[PROPOSAL] [WITHDRAWN] Modification to Autopass Objection bylaw

I, Dan Nelson, in my capacity as Council Member for Shattered Tears Over Rural Michigan do propose the following change to Administrative Bylaw 3.e.iii.2.a.iii

This proposal will require a second.

Current:
iii. [AUTOPASS] Vote Procedure
1. [AUTOPASS] votes are only proposed by Coordinators in passing binding edicts or bylaw changes within the scope of their duties as detailed elsewhere in the bylaws. These proposals need not be seconded, but go immediately into discussion.
2. Objection to an [AUTOPASS] Vote
a. A Council Member or a member of the Executive Team may object to an [AUTOPASS] Vote during the week of discussion. An objection will remove the proposal’s ability to [AUTOPASS] and must instead proceed to Vote.
i. To object to a proposal, post with “[PROPOSAL] [OBJECTION] Proposal Name” in the subject line of the message, where “proposal name” is the title of the proposal, while also removing [AUTOPASS] from the subject line.
ii. In the body of the message, include the statement “I [name] of [Chronicle Name] object to this proposal” followed by the reasoning behind the objection.
iii. Opposition must be in regard to the content of the proposal. This is to allow Coordinators the opportunity to respond and/or make changes/remove the proposal and its contents.
1. This opposition must have some degree of detail to it, e.g. in the case of Legacy exemption, a further reason must be given beyond the status of a legacy exemption / no legacy exemption clause in the proposal itself.
2. Exec is considered to be the final arbiter on what is or is not a detailed enough reason to object to a prop.

New:
iii. [AUTOPASS] Vote Procedure
1. [AUTOPASS] votes are only proposed by Coordinators in passing binding edicts or bylaw changes within the scope of their duties as detailed elsewhere in the bylaws. These proposals need not be seconded, but go immediately into discussion.
2. Objection to an [AUTOPASS] Vote
a. A Council Member or a member of the Executive Team may object to an [AUTOPASS] Vote during the week of discussion. An objection will remove the proposal’s ability to [AUTOPASS] and must instead proceed to Vote.
i. To object to a proposal, post with “[PROPOSAL] [OBJECTION] Proposal Name” in the subject line of the message, where “proposal name” is the title of the proposal, while also removing [AUTOPASS] from the subject line.
ii. In the body of the message, include the statement “I [name] of [Chronicle Name] object to this proposal” followed by the reasoning behind the objection.
iii. Opposition must be in regard to the content of the proposal. This is to allow Coordinators the opportunity to respond and/or make changes/remove the proposal and its contents.
1. This opposition must have some degree of detail to it, e.g. in the case of Legacy exemption, a further reason must be given beyond the status of a legacy exemption / no legacy exemption clause in the proposal itself.
2. Exec is considered to be the final arbiter on what is or is not a detailed enough reason to object to a prop.

 

Reason:
I do not think that it is appropriate to moderate exactly what constitutes a valid objection. If there is an objection it should go to a vote and follow the democratic process.