New Discussion for Article O

Seeing as how Article O has failed once again, lets boil it down to its most basic substance. It defines Provinces. Provinces are made of cities. The people can define where the cities go, and the executives can decide on where the boundaries are.

Hopefully we can get some discussion of this topic, but I sense weariness amongst the populace on this sort of discussion.

I voted for this article. Its a good idea. Ill vote for it again. IN THE NAME OF SID!!! LOWER THE QUORUM!!

Please citizens!! support this!!

I agree, I just hope that the proposal that would do that would pass sucsessfully.

CivGeneral said:

I agree, I just hope that the proposal that would do that would pass sucsessfully.

Click to expand...

Well, that is something we can't control. That is in the control of about 4 or 5 people here. They seem to like being able to deny 85 - 92% of the citizens the right to make a difference.

All we can do is keep coming up with ideas. Personally, I'm not sure I will submit this or the other ones that fail until after the next general election. If we don't have widespread voter fraud it may be able to get through. Maybe.
Here's hoping!

Now, does anyone have any comments on the wording? I did change it significantly.

With both E and O failing - how about merging the two of them?


Quite honestly, the province and city stuff should be in Article D (and should have been all along). The current Article O is wordy and not needed. The above proposal gets the job done, makes it clear who does what.

In addition, it makes clear what Governors can, and cannot, do. This appeared to be missing from the current law.

-- Ravensfire

I like the merged article but I wonder does anyone think it would be possible to investigate the alleged(and likely) voter fraud and just use it to declare a few people ineligible and therefore lower Quorom just enough to pass this freakin article

I am not sure that would be legal, but it would probably be up to the mods.

This combines both Articles E and O. Any comments?

i like the idea, because it only takes 1 article to pass not 2, thus we have a better change of passing it...

Comnenus said:

Code:

Article E. Legislative Branch

The Legislative Branch will be formed of one House of the People.      
       	1.The House of the People will be formed of the entirety of the
          citizenry and is responsible for the drafting of new Laws and
          Amendments to the Constitution in accordance with procedures
          set forth by the Judicial Branch. Proposed legislation will be
          presented to the Judicial Branch for review.
        2.The area contained within the national boundaries of Japanatica 
          shall be divided into areas called provinces, each of which 
          is under the control of a Provincial Governor. Provincial 
          boundaries shall be defined by the Executive Branch, and may 
          extend beyond the cultural boundaries. City locations shall be 
          determined by the People in polls to be conducted prior to each
          turnchat. Provincial Governors shall be elected from among the 
          citizens, with one Governor elected for each Province. Each 
          Governor will advise the House on the state of their individual
          province and make recommendations. Governors are responsible for
          labor allocation, build queues and all uses of population for the
          cities they control.  Discussions on Provincial borders and city
          placement are lead by the Minister of Domestic Affairs.

This combines both Articles E and O. Any comments?

Click to expand...

1) "City locations shall be determined by the People in polls to be conducted prior to each turnchat."

If the People are making this decision, then shouldn't it be under the House section?

2) "Each Governor will advise the House on the state of their individual province and make recommendations."

What does this mean? What is the purpose?

3) "Provincial boundaries shall be defined by the Executive Branch"

The whole Executive Branch? Why not choose 1? Or make 1 leader responsible for making proposals to the House.

Overall, I find it a bit too wordy. Except for defining what a province is, I think Ravensfire's proposal accomplishes the intent of yours much more succinctly.

zorven said:

1) "City locations shall be determined by the People in polls to be conducted prior to each turnchat."

If the People are making this decision, then shouldn't it be under the House section?

Click to expand...

The section on the House more specifically covers legislation, but this could easily be changed.

2) "Each Governor will advise the House on the state of their individual province and make recommendations."

What does this mean? What is the purpose?

Click to expand...

The governors will make recommendations via discussion threads and polls as to what needs to be accomplished in their provinces, as they see it.

3) "Provincial boundaries shall be defined by the Executive Branch"

The whole Executive Branch? Why not choose 1? Or make 1 leader responsible for making proposals to the House.

Click to expand...

Yes, the whole Executive. Since the people as a whole have such difficulty coming to any decision, I thought that it should go to the Executive. The whole idea of any Executive Branch is to make decisions. Gameplay decisions should be in the hands of the people, but management decisions should be in the hands of the Executive. I felt this is a management type decision. If it garners no support then it can be changed.

Overall, I find it a bit too wordy. Except for defining what a province is, I think Ravensfire's proposal accomplishes the intent of yours much more succinctly.

Click to expand...

WHAT??? Ravensfire had nothing to do with this. Please check your facts before you speak. That was a copy of an article from a thread I started into this one. Is my work original? Hardly. I won't claim that it is, but give credit where credit is due.

As far as being wordy, I don't know what you expect from the merging of two different documents. Please enlighten us by writing an Article that covers all the points.

Comnenus said:

WHAT??? Ravensfire had nothing to do with this. Please check your facts before you speak. That was a copy of an article from a thread I started into this one. Is my work original? Hardly. I won't claim that it is, but give credit where credit is due.

As far as being wordy, I don't know what you expect from the merging of two different documents. Please enlighten us by writing an Article that covers all the points.

Click to expand...

I believe he's referring to my proposal in this thread. It's a merger of E and 0, in simple, direct language.

To respond to zorven's comment on my proposal, I didn't want to define anything in the Constitution about how to define a province. That needs to be in a lower law. Should my proposal gain support, I'll grab the provincial stuff from DG4 and toss that out as a starter (with the clarifications that were made as well).

-- Ravensfire

Now that Article I has passed, it appears the poll for Articles E, H, and O would have passed with the current restrictions. I suggest we run those Proposed Amendments as they are and see what happens? What do you think?

I am all for it, Cyc. If Article E weren't missing from our Constitution, I may consider alterations at this time. However, since this is not the case, we should resubmit these immediately.

Since both the discussion's have been open for 24+ hours can we open the new polls as they were before and hope that third times the charm?

mhcarver said:

Since both the discussion's have been open for 24+ hours can we open the new polls as they were before and hope that third times the charm?

Click to expand...

New polls have been created for Articles E and O. There are no changes to them, so they can be resubmitted without further discussion or Judicial Review.

The Article E Poll and The Article O Poll