Term 3 - Judiciary Elections

[GenMarshall]

Please vote for the following Canidates: Daveshack, Octavian X, Peri, Donsig, and Abstain. Poll will close on Feb 29th GMT. The top winner gets the CJ possition and the 2nd and 3rd placers get the AJ possition. This is a Multi-choice poll.

Yours,
The Election Office Staff

 

[Chieftess]

How many people are we voting for?

 

[Bootstoots]

As many as you want to, AFAIK.

BTW, I'm going to reserve my decision for a while...I'd like to see statements by the candidates before casting my vote.

 

[Chieftess]

ok, atleast 1 customary (traditional) vote for donsig so he can "preside over his own PI", as the old saying goes.

 

[Octavian X]

Well, I only do campaign in my own election threads when people want to hear me make a statement.

I'll admit, at first, I was glad to hear the early-on decision to bring back the old Codes of Laws and Standards when DG3 ended. And as I watched the endless debates and legal battles on the meaning of the laws, I just stayed away, hoping it'd all calm down after a while.

It seems to have done that, for the time being.

My term in office on the judiciary would be spend discouraging legal activity. Yes, discouraging it. I firmly believe that the judiciary should stay out of politics as much as possible, only acting as a last resort when two parties can't resolve their differences.

The moment someone steps on someone else's toes, the first thing that shouldn't be done is to run to our beloved court. These things should be discussed the citizen's forum. I believe that such differences could be and should be worked out without the judiciary's action.

Does a law conflict with another? Start a discussion. Do you think someone is acting outside their powers? Talking with that person about it. We're provided with the nearly-perfect median for having these discussions, why not utilize it for everyone's benefit?

Just think about it. (And while your thinking, vote for me... )

 

[Sarevok]

That I will, you are who I would want.

 

[Peri]

I am glad Octavian and I agree. There is too much legal activity and discouraging it is the first step to bringing the fun back.
We need to start cooperating with each other. The only reason the ruleset is so cumbersome is because we don't work together as a team.
In my last term as CJ cooperation was the theme. I encouraged people to work together to sort out problems rather than running to the court like it was a mother. I think that if elected Octavian and I will work really well together.

Bring the Fun

 

[donsig]

We have seen time and time again how our Three Books are inconsistent and too restraining. Little has been done to remedy the problems caused by our ruleset. The ONLY changes to our laws have come about because we have had two terms with an active judiciary. We are a democracy founded upon laws and the litigation we have seen thus far has benefitted our nation. But there is still plently of work to be done. Do not hinder the work that needs to be done by electing a judiciary that will actively discourage litigation.

The issues brought before the judiciary this term have not been trivial. These issues deal with the election process, the definition of provinces and the authority granted to various leaders. There have also been serious allegations of improperly playing the save, and disregarding legally posted instructions. These are certainly things that should be handled through the legal system we have devised as they are of the utmost importance to the realization of our democracy.

 

[Sarevok]

Today's system cannot work how it is going and it will make this Demogame last a year. It has been a fest of CC's, Judicial reviews, and arguing tht has made this happen. The people high in the judiciary have broken the constitution many times, and it is time we had leaders that understand how to make this game return to a game of democracy rather than Bureacracy. Forcing to stop the game because the constitution says pretty much "you must do this" or "It must be this way" needs to stop. I urge all of the citizenry to vote for either Octavian_X or Peri

 

[Chieftess]

I too, put my support for Oct and Peri. And of course, the customary vote for donsig (who's legal views always confuse me as to if he's for or against something. )...

 

[Peri]

Originally posted by donsig
We have seen time and time again how our Three Books are inconsistent and too restraining. Little has been done to remedy the problems caused by our ruleset. The ONLY changes to our laws have come about because we have had two terms with an active judiciary. We are a democracy founded upon laws and the litigation we have seen thus far has benefitted our nation. But there is still plently of work to be done. Do not hinder the work that needs to be done by electing a judiciary that will actively discourage litigation.

The issues brought before the judiciary this term have not been trivial. These issues deal with the election process, the definition of provinces and the authority granted to various leaders. There have also been serious allegations of improperly playing the save, and disregarding legally posted instructions. These are certainly things that should be handled through the legal system we have devised as they are of the utmost importance to the realization of our democracy.

I agree with you totally donsig except on one issue.

Do not hinder the work that needs to be done by electing a judiciary that will actively discourage litigation.

