I am fully opposed to sections 2 and 2a of the bill on the floor. I feel it is unnecessary and potentially causes more problems then it ever could fix, resulting in potentially even more rules we have to pass for the Senate. If these sections would be removed from the Senate Ethics Act, the bill would receive my full backing and support. Until then, I oppose this bill.
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:52 pm
by Denecaep
Based on general consensus, the legislation now being debated reads as...
Proposal IV Senate Ethics Act of 2013 Sponsors: Bolaly Signatories:
RECOGNIZING the amount of bickering that has been taking place in the NSG Senate over political parties, APPALLED by the actions of Senators who continued with said bickering instead of acting like gentlemen, TO ENSURE that all Senators are treated with respect within the Senate Chambers and other official NSG Senate threads, The NSG Senate hereby enacts the following, (1) Senators are prohibited from slandering each other. Any instance of slander will result in the perpetrating Senator receiving a warning. (a) Defines Slander as defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing or pictures. (b) Once a Senator has been warned for slander twice, he/she may face suspension of senatorial service for a period of time which is determined by the appropriate Senate administrators. (2) All political party advertising must be done through telegram and is prohibited in any NSG Senate threads. (a) Each political party will have their name and description of the party stated in the OP. (3) Political Parties are prohibited from pressuring Senators to join a party. (a) Any Senator who feels they have been pressured into joining a party should report this to the appropriate administrative staff. (b) Any Party leader/member that pressures a Senator into joining a party will be given a punishment at the administrator’s discretion.
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:49 pm
by Regnum Dominae
Denecaep wrote:Based on general consensus, the legislation now being debated reads as...
Proposal IV Senate Ethics Act of 2013 Sponsors: Bolaly Signatories:
RECOGNIZING the amount of bickering that has been taking place in the NSG Senate over political parties, APPALLED by the actions of Senators who continued with said bickering instead of acting like gentlemen, TO ENSURE that all Senators are treated with respect within the Senate Chambers and other official NSG Senate threads, The NSG Senate hereby enacts the following, (1) Senators are prohibited from slandering each other. Any instance of slander will result in the perpetrating Senator receiving a warning. (a) Defines Slander as defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing or pictures. (b) Once a Senator has been warned for slander twice, he/she may face suspension of senatorial service for a period of time which is determined by the appropriate Senate administrators. (2) All political party advertising must be done through telegram and is prohibited in any NSG Senate threads. (a) Each political party will have their name and description of the party stated in the OP. (3) Political Parties are prohibited from pressuring Senators to join a party. (a) Any Senator who feels they have been pressured into joining a party should report this to the appropriate administrative staff. (b) Any Party leader/member that pressures a Senator into joining a party will be given a punishment at the administrator’s discretion.
I move to end debate and proceed to voting.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:32 am
by Costa Alegria
Wait, does that mean I can draw penises on people's foreheads and it won't be considered defamation?
Denecaep wrote:Based on general consensus, the legislation now being debated reads as...
I move to end debate and proceed to voting.
Third.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:56 am
by Radiatia
We are not done debating this proposal, and I would like to move to the Senate that this the passage of this bill be broken in multiple readings and/or overseen, section by section, by a committee of the whole Senate.
As it stands I support some aspects of the bill, and I oppose others. I was sorely disappointed to see Section Two, which would have raised the standard of debate in this chamber from its current low quality levels, hamfistedly removed without proper discourse, debate or even a proper vote.
Should this bill come to vote I will OPPOSE it, despite the fact that it has such promise. We need to comb through it in far more detail. In passing legislation, details matter and to ignore details will be to ultimately jeopardise our future.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 8:40 am
by The State of Czecho-Slovakia
Forth! We can revise the rules on ethics later, but we need some rules in now, to keep the thread going without becoming completely unproductive and uncivil. Details can wait untill after we pass the bill. Perhaps we should form a standing comity to revue ethics. Then we could revise our policies as needed, and still get a temporary solution in in a reasonable amount of time.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 9:16 am
by Thafoo
The State of Czecho-Slovakia wrote:Forth! We can revise the rules on ethics later, but we need some rules in now, to keep the thread going without becoming completely unproductive and uncivil. Details can wait untill after we pass the bill. Perhaps we should form a standing comity to revue ethics. Then we could revise our policies as needed, and still get a temporary solution in in a reasonable amount of time.
Fifth and final.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 9:22 am
by Chetssaland
I vote yea
-Senator Chetssaland (Progressive-Conservative)
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:41 am
by Regnum Dominae
I vote Yes.
Current vote count:
Yes: 2 No: 0
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:50 am
by The State of Czecho-Slovakia
I vote Yea! for decency and decorum in these hallowed chambers! Yes: 3 No:0
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:52 am
by Oneracon
I vote Yea!
- Senator Oneracon (RG) For - 4 Against - 0
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:52 am
by TaQud
we are voting on the Ethnics Act right?
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:53 am
by Oneracon
TaQud wrote:we are voting on the Ethnics Act right?
Ethics, not ethnics.
But yes.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:53 am
by Regnum Dominae
TaQud wrote:we are voting on the Ethnics Act right?
You mean Ethics Act? Yes, section 2 has been removed and we are voting.
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:46 pm