Even though the citizens have decided to proceed for now with the current "Triumvirate" Code of Laws, and the Judiciary Review Board has ruled that the current "Triumvirate" Code of Laws is valid and effective, there appears to be an overwelming consent among the citizens to merge/switch the Code of Law to the "Flexible" ruleset as soon as possible. Assuming this Tri-to-Flex CoL merge/switch will happen, this thread here is to discuss the legal and pratical process. Allow me to start by presenting two legal alternatives of changing the current "Tri" CoL to the upcoming "Flex" CoL: 1. Code of Law amendment: amend the complete CoL. 2. Code of Law replacement: amend the constitution to allow complete replacement of CoL under current circumstance, then proceed with the said replacement. Here is an overview of what concrete steps are to be followed in each case (references in  are relevant paragraphs of the Constitution of the CoL; words in italic are my comments): 1. CoL amendment: - a. [CoL 10.B.I] A Citizen posts an idea about the amendment as a thread. (This is obviously trivial.) - b. [CoL 10.B.II] Amendment is debated in the thread. (Also quite easy, in fact the debate has already started in several threads. But to be sure, we should dedicate a new thread specificly to this topic.) - c. [CoL 10.B.III] After at least 48hours the proponent posts a proposed poll. (It's quite uncertain how the discussion will actually take. If the "proponent" post the poll before the discussion dies out, it might be legally seen as that the citizens are not "sufficiently informed" at the time of the poll, thus making the poll impossible to be binding.) - d. [CoL 10.B.IV] Once 24 hours have passed with no significant comments to the thread poll, the issue goes to the Judiciary for review. (This is very problematic. It can take indefinitely long before "no significant comments" comes in any more.) - e. [CoL 10.B.V] If and after Judicial Review passes, the ratification poll is posted by the Judiciary. (My estimate is that this probably takes one or two days.) - f. [CoL 10.A.I] The Code of Laws may be amended by a 60% majority of votes cast in a public poll which shall be open for no fewer than 4 days. (Adds 4 days to the process. In the end, 60% is needed.) Summarizing 1.a. to 1.f., the CoL amendment process starts with a dedicated discussion thread and takes at least 7 days, likely 10 to 12 days, and in worst case indefinitely long. 2. CoL replacement: - a. A discussion starts regarding the Const. amendment to allow CoL being replaced as a whole. (This is already happening here.) - b. We determine under which terms the Const. should allow replacement of CoL. (We can make the terms specific to the current situation or somewhat more general.) - c. We draft a paragraph to be proposed as Const. amendment. (The could be trivial if there is no dispute regarding the terms, or if there is dispute, an addtional poll may be required.) - d. [Const. G.2] The Constitution may be amended by a 60% majority of votes cast in a public poll which shall be open for no fewer than 4 days. ([Const. G.2.a] further specifies: "A lower form of law may specify a procedure which must be followed to amend the Constitution." But our current CoL does not specify any such additional procedure.) - e. After the Const. amendment is passed, follow the procedure specified in that amendment to replace the CoL. (Since there is yet no draft for the Const. amendment, we don't know how complicated this will be. But if we don't put stones in our own way, it's likely to be a simple open, binding poll in form of a Referendum or an Initiative as defined in the Const., with 4 days minimul opening time and either 50% or 60% votes required for it to pass.) Summerizing 2.a. to 2.e., the Const. replacement process starts right here, takes at least 9 days, likely 10 to 12 days, in worst case 14 days. Comparing the two variants above, I personally favor the latter, because (1) it is less likely to be dragged on indefinitely, and because (2) passing a whole new CoL as "amendment" is a *hack*, while replacing it in accordance with the Constitution is a much cleaner solution.