The work of the Judiciary can be done effectively without the need for a 300 post thread. The concept I am trying to encourage is one of co operation. There may be serious problems yet to be encountered. However, rather than point fingers at people or start a fest of insults, I propose (and probably Oct does too) that we solve the problems by talking with each other.
The current CC system was the first brick in this house. This new system's primary purpose is to find a solution, yet it is still too bureaucratic in nature. I would much rather CC's were sorted out by the two people involved civily discussing their grievances and finding their own solution. There is genuine concern that an issue may become the thin end of the wedge where people abuse any leeway given. Nevertheless we need to work together rather than against each other.

This starts now.

 

[Sarevok]

it would also esolve matters much more quickly and without as much rancor.

 

[Peri]

In a different thread CT said that we do have a party system whether we admit it or not. We have this system not because it is fun or because it makes sense to have it but because of fear. Both sides fears the motives of the other. We don't trust each other. Yet this is wrong and it spoils the game. We all need to take a leap of faith and give people the benefit of the doubt that they are not out to destroy the game by one means or another.

Lets start working together for a better Fanatica.

 

[Sarevok]

That I agree with as well. the bureacracy is driving away people from the demogame and the policy that if you move an inch off of the exact rules you get CCed needs to stop as well.

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by Peri
In a different thread CT said that we do have a party system whether we admit it or not. We have this system not because it is fun or because it makes sense to have it but because of fear. Both sides fears the motives of the other. We don't trust each other. Yet this is wrong and it spoils the game. We all need to take a leap of faith and give people the benefit of the doubt that they are not out to destroy the game by one means or another.

Lets start working together for a better Fanatica.

And someone in another thread recently (ravensfire I think) said something to the effect of, "that wouldn't really work since we don't trust each other". "trust each other" for what? That does sound like political parties where one side is trying to out-manuver the other.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Sarevok
Today's system cannot work how it is going and it will make this Demogame last a year. It has been a fest of CC's, Judicial reviews, and arguing tht has made this happen. The people high in the judiciary have broken the constitution many times, and it is time we had leaders that understand how to make this game return to a game of democracy rather than Bureacracy. Forcing to stop the game because the constitution says pretty much "you must do this" or "It must be this way" needs to stop. I urge all of the citizenry to vote for either Octavian_X or Peri

It is not the judicial reviews that are slowing the game. It is the lack of discussions about the Civ III game we're playing that is slowing down the game. The judiciary has not *broken the constitution*. The judiciary has been upholding the constitution.

In any event, electing a judiciary that wants to squelch litigation will not work. In fact it will only lead to more litigation.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Chieftess
I too, put my support for Oct and Peri. And of course, the customary vote for donsig (who's legal views always confuse me as to if he's for or against something. )...

Is that maybe because I'm one of the few actually willing to live by the rules we decided upon? My legal views do not reflect how I feel about a certain issue. My legal views reflect my opinion of what the law is as it is written.

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Sarevok
That I agree with as well. the bureacracy is driving away people from the demogame and the policy that if you move an inch off of the exact rules you get CCed needs to stop as well.

You people kill me. Look through the both terms and count how many CC's there have been. Most that have been requested were withdrawn. We CCed CG and Shasa (whatever his name is). The latter didn't even go to discussion but was resolved. There's one pending against Rik Meleet for something he might have done as a lame duck President. How does one work that out by talking? Get RM to promise never to break the law as a lame duck president? Come on! The only other CC is the one against CT involving the CoC. It is the judicial reviews caused by our inconsistent Three Books that takes the judiciary's time, not CCs. Ignoring the inconsistancies in the Three Books will not help the demogame.

 

[Sarevok]

Its the fact that people are waiting for the ministers or the president to do something wrong to CC them or to frequently ask for judicial reviews and the dealings with "Unwritten Rules" that irritates me. How would each of the candidates deal with that?

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Sarevok
Its the fact that people are waiting for the ministers or the president to do something wrong to CC them or to frequently ask for judicial reviews and the dealings with "Unwritten Rules" that irritates me. How would each of the candidates deal with that?

There have been exactly ZERO CC's or Jrs regarding *unwritten rules*. Each and every one has (by law) concerned our written rules. The Three Books are there for all to see and maybe even READ.

As I said, you people kill me. You whine that things are going too slow because our *leaders* are afraid to act. Well then elect someone not afraid. oh wait, if you did elect someone like that who played ten turns every chat then you'd all cry that the *despot* is making all the decisions and not stopping for *unexpected* things.

Let's stop calling this the demogame can start calling it the crybaby game.

Vote for an active judiciary!