Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
I just wonder if I should waste my time posting amendment proposals with this Judiciary.
Term 3 - Judiciary
- Thread starter DaveShack
- Start date
Black_Hole
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2004
- Messages
- 3,424
You just wasted more time posting thisProvolution said:
You would also need to start a topic first
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Just a general question to the court members (Both old and newly elected). Is it alright for a person, like myself, who aspires to be part of the Judiciary to join in the discussions? I am interested in getting my toes into the Judiciary someday 
.
.
@Provolution: Of course, any amendment proposal submitted by a citizen will get a timely and accurate review. You can also be assured that conflicts with existing law and failure to follow the required procedure are the only valid grounds for not proceeding with a vote on an amendment.
@CivGeneral: One needs only glance at my record of commenting on topics before prior term courts to see that my position is one of openness to citizen comment.
@CivGeneral: One needs only glance at my record of commenting on topics before prior term courts to see that my position is one of openness to citizen comment.
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
DaveShack said:@CivGeneral: One needs only glance at my record of commenting on topics before prior term courts to see that my position is one of openness to citizen comment.
Sounds good. I do it would help me get my feet into the Judicary since I do plan to run for JA or PD for Term 4.
mhcarver
Newspaper Mogul
hello anybody there? is our constitution really that perfect? nobody has someone they want to nail for a questionable offense? c'mon people I spend two terms trying to get this job and the minute I do everything dries up? 
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Im still here, I guess I am the only Judicary Student in this place waiting for the Judicary to become active to at least gain some experiance.mhcarver said:hello anybody there? is our constitution really that perfect? nobody has someone they want to nail for a questionable offense? c'mon people I spend two terms trying to get this job and the minute I do everything dries up?
Nobody
Gangster
I aint saying nothing
Black_Hole
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2004
- Messages
- 3,424
talking about my friend Nothing are ya?Nobody said:
Eklektikos
Eponymous
I suggest that you enjoy it while it lasts.mhcarver said:hello anybody there? is our constitution really that perfect? nobody has someone they want to nail for a questionable offense? c'mon people I spend two terms trying to get this job and the minute I do everything dries up?
Ashburnham
King
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2004
- Messages
- 827
Eklektikos said:I suggest that you enjoy it while it lasts.
You beat me to it.
Furiey
No Longer Just Lurking
We can't have our Judiciary sitting around getting bored so here's something to for clarification/interpretation...
I would like to hold a special session to do the peace deal with the Dutch that is currently being polled. This 0 turn, just make peace session would then allow further trades for Republic etc to be assessed.
The next full session is scheduled for Saturday, however it seems a bit of a waste to do one deal then stop on a fully scheduled session, so I was thinking of slotting a special session to do the deal on Friday, a couple of hours after the poll to confirm it closes.
However I have obviously been thinking of previous demogames when I thought a special session could be slotted in at shorter notice than a normal session as it appears from the constitution that all sessions need a TCIT posted 3 days in advance.
The relaxation of the time limit for the special session no longer appears to be there so it effectively means that it's almost impossible to schedule one in and you might just as well have a very short next scheduled session.
Or am I missing something?
I would like to hold a special session to do the peace deal with the Dutch that is currently being polled. This 0 turn, just make peace session would then allow further trades for Republic etc to be assessed.
The next full session is scheduled for Saturday, however it seems a bit of a waste to do one deal then stop on a fully scheduled session, so I was thinking of slotting a special session to do the deal on Friday, a couple of hours after the poll to confirm it closes.
However I have obviously been thinking of previous demogames when I thought a special session could be slotted in at shorter notice than a normal session as it appears from the constitution that all sessions need a TCIT posted 3 days in advance.
Article J. All irreversible game actions must progress during a scheduled game session while reversible game actions (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can be prepared offline before the scheduled game session.
1. An instruction thread must be created at least 3 days before the scheduled turnchat.
The relaxation of the time limit for the special session no longer appears to be there so it effectively means that it's almost impossible to schedule one in and you might just as well have a very short next scheduled session.
