Guidelines for Platform Proposals
By The Editors
We have a serious challenge before us: to write a new LP platform (or a
set of significant changes to the existing platform) as a large group of people,
who cannot meet face-to-face. As such we cannot exactly simulate an in-person
convention. Then again, a web-based meeting place does provide many advantages:
more time to think, more time to come up with counter-proposals, the ability
to change your vote after hearing new arguments, the use of advanced voting
systems, and a great deal of parallelism in general.
One thing we do not have (yet) is the ability to offer friendly amendments
while a motion is being considered. This could be done by attaching a message
board to each proposal, but we have resisted this option to date because message
boards generate lots of low-quality writing, and worse, acrimony and flame
wars.
To get much of the benefit of the friendly amendment process, we have
an editorial board to review all proposals to make sure they pass basic tests
of clarity, completeness and general good writing. The goal is to save the
general membership the tedium of observing the word-smithing process. The
editorial process and standards are the same as for essays.
While this is not a perfect system, it should clean up proposals to the
point that the members can focus on the general merits of the proposals vs.
grammatical nitnoids. Later, we can get into refining those proposals that
get high approval ratings.
This brings us to the second challenge: voting. There are an infinite number
of ways in which the platform can be modified. To allow a complete free-for-all
format for proposals would make meaningful voting incredibly difficult. For
this reason we constrain proposals to these types:
- Single plank proposals. Take an existing plank and write
a replacement. Or, make a new plank if there is no existing category in
the LP Platform. This is the obvious incremental approach to changing the
platform.
- Complete rewrite proposals. If you think the existing platform
format is completely wrong and too long, then a call for a rewrite may
be in order. This is only workable if the rewrite is meant to shorten the
platform considerably. Huge rewrites are too difficult to edit and
post on the site. Also, they limit group participation. But the rewrite
approach may be appropriate for proposals to get the platform away from
its current laundry-list approach to a short listing of general principles.
Rewrite proposals can be for the entire platform or just a major section
thereof.
- Foundation changes. Proposals to change the foundations of
the Platform such as the Statement of Principles and/or the Pledge. Do
note that changing the Statement of Principles will be an uphill fight,
since it takes a 7/8 vote to change.
If you can think of something
better, write us!
Debate
In order to avoid filling the website with unpleasant argumentation, half-cocked
remarks and flame wars, we have resisted putting in message boards. Perhaps
another site, such as Yahoo, could be used for those who insist on such, or
perhaps we will end up merging with one of the other reform groups which already
have an open debate mechanism. What we do have are:
Time! People have months to consider and reconsider their votes.
People can change their existing votes after sleeping on a decision.
Author’s comments. Those who propose a plank are invited to speak
to their motion.
Essays. Members are encouraged to write quality essays about the
factors going into making a good platform.
Moderated comments. Yes, you can comment on an existing platform
proposal, but such comments are subject to the same quality control as the
proposals themselves. Think letter-to-the-editor vs. open message board.
Parallel consideration. Unlike with Robert’s Rules, all proposals
for a particular plank are considered in parallel. This is debate in and of
itself. If you wish to amend an existing proposal, just copy it, change it,
and send it in as a new proposal. Please do note the existing proposal that
you are amending so we can describe it as such.
If this is not open enough, perhaps a message board will need to be added.
After the web site is complete in other ways, and our 527/PAC is up and running,
then we can reconsider this decision, with input from the membership.
The Voting System
For the moment we are doing
approval voting. This is a very
simple voting system which finds all the ideas that have a broad base of
support. On the downside, this method does not find the very best idea; voters
cannot express their preference level between the options they approve of.
For now, approval voting will be used to narrow the options down to those
that get 2/3 (or more TBD) approval amongst the members. If we end up with
only a few redundant proposals, then we may simply take them all to the convention
and let the convention choose. Or, if we get many redundancies, we can have
a second round of voting using a more complex system such as Condorcet.
Whether and how to have a second round of voting as well as the threshold
for first-round approval are still to be determined. Essays on this subject
are appropriate for the Caucus chapter of the site.
Format
Microsoft Word, Rich Text Format, clean HTML, or OpenOffice are acceptable,
in this order (see Essays ).
If you are sending a proposal of the single-plank type, please seriously
consider the following format:
- Issues.
- Principles.
- Solutions. (Near term only! Unless you want to make some
explicit forward-looking statements clearly labeled as such.)
- Benefits.
This format is based on what was adopted in
2004, with a couple of improvements. First, we focus on near-term solutions
as per our Statement of Purpose. Second, we add a “Benefits” section. The
platform should be a sales document!
If you have good reason to use a different format,
then do so. If you dislike this format in general, write an essay for the
Caucus section explaining your reasons. If your essay gets rave reviews,
then we may change the format.
Of course, if you are doing the complete rewrite
option, you make your own format. Once again, we must emphasize: complete
rewrites are for dramatically shortened platforms only! We will not post 20-page
dissertations! If unsure, send a query letter.
Submit it
To submit a proposal, log in.
Then, go to the directory where you your proposed plank belongs.
There should be a "New Version" button at the bottom of the right sidebar.
Click it and and you will be taken to a form for you to place your proposal.
You may want to compose your proposal in a word processor first, and then
paste it into the form. That way, you get spell checking and the like.
However, be sure to manually put in the paragraph breaks after pasting, because
Word, at least, only gives you one carriage return per paragraph, and you need
either a [p] tag or an empty line to tell the form of a paragraph break.
(I haven't tried it, but it might help to have a small gap between paragraphs
in your Word doc and then hit return twice for each paragraph, just like in
a typewriter. This is bad form for word processing, but might work better for
pasting into the form.)
Once you enter the text, you can hit the preview button to get an idea of how
the proposal will look. You can make edits and hit preview as many times as you
wish. You can also go back and make edits after saving if you wish.
Once you are satisfied, hit "Submit." Within a few days (or a couple of weeks if
things are busy) you will be notified by one or more editors of whether you
need to make changes. Minor edits are done using the [x] and [n] tags which
cross out old text and highlight new text respectively. This allows you to
review changes made by editors to accept, reject, or make counter-suggestions.
You should use these tags as well if you make changes after editing has begun
so the editors can see what is new.
More major editorial suggestions go in the editorial comments box. Both editors
and authors can use this box for comments.
Once both editors and author agree on things, the ball gets handed over to the
webmaster for posting.
That’s it! Start thinking then writing. We have
lots to do before the 2006 convention!
Printer Friendly Version
Top of Page
|
