Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Constitional Congress discussion continued

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Constitional Congress discussion continued

    OK. I could put this up for approval. I think a poll on this should receive 67% yes counting no and abstain. If abstains are ignored for that vote, the whole thing could be a non starter and hence a waste of time.

    Let me know what you think. Prior discussion can be found here

    ---

    Constitutional Convention: Enabling Act

    The Code of Laws will be rewritten by a select committee who will return to us with a completed document(s) once they are finished. They may return to stage quick, unofficial polls to guide them in the meantime if they feel a question warrants it.

    The select committee will consist of 4 people. They will come to some form of agreement among themselves before they return. That means that at least 3 of them will agree that they are finished before they return to present the finished document(s).

    The members of the select committee will be nominated by 2 other citizens of Apolytonia and must themselves be citizens of Apolytonia. A person is a citizen of Apolytonia for the purposes of this nomination process if their user name appears on the citizen list as of the beginning of the nomination process (the opening of the thread).

    A thread will be opened for the purposes of these nominations. It will be maintained by the opener by updating the initial post with information regarding various nominations in progress. The thread will be open for nominations for no less than 7 days and no days beyond that once 4 nominees are obtained. In other words, it will be open for 7 days or as long as it takes to get 4 nominees. The nominee must accept the nomination by posting in the thread for that nomination to be final.

    If more than 4 people are nominated prior to the end of 7 days, then all nominees will stand for public selection in a multiple choice poll. Those 4 nominees with the highest number of votes for them will form the select committee. In the event of a tie for a given total, the nominee(s) who accepted their nomination(s) at the earlier date and time will be deemed to have won and will go on to the select committee.

    The current Code of Laws will be replaced with a Constitution with high standards for amendment. It will include general organization of the state and general principles of good government for us to hold dear as well as other elements the select committee deem warranted. The Constitution will be the supreme law of Apolytonia.

    The Code of Laws will continue as a junior, and specific body of laws. Repeal of old laws and passage of new laws will be possible with lower standards of agreement. The intent is that laws would be relatively easy to pass and repeal as the situation warrants and that current circumstances are best served by laws which are easier to implement and change. Any law will have to abide by the principles of the Constitution to remain valid.

    The completed document(s) will be posted for public discussion and may possibly be amended by the select committee prior to being put to a vote. The discussion of the new document(s) will last no less than 7 days.

    Once discussion is completed, the completed document(s) will be put to public vote in a poll(s). That vote will last 7 days. There shall be no other options than yes or no. It may be desired by the members of the select committee to put more than 1 poll into effect. For instance, there may be one poll for the main body of the Constitution and 1 extra for each original amendment if they decide that would be a better way to present the matter. Additionally, there may a single poll (or more) for the acceptance of a new code of laws. 67 percent of the voters must approve of any Constitutional item by voting yes before that item will be be passed. The percentage approval for the Code of Laws should be defined by the new Constitution. If the main body of the Constitution is not passed then no other items from this process are passed either.

    Should this project be successfully concluded, the new Constitution may then stand in it's own right. It will contain a statement near the beginning that it has amended the prior Code of Laws in it's entirety.

    All significant clauses of the original Code of Laws and it's amendments should be addressed and included in the new Constitution, it's amendments and any accompanying Code of Laws.

    /Edit. My spelling sucks. Someone proof read that for me will ya?
    Last edited by notyoueither; August 12, 2002, 03:02.
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.

  • #2
    Good job, nye.

    EDIT/ 1bigcommunity has just started such a procedure yesterday for the same reason for their DG that is just starting up. I made similar points there like you have made here.

    I would encourage each separate amendment be voted on independently of the Constitution.

    Comment


    • #3
      hmmm...i'm not sure. How will the committee be chosen? I have no doubt there will be far more than 4 people than get nominated, and it would be unfair to just pick the first four because they were the first online to accept their nominations.

