Judiciary Suggestion

greekguy

Missed the Boat
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
4,386
Location
New Jersey, USA
I'd just like to tell everyone about the one thing that brothered me (a lot) this game and my suggestion to fix it. This whole game, I felt upset that the Judiciary consisted of only 3 people. Why should so few people control all the legal actions of the game. I suggest we expand the Judiciary to 4 or 5 members. Now before you say i'm crazy and say it's a horrible idea, just look at all our elections this game. Every single term, the Judiciary was filled with ease, most of the time the elections were contested. There are enough people here who are interested in legal matters, that we should be able to fill these positions relatively easy. I think this will make legal decisions more democratic and more heated.

NOTE: forget this whole idea if we stay with this "alternate" government structure. with that gov. we now have, there are too many positions too fill to expand the Judiciary. but if we use a "traditionalish" gov. with less officials, this may be plausible.
 
greekguy said:
I'd just like to tell everyone about the one thing that brothered me (a lot) this game and my suggestion to fix it. This whole game, I felt upset that the Judiciary consisted of only 3 people. Why should so few people control all the legal actions of the game. I suggest we expand the Judiciary to 4 or 5 members. Now before you say i'm crazy and say it's a horrible idea, just look at all our elections this game. Every single term, the Judiciary was filled with ease, most of the time the elections were contested. There are enough people here who are interested in legal matters, that we should be able to fill these positions relatively easy. I think this will make legal decisions more democratic and more heated.

NOTE: forget this whole idea if we stay with this "alternate" government structure. with that gov. we now have, there are too many positions too fill to expand the Judiciary. but if we use a "traditionalish" gov. with less officials, this may be plausible.
Three people is enough, we don't make the laws, it doesn't take 5 people to interperet... Also if you noticed that the elections were uncontested most of the time... I ran for the Judiciary each term(CJ first term, PD each other term except this) and I only was contested once(and lost...)
 
The Judiciary has worked decently for the pass couple of games, and I see no need to start changing it around right now. It is undemocratic, and it's well known I have never liked the concept of the Judiciary, however, it does work. So let's leave it be.
 
i agree even though 5 judges wouldn't be a bad idea but that could just create position that none would fill
 
Top Bottom