Announcement

**MrWhereItsAt** · July 17, 2002, 16:26

Points 4 and 5 are not really handled by us at all. These are subjects within the domain of moderators, and whatever their ruling is, is at the foundation of all that we can legislate here. We do not need these clauses at all, since they are already taken care of no OT, no violation of 'Poly rules). As for the "redundant with pre-existing polls/threads" part, we cannot actually stop this from happening, merely inform the poll starter of where to find the earlier thread, and collectively ignore such a thread/poll if it refuses to die.

1, 2 and 3 are terrific. I wish I had thought of them so I could take the credit.

6 seems a little iffy to me... although unlikely, it legalizes the foundation and operation of a group designed solely to impede progress or overly criticize the Government etc. Perhaps we can leave this out, and make a ruling on a case-by-case basis if there is ever any issue with an organization here.

**Will 5001** · July 17, 2002, 17:18

Originally posted by Captain
Non-members should not be allowed to vote.

I totally agree non-members should NOT be allowed to influence votes

, well it isn't hard to join is it?!!

**Kloreep** · July 17, 2002, 18:53

Re: AMendment IV: BIll of RIghts

I'm only commenting on the clauses I disagree with. Those I leave out I give a

to.

Originally posted by civman2000
2. No one shall ever be restricted from any poll, unless after the poll it is found that non-members may have significantly altered the vote. In elections, this is only the case if the winner has under 55% support and the people vote to discard nonmember votes by a >50% vote.

IMO opinion, non-members should always not be be allowed to vote. And there definitely shouldn't be a post-election decision on whether or not to discount non-member votes this way; too much possibility of political maneuvering of the votes.

5. No one shall be denied the right to post an unofficial poll, unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.

As many others have said, this should be left open to case-by-case decisions. (Like gallup polls.)

6. THe right to associate into any form of organization shall not be denied.

I think this should also be left to case-by-case.

7. In the absence of any specific rule concerning a poll in the constitution, it is won by the option that wins the most votes. Thus, until an amendment is passed concerning a type of poll, those polls may be posted without any special rules about how the results determine our actions. However, if an amendment is passed that would change the results (say make it require 2/3 when it only got 60%) it may be repolled without the 3-week waiting period.

As others have said, this should be a seperate amendment.

**Harovan** · July 17, 2002, 18:59

What I don't understand at all is, Civman2000, wasn't it you, who founded this 3AC... (whatever) party, which was meant to be against a constitution, because it "sucks the fun out of the game like a leech"? If so, why do you now care so much about it?

**Togas** · July 17, 2002, 19:23

Re: AMendment IV: BIll of RIghts

I would prefer (but that's just me) to have broad, dramatic language in our Bill of Rights, and if necessary, we could later define the specifics. But ignore me if you disagree.

For example:

No person shall be denied the right to become a citizen of Apolytonia.

No citizen shall ever be denied the right to vote in any poll.

The right of free speech, in all it's form, shall not be unreasonably restricted or denied to all citizens of Apolytonia.

The right of all citizens to associate and organize shall not be infringed upon.

No citizen may be denied to right to participate in this game without due process.

etc.

--Togas

**Ninot** · July 17, 2002, 19:27

Togas is right. We should have some fun with the bill, make it dramatic and such.

But, we can't leave out TOO many specifics, thats how we ended up with a loophole that almost got you a co-presidency

**MrWhereItsAt** · July 17, 2002, 19:54

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
What I don't understand at all is, Civman2000, wasn't it you, who founded this 3AC... (whatever) party, which was meant to be against a constitution, because it "sucks the fun out of the game like a leech"? If so, why do you now care so much about it?

I can't officially speak for civman here, but as I was a cofounder of the AAAC in the Civ2 game and also in the 3A2C3 here, I feel qualified to say that, since our anti-Constitutional views are meaningless now, we must adapt to suit our environment. Therefore, since we have a Constitution, we must make it say exactly what it needs to say.

The Constitution, IMO, leads to confusion, and I thinklooking at almost any thread will provide evidence of such. Thus, the Constitution must be made the least confusing possible.

**Switch** · July 17, 2002, 23:41

I too like Togas' idea. Let's make this interesting, and fun. But the idea also allows for more case-by-case judging, and loosens the handcuffs compared to the original suggested bill.

All in all, though, I think this bill is necessary to avoid confusion.

**Togas** · July 17, 2002, 23:43

Originally posted by Ninot
Togas is right.

Hey, Ninot! Can I put this in my sig file?

--Togas

**Robber Baron** · July 17, 2002, 23:51

I support Togas' language -- and I actually like the fact that it is broad and abstract. State the principles; let judges work out applications.

Some modest editing:

No person shall be denied the right to become a citizen of Apolytonia.

No citizen shall without due process be denied to right to participate in this game

No citizen shall be denied the right to vote in any poll.

The right of free speech, in all its forms, shall not be unreasonably restricted or denied to any citizen of Apolytonia.

The right of citizens to associate and organize shall not be infringed upon.

**Captain** · July 17, 2002, 23:56

Re: Re: AMendment IV: BIll of RIghts

I like this version, but with one modification and a re-ordering:

Originally posted by Togas

No person shall be denied the right to become a citizen of Apolytonia.

No citizen may be denied to right to participate in this game, including voting in unregistered polls, without due process.

The right of free speech, in all it's form, shall not be unreasonably restricted or denied to all citizens of Apolytonia.

The right of all citizens to associate and organize shall not be infringed upon.

By unregistered poll, I mean all other polls besides an official poll whereby previous registration (provided by signing up on the topped member list) is required for your votes to count. (Albeit a small danger, this prevents unethical "recruiting" of "ringers" after a poll has been posted. Therefore, if you didn't join/register before a registered poll was created, you are not elgible to vote on that.)

Well, that was a long explanation, but maybe someon can help refine it.

**Captain** · July 17, 2002, 23:59

oops, missed RB's version, that's good too.

**Kramerman** · July 18, 2002, 00:31

Im just now geeting a chance to check out this proposed bill. I would love to give my assistance in any way I can... Im sure you will be hearing alot from me very soon.

Kman

We need a right to bear arms... I don't want the king of England coming in here and pushing me around. I'll cap his ass

**Ninot** · July 18, 2002, 00:37

Originally posted by Togas

Hey, Ninot! Can I put this in my sig file?

--Togas

lol, sure have fun with it.

**civman2000** · July 18, 2002, 08:56

I like Togas's vversion, I suppose that unofficial polls could fall under "free speech"

.

Clause to add due to patch discussion:

No president shall ever use a version of the game which is not available to all players.

If this gets included, that would mean you should not get 1.29 if you plan on running for president in the next 2 months.

Announcement

AMendment IV: BIll of RIghts

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment