Citizen Discussion - Adjust Quorum/Census Levels?

The original measure has passed and is now part of the Constitution (pending update). This is not a problem to getting passage of the donsig/Shaitan Bill (sic). After poring over the rules I've found that our compromise bill fits in very well with only 3 small changes. Following are the changed items with the additions required in bold. Comments are welcome.

CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE I. The average of the number of votes cast in each of the most recent contested elections shall constitute an active census of citizens. The highest vote total of these elections shall constitute a full census (the Congress). A majority of the Congress shall be required to amend the Constitution. A 2/3 majority of the Senate shall be required to ratify said amendment.


CODE OF LAWS

D. Legislative Branch, 3. Legislative Votes, a. Poll mechanics
4 The quorum for changes in the Code of Laws is 1/2 of the Active Census.

E. The Judicial Branch, 3. The Chief Justice
b. Is responsible for posting the current full census and current active census at the beginning of each term.

CODE OF STANDARDS

F. Forum Poll Procedures, 3. Official Polls
a. Quorum level is 1/2 of the active census.

F. Forum Poll Procedures, 4. Quick Polls
b. Quorum level is 1/3 of the active census.
 
@dis - To my knowledge, nobody has used the quick option. That didn't come about until we were in the slower, steadier time of the game. The quick poll's use is for relatively fast but regulated decision making.
 
Is the new rule in effect - do we have a new threshold for amending the constitution? If so, what is it?

I would still support the compromise bill.
 
The altered rule is in effect. The new support level for the CON is 19 or 20 (can't remember which). Our new Chief Justice will get us the official numbers. That 19 or 20 is also the participation quorum for polls.
 
Originally posted by disorganizer
but you may then have been falling over a constitutional paragraph, after which you would have to do your best to get the will of citizenry.

i would believe in this situation, a chat-citizen poll would have been also fit to decide what to do ;-)

I am sorry I missed this comment last week when posted.

The chat turns are already inherently biased against those who are unable to attend chat. I don't like the idea of taking initiatives that failed to win quorum and then pushing them through anyway via chat.
 
Two questions for Shaitan - In COL E3b, does current census equal full census? if so it should be noted.

2. I think it should be explained how the changes to "the Congress" affect the voting laws and standards. This proposal changes the status of "the Congress", but why? What benefit have we gained? And why is this not noted here?
 
Originally posted by Cyc
Two questions for Shaitan - In COL E3b, does current census equal full census? if so it should be noted.

2. I think it should be explained how the changes to "the Congress" affect the voting laws and standards. This proposal changes the status of "the Congress", but why? What benefit have we gained? And why is this not noted here?
1) COL E3b - "Current" was supposed to describe both numbers. I've edited it for clarity.

2) It places the membership of the Congress at the highest verifiable level we have. It actually returns the status of the Congress to what it was before the recently passed amendment except it is based on the highest election poll, not necessarily the Presidential election.

This number is used only for Constitution changes. As we saw in the recent amendment poll, it is possible though difficult to pass an amendment. This is how it should be. It should require some campaigning, some time and perhaps even a bit of politiking in order to get the Constitution changed.
 
@bill:
the quote you choose was meant for a pol which was almost getting it and showed support, for example or was a tie. not redoing a poll just because of formal error with different outcome.
but nevertheless, it could be done without violating any law.
even worse if we ever decline the chats, the dp will have full controll wether to implement or not to implement it.
 
This bill will require changes to each of the Books of Rules. 3 polls and a Council Vote are required for this (1 Congressional poll each for Laws and Constitution, 1 Senatorial poll for Constitution, 1 Council Vote for Standards). Below are all 4, ready to be run. We will need a Leader or the President to sponsor the Standard change. I will request a review tomorrow. Please post any comments before then.

@donsig - As acting President, would you sponsor the Council Vote for Standards change? It's extremely difficult to get participation from the majority of our elected leaders at this point. Since Octavian X has been raised to the Chief Justice position he cannot sponsor these any longer and there seem to be no leaders available.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLL 1 - CITIZEN POLL FOR CHANGE IN ARTICLE I OF THE CONSTITUTION

Poll question and options
Do you support the change in Article I of the Constitution as noted below in the 1st post?
  • YES
  • NO
  • ABSTAIN

First post
Changes are in bold

ARTICLE I. The average of the number of votes cast in each of the most recent contested elections shall constitute an active census of citizens. The highest vote total of these elections shall constitute a full census (the Congress). A majority of the Congress shall be required to amend the Constitution. A 2/3 majority of the Senate shall be required to ratify said amendment.

