1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Legal Discussion, Const Article A.

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game VI: Citizens' started by Provolution, Mar 13, 2005.

  1. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    Honorable Fanatannians

    We need to improve on the law, for the interest of the majority of the people, and the citizen registry discussion proved to be to spurious and speculative, that a stricter definition of Article A would leave nothing to argument and circumstance.

    Article A.
    All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen
    Registry are citizens of our country. Citizens have the
    right to assemble, the right to free movement, the right
    to free speech, the right to a fair and speedy trial, the
    right to representation, the right to name units (within
    the naming convention), the right to request an
    investigation into possible violations of law and the
    right to vote, ADD participate in elections, become elected and to be nominated for appointment or appointed for any office in Fanatannia.
     
  2. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    Citizens are going to be forced to run in elections and become elected, even if they don't want to? I don't see the point of that. I know you're trying to root out people who just register and don't ever show up again, but it's not fair to those who wish to lurk or are busy with real life things.
     
  3. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    this is about the right to become elected and appointed, not a requirement. to run for elections. Read carefully the amendment.

    This is to root out DG players who are not in the citizen registry to mess up our offices.
     
  4. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    My apologies, read the bolded text wrong.

    Read the constitution again. There's no rights given to non citizens. I tought it was agreed that the CoL should be strict and definite, while a constitution that is open is flexible and can be changed. We don't need the Constitution to be the thing to bind our hands.
     
  5. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    The amendment cover something fundamentally basic, and got to be in the Const.
     
  6. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    I almost fell out of my chair laughing after I read this....Are you serious?!?
    This would mean all citizens have the right to be elected(thus if they dont win an election, we will still put them in an office), meaning this doesnt become a democracy anymore... we will need 80 offices(1 for each citizeh)....
     
  7. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    This is the right to participate in the elections, with the outcomes of these.
    There is no other interpretation. However, other election laws and CoC limits the number of offices naturally.
     
  8. Black_Hole

    Black_Hole Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,424
    NO, it clearly says you will have a "right to be elected", which means every citizen can be elected if they wish
     
  9. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    they can be elected, but it is not guaranteed that they will be elected.
     
  10. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    Read again. This is what it would be if were approved. The right to become elected. It means that they are GUARANTEED an elected office by the constitution. Poor choice of wording, might want to change it.

    BTW, the constitution is meant to be interpreted, otherwise it wouldn't be one of the functions of the judiciary.
     
  11. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    The wording is improved even more.

    Article A.
    All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen
    Registry are citizens of our country. Citizens have the
    right to assemble, the right to free movement, the right
    to free speech, the right to a fair and speedy trial, the
    right to representation, the right to name units (within
    the naming convention), the right to request an
    investigation into possible violations of law and the
    right to vote, ADD participate on equal terms in elections and to be considered on equal terms for appointment in any office in Fanatannia.
     
  12. Bill_in_PDX

    Bill_in_PDX Grumpy Submariner

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,880
    Location:
    The Wilderness of Orygun
    I still don't see a problem. The very beginning of constitution defines what a citizen is, and that they must register in the citizen thread to be a citizen. Anything else is not needed.
     
  13. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    The right of participation in the elections should be specified
     
  14. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    This crusade (and that is what it is) has gone on long enough.

    Suppose it was the 26th of the month, 5 minutes before nominations close, and someone who is not registered as a citizen notices that we don't have a candidate for a critical position. This individual posts a self-nomination, but then doesn't complete citizen registration until 5 minutes after midnight. By your attempted change to the rules, we would deny this person the ability to join the game and have his / her self-nomination recognized because of the timing of two posts in the forum, by ten minutes in this example.

    No, the right answer is the same answer it has always been. Point out the oversight, the problem gets corrected, and everyone (except yourself it seems) is happy.

    The incident you're trying to solve is over. Please drop the matter.
     
  15. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,101
    Location:
    London
    Not a problem DS. The President will then basically appoint the official following the elections, and after the person signed the citizen registry. But the person would have no rights in the election process against a legitimate candidate that posted in time and
    managed to sign in the citizen registry.

    But election laws must have deadlines. Look at how strict we regulate the polls. One wrong word and the poll is invalidated. With defined deadlines, we are certain all candidates get a fair chance to nominate and be elected, as the deadlines should be written in the nomination thread. These nominations and elections should be exactly as time sensitive as the official game polls. It is a matter of principle, and this is a government simulation. People abiding by deadlines and rules are rewarded, where those who are not are penalized.

    This is not a crusade, but a legal process to set things straight. Obviously, we disagree on what is right and wrong, but there is no need to threat me for pursuing this legal debate.
     
  16. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    No threat implied here, just pointing out that an amendment is an awfully tall hill to climb. Our efforts are better utilized on the actual game. BTW good work with the culture strategy discussion. :)
     
  17. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Again? Sigh.

    We don't need this.

    It's already in the ruleset.

    It was already confirmed in a judicial review over the matter.

    We don't need this.

    Show me where any harm has ever come because this was lacking. There has been one time that someone forgot to register and happened to be away during the start of the matter. It has been corrected, they were somewhat embarrased over the matter and took care of it immediately.

    Where is the problem? I just cannot see anything that this proposal will do that isn't already in the ruleset.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  18. Eklektikos

    Eklektikos Eponymous

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,635
    Location:
    London, UK
    Agreed.

    The proposed amendment is nothing more than unnecessary verbiage, at best adding nothing of value and at worst causing confusion due to the linguistic contortions required to phrase the additional text in a manner consistent with the existing article. I would most definitely vote against its enactment.
     
  19. classical_hero

    classical_hero In whom I trust

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    33,209
    Location:
    Perth,Western Australia
    There is nothing wrong with Article A as it stands at the moment. It is not a problem of the constitution.
     
  20. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    I'm surprised that there is even the possibility that someone can think of us capable of such a gross negligence as denying people a right to run and nominate in elections. This is like codifying everyone has the right to make posts, threads, and replies in the forum.
     

Share This Page