Cheetah
Deity
Officials
Legal Links
Past Courts
Term 6 - High Court of Fanatica
- Thread starter Cheetah
- Start date
Cheetah
Deity
On turn 132, in the year 70 AD, we decleared war on Civ3 Brazil. Our president, Emp.Napoleon, has expressed a complaint about the decission and asked for a judicial review of it.
Now, Article O of the constitution says:
So it is clear that Article O in the Constitution was violated. But it is still unclear who to blame for this, and if this realy was a major violation.
First of, it is difficult to say exactly who broke the law. In the final instance it was Rik who played the turn, but all the comments in the poll were pro-war, and the poll also had a pro-war majority. That could be understood by Rik as being the will of the people.
In addition, we have had at least 3 other polls where we discussed a declearation of war:
Military Strike against C3B
This poll ended with 13 pro-war votes, 1 abstain and 1 against.
Declaration of War on C3B
This poll ended with 6 votes to start the war, 8 to hold the attack and 2 abstaining. But most of the posters was only complaining about the time of attack not being good enough, and not about the war in general.
Declare war on C3B ? redone
This poll ended with 5 votes for an attack, 8 against and 4 abstaining. Once again, the reason the poll failed was because a number of people felt we were not ready yet. Here Rik Meleet also posted his understanding of the discussion:
This Article is, in my view, one of the most important articles in the Constitution. It is very clear what the will of the people seems to be. They want a war with C3B. And as the poll has been open for more than 48-hours we can all see that a simple majority won. So the actions taken has not created any problems in that regard; War would have come anyway.
Based on this I don't think punnishing Rik or anyone else is appropiate, nor needed. I will just remind everyone to check our laws when making important decissions.
More precisely his complaint is that the poll did not last long enough before war was decleared:
The point of poll time seems to be supported by others as well:Emp.Napoleon said:
Now, Article O of the constitution says:
Code:
[B]Article O[/B]
Treaties and agreements with foreign nations may be ratified by
Fanatica with a poll open for minimum 48 hours. A simple
majority of voters is required to ratify the treaty or agreement.First of, it is difficult to say exactly who broke the law. In the final instance it was Rik who played the turn, but all the comments in the poll were pro-war, and the poll also had a pro-war majority. That could be understood by Rik as being the will of the people.
In addition, we have had at least 3 other polls where we discussed a declearation of war:
Military Strike against C3B
This poll ended with 13 pro-war votes, 1 abstain and 1 against.
Declaration of War on C3B
This poll ended with 6 votes to start the war, 8 to hold the attack and 2 abstaining. But most of the posters was only complaining about the time of attack not being good enough, and not about the war in general.
Declare war on C3B ? redone
This poll ended with 5 votes for an attack, 8 against and 4 abstaining. Once again, the reason the poll failed was because a number of people felt we were not ready yet. Here Rik Meleet also posted his understanding of the discussion:
I do believe that was the right way to intrepret the poll and the discussion.Rik Meleet said:
Code:
[B]Article H[/B]
All officials must plan and act according to the will of the people.Based on this I don't think punnishing Rik or anyone else is appropiate, nor needed. I will just remind everyone to check our laws when making important decissions.
How can you ignore Article O like that?
I agree with the declaration, but I do not agree with the way it was declared. You can't ignore articles of the constitution.
At the same time, I do believe Rik was following the will of the people.
I am of the opinion that a warning should be issued to our Turn Player.
If this act goes unpunished it sets a precedent that is no good. In the future Turn Players might start interpreting polls when the results aren't crystal clear.
Shame on Cheetah for ignoring our constitution. If people don't like these rules, then let's SCRAP THEM! If we have them, let's follow them.
I agree with the declaration, but I do not agree with the way it was declared. You can't ignore articles of the constitution.
At the same time, I do believe Rik was following the will of the people.
I am of the opinion that a warning should be issued to our Turn Player.
If this act goes unpunished it sets a precedent that is no good. In the future Turn Players might start interpreting polls when the results aren't crystal clear.
Shame on Cheetah for ignoring our constitution. If people don't like these rules, then let's SCRAP THEM! If we have them, let's follow them.
Cheetah
Deity
I do not see much reason to punnish anyone. It has been clear for weeks that we want a war, so starting the war before the 48 hours passed was, even though it was against one article, was not a big crime.
But very well. I know I am not totaly objective here, as I too have opinions about this declearation. So we'll have a simple poll.
Poll
But very well. I know I am not totaly objective here, as I too have opinions about this declearation. So we'll have a simple poll.
Poll
Did I say it was a big crime?