Implementation: This poll is part of an overall bill requiring changes to the Constitution, Code of Laws and Code of Standards. No individual element will be effective until all elements are passed. As a result, implementation of this element will not occur unless all elements are approved.

Poll particulars: This topic was discussed in this thread. This poll will remain open until a majority of the Congress has passed or defeated it. This requires 21 YES or 21 NO votes. The ABSTAIN option is included as a courtesy but it should be noted that the effective result of an ABSTAIN vote is the same as a NO vote inthis poll.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLL #2 - SENATORIAL POLL FOR CHANGE IN ARTICLE I OF THE CONSTITUTION

First post
Do you support the changes in Article I of the Constitution as detailed below? All Senators (Governors) should reply with a vote of YES, NO or ABSTAIN.

Changes are in bold

ARTICLE I. The average of the number of votes cast in each of the most recent contested elections shall constitute an active census of citizens. The highest vote total of these elections shall constitute a full census (the Congress). A majority of the Congress shall be required to amend the Constitution. A 2/3 majority of the Senate shall be required to ratify said amendment.

Implementation: This poll is part of an overall bill requiring changes to the Constitution, Code of Laws and Code of Standards. No individual element will be effective until all elements are passed. As a result, implementation of this element will not occur unless all elements are approved.

Poll particulars: This topic was discussed in this thread. This poll will remain open until passed or defeated by the senate. Passage requires 7 YES votes. Defeat requires 4 votes of anything other than YES. The ABSTAIN option is included as a courtesy but it should be noted that the effective result of an ABSTAIN vote is the same as a NO vote in this poll.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLL 3 - CITIZEN POLL FOR CHANGE IN THE CODE OF LAWS

Poll question and options
Do you support the changes in the Code of Law detailed in the first post below?
  • YES
  • NO
  • ABSTAIN

First post
Changes are in bold:

D. Legislative Branch, 3. Legislative Votes, a. Poll mechanics
4. The quorum for changes in the Code of Laws is 1/2 of the Active Census.

E. The Judicial Branch, 3. The Chief Justice
b. Is responsible for posting the current full census and current active census at the beginning of each term.

Implementation: This poll is part of an overall bill requiring changes to the Constitution, Code of Laws and Code of Standards. No individual element will be effective until all elements are passed. As a result, implementation of this element will not occur unless all elements are approved.

Poll particulars: This topic was discussed in this thread. This poll will remain open for 48 hours or until a quorum is reached, whichever comes later. Quorum for this poll is 21 votes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLL 4 - COUNCIL VOTE FOR CHANGE IN THE CODE OF STANDARDS

First post
Do you support the changes in the Code of Standards as detailed below? All Department Leaders should reply with a vote of YES, NO or ABSTAIN.

Changes are in bold

F. Forum Poll Procedures, 3. Official Polls
a. Quorum level is 1/2 of the active census.

F. Forum Poll Procedures, 4. Quick Polls
b. Quorum level is 1/3 of the active census.

Implementation: This poll is part of an overall bill requiring changes to the Constitution, Code of Laws and Code of Standards. No individual element will be effective until all elements are passed. As a result, implementation of this element will not occur unless all elements are approved.

Poll particulars: This topic was discussed in this thread. This poll will remain open until a quorum of 4 Leaders has responded. Once a quorum has responded this poll will close after an overall run time of 48 hours or when an unbeatable majority of respondents passes or defeats the measure, whichever comes first. In the event of a tie, the President will cast the tie-breaking vote.
 
Judge Advocate Review -
Proposed Change to Constitution - Article 1
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section D
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section E
Proposed Change to Code of Standards - Section F


Modified Quorum Levels

In accordance with Section E, Point 6, multiple subsections, of the Phoenatican Code of Laws, I submit the Judge Advocate review of this proposal.

Findings: The JA office has determined that this addition, in it's entirety, would not be a violation of the Constitution, and is sufficient as currently written to function correctly in our Code of Laws and Standards.

Therefore I cast my vote in favor of allowing a poll for passage.

Explaination: This office had previously reviewed other plans for changing the quorum levels, and finds that this one is to date the best plan submitted for leveling the vote count.

