Re: [ga-int] Popular motions (Dragging in a proposal to fill up this space)
I think this is an excellent suggested process.
It certainly addresses a number of the concerns that have been raised
on the GA list with a motions process.
However, I think a week for discussion is too short a time.
Motions are supposed to only codify the sense the assembly. Except
for certain exceptions, most likely that cannot occur in the time
frame of a single week.
Perhaps a process for a "pressing" motion can be developed that sets a
much higher threshold of expressed support to push a motion to a vote
after a week, but otherwise, the motion is subject to discussion for,
say....3 weeks perhaps.
Sunday, May 06, 2001, 1:52:16 PM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> Since there seems to be no other initiative here, let's try one....
> The issue of getting a motinon balloted has been discussed on the GA list a
> number of times.
> At the moment, the Chair creates the motion text and generates the ballot.
> This creates a problem for certain motions (such as a motion to remove the
> chair, or other motions that the chair might not like).
> Suggestion for a rules line:
> 1 A Popular Motion is a text to be balloted by the DNSO GA that is supported
> by at least 5% of the GA Voters, or 15 people, whichever is the smaller.
> 2 A Popular Motion shall be presented in the form of a message to the GA
> list carrying the complete text of the Motion, the names of the supporting
> GA members, and a request for the Motion to be balloted.
> 3 A Popular Motion shall be put to a vote within a week of its
> presentation to the General Assembly, unless conditions below happen.
> 4 Putting a Popular Motion to the vote may be delayed until a week after
> the end of the vote on another Popular Motion.
> 5 A Popular Motion may be removed before balloting in the case of:
> A - The declaration of at least 2 of the listed Supporters that they do not
> support the Popular Motion
> B - A Popular Motion with a greater number of supporters, asking that the
> first Popular Motion be dismissed. Neither will then be put to a vote.
> - Rule 1 should be easy. The numbers are rather arbitrary.
> - Rule 2 is intended to avoid someone claiming "popular motion" based on a
> series of "me too" messages. He actually has to list the names (and under
> rule 5 A, give those names the right to kill the notion).
> - Rule 3 should allow the secretariat enough time to do the preparations.
> - Rule 4 is intended to avoid exhaustion by a group of 15 people proposing
> tens of motions at the same time.
> - Rule 5 A is intended to allow supporters to kill a motion if they decide
> it's better not to do it after all.
> - Rule 5 B is intended to allow a deeply divided GA (if it occurs) to avoid
> a situation where 2-3 groups spit motions at each other continuously,
> none of which have a chance of passing.
> (PS: what I would really like is for one of the old "rules of order as
> adapted for electronic media" people to come in here with a proposal, and
> TAKE COMMENTS ON IT.....what is currently happening is just forging Lego
> bricks for the foundations.....)
> This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
> Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-int" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
William X Walsh
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-int" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html