Court: Informal: Is the Blood Truce with the Hive constitutional?

[Archaic]

Why not just the simple way that satisfies all requirements?

ie. The Truce was unconstitutional. We goad him into declaring war again through various threats (Maybe getting some bases of his from those in the bargain if we're lucky), and then he'll finally get pissed enough to declare war again. We got some concessions out of him via strong arm diplomacy, and the war back in the bargain. The DLP then shouts everyone to P4PSI. Yay.

[Drogue]

Did Yang offer peace to us, or did we ask for it? If it is the former, then it is constitutional, since you cannot poll for something you did not intend to do, therefore a quick poll at the time is the usual way of doing it. However, a plebiscite to ratify it would be appreciated. If however, it is the latter, then it is unconsitutional. To answer Herc's question, you do not need to poll to contact someone (however it has been done before) but you do need to poll if you intend to offer anything. I had always taken it that if offered something unexpected in turnchat, it is up to those present how to respond. Should the constitution be amended, so that a post-event poll is acceptable, for unforseen circumstances?

[GeneralTacticus]

We contacted the Hive, at Herc's suggestion, and he offered the deal, but he didn't come to us.

[Drogue]

In that case it is an unforseen circumstance. Since (unless I've missed something) it is constitutional to contact a faction, with the intention of purely information gathering, without polling, nobody did anything unconstitutional. He offered it, thus you reacted as best you could. I would still like a plebiscite to ratify it, but what else were you meant to do at the time?

[Maniac]

I think the judges should only judge about the following issue: which save file to use.
If it is the pre-contact save, the DFA should post a poll asking what our diplomatic stance with the Hive (and others) should be.
If we used the after-contact save, we just continue, but perhaps the DFA could organize a poll asking if we should surprise-attack the Hive after sixteen years.

[GeneralTacticus]

Is that how long it takes for Blood Truces to expire?

[Cedayon]

Originally posted by Maniac
I think the judges should only judge about the following issue: which save file to use.

That's easy, the most recent one. I don't think this is serious enough a fubar to consider breaking the no-playing aheard rules in an official capacity.

In the meantime, the DFA should post new policy polls so we don't have this "valid or no?" question popping up everytime we have to go by DFA orders.

[Maniac]

Yes, but as several people have argued, using the pre-contact save and thus ignoring the after-contact doesn't have to be seen as having played ahead. We are just deliberating whether to accept the truce or not.
Also, using the after-contact save would be unconstitutional as well, because Hercules asked to contact Yang. However he wasn't yet DFA, so that request was granted unconstitutionally.
So there aren't any conclusive legal arguments for each side. Instead we have to look what's best for our democracy. I think that would be using the pre-contact save and let the DFA poll whether to ask Yang a truce or not.

[Kassiopeia]

I concur with MWIA's position that returning to the earlier save would not be playing ahead.

Also I agree with GeneralTacticus; reverting to the old save file would not be against any role playing principle.

The high council had a force majeure situation in which they really had no other option but to make the two saves; I think that the HC handled the situation well. However, we should take a closer look at turnchat protocol and create a good, covering rule of any future instances where we make contact with other factions.

I'm a bit ambivalent, since I am leaning towards using the old save and posting a "war or no" poll, but on the other hand, this is indeed not a too big situation. A truce would allow us a little breather, and besides, I'm fairly sure Yang will break it anytime soon. In that sense, this truce could help us in bringing Yang's global reputation down (if that is possible any longer). Archaic's proposition of making Yang declare himself on us is slightly to the side of subterfuge, but a thought worth considering nonetheless. After all, we would be just demanding necessary reparations from Yang after such a sordid vendetta.

On the other hand, if we dismiss this situation as "not too important", we might in the future have similar situations with the same principle, except the ramifications might be much, much more wide in scale. In that sense, it would help if we set a sturdy applicable precedent here and now.

All in all, I think the best option would be to post a poll to ask the people if we should use the first save, and continue the war, or use the newer save, and have the truce. Edit - Maniac's proposal, "I think that would be using the pre-contact save and let the DFA poll whether to ask Yang a truce or not" is equally good. After all, the situation in the saves is similar only in the sense that there is and isn't a truce.

By the way, would it have been possible to check our relations to the Hive through the datalinks, or was it absolutely necessary to contact Yang? Also, I do think checking his relationship to us was a bit useless, since there were no late polls to decide on a possible policy change towards him, and we were in vendetta after all.

[Cedayon]

Yes, I see the point about it not being playing ahead, despite the foreknowledge of the diplomatic proceedings... we had no choice, as we could not safely save in the middle of the communication.

Clearly the democratic thing to do is have the DFA post a poll as to whether or not the people want this truce with Yang.

Whether this is the constitutional thing to do... well, I'm not sure if it's properly covered in the constitution... so I'll just be reading this large book that blocks my vision while the poll is posted ...

Someone let me know if there is a deciding provision in the constitution that I missed, though. Otherwise, it's time to consider an amendment regarding the validity of "old" polls and the proper course of action when something like this pops up in a turnchat.

[Hercules]

Right, there seems a consensus that a poll be posted by the DFA on this particular matter more or less forthwith.

[Method]

Re: Court: Informal: Is the Blood Truce with the Hive constitutional?

Originally posted by AdamTG02
The poll posted during Term III is no longer valid because it has been so long since it was posted.

just a question: how long ago does a poll have to have ended before it is considered "no longer valid"?

[Cedayon]

Re: Re: Court: Informal: Is the Blood Truce with the Hive constitutional?

Originally posted by TKG
just a question: how long ago does a poll have to have ended before it is considered "no longer valid"?

An excellent question. I don't see the answer in the constitution. Did I miss it, anyone?

[MrWhereItsAt]

No, I don't think you missed it. This is clearly a failing of the Constitution, thus we should go by our own decisions and feelings here and patch the thing later. This is not an issue addressed adequately by the Constitution and I hope the judges decide it is not covered well enough in the Con to be ruled upon.

In this situation we have to say "OK, we missed a circumstance. Let's decide on a course of action and keep the game moving, and when we are continuing, we can address an amendment proposal at our leisure."

[Cedayon]

I'm inclined to agree with MWIA: the constitution doesn't say whether the orders were "outdated" or not, since it has no provision to consider orders "outdated".

Had people been clamoring for a new poll on DFA orders over the past couple months, I might consider the polled-in-november-or-so orders invalid from the democratic point of view (which isn't really my job, but still)... but there hasn't really been such a demand (or did I miss it?).

It seems, thus, that there aren't really grounds to invalidate the orders which effectively mandate the acceptance of the blood truce offer from Yang.

Whether we should have initiated contact, well, that's a somewhat different matter. I'm not sure if the Con mentions who can/cannot call for initation of contact with another faction. And if it doesn't say, why are you bugging us?