Other Comments: All four changes must pass and be implimented at the same point in time for these laws to remain constitutional.

Bill
Judge Advocate of Phoenatica
 
Judicial Review
The Office of Chief Justice
Proposed Change to Constitution - Article 1
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section D
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section E
Proposed Change to Code of Standards - Section F

After reviewing the proposed changes, I have found a single problem. In the polls 1, 2, and 4 of the proposal, the question asks to change article 1 (one) of the constitution. These should say 'I'. Otherwise, the Office of Chief Justice casts its vote in favor of allowing a poll for passage.
 
Originally posted by Octavian X
Judicial Review
The Office of Chief Justice
Proposed Change to Constitution - Article 1
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section D
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section E
Proposed Change to Code of Standards - Section F

After reviewing the proposed changes, I have found a single problem. In the polls 1, 2, and 4 of the proposal, the question asks to change article 1 (one) of the constitution. These should say 'I'. Otherwise, the Office of Chief Justice casts its vote in favor of allowing a poll for passage.
Good catch, Octavian. 'Ware the dangers of copy and paste.

I've edited the typos. Poll 4 shouldn't have refered to the CON at all. It's for a COS change.
 
Public Defender's Review

Proposed Change to Constitution - Article I
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section D
Proposed Change to Code of Laws - Section E
Proposed Change to Code of Standards - Section F

None of the above conflict with other Articles or Laws, and create no issues with existing standards that I can see. They therefore pass my review
I am recommending that the polls be posted sequentially rather than simultaneously, with the CON change polls first, then CoL changes, and finally the CoS change. This will ensure that we do not end up enacting one change while rejecting the change above it and thus rendering the enacted change unconstitutional.
 
Originally posted by Eklektikos
I am recommending that the polls be posted sequentially rather than simultaneously, with the CON change polls first, then CoL changes, and finally the CoS change. This will ensure that we do not end up enacting one change while rejecting the change above it and thus rendering the enacted change unconstitutional.
Should be necessary. There's a proviso in each one that they don't go into the books until they're all passed.
 
I'm still not clear on what the active census is versus the census we have in place now... What's the difference between the two?
 
The active census is the guestimate number of generally active citizens. The census is the maximum number of citizens who voted in any election (absolute maximum possible expected participation).

Poll quorums and Code of Law quorums are based on the practical number (active citizens) while Constitution change requirements are based on the higher number.
 
Other Comments: All four changes must pass and be implimented at the same point in time for these laws to remain constitutional.
Since it takes all 4 to be passed, why not vote all at once, either up or down?

Since I'm new to this Civ3 Demo game, it's my impression the Civ3 members mostly do other things besides play the game and crush the enemy, right? LOL, or maybe it's just semantics about exactly what or who is the enemy (after scanning a few posts)....

BTW, it's quite a massive Constitution and Beauracracy... a veritible marvel of red tape, much like real life, hehe.

This seems a pretty much a biased presentation, since the prior version of what is being modified is not presented alongside. I'm sure the info is buried somewhere, I didn't see a comparision to what the original version said.
 
Originally posted by starlifter

Since it takes all 4 to be passed, why not vote all at once, either up or down?

Since I'm new to this Civ3 Demo game, it's my impression the Civ3 members mostly do other things besides play the game and crush the enemy, right? LOL, or maybe it's just semantics about exactly what or who is the enemy (after scanning a few posts)....

BTW, it's quite a massive Constitution and Beauracracy... a veritible marvel of red tape, much like real life, hehe.

This seems a pretty much a biased presentation, since the prior version of what is being modified is not presented alongside. I'm sure the info is buried somewhere, I didn't see a comparision to what the original version said.
Welcome to the game, starlifter. :)

The complexity in passage is because different parts of the rules require different parts of the government to pass them. It might do us well to develop a "fast track" legislation that can pass a rule plus the items related to it that are in lower books.

We had quite a lot of bashing the enemy in the last game (though we never once declared war) but also a lot of sidebar issues and fun stuff. This game will be on Emperor level so there should be as much or more enemy bashing. The introduction of the RPG game will hopefully add a lot to the side play.

In the proposals, the changes are in bold. To read the original, just ignore the bold words. You have a good point though, we should link back to the original in these to make it easy for people to see what's changing.
 
Top Bottom