[BILL - VOTED] Overhaul of the Standing Orders of the Magisterium

I promised a proposal to reform the Standing Orders, and I deliver. On the left you’ll find the current SOM, on the right the newly proposed version.

SECTION I. ACCEPTANCE OF MAGISTERS
…1.1- Citizens wishing to become Magisters must do all of the following:
…1.1.1- Be a Citizen of TEP;
…1.1.2- Be a WA Member with their TEP resident nation;
…1.1.3- Supply the name of their resident WA nation, except if their WA nation is involved in EPSA, in which case it may remain classified;
…1.1.4- Endorse the Delegate and all Viziers;
…1.1.5- Complete a Public Official Disclosure Form;
…1.1.6- Make at least 3 on-topic opinion posts in the Magisterium debate forum as verified by the Provost;
…1.1.7- Recite the Magister’s Pledge in the appropriate designated location in the Magisterium sub-forum;

…1.2- It is recommended, but not required, that Citizens wishing to become Magisters do the following:
…1.2.1- Complete a course, practicum, tenure or academic publication in The East Pacific University;
…1.2.2- Join and contribute to an Executive ministry, service or agency, including EPSA, evidenced by recognition of contribution by an Executive Minister or the Delegate;
…1.2.2.1- If an active Roleplayer, instead of 1.2.2, have a documented history of Role Play;
…1.2.3- Post on the RMB at least three times;
…1.2.4- Contribute to ‘TEP Evolved’ subforum at least three times;

…1.3-The Magisterium shall, by majority vote, decide whether a new Magister will be accepted;

…1.4- Citizens who are denied acceptance into the Magisterium may appeal the decision to the Conclave;
…1.4.1- The appellant must present a petition on Magister Acceptance to the Conclave, listing their qualifications for the Magisterium and their reasons why they feel the original Magisterium vote should be declared invalid. The petition must be endorsed by at least 5 citizens;
…1.4.2- The contents of the petition will be reviewed by the Conclave and if valid, the Conclave will instruct the Provost to present the contents of the petition to the Magisterium and schedule a new election;
…1.4.3- If elected by a majority vote of the Magisterium, the applicant will be accepted into the Magisterium;
…1.4.4- There is no appeal of a second Magister election, however, the candidate can reapply in 30 days from the end of the second election;

SECTION II. LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE
…2.1- Any Magister may propose a bill, resolution, or amendment to the Concordat and the Magisterium shall debate that proposal immediately.
…2.2- Any Magister may motion to amend proposed legislation at any time during debate;
…2.2.1- If the author(s) of the legislation accepts the amendment they are required to post the amended proposal in the debate thread, which will then be considered the current proposal;
…2.2.2- If the author(s) of the legislation does not accept the amendment, yet the amendment receives a second, the Magisterium shall vote on the amendment;
…2.2.2.1- The voting period on the amendment shall begin immediately and last for a period of 72 hours or until all eligible Magisters have voted;
…2.2.2.2- If the vote on the amendment receives majority support, the legislation shall stand amended as motioned and the authors shall be required to post the amended proposal in the debate thread, which will then be considered the current proposal;
…2.3- The Magisterium shall continue to debate that proposal until any Magister has motioned to vote and any other Magister has seconded that motion. Any such motion shall only be valid if 48 hours have passed after the bill or resolution has been proposed.
…2.4- The same procedure shall be used for nominations by the Delegate as well as motions to overrule a Delegate’s veto.

SECTION III. PROVOST AND DEPUTY PROVOST
…3.1- The Magisterium shall immediately act to appoint a Provost from among its members;
…3.1.1- An election is to be held whenever the position is vacant or at the end of the Provost’s three-month term (March, June, September, and December); to be orchestrated by the previous Provost, the Deputy Provost, or a representative thereof.
…3.2- When the position has become vacant, a 48-hour period for nominations is to be held.
…3.2.1- Any Magister may nominate any other Magister. Another Magister other than the nominee must second that nomination before it is official.
…3.2.2- A Magister may nominate themselves. Another Magister must second that nomination before it is official.
…3.2.3- A Magister may decline nomination for the position of Provost.
…3.3- The Magisterium shall then vote for a period of 72 hours and the candidate receiving the most votes shall be elected as Provost.
…3.3.1- Should the election result in a tie and no candidate concedes, all Magisters who previously abstained must cast a vote in favor of a candidate;
…3.3.2- If a tie persists after forced voting, a runoff election between the tied candidates shall be held for a period of 72 hours with the candidate receiving the most votes declared the winner.
…3.3.3 If a tie persists after the runoff election, the vote is opened to all citizens for a period of 24 hours;
…3.3.4- If a tie exists after the citizen’s vote, the Magisterium may conduct a random selection which grants each tied candidate equal chances.
…3.4- The newly elected Provost shall immediately name a Magister as Deputy Provost, who can assist the Provost in conducting their duties upon the request of the Provost and who shall assume the Provost’s duties temporarily in the case the Provost is absent for more than 48 hours for any reason.

