Whew, what a relief.

[andy]

Finally got a chance to read through all the bills and vote.

I voted against the re-write of the Covenants for the sole reason that the bill didn't point out what had changed. It might have been perfectly fine, but damned if I'm going to do a text-compare just to figure out if there's any bamboozlement going on. If there's no exposition of changes, then I have to assume the worst.

Man, what a cynic I've become.

Oh, and I went for my own party this time: the E-flat Telecaster Party International. Since I couldn't find them on the list, I went, well, you know.

[D. N. Vercáriâ]

I voted against this law that allows for a paper ballot for those who chose to use a paper ballot, because it is kind of half-assed in the issue of secret voting.

I read the proposed covenants and couldn't find any cheap pitfalls in the text, so I voted ÜC, but yes, I found it annoying that no one cared to point out the points of amendment.

Shall we get loud and complain about this?

[Vitxalmour Conductour]

I was actually toying with the wording and thinking of introducing a bill that stipulates that all amending acts must include precisely what is being changed and what it is being changed to. The reasons pointed out above make me even more certain I will. I mostly found it annoying trying to clean up the digest of laws, once an act has been am mended by three different amending acts, only two of which were actually carried out, and with records spotted at best of previous versions, it becomes difficult to know exactly what "the third sentence of the second section" originally referred to.