The court should be able to change the amendments without the people, except for very major things.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Retry: Amendment III
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Spiffor
UberKrux : although I'm in favour of unlimited terms, we have to abide with the poll. It was a grouping poll, and a majority wanted limitations to some extent (the majority within this majority wanted 2 terms in a row).
Trip doesn't always have a perfect behaviour when he writes amendments, but this time, he has done this work very democratically."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card
Comment
-
Originally posted by skywalker
Spiffor is not the same person as tass
im going to get some breakfast/lunch before the turnchat, so see everyone there."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card
Comment
-
Originally posted by civman2000
Running for multiple postions was allowed in the civ2 game and there were no problems. I doubt that it would happen very often anyways. If someone wins 2 they just drop one and let the runner up have it. I think we should limit it to at most 2 positions at a time thoughLast edited by Jon Shafer; July 14, 2002, 18:08.
Comment
-
I'm still thinking over the two-in-row term limit...
The only reason I can think of for it is to force the people to bring in new blood occassionally. But do we really want to force a popular official out of their chosen office for a term so frequently?
Perhaps it should be three or four terms in a row. However, I think there should be a limit to how many terms in a row someone can hold an office to make sure other candidates have a chance to prove themselves.
Comment
-
Kloreep, UberKrux :
The only way to avoid term limits would be to post a new poll about this. However, the previous poll must be at least 3 weeks old so that the repoll is valid.
For the same reason, this here amendment won't be polled in next 3 weeks, because itwould be an unconstitutional repoll."I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
"I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
"I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- Dis
Comment
-
But, if we introduce and pass a new amendment that cuts the repoll time to 2 weeks or less and make it retroactive...
However, this is just sort of a legal loophole and isn't in the spirit of the law. Plus, I approve of the 2 consecutive term limit. You can always run for some other office Uber in the interim, maybe you'd like being President... or FAM for a monthProud Citizen of the Civ 3 Demo Game
Retired Justice of the Court, Staff member of the War Academy, Staff member of the Machiavelli Institute
Join the Civ 3 Demo Game $Mini-Game! ~ Play the Civ 3 Demo Game $Mini-Game!
Voici mon secret. Il est très simple: on ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.
Comment
-
I think we can all agree this amendment not passing before election time may lead to a very interesting situation.
Either way, I still think the sooner we can get these kinds of things on the books the better. There's only a problem if someone complains. And why would they? The amendment is simply fixing things that were wrong, not trying to overrule a previous decision.
Comment
Comment