SECTION IV. VOTING
…4.1- When a motion to vote has been seconded in accordance with subsection 2.3, the Provost shall then immediately officiate a voting period of 168 hours (seven days) on the proposal.
…4.2- Each time a Magister votes, they must also explicitly supply their TEP nation and WA nation in the same post.
…4.3- A vote will be concluded when:
…4.3.1- The prescribed voting period ends;
…4.3.2- The Provost concludes the voting period, given that all eligible Magisters have voted.
…4.4- A motion shall pass if
…4.4.1- Greater than 50% of the votes not including Present or Abstain are in favor of it; and
…4.4.2- The quorum number of 50% or more of eligible Magisterium voters has been met.
…4.4.3- This order is notwithstanding any special requirements set out by the Concordat for certain types of votes, and in the case of extended requirement, the quorum shall always be achieved.
…4.5- When a vote has concluded, the Provost shall then proceed as provided by the Concordat, according to the type of vote.
…4.6- Any Magister that was approved during any voting period shall not have their vote counted for that particular voting period.
…4.7- Any Magister removed or resigned from office or on an official Leave of Absence during any voting period shall not have their vote counted for that particular voting period.

SECTION V. QUORUM AND UNANIMOUS CONSENT
…5.1- In order for any exercise of the Magisterium’s powers, a quorum must be shown to exist. If the quorum is not achieved, the vote is considered ineffective and may not be acted upon.
…5.2- To achieve quorum, at least 1/2 of eligible Magisters must have made their presence known during a vote, by providing their vote or abstention.
…5.3- In the case of a vote under section 8 to remove a Magister for inactivity, any Magister who has not logged into their forum account for more than 72 hours may be excluded for the purposes of determining if a quorum exists for that vote.
…5.4- Where a Magister has made a motion on any procedural matter or suspension of procedural rules for the purposes of expediting the conduct of the Magisterium’s business, the Provost may then choose to proceed accordingly, provided there is no objection within 72 hours of the motion being made.
…5.5- Orders 4.1, 4.3, and 4.4 notwithstanding, where the Magisterium is in receipt of an Executive Nomination by the Delegate, a negative consensus voting period of ten days shall be held in which any Magister may object or move for a Section IV vote:
…5.5.1- Should no Magister object or motion for a Section IV vote, the nomination is to be considered accepted by unanimous vote.
…5.5.2- Executive Nominations for Viziers shall be excepted from this procedure.
…5.6- Under no circumstances shall this procedure of unanimous consent be used to pass legislation or exercise any of the Magisterium’s powers beyond consideration of Executive Nominations.

SECTION VI. CLOSED SESSIONS
…6.1- A Magister may move that a matter be considered in closed session, and if the motion is seconded and a majority of votes are in favour of doing so, the Magisterium shall consider that matter in closed session.
…6.2- The Foreign Affairs Committee is established as a committee of the whole Magisterium and it shall always meet in closed session.
…6.2.1- The Foreign Affairs Committee will be chaired by the Provost.
…6.2.2- The Delegate and any minister(s) he/she designates will be ex officio members of the committee without voting privileges.
…6.2.3- The Delegate or the Provost may initiate a meeting of the committee.
…6.2.4- The Magisterium may not ratify a treaty or declaration of war in a closed session of the committee.

