OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: Citizen's Rights

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chieftess

Moderator
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
24,160
Location
Baltimore
This is the discussion to determine what rights the citizens will have in DG6.
 
Quoting from the original consitution, I beleve that it should be carried onto the next game

Code:
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 trial, the right to 
            representation, the right to seek to redress grievances 
            and the right to vote.
 
Some minor changes -

from "the right to a fair trial"
to "the right to a fair and speedy trial"

from "the right to seek to redress grievances"
to "the right to seek a redress of grievances"

Also, should we include the "no political parties" clause? That seems to have been missing from DG5, thus making them okay ...

-- Ravensfire
 
I agree that we should carry over the DG5 rights. Ravensfire's tweaking also looks fine. Political parties seem to be such a taboo in the Demogame that I doubt anyone would try it even if it wasn't in the Constitution. Still, for the sake of completeness, I suppose we should include it.
 
I agree, I had bad experiences with what some called "traditional laws" recognizable only by indoctrinated veterans to stuck with their own digital world to introduce it to new players. I tried to start one once, and I got this angry PM from Rik stating it was not acceptable with political parties, but there was no law against it. Of course I adapted, but would like to see both the ban on political parties and the new Naming Laws firmly carved out in stone. In fact, all traditional laws should be made consitutional or totally omitted from the game, and there should be no such thing as traditional laws. I would also like a legal definition on the Will of the People, and mete out penalties to those abusing this word in public debates, hijacking the crux term of traditional law and abusing it to squash political opponents among the newbees easily intimidated by such an institutionalized term.
 
I beleve there should be something set instone regarding political parties.
 
Rights? RIGHTS?.... What the hell do they think this is?... A Democracy? :lol:
 
What does "the right to representation" mean exactly? People can represent themselves or they can elect representatives?

There should also be the right to protest. ;)
 
blackheart said:
What does "the right to representation" mean exactly? People can represent themselves or they can elect representatives?

There should also be the right to protest. ;)

I just studied the US Constitution and it had something like that in there...now I forgot...at least I past the test..:D

Anyway....DG5 Bill of Rights

-TP
 
What about this:

Bill of Rights, 10 rights

Right to a named military unit (Unit Code, Unit name, City Code)
Right to Protest (In discussion threads and protest threads, not government threads)
Right to Information (defined in CoL)
Right to a fair and speedy trial (defined times and date of obsoletion of a crime)
Right to form Citizen groups (defined in CoL)
Right to codifed poll standards that are applied on critical decisions
Right to Defend against undue criticism
Right to Participate in elections and to vote in elections
Right to put up citizens polls without being policed by other citizens, only moderators
 
Provolution said:
What about this:

Bill of Rights, 10 rights

Right to a named military unit (Unit Code, Unit name, City Code)
Right to Protest (In discussion threads and protest threads, not government threads)
Right to Information (defined in CoL)
Right to a fair and speedy trial (defined times and date of obsoletion of a crime)
Right to form Citizen groups (defined in CoL)
Right to codifed poll standards that are applied on critical decisions
Right to Defend against undue criticism
Right to Participate in elections and to vote in elections
Right to put up citizens polls without being policed by other citizens, only moderators

Sounds awefully fishy like a personal vendetta to me :mischief: :lol:
Why can't we protest in government threads? Government officials are immune to criticism?
 
You are taking it all personal. There were several instances government threads was threadjacked, without mine or your participation, so they had to be restarted and so on.
This may learn players to discipline their outbursts into separate citizen threads and discussion threads, maybe even PMs for those from furnished homes. Government threads
should be informational, and should not include attacks on opposition as well.
I think many agree on this, and this division should indeed be discussed and polled.

I think the moderator are tired of cleaning up excesses and citizens tired of seeing their information sourced tarnished by spam, threadjacks, flames and coup d'etats originated in provoked bans. Sorry Blackheart, but your shenanigans should be limited.
 
Who's taking it personally, Provolution?

Who continues the personal and political attacks, Provolution?

-- Ravensfire
 
Ravensfire, I know you are after me for many reasons. Well, all I wanted here was to make government threads informational havens, where the Right to Information on a report base could be orderly combined. You don't see the need Ravensfire, why are you prodding at me and not looking on the issue ?
 
Provo - quite honestly - I ignore you most of the time.

I'm not after, have not been after you, and won't be after you. Bluntly - this is virtual and you're not worth my time.

You, however, have a pointed vendetta against various people. You couldn't handle that some people didn't like your style, your decisions or your methods. Guess what - that's healthy. Yet you continually strive to silence your critics and toss back-handed insults. What what that one rule you proposed? Something about admitted drug users not holding office? Gee, now WHO could that have been targetting?

I do get a great laugh skimming through your posts, though. Thanks for the break!

-- Ravensfire
 
Provolution said:
You are taking it all personal. There were several instances government threads was threadjacked, without mine or your participation, so they had to be restarted and so on.
This may learn players to discipline their outbursts into separate citizen threads and discussion threads, maybe even PMs for those from furnished homes. Government threads
should be informational, and should not include attacks on opposition as well.
I think many agree on this, and this division should indeed be discussed and polled.

I think the moderator are tired of cleaning up excesses and citizens tired of seeing their information sourced tarnished by spam, threadjacks, flames and coup d'etats originated in provoked bans. Sorry Blackheart, but your shenanigans should be limited.

My my, you make it sound as if there were a shadow government pulling the strings. Government threads are there for information about the government, that's right, but why bother to have seperate government threads if all that is going to be in it is information? We could group everything in one thread.
 
Provolution said:
Bill of Rights...
...Right to Defend against undue criticism....
Who determines what "undue criticism" is? I can easily see a flame war starting because someone complains "you threw undue criticism at me." "Did not, you silly person!" "Did too, wiper of other people's bottoms."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom