Civ4 - Game of Democracy - Announcement

[Swissempire]

I don't think that the legality of the CoL should be in question here, seeing as it was RATIFIED, so regardless of whether or not you agree with how the content came to be, you agreed that the content should be law!

 

[Blkbird]

As Chief Justice presiding over a ruling on whether the CoL is legal, I can't say definitively one way or the other until I've given my official ruling. Therefore I can't post or even suggest a reworded poll on this issue without keeping it open for the ruling to go either way.

But you can - and you should still uphold that the CoL's legality issue absolutely matters. The CoL may either be legal or not, but in either cases it is significant, and a question which implicitly denies the relevance of the legality issue is highly offensive to the Justice System. That's what I meant, if it wasn't clear to you.

Putting the question this way would be assuming that the CoL is valid, which has not been determined yet by the Judiciary. I'd have to object on essentially the same ground you object on, the question is suggestive.

I know, therefore I said myself that it wouldn't be the right question. We're pretty much stuck until the CoL's legality is cleared, unless we intentionally decide to do something illegal - God forbid that.

Looking from this point of view, the vage formulation of this poll here might not have been that bad at all. This serves as an informational, non-binding reference for further specific, binding decisions.

 

[Mike Lemmer]

Now that I've thought about it, I think we should treat this as if we were making a new constitution in the midst of an ongoing democracy. While the Founding Fathers were making the current U.S. Constitution, they didn't shut down the government completely. They still went by the Articles of Confederation until they had a better system to implement.

Therefore, I would suggest we run with the Triumverate rules for now and switch once the new proposed system is finalized. It would be nice to wait until we were sure everything was clean & ready, but another long delay might kill the motivation from the start.

 

[DaveShack]

Now that I've thought about it, I think we should treat this as if we were making a new constitution in the midst of an ongoing democracy. While the Founding Fathers were making the current U.S. Constitution, they didn't shut down the government completely. They still went by the Articles of Confederation until they had a better system to implement.

Therefore, I would suggest we run with the Triumverate rules for now and switch once the new proposed system is finalized. It would be nice to wait until we were sure everything was clean & ready, but another long delay might kill the motivation from the start.

Does this represent a vote change, or a suggestion on how to implement whatever we decide to do?

 

[Mike Lemmer]

A suggestion on implementation. The Triumverate is a solid set of laws, even if its ratification was crooked. The Demogame won't fall apart if we use it for a term while we prepare an alternative in the background.

 

[Swissempire]

If the Code of Laws was Ratified and accepted, how can the judiciary rule it not so. I see no reason it is unconstitional. Also since my proposal is not mentioned does evryone dislike it. Just wondering

 

[DaveShack]

Notice:

The Court is close to being ready to rule on the CoL ratification. Tentatively we plan to conclude discussion tomorrow. Although we are well aware of the discussion in this thread and are willing to use it in our deliberations, we also invite citizen comment in the Judicial Review Discussion thread, particularily comments on the ratification itself. We are not reviewing the relative merits of the systems, that topic should remain here.

 

[Rik Meleet]

It looks like most of the citizens have voted or are aware this poll exists. It's time to pick the closing date and time. 4 days seems enough.

This poll was created just shortly before 00:00 GMT Saturday January 8th 2006. For me the first post is timestamped "Jan 07, 2006, 12:40 AM". The poll is made 1 minute later.

That means that this poll will be closed automatically on:

Jan 11, 2006, 12:41 AM CET
=
Jan 10, 2006, 11:41 PM GMT
=
Jan 10, 2006, 18:41 (6:40 pm) New York time
=
Jan 10, 2006, 15:41 (3:40 pm) Los Angeles time

 

[Blkbird]

That means that this poll will be closed automatically on:

Please edit the first post to include this information - preferrably in red color or at least in bold.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Please edit the first post to include this information - preferrably in red color or at least in bold.

done, but not really necessary; the poll also shows when it will close.

 

[Swissempire]

Hsve we decided whether this is binding or not? I personally vote binding, because the people ahve spoken!

 

[Black_Hole]

Hsve we decided whether this is binding or not? I personally vote binding, because the people ahve spoken!

If Flexible wins this poll is it still binding?

This poll is an opinion poll because it wasn't posted by an official in the area of pre game options(ie a founding father), check Article C of the constitution

 

[Swissempire]

just wondering. Though if flexible won i would be mad but accept it!

 

[Blkbird]

This poll is an opinion poll because it wasn't posted by an official in the area of pre game options(ie a founding father), check Article C of the constitution

Your interpretation of that part of the Constitution is - again - totally without merit. An official poll doesn't have to be binding, a binding poll doesn't have to be official. There two properties of a poll have no causal connection to each other.

 

[Black_Hole]

Your interpretation of that part of the Constitution is - again - totally without merit. An official poll doesn't have to be binding, a binding poll doesn't have to be official. There two properties of a poll have no causal connection to each other.

So what is different about an official poll from a non official one?

 

[Blkbird]

So what is different about an official poll from a non official one?

See here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=152793#post3549398

To make it even clearer: A poll can be -
- official and binding
- official and non-binding
- non-official and binding
- non-official and non-binding

 

[Black_Hole]

See here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=152793#post3549398

To make it even clearer: A poll can be -
- official and binding
- official and non-binding
- non-official and binding
- non-official and non-binding

you aren't telling me any difference, you are just pointing out an elected official has to post a poll to make it official, what I am asking is do official polls have more relevance? or are they just called official for the fun of it

 

[Blkbird]

you aren't telling me any difference, you are just pointing out an elected official has to post a poll to make it official, what I am asking is do official polls have more relevance? or are they just called official for the fun of it

I thought by "difference" you meant "difference in definiton", I didn't know you omean "difference in effect".

Well, under the current Constitution, an official non-binding poll has equal relevance to a non-official non-binding poll, while an official binding poll (which is defined as Referendum) has *less* relevance than a non-official binding poll regarding a general issue (which is defined as Initiative).

So the answer to your question is, official polls don't have more relevance, they have equal or less relevance than non-official polls depeding on if they're binding. Since there *is* a difference, they're not called official for fun.

 

[DaveShack]

That's interesting... Thunderfall has turned his attention to our little dilemma. And abstained. Support for us making our own decision? Interest in joining the game?

In any case,

 

[DaveShack]

As a citizen and Constitutional scholar (but not as CJ at this time) I don't think this poll can be considered binding. It fails the "informed" criteria because the citizens are not presented with a clear statement of what the effects of each choice would be.

That said, I think many of us would take actions based on the result, even if the result doesn't force us to take those actions. Also the whole thing might be rendered unnecessary by the pending JR.