No. The fact that you say it was not a big crime leads me to believe that you still consider it a crime.
I think Rik did break a rule. Article O. The rule is right there for everyone to see. I think your office should isssue an official warning. While what he did posses no immediate threat or problem, a rule was still broken.
No. The fact that you say it was not a big crime leads me to believe that you still consider it a crime.
I think Rik did break a rule. Article O. The rule is right there for everyone to see. I think your office should isssue an official warning. While what he did posses no immediate threat or problem, a rule was still broken.
RegentMan
Deity
I would like to bring up an issue I talked about in the punishment poll. We have no clear process of declaring war in our constitution. I would like to get a new article added that would clarify the process of war.
Obviously, a declaration of war isn't an agreement nor a treaty. Our constitution doesn't have a set guideline of war declaration. I want to ask everyone what he/she thinks should be in a new article, if people think that that's the way to go.
Our Constitution said:
Obviously, a declaration of war isn't an agreement nor a treaty. Our constitution doesn't have a set guideline of war declaration. I want to ask everyone what he/she thinks should be in a new article, if people think that that's the way to go.
RegentMan, how is that obvious?
Maybe it is obvious to you since it fits your arguement. That is not obvious to me. To me a declaration of war falls under Article O.
This is just another example of a hole in the constitution.
Maybe it is obvious to you since it fits your arguement. That is not obvious to me. To me a declaration of war falls under Article O.
This is just another example of a hole in the constitution.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
If we need to amend the constitution its so that we don't have to penalize our team by holding the save for over 48 hours waiting for a poll when the vote (out of at most ~17 voting players) is at 13-1-1
RegentMan
Deity
Well, is a declaration of war really a treaty; can you please show me the treaty that both CFC and C3B signed? No. Is it an agreement; can you please show me the chat/thread/whatever where our rep and their rep agreed on something? No. Thus Article O isn't violated.Goonie said:
Our Constitution said:
RegentMan
Deity
It says nothing of breaking treaties. Just ratifying them.
Our Constitution said:
No where else is war mentioned so depending on how you wish to interpret the constitution, a declaration of war may or may not fall under article O.
Why do you feel the need to press on with this? It is a matter of interpretation and this vagueness highlights the need for something more substantial and less ambiguous.
Why do you feel the need to press on with this? It is a matter of interpretation and this vagueness highlights the need for something more substantial and less ambiguous.
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
Well , there was no treaty with C3B, they said explicitly they cancelled it. In fact, we were in a legal vacuum. There was no agreement with C3B, just a state of temporary peace, a peace hanging in a thin thread, and a peace we had nullified with nothing less than three valid polls substantiating the transition from peace to war, at our behest. The state of no-war and no-peace between North and South Korea could be a description of the legal state between Joker Scandal and now.
That we have a Mickey Mouse Constitution we need to "respect" of keeping "pinciple" or the "house-peace" is a different story. I may accept it, but never respect it. Respect for me is a big word that requires some decent effort and constructive outcome. Since there is nothing constructive coming out of it, except for reminding us that our Constitution is a Mickey Mouse one in the end of the game, is a different story. Well, this is hardly the best timing for rewriting our laws, as these laws are of spurious interest following the end of the game. In fact, the less legalities we have in a demogame the better, and if this damages the respect in the "legal" system, the better. Get a firm grip, all demogame "courts" are nothing but Kangaroo courts where political decisions prevail in polls. This is not a real democracy and not a real court, merely a group of people agreeing on polling practices, rules of engagement and decision-making procedures. All courts are nothing other than a popularity contest of person or strategy, or evaluation of person and strategy, nothing more and nothing less. My projection of this case, is that all these respectable candidates will exchange some paralegal jibber and some high lofty thoughts of the ideal of democracy and the epiphamy of the sanctity of the "prestigious" court.
There will be some exchanges of shots, some hopeless innuendos, some false accusations, some unfair accusations, there will be some last-minute attempts to rewrite soon obsolete laws. William Goldings Lord of the Flies springs to mind in summing up the social dynamics and mechanisms creating this unfathomably waste of time of energy in a critical time where focus should be spent elsewhere.
If I was in a bad mood, I may even consider this national treason of sorts.
Citizens, ignore this case, and vote against it if you have to, I cannot recommend wasting more time on it. I am sorry.
This legal process is probably the singularly most useless request ever posted in any demogame, and for that, I cannot endorse or respect this futile request.
Brazuca Delenda Est.
What I do not like , is that the legalist troublemakers are soulstealers from what should be the objective now, to win the game. We need all the citizens input on the war and relations to CDZ, not waste more time on this ordeal.
