NSG Senate Chamber [NSG Senate] - Version 4

by **Libertechie** » Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:53 pm

Kamchastkia wrote:
Libertechie wrote:Can a bill be voted by the President for financial reasons?

Only if it is unconstitutional I believe.

Because this is my question, I think certainly for the sake of transparency and avoiding mountains of public sector debt, the veto should be available if the govt can't afford it.

by **Finium** » Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:02 pm

Libertechie wrote:
Kamchastkia wrote:Only if it is unconstitutional I believe.

Because this is my question, I think certainly for the sake of transparency and avoiding mountains of public sector debt, the veto should be available if the govt can't afford it.

I don't actually think that the President has veto powers, at all.

by **Libertechie** » Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:03 pm

Finium wrote:
Libertechie wrote:Because this is my question, I think certainly for the sake of transparency and avoiding mountains of public sector debt, the veto should be available if the govt can't afford it.

I don't actually think that the President has veto powers, at all.

He does, read the second legislation up for debate, it's in there.

by **Regnum Dominae** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:44 am

Anyone know when voting starts on the next two bills?

by **Pesda** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:51 am

HumanSanity wrote:
HumanSanity wrote:Therefore I'd like call into question the impartiality of Ainin, as an Admin, for rejecting the counter motions portion of the MRA but believing the above when it favors him. That entire decision was rediculous and swept aside the duties of the administration, redefining them to serve the wishes of the administrator.

Raising this again as now MV has withdrawn the previous motion

Is this a motion? If so, seconded. Sorry Ainin but I think you showed inconsistency.

by **New Zepuha** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:53 am

Pesda wrote:
HumanSanity wrote:Raising this again as now MV has withdrawn the previous motion

Is this a motion? If so, seconded. Sorry Ainin but I think you showed inconsistency.

Thirded. Sorry, I've had my reservations for awhile.

by **The Nihilistic view** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:13 pm

I happen to agree that counter motions defeat the whole point of motions and would ruin that side of the RP. I agree from an OOC perspective in the decision and so I do not support the motion. I would for example if this was not struck off by the admins counter motion this motion and I am sure you can see this would lead you to not have a chance in getting near the required number of seconds. I am sure there are many who would support my counter motion thus neatly illustrating how counter motions are something that would break the RP as no motion would ever likely succeed.

by **Auca Cfg** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:15 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:I happen to agree that counter motions defeat the whole point of motions and would ruin that side of the RP. I agree from an OOC perspective in the decision and so I do not support the motion. I would for example if this was not struck off by the admins counter motion this motion and I am sure you can see this would lead you to not have a chance in getting near the required number of seconds. I am sure there are many who would support my counter motion thus neatly illustrating how counter motions are something that would break the RP as no motion would ever likely succeed.

Exactly.

~East Ormania

by **The Nihilistic view** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:44 pm

Auca Cfg wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:I happen to agree that counter motions defeat the whole point of motions and would ruin that side of the RP. I agree from an OOC perspective in the decision and so I do not support the motion. I would for example if this was not struck off by the admins counter motion this motion and I am sure you can see this would lead you to not have a chance in getting near the required number of seconds. I am sure there are many who would support my counter motion thus neatly illustrating how counter motions are something that would break the RP as no motion would ever likely succeed.

Exactly.

~East Ormania

I just hope they see the irony of the only reason their motion has a chance to succeed against Ainin for leading the Admins to veto the counter motion's clause is because Ainin lead the admins in vetoing the counter motion's clause.

by **East Ormania** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:51 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Auca Cfg wrote:Exactly.

~East Ormania

I just hope they see the irony of the only reason their motion has a chance to succeed against Ainin for leading the Admins to veto the counter motion's clause is because Ainin lead the admins in vetoing the counter motion's clause.

Yeah. Also, while we're at it, there was a thread for your removal as PpT started by Dragomere.

by **New Zepuha** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:12 pm

East Ormania wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:
I just hope they see the irony of the only reason their motion has a chance to succeed against Ainin for leading the Admins to veto the counter motion's clause is because Ainin lead the admins in vetoing the counter motion's clause.

Yeah. Also, while we're at it, there was a thread for your removal as PpT started by Dragomere.

Lol wut

by **Britanno** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:22 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:I happen to agree that counter motions defeat the whole point of motions and would ruin that side of the RP. I agree from an OOC perspective in the decision and so I do not support the motion. I would for example if this was not struck off by the admins counter motion this motion and I am sure you can see this would lead you to not have a chance in getting near the required number of seconds. I am sure there are many who would support my counter motion thus neatly illustrating how counter motions are something that would break the RP as no motion would ever likely succeed.

Erm... so someone made a motion against his counter motion against her motion?

by **Britanno** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:44 pm

New Zepuha wrote:Thirded. Sorry, I've had my reservations for awhile.

Is it really appropriate for a fellow admin to be doing this?

by **New Zepuha** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:06 pm

Britanno wrote:
New Zepuha wrote:Thirded. Sorry, I've had my reservations for awhile.

Is it really appropriate for a fellow admin to be doing this?

If I can't vocalize my opinions then what? Withdrawn the second.

by **The Nihilistic view** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:27 pm

East Ormania wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:
I just hope they see the irony of the only reason their motion has a chance to succeed against Ainin for leading the Admins to veto the counter motion's clause is because Ainin lead the admins in vetoing the counter motion's clause.

Yeah. Also, while we're at it, there was a thread for your removal as PpT started by Dragomere.

Yeah I know, the only post was Ainin ramming a bus at the petition booth! :rofl:

by **Ainin** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:00 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Auca Cfg wrote:Exactly.

~East Ormania

I just hope they see the irony of the only reason their motion has a chance to succeed against Ainin for leading the Admins to veto the counter motion's clause is because Ainin lead the admins in vetoing the counter motion's clause.

I didn't lead anything...

I just typed "I agree", or something along those lines.

by **Regnum Dominae** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:28 pm

Regnum Dominae wrote:Anyone know when voting starts on the next two bills?

by **East Ormania** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:48 pm

The Nihilistic view wrote:
East Ormania wrote:
Yeah. Also, while we're at it, there was a thread for your removal as PpT started by Dragomere.

Yeah I know, the only post was Ainin ramming a bus at the petition booth!

He must've gotten pissed! :lol2:

by **Geilinor** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:55 pm

East Ormania wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:
Yeah I know, the only post was Ainin ramming a bus at the petition booth!

He must've gotten pissed!

by **HumanSanity** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:16 pm

The PoO is withdrawn. Nihil, you should feel free to counter motion it. Similarly, in accordance with portions of the MRA that did pass the motion is tabled anyways because 24 hours passed.

by **Libertechie** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:43 pm

Geilinor wrote:
East Ormania wrote:
He must've gotten pissed!

LINK THE THREAD WE SHOULD TROLL IT

by **Regnum Dominae** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:16 pm

When are we going to begin debate/voting on the next set of bills?

by **HumanSanity** » Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:17 pm

Regnum Dominae wrote:When are we going to begin debate/voting on the next set of bills?

Debate has already begun, we begin voting when Nihil sez.

by **Finium** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 6:29 am

Libertechie wrote:
Finium wrote:I don't actually think that the President has veto powers, at all.

He does, read the second legislation up for debate, it's in there.

If its up for debate he doesn't have those powers yet now does he?

by **Ainin** » Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:40 am

Finium wrote:
Libertechie wrote:He does, read the second legislation up for debate, it's in there.

If its up for debate he doesn't have those powers yet now does he?

He doesn't. REA2 removed them.

NSG Senate Chamber [NSG Senate] - Version 4

Who is online