The Court

[Pedrunn]

Each Judge serves a three month term of office.

Shouldnt we be talking in term istead of time?

Still we need to dicuss how fast the game will go.

[Locutus]

Well, I copied the other DGs for the time being, to keep things simple. Tthings like that can always be changed of course. Nothing's final yet...

[mapfi]

Ok, you're making sense, Loc... (and I don't have time to argue)

[RunsWithDwarf]

Hey! I got aquestion, or two.

First, Why does the President "HAVE" to do what the Ministers tell him to? Aren't they there in essence to advise him on what to do, and then based on their reports make his final decisions? After all as Locutus stated earlier citing some of the examples of reasons courts were needed, I believe one of the cases involved a conflict of orders among ministers as to what to build, These are exactly the types of decisions that make or break leaders and is usually the biggest reason they run for the position to begin with to lead thier nation into a brighter future, They would all like to be immortalized in history for something positive I'm sure, and these are the same kinds of decisions that make news, that affect their popularity rating in the polls and so forth I mean I could forsee a few possible scenarios where the President might have to override their orders and not neccessarily have time to apply to the courts for a decision albeit without stopping the game, if you keep the game running it gives you grounds for litigation and a reason for the courts perhaps some citizen or citizens felt he made a bad choice, and want to file a motion with the justice citing their grieviences, could be a short presidency if he's found to ultimately responsable, or a new law is passed that drastically reduces this ability.
Second, why can't you appeal? Isn't that what the Supreme Court justice is there for to repeal unfair decisions? or to turn over lower court decisions? or to cast a deciding decision in the case the lower courts are deadlocked? or to agree with the lower courts reccomendation if the judge feels its fair or warrented? I mean this way it keeps the lower courts busy as well so your supreme court justice would not tow the majority of the proverbial line, I don't know, this is a tough one to chew on as well.

[Pedrunn]

What about an section about the Court possible punishments.
Something like (It works just like soccer):

5. Punishments
(a) The first time a citzen makes problem (s)he gets a yellow card and at the second problem (s)he causes in less than two weeks after receiveing a yellow card (s)he receives a red card. If he has done somthing really bad it gets a red card automacly. The size of the problem is decide by the Court.
(b) Yellow Card - The citizen receives a warning.
(c) Red Card - The citzen can no longer post in the CTP2DG thread for one week and cant run for a government position in the next term. If it is a officer in a government position (s)he is impeached.
(d) The Court will keep a criminal record for those who have a yellow card until the time of two weeks end. And will keep the record on those with red card until the end of the game.

What you guys think? Is this just xtra stuff and we should give the Court the power of deciding the punishment?

[J Bytheway]

We can get a yellow car? Cool! What make?

[Pedrunn]

Why does the President "HAVE" to do what the Ministers tell him to?

The DG games works differently from the real-life western democracy. The minister do actually have an executive powe bigger than the president. Since the idea is to divide the tasks among these minister so that the interaction between governors and citzens is more evidenced. And among a dicussion between them not all tasks have to stop since if only one encharge he would have the attetion too much divided. Thats what i think though.
We could change the name "minister of" by "commander of" or "leader of". Exacly what is being discussed here How shall we call our government
Note: Has been days since nobody post hexacly beacuse the nam "Minister of" is already being used by all. So the discussion seemed to be restricted to the President name.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

WE ALL LIVE IN A YELLOW CAHAHAR

[Frozzy]

I think we should have a jury of all non-affected ministers to call the punishments.

[Frozzy]

Actually, I think all non-serious cases go through the non-Supreme judges, with the Presiding Judge calling the punishments. All serious cases (i.e. President breaking the constitution) go via the Supreme Judge, and the jury being elected as above.

[J Bytheway]

So the judges make the verdict and the jury chooses the punishment? Is it just me,or is this a strange reversal of roles...

Punishments are likely to be a tough subject to get right, IMO.

[Frozzy]

But the ministers have worked closely with the accused (saying it is a minister) and know if he is worthy of a harsh punishment,or a light one.

The judge makes the verdict as he can make view all possible evidence for and against

[RunsWithDwarf]

J, you can get those cars right here in America, and not only can you get them, but Americans will pay you to drive them.
We call them taxi's

[Frozzy]

I think we need to establish something basic. i.e. stop the President becoming Judge, Jury and Excecutioner.

[RunsWithDwarf]

I agree! We should separate those three powers.
which one do you propose he should keep?