I believe we need a CommentPeriod to give everyone time to review changes in the Law.

I made a new proposal based on StarPilot's ideas. The old one is below for reference.

Here are two proposals for discussion. ConsensusByDefault is not yet invoked (but if you agree to this change, sign your agreement, and ConsensusByDefault will be invoked later):

=== Proposal 1: CommentPeriod

=

Whereas it is desirable that,

that all changes receive adequate discussion,

that confidence be maintained that the Law of AnewGo represent in some form the Will of the Citizens:

1) No law shall be changed without giving at least one week of notice to the community. Vetoing a law counts as a "change".

=== Proposal 2: Formality Act of May 2003

=

== Summary: ==

The category CategoryAnewGoAct is the Law.

Proposed changes in their comment period go in CategoryAnewGoProposedAct.

== Text of Act: ==

Whereas it is desirable that,

Law is clearly distinguished from discussion,

All citizens be appraised of impending changes to the Law,

All citizens should be able to easily find every Law which is in force:

1) Any page with an Act, in force or proposed, shall have the text of the Act in a section at the top of the page, and then a divider. Nothing after the divider shall be considered Law.

2) Any page with an Act currently in force shall have the word "CategoryAnewGoAct" near the bottom.

Any page with an Act or change to Law which is submitted to the community as per CommentPeriodLaw shall have the word "CategoryAnewGoProposedAct" neat the bottom.

Any page which mentions either the word CategoryAnewGoAct or CategoryAnewGoProposedAct in passing, but which is not an Act or a proposed Act, must state "This page is not an Act." in the first paragraph at the top of the page.

3) The Law of AnewGo shall be exactly the first sections of pages in CategoryAnewGoAct which do not say "This page is not an Act" in the first paragraph.

Discussion:

StarPilot, I hadn't thought to just use categories, that's a good idea, thanks.

The CommentPeriod proposed law says, in the simplest way possible, that there is a comment or grace period in between changes to the Law and their adoption.

The Formality Act institutes CategoryAnewGoAct and CategoryAnewGoProposedAct and makes their use compulsory. It also creates a section at the top of each Act page with the actual text of the Act. I think that is necessary for clarity. The Act text may still be copied below, in the discussion section which is on the same page, and discussed with inserted comments.

-- BayleShanks

=== the old proposal (for reference only)

=

Here is a proposal for discussion. ConsensusByDefault is not yet invoked (but if you agree to this change, sign your agreement, and ConsensusByDefault will be invoked later):

====Votes For

==

====Votes Against

==

StarPilot 2003-05-23

The old proposal:

(to be relocated to CommentPeriodLaw if passed)

Whereas it is desirable that,

1) all citizens be appraised of impending changes to the Law,

2) that all changes receive adequate discussion,

3) that confidence be maintained that the Law of AnewGo represent in some form the Will of the Citizens:

All discussion must be relocated immediately from AnewGoLaw. After this time, it shall be illegal to change the page AnewGoLaw or any Law linked from it unless a link to the proposed change has been posted on the page ProposedLaw for at least one week, and the change has been approved according to the legal process.

Only that which is posted on or linked from AnewGoLaw is Law. Changes to AnewGoLaw which disrespect this CommentPeriod are null and void.

Each page with Law on it shall have the Law in a section at the top of the page, and then a divider. Nothing after the divider shall be considered Law. Only the Law may not be changed without a CommentPeriod.

===Discussion on the old proposal:

=

Note that approval or disapproval of a proposed change may be made by any method, including ConsensusByDefault. Right now, "the legal process" is ConsensusByDefault. So, to make a new law, you post the change on ProposedLaw, and then a week later, if no one disagrees, you may link it from AnewGoLaw, and then it is Law. To veto an existing Law, you serve notice of your veto on ProposedLaw, and then a week later, you remove the Law in question from AnewGoLaw, and then it is not Law.

-- BayleShanks

That went right over my head, today. Just one of those days...

Ok, to make a new AnewGoAct, or protest an existing AnewGoAct, one has to post a link to it here. Then in a week, one links or unlinks it on AnewGoLaw?

Where does AnewGoLaw page get it's authority? I thought that was a function of AnewGoCongress? To either have or to link all existing AnewGoActs?

Second, to protest an existing AnewGoAct, one simply files a complaint about it with AnewGoCourt. So are you proposing to change it to add unlinking it from the AnewGoLaw page and then filing the protest? Otherwise, you are allowing anyone to unlink anything, and the act of unlinking is the signal that the AnewGoAct is no long in force.

On further thought, you want to move the mess that is effectively AnewGoCongress to here? And then split subsequent comments? I think that is a bad idea. The community is served best when all comments about a proposed AnewGoAct is located with that Act. In general, Acts should be given their own page. Yes, I think that works best. We just need a central point that gives us a list of the current proposed acts. And for that, a CategoryAnewGoProposedAct should suffice.

I vote against this CommentPeriod as I understand it at this time. (2003-05-23)

Note: I'm not against a "grace period". That is an excellent suggestion. However, I am against all this linking and unlinking and by design splitting of comments and discussion on an AnewGoAct.

---StarPilot

====AnewGo Functionality Section

==

CategoryAnewGoProposedAct
AnewGoToDo: Review this topic.
AnewGoToDo: Vote.