SECTION VII. ABSENCE AND REMOVAL OF PROVOSTS
…7.1- If both the Provost and Deputy Provost have been absent for a period exceeding 72 hours:
…7.1.1- The current active, and longest serving, member of the Magisterium shall assume the Provost’s duties temporarily;
…7.1.2- Said member will be recognized as an “Interim Provost” and carry the duties of the Provost until another Provost is selected.
…7.2- Any Magister may move for the removal of the Provost and upon a Magister seconding this motion, the Deputy Provost shall officiate a vote of a period of 72 hours. The Provost may then be removed by majority vote.
…7.3- The Deputy Provost may be removed and replaced by the Provost at any time.

SECTION VIII. REMOVAL OF MAGISTERS
…8.1-The Provost may, from time to time, hold a roll call and require that Magisters respond within 1 week, or 168 hours, to confirm their activity:
…8.1.1-Any Magister not responding to such a roll call may then be eligible to be suspended or removed by a majority vote of the active Magisters.
…8.2- A Magister may be immediately suspended by the Provost and subject to removal by a majority vote of the active Magisters if:
…8.2.1- the Magister has not logged into the forums for more than two weeks and has not informed the Magisterium of said absence;
…8.2.2- the Magister has not voted or confirmed attendance in at least two successive votes that have taken place at least seven days apart from each other.
…8.3- A Magister will be removed automatically, which shall be published by the Provost, if any of the following circumstances are met:
…8.3.1- the Magister has not logged into the forums for more than four weeks and has not informed the Magisterium of said absence;
…8.3.2- the Magister has failed to vote or confirm attendance in three votes over a three week period to begin on the post date of the first missed vote;
…8.3.3- the Magister is found to have supplied falsified information in their Magister’s Pledge or Public Official Disclosure Form;
…8.3.4- the Magister is found to have supplied falsified information about their WA nation attached to a vote in accordance with Order 4.2.
…8.4- A Magister shall be suspended upon notice by the Provost or Compliance Officer if their resident TEP nation is not a WA member, which:
…8.4.1- Invalidates any vote cast by the suspended Magister during the suspension;
…8.4.2- Shall result in the automatic removal of the Magister if WA membership of their TEP resident nation is not restored within 72 hours of notice;
…8.4.3- Shall result in the automatic removal of the Magister should they be suspended for a second time within the span of thirty days;
…8.4.4- Shall lapse automatically upon restoration of WA membership of the Magister’s resident TEP nation if this suspension has not resulted in automatic removal.
…8.5 - If a Magister is confirmed by the current Overseeing Officer or Delegate to be serving as an active member of the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army, they are hereby exempt from the World Assembly membership status requirement for Magisters as detailed in Section 8.4.
…8.6- A Magister may resign at any time.

SECTION IX. AMENDMENTS
…9.1- The Standing Orders shall be amended in the same manner as a legislative proposal. Any alterations that conflict with past resolutions shall be remedied.
…9.2- The Standing Orders shall have any headings shown in bold, underlined all-capital text, with the “big” script, (Headings to be known as titles of sections with the numbers immediately preceding them).
…9.3- Any following Order under the Headings shall be removed from the margin by three (3) periods (to distinguish between orders), and shall be notified with the number of the Section and the number of the Order, in bold (example 5.3, being Section 5, Order 3):
…9.3.1- Every Order with no Provisions shall each end with a period “.”;
…9.3.2- Orders with Provisions shall end in a colon “:”, and each consecutive Provision to end with a semicolon “;”, the final Provision ending in a period “.”. The use of the period marks the end of the Order.
…9.4- Any order with necessary addenda shall be added in the form of ‘provisions’, and shall be notified as outlined in the above, but with an added number for the provision. This number may not be bolded, but additionally removed from the margin with seven (7) periods (example 5.3.2).
SECTION I. ADMITTANCE OF NEW MAGISTERS
…1.1. A Citizen wishing to join the Magisterium (“applicant” hereinafter) shall :
…1.1.1. Recite the Magister’s Pledge in the appropriate designated location in the Magisterium sub-forum; …1.1.2. Supply the name of their resident Nation and, if applicable, their WA nation, except if their WA nation is involved in EPSA, in which case it may remain classified.
…1.1.3. If applicable, endorse the Delegate and all Viziers;
…1.1.4. Complete a Public Official Disclosure Form.
…1.2. The Provost shall verify whether all all conditions described in Section 1.1. of these Standing Orders have been met.
…1.2.1. If the applicant has their WA nation in TEP, the Provost shall admit the applicant to the Magisterium.
…1.2.2. If the applicant has no WA nation in TEP, The Magisterium shall, by majority vote, decide whether the applicant will be accepted.
…1.3. The Provost may deny applications of applicants convicted of any crime and applicants who have committed subversive acts, in The East Pacific or abroad.
…1.4. Applicants who are denied acceptance may appeal the Provost’s decision to the Conclave.
…1.5. The contents of the petition will be reviewed by the Conclave and if valid, the Conclave will instruct the Provost to admit the applicant to the Magisterium.

