1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Amending Article D

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game IV: Polls' started by Strider, Feb 29, 2004.

?

Shall we amend Article D?

Poll closed Mar 2, 2004.
  1. Yes

    11 vote(s)
    55.0%
  2. No

    9 vote(s)
    45.0%
  3. Abstain

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    This poll will run for 48 hours. These changes will take place at the start of the new term.
     
  2. Civanator

    Civanator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    2,865
    Location:
    Gone
    ok, so is the REAL Seperating the departments poll?

    Also, you forgot Culture and Science's responsibilities ;)
     
  3. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    NOTE - This is informational only.

    -- Ravensfire, Chief Justice of Fanatica
     
  4. Civanator

    Civanator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    2,865
    Location:
    Gone
    How is it informational? it's like the 4th poll
     
  5. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    As I've posted once already:

    -- Ravensfire
     
  6. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Chieftain Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    8,473
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Even if this poll is legal, it's never a good idea to try to amend the constitution without a large amount of discussion beforehand. The constitution shouldn't be changed on a whim, and I hope the other citizens will support this viewpoint.

    I voted No.

    EDIT: I do know that you had this planned out (privately) for a while, but we really should have ample public discussion; a couple of days of informational polling where there was a heated debate is not enough; we need to allow time for cooler heads to prevail.
     
  7. CivGeneral

    CivGeneral Valkyrie Grand General

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    42,448
    Location:
    Solitude, United Systems of Nova Terra
    Oh god :rolleyes:. Why not just make this a regular poll.

    I voted Yes to this poll since I beleve it is time to change the consitution.
     
  8. Civanator

    Civanator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    2,865
    Location:
    Gone
    We had a 4 page discussion (well, 2 if you use 40 posts per page), and 3 other informational polls showing a majority was for it. I don't think this is 'out on a whim'
     
  9. CivGeneral

    CivGeneral Valkyrie Grand General

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    42,448
    Location:
    Solitude, United Systems of Nova Terra
    Delete me
     
  10. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Chieftain Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    8,473
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Given that this is an amendment of the highest book of the law, and we've had somewhere between 72 and 96 hours to discuss it, including some polls that were supposed to be official posted before that, I'd say this is "out on a whim," especially when you consider that we spent weeks discussing the four-member cabinent plan, and that wasn't even while a DG was going on.

    Because of this haste, some things haven't been thought of. They include:

    If a constitutional amendment passes in mid-term, it will take effect immediately unless there is a clause stating that it will not take effect until a certain time. Even the proposers of this plan recognize that it would not be a good idea to have this amendment take effect until the start of Term 4.

    We need to have supporting laws under the CoL and CoS made to take effect at the same time that this amendment would. Otherwise there will be a huge legal problem over the fact that two of the positions would be undefined by law (except for the extremely vague wording of this constitutional amendment), the CoC wouldn't include them, and a host of other problems.

    I don't support this amendment, but if the people vote to amend the constitution after a long, reasoned discussion and careful attention to detail like what was mentioned above, I would accept the splitting of the offices, despite disliking it.

    I strongly encourage all citizens, including those who would support the division of offices, to vote no to this amendment and related ones in official polls, until we have followed proper procedure and have taken care to make sure we have done everything we need to do to avoid more legal mayhem over this if it gets ratified.
     
  11. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Wrong, amending the Code of Laws has to go through a judicial review, amending the constitution does NOT. This poll is perfectly legal.


    Amending the Constitution:
    Amending the Code of Laws:
     
  12. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Interesting - looks like a JR for the new court. I feel that M.2 must be followed, even for the Constitution.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  13. Bootstoots

    Bootstoots Chieftain Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    8,473
    Location:
    Mid-Illinois
    Regardless of whether this poll is legal or not, I don't think it has followed proper procedure (fairly lengthy discussion tending toward an agreement on what to change and how to change it) and it would be foolish to amend the constitution without paying attention to the issues displayed in my above post.
     
  14. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Well, should it pass, we will have three vacant office to fill (Ministry of Trade, Ministry of Research and Ministry of Culture), and no supporting legislation on supporting those offices. The CoC is toast. Section B of the CoL is seriously flawed. Section F of the CoL has issues - why these new office have no term limits!

    Whatever - Strider is determine to plow this through regardless. Let him reap the chaos of which he soes.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  15. Peri

    Peri Vote early and vote often

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,261
    Rik loses his office mid term and we have to have 3 new elections immediately. Also we have to pass a lot more laws before the new officials can start executing their office.
    It will be a very dificult time for the game.
     
  16. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Please note that it says "These change's will take place at the start of Term 4." Also, As far as I see the Consitution and Code of Laws must be amended seperatly, and I haven't got around to posting a judicial review over the Code of Laws part.
     
  17. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    On a second though, Article D of the Constitution MUST be changed before Article B.2 and Article G.3 of the Code of Laws can be, otherwise it can not pass the judicial review of it's legality.
     
  18. Peri

    Peri Vote early and vote often

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,261
    I think one problem that needs addressing is that even though you want it to start next term it will start immediately because there is no clause to prevent it.
    I understand that this may seem silly but riders have to be part of the proposal rather than noted separately. This is to stop people tagging on whatever they want after the event. Same rule for everyone and all that. :)
     
  19. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Well, what you feel is not what the constitution says. It specifically lists the process's for both amending the Constitution and Code of Laws. Also, for some strange reason it is lack in the process for the Code of Standards.
     
  20. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    It has followed proper precedure, as there is no set time limit for discussion. Also, this is not a threat as it seems putting this into effect is going to take around a week, which should allow plenty of discussion.
     

Share This Page