Council Vote to Amend CoS Section F

[GenMarshall]

This is a council vote to amend CoS Section F. A simply majority of council members is required to pass this vote.

All members of the council, please vote YES, NO, or ABSTAIN.

Relevant discussion may be found here. Please post all comments about this proposal in that thread, and refrain from discussion here.

Proposal:

CoS F.6: The first post of any poll, informational or official, may only contain neutral information presented without bias.

Note: There would no amendments to current standards. Rather, this is an addition.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Domestic Department

After reading further discussion, I vote ABSTAIN

 

[eyrei]

Foreign Affairs

Abstain.

 

[Immortal]

Abstain

 

[GenMarshall]

Military Department

After looking through the disscutions. I have made my desision.

Abstain

Sorry Goonie .

 

[Strider]

Science Department Votes

Accept

I was alittle torn between voting accept or abstain, but I decided to be differant

 

[Plexus]

Abstain... I didn't see this before.

 

[Octavian X]

With 5 abstaining, and one affirmitive vote, the council vote is passed. The CoS has offcially been amended.

 

[Goonie]

One of my proposals was actually passed. WOW! Thats a first.

 

[Cyc]

Congratulations Goonie. The first one is always the best.

 

[Shaitan]

Please note that this standard must pass through a Judicial Review before it will be added to the Code of Standards.

 

[Goonie]

Shaitan you stole my thunder ! Theres always a catch these days!

 

[Shaitan]

It's quick and easy, Goonie. Just put a link to this thread in the Judicial thread and request a review.

 

[Octavian X]

Might as well get this out of the way...

In accordance with Section E.6.C. of the Fanatikan Code of Laws, I hereby submit my Judicial Review.

After thorough review of the Constitution, Code of Laws, and Code of Standards, I find that this standard does not conflict with the three aformentioned documents.

Octavian X
Public Defender of Fanatika.

 

[FortyJ]

I am deeply troubled that this should pass when the only council member voting in favor of it happens to be the only council member that has resigned his position in the middle of the term... twice.

Furthermore, I believe that our entire polling system is in dire need of reworking. I encourage our council members to reexamine the proposal Shaitan put forth earlier.

Lastly, I must disagree with our distinguished Public Defender. I find that this standard does, in fact, restrict an individual's right to freedom of speech and is therefore illegal. There are several reasons for my decision:

Primarily, we should not be so eager to "protect" ourselves from personal opinions that may infringe on a leader's right to express his or her opinions on a proposal that he or she has put forward. If we require the proposing individual to refrain from posting any opinion in the first post of a poll, why not in the discussion thread as well? In fact, perhaps the proposing individual should refrain from posting opinions at all, so that the people can be free to make up their minds on their own? And don't be so quick to condemn these statements as ludicrous. We are inches away from denying a person the right to speak his or her mind in a particular post. How far can a particular thread be from that?

Additionally, the policing of such a rule could slow the game down to a crawl and bog down the entire Judiciary for eternity. Personal bias cannot possibly be removed entirely from a post. It is human nature to infer emotions and feelings from written word (that's why a good book is, well... good).

For example, I could take issue with this very poll. Since CivGeneral went out of his way to include the note that made it clear that no rule would be changed, only added, I could argue that he was attempting to illustrate how easy and uncomplicated this rule would be and hence influence the council. Scoff if you like, but if I asserted that my vote was influenced by that statement, he would have to be found guilty of this law, and there would be no way to prove me wrong. Simply put, bias cannot be measured quantitatively and therefore should not be used as a legal barometer for our actions.

 

[Immortal]

iron clad arguement FortyJ, pleasure to hear your opinions!

 

[Goonie]

Primarily, we should not be so eager to "protect" ourselves from personal opinions that may infringe on a leader's right to express his or her opinions on a proposal that he or she has put forward. -FortyJ

40J, this law does not prevent ANY leader from posting his or her opinions. It simply states that NO leader may put bias in a POLL. The leader presenting the idea may put all the bias in the world into their discussion(What I consider a campaign), but on a final ballot in real life, do you see the arguments? No, you simply see the names of the person you are voting for. This law in NO way stops opinions, it stops the LUCKY person who posts the polls to take advantage of their position as poll poster.

Please quote what article of the constitution this law breaks.

 

[FortyJ]

[b]The Constitution[/b]
[b]A. [/b]All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen
   Registry are citizens of Fanatika. Citizens have the right to
   assemble, the right to free movement, the right to free speech,
   the right to a fair trial, the right to representation, the right
   to demand satisfaction and the right to vote. 

[b]Code of Laws[/b]
[b]A. [/b]Citizen Rights
    [b]3. [/b]Right to Free Speech
        [b]A. [/b]Citizens may post their comments in forum threads
           wherever appropriate. 
        [b]B. [/b]Citizens may post their comments in chats
           wherever appropriate. 
        [b]C. [/b]Citizens may create discussion threads on any topic. 
        [b]D. [/b]Citizens may create polls on any topic.

 

[disorganizer]

btw (hope i dont get banned for posting to a council vote ):
it should not be allowed to have discussions going in a poll of any kind. instead, the 1st post should be forced to hold a link to a coresponding thread which can hold that discussion. this way people can not be fooled by false arguments or repeated spamming in a poll thread.

best example for these are pi-polls with an ongoing "guilty or not" campaign in the discussion beneath it. this can greatly influence the voters.

(it would be like having a political discussion in your ballot room while voting=ridiculous)

 

[FortyJ]

Something else to ponder...

Denied the right to include a recommendation on a proposal, savvy leaders, hoping to get their proposal adopted, will eventually stop offering multiple option pools and limit their polls to a single option with your choices being Accept/Reject/Abstain. After all, this is how ballots are presented in real life....

Failure to adopt a leader's recommended city selection could postpone activity in a turn chat indefinitely while the leader continues to work down his or her list of preferred locations until one is adopted.

While I agree that polls should not present undue bias, attempting to eliminate bias altogether is not only illegal, but will prove impossible to enact and equally impossible to enforce.