[Passed] Rules of the Constitutional Convention

[Cormac]

Rules of the Constitutional Convention I. Convention Administration

(1) The Pharaoh will appoint a citizen to chair the constitutional convention. The chairperson will administer the constitutional convention according to Article II, Section 3 of the Scroll of Ma'at and according to these procedural rules.

(2) In the event that the chairperson is derelict in their duties, the Pharaoh may remove and replace the chairperson.

II. Convention Procedure

(1) Any citizen may submit a constitutional proposal to the convention. One week will be allotted for submission, discussion, and revision of constitutional proposals, henceforth referred to as the discussion period. The chairperson may extend the discussion period by up to one week if significant discussion or revision is ongoing.

(2) Should the chairperson determine that significant discussion or revision is ongoing after two weeks, the chairperson will call a vote to extend the discussion period for an additional one to two weeks, at the discretion of the chairperson, subject to an absolute majority vote (defined as 50%+1).

(3) The chairperson may correct spelling, grammatical, and formatting errors in any constitutional proposal prior to bringing the proposal to vote, provided that such changes are non-substantive in that they do not in any way affect the interpretation of the content of the constitutional proposal. All such corrections must be publicly declared in the relevant thread, detailing the full extent of corrections made. Such corrections may be overruled by the Pharaoh.

(4) Following the discussion period, three days will be allotted for voting on all constitutional proposals that have been certified as complete by their authors. For the purposes of these rules, "author" is defined as the person who submitted a constitutional proposal.

(5) Following the voting period, all constitutional proposals that have met the required two-thirds threshold will be presented to the Pharaoh for assent. The constitutional proposal that receives the assent of the Pharaoh will be the new constitution of Osiris.

(6) Should no constitutional proposal meet the required threshold, or should the Pharaoh withhold assent from all constitutional proposals that meet the required threshold, the discussion period will be restarted and will be subject to the same rules as the initial discussion period.

(7) Citizens may vote "Aye," "Nay," "Abstain," or votes of clearly similar intent, on any vote before the convention. Abstentions may not be used to determine the outcome of any vote, and all votes will be determined based on the highest number of votes cast for or against a constitutional proposal rather than the overall number of citizens.

[Cormac]

This is, I guess obviously, a draft set of rules for this convention, which is the first thing we need to address.

Until rules are adopted, the convention will be provisionally administered by the Pharaoh and his Deputy Scribes (Adytus and me) as the Council of Scribes is currently being administered. As we have no rules, we have no defined discussion periods, but I think we should aim for discussion on these rules to take no more than 24-48 hours if possible so we can get moving. If after 24 hours nobody has chimed in with any issues with these rules, I'll confer with Syberis and Adytus about bringing them to vote.

[Halo]

Is that one week of discussion for each proposal? Also, what time will we give between proposals before we move to close the period of introducing proposals? I would suggest that if we have received no new proposals for ten days following the introduction of the last proposal, a motion to close accepting new proposals would be in order. This would allow a full discussion period of the last proposal and a few days of reflection and preparation before another proposal would have to be submitted.

[Cormac]

Is that one week of discussion for each proposal?

No, it's one week for the submission and discussion of all proposals, which may be extended by up to one additional week by the chairperson, and then may be further extended by vote of the convention. I don't imagine we'll even get to step three, but it exists if needed.

Also, what time will we give between proposals before we move to close the period of introducing proposals? I would suggest that if we have received no new proposals for ten days following the introduction of the last proposal, a motion to close accepting new proposals would be in order. This would allow a full discussion period of the last proposal and a few days of reflection and preparation before another proposal would have to be submitted.

You're misunderstanding. The way the procedure is structured, there is a period for all proposals to be submitted and discussed, and then all proposals that are finished at the conclusion of the discussion period will go to vote. Any proposal that meets the 2/3 threshold for passage will then be presented to the Pharaoh for assent, and whichever proposal to which he assents will be our new constitution.

So it's like this: Submit and discuss all proposals --> Vote on all finished proposals --> Pharaoh assents to one proposal.

We can discuss other ways of doing it if folks don't like this method, but this seemed like the least complicated and most streamlined to me. I could be wrong but I don't think we're going to see more than two or three proposals submitted during this convention. Osiris has not thus far had a big appetite for legislating and I would be very surprised if we see a bunch of competing proposals, though if we do, this way of doing it does enable extension of the submission/discussion period to accommodate a larger than anticipated number of proposals.

[Cormac]

One thing that's been discussed a bit on Discord is the possibility of either having a week long period for submission followed by a week long period for discussion, or extending the joint submission/discussion period to two weeks.

Thoughts on that? I'm okay with it, in theory, but I don't want to hold up the convention longer than necessary, and these draft rules would allow for the submission/discussion period to be extended by the chairperson if it's found to be necessary. My concern with implementing a mandatory two week period is we're going to be ready to go before two weeks is up and just sitting here. And if we're not ready to go after a week, the chairperson could extend the period. But, if we think we need a mandatory two week period, that's an option.

[Badger]

I think that we should keep to the original rules. Seems long enough.

[Altino]

I think the original rules are fine, as long as we can extend them if we need to.

[Adytus]

I third the original rules.

[Halo]

I think a week to submit proposals is fine, but only one week for discussing the proposals is not, in my opinion. However, since that time period can be extended, I'm OK with it as it stands.

[Wymondham]

I fourth the original rules