CFC Parliament: Constitution Discussion

[h4ppy]

Maybe there should be a "game constitution," a list of basic rules and regulations, that exists outside of the actual constitution.

 

[NYHunter]

Definitely, they need to be seperate.

 

[Olleus]

You want two consitutions and haven't agreed on one yet?
I think that the game constitution should remain to the discretion of the GM, but enable a 3/4 majority to remove a GM. As for ministers, that shouldn't be defined in the constitution at all. Just look at what Gordon Brown has just done in the UK, created and removed a whole load of different posts. All positions of government should be left to the discration of the PM.

Also, until we get more people, I am against having states. It simply doesn't make sence to have them unless we have enough people for every MP to 'live' in a particular state and vote an affairs concerning that state. Leave it as a simple non-state constitution.

Apart from that, I agree with the first consitution and will vote for it.

Are there any plans for a second house?

 

[h4ppy]

Are there any plans for a second house?

No, and I doubt there will be unless the game gets a lot bigger.

 

[Samuelson]

When will we vote on the constitution?

 

[h4ppy]

When we actually create it...

 

[Samuelson]

If you go to the first post of this thread you will see how their is a constitution already created...

 

[Ball Lightning]

Theres also another one which is better on the second page (or the third)

 

[Red Door]

I think there should be able to be a vote to remove a GM. 3/4 is good IMO.

Why? A GM isn't playing, he's just keeping us from ripping each other's heads off, it's kind of like removing God from real-life Parliament (and don't read into that by thinking I mean there is a God or not).

 

[Ball Lightning]

I think we should be able to get rid of the GM as they may:
1: Leave
2: decide to go crazy (or whatever)

But it should be like 85% or 90% vote.

 

[h4ppy]

There are multiple GMs so they, themselves, can keep track of each other.

 

[Ball Lightning]

Good point. Ok, they can always be there. Fine with me.

 

[Equuleus]

I think it is best to be able to remove a GM with a 3/4 vote.

 

[JohnRM]

I think it is best to be able to remove a GM with a 3/4 vote.

Agreed.


erjerjtencharacterrulecangostraighttof'inghellerfjkdfsdg

 

[Red Door]

I think it is best to be able to remove a GM with a 3/4 vote.

But why? What does a GM do that could make him get removed?

 

[Olleus]

Do stupid events like "A martian invasion has been spotted, they will invade earth in 3 days time. What do you do?"

The point is that we don't know what there going to do, so we must have some sort of safeguard to stop this from going horribly wrong.

 

[JohnRM]

But why? What does a GM do that could make him get removed?

Well, perhaps one my biggest concerns is a GM that would validate Communism with his results by making programs that in real life are proven not to work to somehow yield amazing results in-game. The results need to be impartial and realistic, not slanted in favor of a particular ideology. The GM would be able to do that by making all programs that Conservatives enact fail and all those that Socialists propose succeed.

 

[Splime]

So, for GM, we should have people who we know to be politically moderate (by CFC standards) that will not favor either wing excessively.

 

[JohnRM]

And I would argue that an advisory council made up of at least one member from each significant party should be formed in order to settle disputes and make rulings on other important issues that the GMs may not be able to settle on their own.

 

[h4ppy]

Why are y'all worried, it looks incredibly likely that Perfection and Abgar will be the mods, they are both smart and rational people. I'd prefer adding a socialist to even them out (and take a way a vote, ay!) but whaeva.