• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Second Item of Business (discussion only0

I think I'll look at that...stereotype?...as both a joke and a reminder NOT to apply the stereotype...if that makes any sense...
 
I think that after we determine who will lead, we need to determine where to start.

Someone suggested starting by determining which entities/areas we represent.

Another suggested starting by determining what rules/guidelines we will operate under.


I think the rules may be optimal - after that we can use them as a framework to do other work. Of course the option to amend the rules always exists.
 
well i didn't get that writing.... !!!
 

I think that we should establish our thesis firmly so that everyone is on the same page, and then get to the rules, whose representing what and then on to our first order of business.
 
jet57 said:
I think that we should establish our thesis firmly so that everyone is on the same page, and then get to the rules, whose representing what and then on to our first order of business.
Click to expand...

IMO, the rules should come first. Particularly rules about voting. If there are no rules about voting, then how do we know who won the vote?

Generally speaking, when people think about votes, the assumption is "majority wins". However, when talking about a document that's meant to bind an entire people, I think the requirement should be stronger than that. That's why, when the rules are proposed and discussed, I intend to propose that any text included in the proposed constitution should require the support of a super-majority of some sort (60%?, 2/3?, etc)
 

Sure; that is a good suggestion, however I'm thinking of order of operation. That is to say: 1) what are we doing? and then your suggestion comes in - 2): how do we do it?

Yes?
 

75% would be a good super-majority - agreed on by 3/4 members. Very little opposition.
 
Jango said:
75% would be a good super-majority - agreed on by 3/4 members. Very little opposition.
Click to expand...

And probably will doom us to failure.

The original convention was a bunch of people (white men, property owners) with pretty similar backgrounds - wonder how many of their suggestions got 75% agreement? I'm sure those who know more about the convention will be happy to fill me in.

I also wonder how much "back office" dealing went on.

I'm interested in this effort because it is interesting to see if a constitution can be crowd-sourced. But I have to admit, I'm not expecting it to succeed. I hope I'm wrong!
 
jet57 said:
Sure; that is a good suggestion, however I'm thinking of order of operation. That is to say: 1) what are we doing? and then your suggestion comes in - 2): how do we do it?

Yes?
Click to expand...
We already know what we're doing - having a constitutional convention on a debate forum (currently).

Determining what guidelines we operate under is going to be important later, because even if they're not perfect, they still provide a framework that can be modified as necessary.
 
The Mark said:
I think I'll look at that...stereotype?...as both a joke and a reminder NOT to apply the stereotype...if that makes any sense...
Click to expand...

No. I think it's a real stereotype that people pretend isn't a stereotype.
 

Sure: but there has been nothing formal - as an item of business - to be followed by the rules and oder of operation.
 
jet57 said:
Sure: but there has been nothing formal - as an item of business - to be followed by the rules and oder of operation.
Click to expand...
It's kinda a catch-22 situation, but we need rules so we can debate the rules.
 
The Mark said:
It's kinda a catch-22 situation, but we need rules so we can debate the rules.
Click to expand...

Sure: but without formally knowing what the rules apply to the rules arent really rules are they.

I'm only following what seems to be protocall here: for nomintions of officers it was necessary to make a formal nomination that included # as a requirement...

Therefore, it only stands to reason then - puropose - goal - rules.... delegates etc etc.

Yes?
 

We are in anarchy mode at the moment. We will establish order very soon.
 
I think our next item of business should be to finalize our list of members. We have 64 members. That's a lot. If it gets much bigger it might be difficult to manage. I think we need to vote on finalizing the membership list.

Here is the list of members of the Debate Politics Constitutional Convention:

29A
Agent J
AlbqOwl
Amandi
American
Americanwoman
Apacherat
Azgreg
Beaudreaux
Bigfoot 88
BrewerBob
Buck Ewer
Cardinal
chromium
Citizen.Seven
d0gbreath
DaveFagan
ernst barkmann
FreedomFromAll
Gaius46
gdgyva
Geoist
Grand Mal
grip
hallam
Hamster Buddha
Hatuey
haymarket
imagerep
Jango
jet57
Kal'Stang
Kobie
Korimyr the Rat
Kushinator
Lovebug
Luftwaffe
mak2
Navy Pride
Nilly
NIMBY
OrphanSlug
paddymcdougall
Paleocon
PirateMk1
Poiuy
Psychoclown
rabbitcaebannog
radioman
RedAkston
Removable Mind
rjay
roguenuke
sangha
TeleKat
The Mark
TheDemSocialist
Threegoofs
tres borrachos
TurtleDude
US Conservative
vasuderatorrent
Wiggen
Your Star

I removed Northern Light from the list by his on request.
 

If you like, I can participate. I have some knowledge of the theory of efficient constitutions, public goods and property rights systems from the economic viewpoint and some limited practical experience in developing a constitution.
 
Last edited:
I'm not entirely sure if more would be better, but it would probably keep discussion moving...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…