That we have a Mickey Mouse Constitution we need to "respect" of keeping "pinciple" or the "house-peace" is a different story. I may accept it, but never respect it. Respect for me is a big word that requires some decent effort and constructive outcome. Since there is nothing constructive coming out of it, except for reminding us that our Constitution is a Mickey Mouse one in the end of the game, is a different story. Well, this is hardly the best timing for rewriting our laws, as these laws are of spurious interest following the end of the game. In fact, the less legalities we have in a demogame the better, and if this damages the respect in the "legal" system, the better. Get a firm grip, all demogame "courts" are nothing but Kangaroo courts where political decisions prevail in polls. This is not a real democracy and not a real court, merely a group of people agreeing on polling practices, rules of engagement and decision-making procedures. All courts are nothing other than a popularity contest of person or strategy, or evaluation of person and strategy, nothing more and nothing less. My projection of this case, is that all these respectable candidates will exchange some paralegal jibber and some high lofty thoughts of the ideal of democracy and the epiphamy of the sanctity of the "prestigious" court.
There will be some exchanges of shots, some hopeless innuendos, some false accusations, some unfair accusations, there will be some last-minute attempts to rewrite soon obsolete laws. William Goldings Lord of the Flies springs to mind in summing up the social dynamics and mechanisms creating this unfathomably waste of time of energy in a critical time where focus should be spent elsewhere.
If I was in a bad mood, I may even consider this national treason of sorts.
Citizens, ignore this case, and vote against it if you have to, I cannot recommend wasting more time on it. I am sorry.
This legal process is probably the singularly most useless request ever posted in any demogame, and for that, I cannot endorse or respect this futile request.
Brazuca Delenda Est.
What I do not like , is that the legalist troublemakers are soulstealers from what should be the objective now, to win the game. We need all the citizens input on the war and relations to CDZ, not waste more time on this ordeal.
Provolution, for someone who is so adamantly against all these proceedings, you do spend alot of time in them.
If you do not feel like "wasting more time on this ordeal," then don't. Simply because you feel that you are above this, does not give you moral superiority to belittle those of us who feel that the laws should help this game and not bog it down.
Wouldn't this all have been simplier if the laws were clear? Why not re-write the law allowing for the TP to interpret polls if x number of votes have been cast and if there is a y percent difference between YES and NO. x should be approximately 60% of the populous and can be determined by how many people vote in the Presidential election (if no Presedential election is held, then it goes to FA... so on.) y should be set at ~ 75%.
At the beginning of the game, you should not have scraped all the former laws because there are holes everywhere.
Laws are like lube. They make things much smoother.
If you do not feel like "wasting more time on this ordeal," then don't. Simply because you feel that you are above this, does not give you moral superiority to belittle those of us who feel that the laws should help this game and not bog it down.
Wouldn't this all have been simplier if the laws were clear? Why not re-write the law allowing for the TP to interpret polls if x number of votes have been cast and if there is a y percent difference between YES and NO. x should be approximately 60% of the populous and can be determined by how many people vote in the Presidential election (if no Presedential election is held, then it goes to FA... so on.) y should be set at ~ 75%.
At the beginning of the game, you should not have scraped all the former laws because there are holes everywhere.
Laws are like lube. They make things much smoother.
magnusmarcus
Prince
Goonie said:
Actually any laws above and beyond what we currently have would only serve to introduce more legaleze into our fair game. More laws would only give power to a certain select members of our society whose only joy in this game is to introduce hate and discontent. (My opinion) I certainly don't want to take up lawyering just so I can play a game.
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
Actually hate and discontent is the very lube, they make things smoother.
The problem is, we need to direct this hate and discontent on the enemy, Brazuca, and use this dark fuel to thrust us into the premier division of Civ3 realms. Call me a warmonger, and yes, people may be glad I am not in a "real" position of political power due to my obviously sinister views on ideologies and political systems.
We can also say that alcohol and communication is a lubrication for a succesful negotiation, especially towards the opposite sex, but that is another story... (though, someone would probably have a minority dissent here)
The problem is, we need to direct this hate and discontent on the enemy, Brazuca, and use this dark fuel to thrust us into the premier division of Civ3 realms. Call me a warmonger, and yes, people may be glad I am not in a "real" position of political power due to my obviously sinister views on ideologies and political systems.
We can also say that alcohol and communication is a lubrication for a succesful negotiation, especially towards the opposite sex, but that is another story... (though, someone would probably have a minority dissent here)
Similar threads