Or am I missing something?
Furiey said:
I might argue that Furiey's planned special session is in fact a continuation of Wednesday's turnchat, and not an entirely new session. Play was stopped to confirm that the conditions under which the Dutch were willing to make peace were in accordance with previous discussion and polls. The External Consulate's exact instructions regarding what to seek in peace were: "We should seek the most valuable techs. The Dutch will give us Feudalism; and we hope by the time peace is negotiated they will give us another tech. If they will give us Feudalism and Monotheism, take those. We also want the Republic but with one of those techs for ammunition we should be able to trade for it."
This is essentially what the Dutch offered us; the only difference is they also want some gold (41 pieces) which we hadn't previously polled. The previous poll speaking to what peace settlement we should seek IS HERE; the current poll asking whether we should pay the 41 gold (plus peace) in exchange for the techs we prefer - Monotheism and Feudalism - IS HERE.
Therefore I'd argue we don't need an instruction thread for this special session because we're holding the special session only to confirm that the will of the people is in fact to take the two techs that we prefer even though it will cost us a modest 41 pieces of gold. In other words, this isn't a new session (strictly speaking); rather it's a continuation of Wednesday's session. Wednesday Part 2.
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
I agree, I cant be sitting around using up my DG Law School time waiting for notingFuriey said:
. Eventhough I am just a Judicary Student, I do wish to put in my $.02 .I would agree, as a Judicary Student, with Bertie that we dont need a special TCIT unless there is a big need for one
.
The question asked by President Furiey has merit and is designated DG6T3JR1.
To rephrase it slightly, I see two questions being asked.
1. Are special sessions subject to the same timeframe requirements as regular sessions?
2. Is the proposed session actually a special session?
I would like to post comments on these two questions without those comments being considered my official ruling on the matter, to see if any arguments to the contrary develop.
For the first question, we had considerable discussion on this point and the general concensus was that we wanted to support the idea of special sessions with the purpose of finding out information which is needed for the next real session. Given a special session's purpose it was not intended that the long time period would be required, however it does not appear the law was written with this idea in mind.
For the second question, I'm inclined to agree that the action to be taken falls under what was already instructed in a TCIT and therefore would not be required to follow the advance posting requirement, as long as no citizens protest.
To rephrase it slightly, I see two questions being asked.
1. Are special sessions subject to the same timeframe requirements as regular sessions?
2. Is the proposed session actually a special session?
I would like to post comments on these two questions without those comments being considered my official ruling on the matter, to see if any arguments to the contrary develop.
For the first question, we had considerable discussion on this point and the general concensus was that we wanted to support the idea of special sessions with the purpose of finding out information which is needed for the next real session. Given a special session's purpose it was not intended that the long time period would be required, however it does not appear the law was written with this idea in mind.
For the second question, I'm inclined to agree that the action to be taken falls under what was already instructed in a TCIT and therefore would not be required to follow the advance posting requirement, as long as no citizens protest.
Black_Hole
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2004
- Messages
- 3,424
I will be ruling on this JR tomorrow, if you have comments post them!
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Also, I hope that none of the Judicaries mind if a Student from the Judicary School places his $.02 in .
.
Nobody
Gangster
Cool i want to be in the Judicary School, well if you guys don't mind two students (there are three of you) i will also most my oppion
DG6T3JR1.
Question 1.
Yes, because special sessions are really regular game session subject to the same timeframe requirements. Therefore the session would require an instruction thread . Created at least 3 days before the scheduled game session [Article J., Section 1.]
Question 2.
There is no reference to special sessions in the constitution or code of laws, so it is not really a special session just a regular session that will be short.
Obiter dicta
If you were to declare a turn session this afternoon to carry out some instructions in the may 14th turn chat instruction thread, and then only carried out External Console specific instruction 2
2. Make peace with the Dutch. They will give us Feudalism and Monotheism; we will give them 41 gold.
THIS POLL supports this
Then this would probably be legal as there is no part of the code of laws or constitution that states that each game session needs its own instruction thread. Or that all Instructions need to be carried out in one game session.