SECTION II. LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE
…2.1. Any Citizen may start a debate, propose legislation, a resolution, or an amendment to the Concordat (hereinafter “Bill”).
…2.2. Any Magister may motion to amend a Bill at any time during debate. The sponsor shall accept or reject the proposed amendment. Upon acceptance, the sponsor shall post the amended Bill.
…2.3. A Bill, or an amended Bill, shall be debated for a maximum of 14 days at most, at which time the Provost shall close the debate. The sponsor may motion the Bill to vote at any time during debate. A Magister must second that motion.
…2.4. The same procedure shall be used for a nomination by the Delegate, the ratification of a treaty, or any other motion.

SECTION III. PROVOST AND DEPUTY PROVOST
…3.1. The Magisterium shall appoint a Provost from among its members.
An election shall be held when the position is vacant or at the end of the Provost’s three-month term (March 30th, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st), organized by the previous Provost, a Deputy Provost, or a representative thereof.
…3.2. A 48-hour period for nominations is to be held.
…3.2.1. Any Magister may be nominated by another Magister, and said nomination must be seconded by a third Magister to be official.
…3.2.2. A Magister may nominate themselves. Another Magister must second that nomination before it is official.
…3.2.3- A Magister may decline nomination for the position of Provost.
…3.3. After nominations, the Magisterium shall vote for a period of 72 hours. The candidate receiving the most votes shall be elected as Provost.
Should the election result in a tie and no candidate concedes, a new 72-hour vote shall be held.
If a tie persists, the vote shall be opened to all Citizens for a period of 72 hours.
…3.4- The newly elected Provost shall appoint up to two (2) Magisters as Deputy Provost, who can conduct the Provosts’ duties upon the request of the Provost, and who may assume the Provost’s duties temporarily if the Provost is absent for more than 48 hours for any reason.

SECTION IV. VOTING
…4.1- When a motion to vote has been seconded in accordance with subsection 2.3, the Provost shall then immediately officiate a voting period of 168 hours (seven days) on the proposal.
…4.2- Each time a Magister votes, they must also explicitly supply their TEP nation and, if applicable, their WA nation in the same post.
…4.3- A vote will be concluded when:
…4.3.1- The prescribed voting period ends;
…4.3.2- The Provost concludes the voting period, given that all eligible Magisters have voted.
…4.4- A motion shall pass if
…4.4.1- Greater than 50% of the votes not including Present or Abstain are in favour of it; and
…4.4.2- The quorum number of 50% or more of eligible Magisterium voters has been met.
…4.4.3- This order is notwithstanding any special requirements set out by the Concordat for certain types of votes, and in the case of extended requirement, the quorum shall always be achieved.
…4.5- When a vote has concluded, the Provost shall then proceed as provided by the Concordat, according to the type of vote.
…4.6- Any Magister that was approved during any voting period shall not have their vote counted for that particular voting period.
…4.7- Any Magister removed or resigned from office or on an official Leave of Absence during any voting period shall not have their vote counted for that particular voting period.

SECTION V. QUORUM
…5.1- In order for any exercise of the Magisterium’s powers, a quorum must be shown to exist. If the quorum is not achieved, the vote is considered ineffective and may not be acted upon.
…5.2- To achieve quorum, at least 1/2 of eligible Magisters must have made their presence known during a vote, by providing their vote or abstention.

