt. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The total number of seats in the legislative assembly. Should be between 75 and 750.
Old value:: 651
Current: 200
Proposed: 599
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:40:22, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Alianse Progresivitāte | To | Debating the A rationalisation of Parliament |
| Message | 499 is also an odd size for 2/3 purposes though. How about 599? |
| Date | 20:25:48, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Dolgarian Imperial Revivalists | To | Debating the A rationalisation of Parliament |
| Message | Oh yeah, doh! That's what happens when you propose bills after only having had five hours sleep over the entire course of the weekend. Damn soldiers needed painting for my Warmaster Ancients tournie, then I made the mistake of drinking a can of Red Bull at 1am on Saturday when I was at the Casino. Got to bed by 2am, but couldn't get to sleep, so read until 4am, and had to get up at around 7:30am.... |
| Date | 03:25:53, November 02, 2005 CET | From | Movement for White Supremacy | To | Debating the A rationalisation of Parliament |
| Message | I aagree, 599 is a good number |
| Date | 06:48:20, November 03, 2005 CET | From | Liberty and Prosperity Party | To | Debating the A rationalisation of Parliament |
| Message | When a nation is growing, it should not be reducing to size of it's government purely for the conveniance of crunching numbers. The ruling party expanded the assembly beyond it's limited ability to do basic arithmatic... And now, because of a lack of oversight, we want to go back and disenfranchise voters? |
| Date | 18:43:19, November 03, 2005 CET | From | Dolgarian Imperial Revivalists | To | Debating the A rationalisation of Parliament |
| Message | I didn't propose that bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 374 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 124 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 83 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "In heaven all the interesting people are missing." - Friedrich Nietzsche |