Do we want a Court ?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
MAYBE it is how are you to decide what is essential and isnt let the people make there own descion without propagande from the people against and for the proposal

Hey, this is a democracy. Am I not alllowed to voice my opinion?

[DeathByTheSword]

yes ofcource but with you it always has that propaganda smell on it.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
yes ofcource but with you it always has that propaganda smell on it.

*Sigh*

Back on topic....We dont need a court. Pretty much serves the same functino as the people while promoting certain citizens to "judge" status and giving them more power WHILE stripping power away from the people....

Not good

[DeathByTheSword]

yes but I dont like the idea of just anyone without a good an legal reson start a impeachment process and when something is not clear in the constitution do we have to freeze the game for atleast 3 days to let everone vote on it...well that is time consuming...

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
yes but I dont like the idea of just anyone without a good an legal reson start a impeachment process and when something is not clear in the constitution do we have to freeze the game for atleast 3 days to let everone vote on it...well that is time consuming...

We dont have to freeze anything during an impeachment process. All we do is let the demo game continue. Its that simple.

And with a court, there would just be more to deal with....Because only certain people are the ones who decide whether its valid or not or whatever.....Again, let's let the people decide.

[Anodyne]

We might have a "Supreme Judge" (or a council of 3-5), who would decide what is a case of impeachment and what is not. But the final call would still be at the hands of the people.

[DeathByTheSword]

ade: that the idea. first a jugde penal to validate the progress and then let the people vote this way you wouldnt be swampt with stupid impeachment polls

tass: i dont mean impeachment it dosnt have to be frozen but when during the game too directors claim a unit or a screen or stuff and then we would have to freeze the game for a poll do you see my meaning

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
tass: i dont mean impeachment it dosnt have to be frozen but when during the game too directors claim a unit or a screen or stuff and then we would have to freeze the game for a poll do you see my meaning

That would happen with or without a court....If they claim control over a unit, the formation of a court would not be able to dismiss the claim and the game would still have to freeze.

That is why we need a clear consitituon over what positions can do what.

[DeathByTheSword]

but a court would be able to do it faster then all the people within one day if we are lucking and it doesnt matter how clear the consitution will be some think always comes up

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
but a court would be able to do it faster then all the people within one day if we are lucking and it doesnt matter how clear the consitution will be some think always comes up

Actually, the court may be even slower because of procedures it must follow and the beuocracy and someone contesting the decision and claiming the court is biased and....

I say its just better to let the people decide.

[DeathByTheSword]

yes ofcourse if you use DGcivIII court but a quicker jugding system with three jugdes hearing one speach from both parties coming to a descion could be done quickly i think

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
yes ofcourse if you use DGcivIII court but a quicker jugding system with three jugdes hearing one speach from both parties coming to a descion could be done quickly i think

and the people simply voting on the matter would be even faster because there is no garentee that the three judges will be online...However the people are ALWAYS online

[DeathByTheSword]

NO thats not correct the constitution states (or will be stating) that every 'official' poll must be open for atleast 3 days.

and about not being online active members are (wel atleast i am) online every day. so within a max. of 2 day a descission will be made

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
NO thats not correct the constitution states (or will be stating) that every 'official' poll must be open for atleast 3 days.

Yes, and thats pretty good.

and about not being online active members are (wel atleast i am) online every day. so within a max. of 2 day a descission will be made

2 day discussion and how many days until the verdict comes out? One day? Then it would simply equal out to three days...

And also we have the issue of Party Politics we need to adress. I personally wouldnt want any one party controlling the court.

So far the court is not needed and will simply post more problems then needed.

[DeathByTheSword]

the verdict is the end of the discussion. (but that in my english sorry for the misunderstanding) i believe within 2 days there can be a verdict and a court hasnt been needed because WE HAVENT STARTED YET and i hope it will never be needed but it could always be handy and no parties in a court ofcource