SECTION VI. CLOSED SESSIONS
…6.1- A Magister may move that a matter be considered in closed session, and if the motion is seconded and a majority of votes are in favour of doing so, the Magisterium shall consider that matter in closed session.
…6.2- The Foreign Affairs Committee is established as a committee of the whole Magisterium and it shall always meet in closed session.
…6.2.1- The Foreign Affairs Committee will be chaired by the Provost.
…6.2.2- The Delegate and any minister(s) he/she designates will be ex officio members of the committee without voting privileges.
…6.2.3- The Delegate or the Provost may initiate a meeting of the committee.
…6.2.4- The Magisterium may not ratify a treaty or declaration of war in a closed session of the committee.

SECTION VII. ABSENCE AND REMOVAL OF PROVOSTS
…7.1- If both the Provost and Deputy Provost have been absent for a period exceeding 24 hours, the longest serving member of the Magisterium shall assume the Provost’s duties temporarily until another Provost is selected.
…7.2. Any Magister may motion for the removal of the Provost by majority vote. Upon such motion: (1) the Provost shall be immediately suspended and can no longer exercise any of the Provosts’ duties; (2) after a Magister seconding the motion, the Deputy Provost or Interim Provost shall officiate a vote for a period of 72 hours.
…7.3- The Deputy Provost may be removed and replaced by the Provost at any time, except when suspended under section 7.2 of these Standing Orders.

SECTION VIII. REMOVAL OF MAGISTERS
…8.1. The Provost may hold a roll call and require that Magisters respond within 1 week, or 168 hours, to confirm their activity:
…8.1.1. Any Magister not responding to such a roll call can be suspended by the Provost, or removed by a majority vote of the responding Magisters.
…8.2. A Magister may be suspended by the Provost, and removed by a majority vote if:
…8.2.1. the Magister has not logged into the forums for more than two weeks and has not informed the Magisterium of said absence;
…8.2.2- the Magister has not voted or confirmed attendance in at least two successive votes initiated at least seven days apart from each other.
…8.3. A Magister will be removed automatically, which shall be published by the Provost, if:
…8.3.1. the Magister is found to have supplied falsified information in their Magister’s Pledge or Public Official Disclosure Form;
…8.3.2. the Magister is found to have supplied falsified information about their resident or WA nation attached to a vote in accordance with Order 4.2.
…8.3.3. the Magister has no resident TEP nation.
…8.4. A Magister may resign at any time.

SECTION IX. AMENDMENTS
…9.1. The Standing Orders shall be amended by a majority vote of Magisters, following the same procedure as a Bill.

As [DEBATE] Magisterium To-Do List - The East Pacific - Tapatalk, this reform includes :

  1. Removing having votes on new applicants; the Provost determines if the requirements are met, and that’s it. Decision by the Conclave in case of appeal.

  2. Further simplify the requirements.

  3. If almost any Citizen can join upon simple application (or ruling by the Conclave), you never risk having a faction in the Magisterium that blocks or pushes through laws on its own. It also enhances our democratic input. I would include a clean record regarding subversive activities in GCR’s as one of the few requirements remaining, besides the obvious ones like having a nation and so forth.

  4. Have a fixed term to debate legislation proposals, after which either it goes to vote, or it is tabled.

  5. Only the author of a proposal can accept amendments and motion to a vote or decide to table the proposal. If the time is up, and no decision is made by the author, the proposal is tabled by the Provost (but can of course always be introduced again).

  6. Make a clear difference in procedure between actual legislative proposals, and nominations/impeachment-type motions and repeals (to be more simple), and debates (also more simple).

  7. Have more than one deputy provost.

Section V’s heading should not have “Unanimous Consent” if it doesn’t mention unanimous consent.

I can also imagine Concordat amendments and treaties (are treaties a bill?) taking more than 14 days to pass. Other than that, I fully support.

— Begin quote from ____

Section V’s heading should not have “Unanimous Consent” if it doesn’t mention unanimous consent.

I can also imagine Concordat amendments and treaties (are treaties a bill?) taking more than 14 days to pass. Other than that, I fully support.

— End quote

Good points, & fixed. Section 2.4 now speficies that the same procedure goes for treaty ratifications, and “unanimous consent” is removed from the heading of Section V.

I know 14 days is not a lot, but the intent is to make things move faster : either it can go to vote, or it is tabled (or proposed anew in some amended form in a new thread). It’s meant to avoid having these lingering debates, and have a clear cut procedure.