      Comment


      • #4
        civman that's in there. If there are more than 4 people selected, then there is a multiple choice poll between all the nominees, four highest go on. And if there's a tie there-- are you sure it's accept nominations first? I think he means nominated first.


        I like it

        Comment


        • #5
          oops, missed that. How long will the poll last? 5 days?

          Comment


          • #6
            This is a very safe and legal way to go about changing our Code of Laws or Constitution or whatever people prefer calling it. I am in support.

            I just have one question ... why only four people? I'm not saying I'm in favor of more (a smaller group is more efficient), I'm just curious why that number was chosen. I guarantee you that we'll have a lot more than four wanting to be included in this.

            --Togas
            Greatest Moments in ISDG chat:"(12/02/2003) <notyoueither> the moon is blue. hell is cold. quote me, but i agree with ET. "
            Member of the Mercenary Team in the Civ 4 Team Democracy Game.
            Former Consul for the Apolyton C3C Intersite Tournament Team.
            Heir to the lost throne of Spain of the Roleplay Team in the PTW Democracy Multiplayer Team Game.

            Comment


            • #7
              reminds me of a "Royal Commission" or a focus group. I'm sure other people could draw up their own version of the Constitution and COL, and PM it to the group, and hopefully they'd consider it if it has merit.
              Proud 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


              • #8
                Four people is good because it means that if there is a tie on an issue, someone needs to be persuaded to switch, and compromise. If we had five people, no compromises, one side just wins. And yes, four is a nice small number.

                Comment


                • #9
                  the commission should probably have a look at Phoenatica's structure too, could get some good ideas and see where they encountered problems.

                  I'm in support of the idea of the Convention even if many people are upset they don't get onto it. the benefits seem to outweigh the negs.
                  Proud 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


                  • #10
                    I like this idea. At the very least it will be a good framework, and will jumpstart the new constitution; at the most, it will only need to be tweaked a little by the public before being quickly passed.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Interesting. I have no objections.
                      If you're interested in participating in the first Civ 5 Community Game then please visit: http://www.weplayciv.com/forums/forum.php

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I set it on accepts nomination, because that would be when the nomination is final. It could easily be the date and time of the first nominating post though. People could help by expressing their preference(s) on this and other questions in replies in this thread.

                        How long the poll? Oh, darn. Good catch civman. I'm of the opinion that any poll involving the Constitution should run 7 days. That way all of our citizens are given an opportunity to express themselves when they drop by in their weekly schedules.

                        The number 4? Well, it's even, so that forces consensus and hopefully makes the final document(s) more likely to be accepted. It could be 6. Many more and the process likely starts to bog down due to scheduling, etc.

                        I think 4 is a nice, managable number. They should of course solicit and accept input from other interested parties.
                        (\__/)
                        (='.'=)
                        (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I think 6 would be better. 4 means that all decisions are either 3-1 or unanimous, but I think it is important that there are more "shades" to the decisions. In the US SUpreme Court, it has a different meaning if a decision is 9-0, 8-1, 7-2, 6-3, or 5-4. Although we do not need that many shades, I think we need more than just 2 and 6 provides 3 while not being a huge amount of people.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Well how do you want them to organize? If there's 4 of them, they could likely chat on occasions. If there's 6, they will have nothing more than the ability to send suggestions to eachother, until people finally agreeing to things to make things simpler.

                            There are five justices. How long do you think it takes for all of them to read one message from the other?
                            4 is better... 6 is worse..

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I have to say that a lot of people have expressed a preference for reworking our Laws, and this seems the best way proposed to do so .

                              I like what I read so far, including having only 4 Committee members - they are there not to make decisiions for themselves, but to listen to what everyone says; disagreements should be rare, and there can always be a poll. Never lose sight of the aim to rework the Constitution to suit the people of Apolytonia - not just yourself.

                              Seven days sounds fine for both nominations and confirmations via voting.
                              Consul.

                              Back to the ROOTS of addiction. My first missed poll!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X