Discussion on the Constitution

[Method]

where's miggio?

[Martin Gühmann]

Of course we can still talk about it if it should be 7,8,9 or 10, but it should be something like that. I think we could use the mean of unofficial polls, to get to know the exact number. That would be also a good idea for the other stuff, so that we can put it into one big amandment.

Another point is the length of that amendment poll:

(f) Amendment polls shall expire in five days and the citizen who started the poll must include the expiring day in its first post.

From my point of view the five day period is just a suggestion, because there is the word "shall" and not "must". (According to my grammers book) The advantage would be to leave it open for more then five days is that it would allow more people to vote for and we votes. Even if I must admit that the suggested five day period should be long enough, if we would have enough regulars here.

-Martin

[Method]

but the part about multi-choice ammendments is really the crucial part. also, IMO, we shouldn't restrict them to yes/no either. see this thread. in the case of #8, for example.

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by TKG
but the part about multi-choice ammendments is really the crucial part. also, IMO, we shouldn't restrict them to yes/no either. see this thread. in the case of #8, for example.

In the current situation you can do it as an unofficial poll to ask the people what is the best combination for the amendment. We had such a multi-bit chioce poll in the CTP2 DG, our problem was our to deal with "incorrect" votes like voting for ebery option. But after further consideration the problem could be solved if we see giving the vote to No and Yes to proposal no. 5 for instance as abstain concerning proposal 5 also no votes for both options should be considered as abstain. That needs to be written into the constition. So that it is clear how the result should be interpreted, if someone do such a thing on purpose or by accident.

-Martin

[TheBirdMan]

I think that this § is slowing the game. And I think Martin wrote the same in his post 31. march.

Article IV, 2 e
Official polls must be open a minimum of 2 days and a maximum of 7 days. this must be stated in the first post. The same officer who started it must include this information in the first post.

I say, that if the members want to have influence on the game, then they should visit the forum as regular as possible.

Change the polls to be open a minimum of 36 hours and a maximum of 72 hours!

[Method]

IMO, 36 hours is too short for a poll (that and polls only allow you to put in how many days they should be open for, not hours) and 72 is too short for a maximum. though 7 days is way too long for a maximum length, i think we can trust our officials not to make ridiculously long polls.

[TheBirdMan]

No, 36 to 72 hours are not too short. In my opinion. If people are given a looooong time to respond, then someone is just asking for a slow game.

[checkMate]

I guess it doesn't bother anybody that we have an unconstitutional court at the moment.

[Frozzy]

I like TKG's suggestion, and since no one has any qualms about the term starting on the 1st, it works.

If you really are worried file a case in the topped thread

[TheBirdMan]

I might - course I DO mean what I write. People tend to use ALL the time they are allowed to use ...... plus a little more.

[Method]

*bump*

would anyone like to add anything? otherwise i'll just put this poll.

[checkMate]

Well now the 10th came and went as well.

[Method]

just hold on! nominations start on the 15th. elections start on the 25th. new government begins on the 1st.

[checkMate]

I guess I missed something, sorry?

[Method]

was that not another reminder for nominations?