Ratification Poll: Constitution Articles E and F

[DaveShack]

This is the ratification poll for the Constitution, Articles E and F. A majority of votes cast in the affirmative will signify these articles are ratified. Amendments to these articles may be proposed and passed using a majority until such time as the constitution in its entirety has been ratified, at which time the rules regarding ratification of amendments (if any) take effect.

Please vote yes to ratify (accept) these articles as written, no to reject them, or abstain if you wish to record your indifference to this decision. A majority is defined as (YES > NO) AND (YES >= NO + ABSTAIN). For example, yes=15, no=14, abstain=1 -> the articles are ratified. yes=15, no=15 -> ratification fails.

This poll will remain open for 7 days, and the option to see all the votes is enabled to ensure that we can tell later whether people voting in the poll were actually intending to become citizens. If there is significant disagreement with the poll being open, I will ask the moderators to delete it and I'll repost it as closed.

The text to be ratified:

Article E.  The Legislative Branch will be the Congress,
            will consists of the entirety of the citizenry and is 
            responsible for the drafting of new Laws.

Article F.  The Judicial Branch will consist of one Chief Justice
            and two Associate Justices. These three justices are 
            tasked with upholding the Constitution and its supporting 
            laws (if any) in a fair and impartial manner as prescribed 
            by law. The Chief Justice shall have the additional 
            responsibility to organize and conduct the affairs of the 
            Judicial Branch.

 

[zorven]

Article E. The Legislative Branch will be the Congress,
will consists of the entirety of the citizenry and is
responsible for the drafting of new Laws.

Why have: Legislative Branch = Congress = Citizenry. Just state that the citizenry is repsonsible for drafting new laws.

 

[ravensfire]

NO

Again, NO DISCUSSION.

Are people that concerned about actually posted an idea, and discussing it prior to polling it?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Fier Canadien]

There is one very small problem (not with the constitution): where is article D? We have intro/ABC and EF, where is D?

And, while i'm at it, where are G and H?...

 

[donsig]

Good question Fier Canadien.

I'm voting yes though.

 

[Black_Hole]

There is one very small problem (not with the constitution): where is article D? We have intro/ABC and EF, where is D?

And, while i'm at it, where are G and H?...

i believe daveshack is polling articles that no one has had a problem with..

 

[Sarevok]

Looks good to me.

 

[truckingpete]

Yes, It is really good...

 

[DaveShack]

Actually I didn't realize until way after posting this that E doesn't include the governors.

And yes, this was meant to be a poll on articles that nobody seemed to have a problem with.

 

[TimBentley]

Actually I didn't realize until way after posting this that E doesn't include the governors.

And yes, this was meant to be a poll on articles that nobody seemed to have a problem with.

Governors should be part of the executive branch; they are the executive leaders of their province.

 

[ravensfire]

Actually I didn't realize until way after posting this that E doesn't include the governors.

And yes, this was meant to be a poll on articles that nobody seemed to have a problem with.

Where were these posted as "official articles" for people to review? It seems there are a few areas of discussion.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Epimethius]

These are from the initial post of the constitution thread. Their being here means no one had any serious problems with them.

 

[Cyc]

I see no problem with Articles E and F, but there should have been a proposed poll posted in a forum discussion for at least 24 hours before this poll was posted.

 

[ravensfire]

These are from the initial post of the constitution thread. Their being here means no one had any serious problems with them.

Really? Which version was used? Why were the other versions discarded? And no problems/issues? Funny, I'm seeing some in this discussion.

Thanks, try again please.

-- Ravensfire