Term 2 Judicial Thread ~

[Nobody]

Hi there,
Im here to inquire about the law. I know you can't play the save, but i was wondering after a turn chat has happended can you play those turns to find stuff out. For example now were at war with iroquios(whatever) can you play the last few turns to see if any deals could of stoped war (giving them 1gpt or a right of passage) as long as the person didn't go into the future.

 

[Black_Hole]

Hi there,
Im here to inquire about the law. I know you can't play the save, but i was wondering after a turn chat has happended can you play those turns to find stuff out. For example now were at war with iroquios(whatever) can you play the last few turns to see if any deals could of stoped war (giving them 1gpt or a right of passage) as long as the person didn't go into the future.

i dont think so, as that is a non reversible action

 

[Chieftess]

You can only do that at the end of the game, when the game is over. (or, a really long time afterwards where it would make no difference).

 

[Nobody]

ok thanks, i wont do that then

 

[Cyc]

Hi there,
Im here to inquire about the law. I know you can't play the save, but i was wondering after a turn chat has happended can you play those turns to find stuff out. For example now were at war with iroquios(whatever) can you play the last few turns to see if any deals could of stoped war (giving them 1gpt or a right of passage) as long as the person didn't go into the future.

Article M of the Constitution covers your question, Nobody. It states:

Article M.  Commission of any game action by any person other than 
            the Designated Player while carrying out their duties 
            that is not instantly reversible without reloading the 
            save is strictly forbidden.
              1.  Exception: Determining options in the renegotiation 
                  of Peace agreements requires an action of acceptance 
                  or war to exit the bargain screen. This may be done 
                  but the game must be immediately closed without 
                  saving.

Simplified, this means with the help of Article K, nobody can play the save outside of an officially authorized public Turn Chat. Nooo, this does not mean YOU can play the save. No person, outside of the Official DP may play the save, and that person can only do things like processing Instructions. This is to eliminate problems caused by different machines (computers) playing the save differently.

 

[Cyc]

And don't worry about Black_Hole and CT, Cyc whispers *they just think they're in the Judiciary*.

 

[Black_Hole]

And don't worry about Black_Hole and CT, Cyc whispers *they just think they're in the Judiciary*.

we are all jurors cyc
*BH gets ready to spam judiciary with 500 Judicial Reviews *

 

[Cyc]

we are all jurors cyc
*BH gets ready to spam judiciary with 500 Judicial Reviews *

That's my point B_H. Anyone who registers to vote is eligible for jury duty.

 

[KCCrusader]

/me awaits completing all 500 JR's

 

[Cyc]

To: The Office of the Public Defender

KCCrusader, this memo is to inquire about the length of time, if any, we should wait before declaring Octavian X (our current JA) absent. It has been three days since DG5JR13 was opened and we haven't heard a word from him, even though he has posted elsewhere in these forums. Your thoughts?

CJ Cyc

 

[KCCrusader]

I think three days is more than enough to declare him absent. As far as vacant, that can be dealt with if he doesnt arrive within a few more days.

 

[Octavian X]

Really, you know I'm still here, just quite a bit lazier than my judicial counterparts. Send me a PM or something to bug me about it.

In regard to the matter of DG5JR13, I find no conflict in the proposed article and laws with currently existing laws/articles.

I wonder, though, if my consent is necessary, as the two other members of the court have already found no problems. In cases where people are downright lazy (like me), perhaps the judicial process could be sped up by removing the quorum requirement for judicial reviews, so long as 2 out of the 3 agree. But, that's another thread.

 

[Cyc]

Sorry, Octavian, the JR quorum will remain. This court finds it much more probable to remove "downright lazy people", who can't check the Judicial thread every other day (or when their not posting in the RPG). I hate to say this, Oct ole buddy, but it's your job to stay in focus with Judicial proceedings, it's not our job to kep you focused. Thank you posting your Opinion on DG5JR13. That will save me the trouble of finding a replacement for you.

 

[KCCrusader]

heh welcome back oc

 

[Sir Donald III]

Because of certain "rogue actions" taken by people who are not happy with the current law, I would like the Justices' Opinions on whether we should Codify the "Judicial Guide".

This is only semi-formal. (No JRs on this except for the future Proposed Polls...)

 

[Sir Donald III]

May it Please the Court!

I have here submitted for Judicial Review a Proposed Poll for a Section of the Code of Laws under Article O.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2166135&postcount=17

Article O has been included here for reference.

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 Governor as stated in Article E. of the Constitution. These boundries must be defined and approved by the House well ahead of expansion, and may extend beyond the cultural boundaries. City locations shall be determined by the Will of the People.

I request the Timely (glances at the JA) review of this Proposal so it can go to Poll.

 

[Octavian X]

Hmm...

In regard to codifying the juducial code, I'd rather it remain in the hands of the judiciary. The legal code is always troubled, often requiring minute modifications here and there. It seems like a bit of a waste of time in a slow process to make a formal law. Perhaps, for the sake of good government, a citizen override mechanism could be written in to force changes from outside the judiciary...

And, in regard to the proposed laws, I will withhold my review for the moment, just because I just had an additional thought (see the thread).

 

[Sir Donald III]

I agree with the additional thought. Your Honor, I Request that my previous request for a JR in Post #36 be tabled until we can sort out whether a new period is required.

EDIT: Did I say Tabled? Well, change that to Recinded.

 

[Cyc]

Honorable Domestic Minister, Sir Donald III
Your last request shall be granted, until we get word from you that you are ready to move forward in this matter.

 

[Sir Donald III]

May it Please the Court!

I have herewith a Judicial Review Concerning the newly ratified Article G. From section 2:

2. All Executive and Legislative positions shall have a
deputy. The Deputy will be permitted to conduct the
affairs of the office as directed, or during a planned
Absence of the elected official. If no instructions have
been posted for an office within 24 hours of the upcoming
Turn Chat, the deputy for that office may post the official
instructions for the office.

The President did not create the turnchat instructions thread for 8 September's TC until 10:45 PM EDT on 7 September. This was within 24 hours of the TC. An isolated incident, but it gave me, as a minister, a good bit of concern.

The question I would like to pose to the Justices in this Judicial Review is:

Given: The Vice President is considered as the Deputy of the President for the purposes of the VP's current duties. ("All Executive ... positions shall have a Deputy")

and Given: "If no instructions have been posted for an office within 24 hours of the upcoming
Turn Chat, the deputy for that office may post the official instructions for the office."

Does the Vice President have the right to create Turnchat Instruction Threads if the President has not done so within 24 Hours of the Pre-specified time of the TC? (This is given that the President has prespecified a time.)