DG6T3JR1.
Question 1.
Yes, because special sessions are really regular game session subject to the same timeframe requirements. Therefore the session would require an instruction thread . Created at least 3 days before the scheduled game session [Article J., Section 1.]
Question 2.
There is no reference to special sessions in the constitution or code of laws, so it is not really a special session just a regular session that will be short.
Obiter dicta
If you were to declare a turn session this afternoon to carry out some instructions in the may 14th turn chat instruction thread, and then only carried out External Console specific instruction 2
2. Make peace with the Dutch. They will give us Feudalism and Monotheism; we will give them 41 gold.
THIS POLL supports this
Then this would probably be legal as there is no part of the code of laws or constitution that states that each game session needs its own instruction thread. Or that all Instructions need to be carried out in one game session.
Furiey
No Longer Just Lurking
On Question 1:
When I was going to do the special session, I checked the constitution to check the specific requirements for one. I was very surprised that there was not mention of one. I remembered the discussions before the start of the game - people wanted to allow them, they were considered a "good thing", and much of the discussion was on whether they could be offline or not. Unfortunately this didn't seem to get in the constitution or COL and what we have now makes no provision for shorter sheduling. As it stands now, my interpretation is that there is no provision for special sessions and all sessions come under the 3 day rule. This is unfortunate as we certainly seemed (and still seem) to want to be able to have them.
on Question 2:
The last turnchat session was stopped and this issue was brought back to the forums for discussion. Anything done from now must therefore part of a new session be it special or scheduled as normal. To allow "well it was covered in the last set of instructions" as a reason for it not being a new session at all but part of the old one opens up a whole can of worms - there are lots of instructions that weren't completed as ministers do not post for exactly 10 turns (and we do not necessarily do exactly 10 turns) - how far could we go? A special session to play out the other 6 that weren't done? This could give the judicary lots to do.
There were things written to cover special sessions in previous demogames, if I get the time I'll probably fish them out. Getting something in to cover it would probably be best for the rest of the game rather than try to fudge it now.
When I was going to do the special session, I checked the constitution to check the specific requirements for one. I was very surprised that there was not mention of one. I remembered the discussions before the start of the game - people wanted to allow them, they were considered a "good thing", and much of the discussion was on whether they could be offline or not. Unfortunately this didn't seem to get in the constitution or COL and what we have now makes no provision for shorter sheduling. As it stands now, my interpretation is that there is no provision for special sessions and all sessions come under the 3 day rule. This is unfortunate as we certainly seemed (and still seem) to want to be able to have them.
on Question 2:
The last turnchat session was stopped and this issue was brought back to the forums for discussion. Anything done from now must therefore part of a new session be it special or scheduled as normal. To allow "well it was covered in the last set of instructions" as a reason for it not being a new session at all but part of the old one opens up a whole can of worms - there are lots of instructions that weren't completed as ministers do not post for exactly 10 turns (and we do not necessarily do exactly 10 turns) - how far could we go? A special session to play out the other 6 that weren't done? This could give the judicary lots to do.
There were things written to cover special sessions in previous demogames, if I get the time I'll probably fish them out. Getting something in to cover it would probably be best for the rest of the game rather than try to fudge it now.
Black_Hole
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2004
- Messages
- 3,424
Public Defender's Ruling on JR # ?
1. As it is not specified anywhere in the law, special turnchats do require a Turn Chat Instruction Thread posted 3 days in advance.
2. Again, as it is not specified in the constitution special sessions really aren't special sessions, just a regular game play session where the the DP decides the end the game after a turn.
1. As it is not specified anywhere in the law, special turnchats do require a Turn Chat Instruction Thread posted 3 days in advance.
2. Again, as it is not specified in the constitution special sessions really aren't special sessions, just a regular game play session where the the DP decides the end the game after a turn.