Regarding your point on the Provost confirming Magisters, you say “you never risk having a faction in the Magisterium that blocks or pushes through laws on its own” but that is not the case, because, all too easily, that faction could sneak one of their own into the Provost position, and, if they do, then it makes it much easier to disallow people who don’t agree with them. So in the case of Fedele and Davelands, Fedele would just say “All these LWU raiders would make really good Magisters” and Davelands would be like “You’re absolutely right, Supreme Leader— I mean great Delegate.” Of course, it’d be more covert than that, but it would be basically allowed. Since it’s late, I didn’t get to read all of it, though, so this might be addressed or it might not be somewhere else in the revision. My additional thoughts on the matter will be posted tomorrow after a thorough readthrough.

I look forward to your further input. I believe “sneaking” one in to the Provost position is always a possibility, really. However in my draft, this would be easier to counter than it is now : the Conclave can just decide to accept an applicant.

I’ve updated the proposal. See Section I. Non-Wa applicants can join too, after a vote.

— Begin quote from ____

Regarding your point on the Provost confirming Magisters, you say “you never risk having a faction in the Magisterium that blocks or pushes through laws on its own” but that is not the case, because, all too easily, that faction could sneak one of their own into the Provost position, and, if they do, then it makes it much easier to disallow people who don’t agree with them. So in the case of Fedele and Davelands, Fedele would just say “All these LWU raiders would make really good Magisters” and Davelands would be like “You’re absolutely right, Supreme Leader— I mean great Delegate.” Of course, it’d be more covert than that, but it would be basically allowed. Since it’s late, I didn’t get to read all of it, though, so this might be addressed or it might not be somewhere else in the revision. My additional thoughts on the matter will be posted tomorrow after a thorough readthrough.

— End quote

Maybe, but the fact is that the new standard of the Magi with this new SOM is, in general, if you meet all the requirements, you’re in. It would probably look mighty suspicious of a provost to allow many applicants of such background during a term and could result in removal of the provost, I believe .

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk

After reading through it finally, I can say that the allowance of any citizen to propose a bill is a huge step in the direction of true democracy and is a definite improvement (in regards to readability/conciseness) from the current SOM. It also streamlines the magisterium application process, which opens up the Magisterium more and makes the process way quicker. I also quite like that it’s been opened to non-WAs, considering my WA is currently tied up with XKI and that others might be smart, hard-working, and dedicated Magisters but also have a WA elsewhere or are opposed to handing out their email. So all in all, it’s pretty good.

Also, @zukchiva I guess you’re right that it would be a little too suspicious to go unnoticed.

I motion this to a vote.

Is there a second?

I’ll second this.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ANE-LX1 met Tapatalk

— Begin quote from ____

…1.3. The Provost may deny applications of applicants convicted of any crime and applicants who have committed subversive acts, in The East Pacific or abroad.

— End quote

Bit late, I know. Been a busy month for me. But I voted against this proposal due to that line. Bit of a logical extreme, but theoretically the Provost could refuse a candidate because they were in a region that had a ban on red flags, and the candidate had a red flag.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

…1.3. The Provost may deny applications of applicants convicted of any crime and applicants who have committed subversive acts, in The East Pacific or abroad.

— End quote

Bit late, I know. Been a busy month for me. But I voted against this proposal due to that line. Bit of a logical extreme, but theoretically the Provost could refuse a candidate because they were in a region that had a ban on red flags, and the candidate had a red flag.

— End quote

I’m fairly sure the Conclave would rectify such a ridiculous decision in a jiffy. The proposal has an appeals procedure. Such a Provost would not be Provost for long either. This is not an issue.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

…1.3. The Provost may deny applications of applicants convicted of any crime and applicants who have committed subversive acts, in The East Pacific or abroad.

— End quote

Bit late, I know. Been a busy month for me. But I voted against this proposal due to that line. Bit of a logical extreme, but theoretically the Provost could refuse a candidate because they were in a region that had a ban on red flags, and the candidate had a red flag.

— End quote

Perhaps if the candidate believes the violation was necessary or the law was unnecessary, they can make an appeal to Conclave?

What Mangegneithe says is true. For example, if the said crime was committed during the Fedele coup, and was declared as such by those implicated in the said coup, but was rejected by the Magisterium, an appeal to the Conclave should be an option.

  1. That IS an option.
  2. This was approved. Discussion closed.