User:ElectionJune2015/Referenda/1: Difference between revisions
imported>John Stephenson (Formatting - adding support instructions) |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{AccountNotLive}} | |||
'''Only the proposer of the referendum and Election Committee members may modify this page. Substantive modifications by the proposer after the referendum has been formally proposed at '[[User:ElectionJune2015/Referenda|June 2015 Referenda]]' will invalidate the signatures of any current supporters, and require them to sign again. Comments should be placed on the Talk page.''' | '''Only the proposer of the referendum and Election Committee members may modify this page. Substantive modifications by the proposer after the referendum has been formally proposed at '[[User:ElectionJune2015/Referenda|June 2015 Referenda]]' will invalidate the signatures of any current supporters, and require them to sign again. Comments should be placed on the Talk page.''' | ||
{{TOC|right}} | {{TOC|right}} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:49, 22 November 2023
The account of this former contributor was not re-activated after the server upgrade of March 2022.
Only the proposer of the referendum and Election Committee members may modify this page. Substantive modifications by the proposer after the referendum has been formally proposed at 'June 2015 Referenda' will invalidate the signatures of any current supporters, and require them to sign again. Comments should be placed on the Talk page.
Approval of articles, June 2015
Proposed by Martin Wyatt
A proposed referendum on existing rules follows. If it is voted on, Citizens could support or oppose the question by indicating 'Yes' or 'No'. Under Article 37, a simple majority is required for this referendum to pass because it does not propose to modify the Charter.
To support the establishment of a referendum on this issue, sign here.
Text
As the Approved Articles system is clearly not working due to the lack of active Editors, the Council is asked to consider what can be done to remedy this situation, for instance, by abolishing the Approved Article status altogether, or by making the requirements for the appointment of Editors less stringent while still ensuring that they are reliable.