Contitution Article: Poll Scheme

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Gilgamensch
I kind of agree, it was just that Pedrunn's BoR ..... contained in the header part IV, so I thought let's throw my thought's in to get something started (don't want to blame him.......)

Don't blame Pedrunn, blame me I insisted on keeping the BoR here once Pedrunn had brought it up. No use polluting the forums with a thread dedicated to 5 lines of Constitution text (that are fairly intertwined with Polling anyway)...

Talking about this, I recognised that we have three threads kind of handling the same stuff.......... Time to restart????????

Which three are those? We have 5 topped threads on different parts of the Constitution, but he can hardly lump all those together at this point, while almost every line is still undergoing fierce debate?

And for the minister positions: I didn't mentioned anything about the # of jobs

True, but the article on ministers will be a 2-parter: part 1 will deal with what ministers there are and what responsibilities they have while part 2 will deal with additional issues like chain of command, orders, etc (whatever is needed - hopefully we can keep it simple). IMHO part 1 should first be dealt with (at least in large outlines) before we look into part 2 in too much detail. Together with timing issues, that article is the last part of the constitution we still have to write, once that's done we can start the game. However, I for one don't have the time to discuss 5 constitution articles at once so I myself will wait until one or several other constitution articles are more or less finalized before giving any further thoughts on that subject. Feel free to start discussions on the issue yourself if you want (in the 'Government positions' or a new thread), but don't count on my feedback, at least no yet...

[H Tower]

the BOR hasn't been changed or challenged in more than a week, i think that it could be voted upon on whether it is good or not by the people right now. only i think that either locutus or pedrunn, the two major drafters of the consitution should do the poll. (I say pedrunn and locutus because they've done the most work on the entire connie IMO)

likewise, i'm hoping to see an updated article about polling soon

[Gilgamensch]

Yes, I agree with you H Tower.

the poll could have the option's (as in Pedrunn's one) Yes/No/abstain, meaning No, something has to be changed.

Otherwise we have an official part of connie

[Locutus]

Well, changes in one part of the Constitution can prompt changes in other parts, so personally I think we should poll all articles at the same time (but still 1 poll per article).

[Pedrunn]

Seconding Locutus

[Gilgamensch]

Locutus (and Pedrunn),

it is a bit contradictary what you are saying.

You are that changes in one part might make changes in the other, but still saying let's vote for all of them one-by-one?

So it would still mean, changes to be made.

But with the court active (I know different threat, but overlapping) they could help us decide it a bit more..........

[Locutus]

Yes, I agree that in theory that could create problems. But if changes in one article (that are necessary to get the article passed) really cause contradictions in other articles that have already been passed, we'll have to look at those changes very critically and see if it's possible to re-submit the passed articles (including necessary changes) for voting. However, we should aim to make the vote for the Constitution more than a formal one. If we throw the whole document together, most people will probably think 'whatever...' and agree with it regardless of it's contents. If it's cut in smaller pieces it might be easier to digest and vote properly...

(But I'm kind of hoping we're listening sufficiently to people's feedback now and using it in writing the Constitution, thus creating a lot of support for it already)

[Pedrunn]

I will try to show you an example.

We have the Poll Scheme and the Government changes articles.
Consider we vote for the poll scheme to be accepted but we are still working in the Government Changes.
Lets say we make a important change in this aticle that will reflect in the Poll Scheme in such a way that we will have to change it.
But how can we change it if we have already voted for it.

I hope you got what i mean

[Gilgamensch]

I know exactly what you mean. (both of you)

I said somewhere else, that I would like to have seen far more polls on the connie, avoiding the 'whatever' kind of poll.

It's just like with the court in place, we would have somebody as a first barrier, shielding of 'stupid' requests.........

If changes needs to be made, it could be done by the court and passed by us. Only as a thought..........

[Locutus]

The problems with too many polls is that it will take forever to get a full Constitution to pass and get this game to start. As much as I would like to poll not every article but every section (and even the subsections if needed), I think that would take too much time. We can change individual sections once the game has started IMHO, even though I'd rather do that in advance...

[H Tower]

I'm ok with posting just one poll, based on locutus' reasoning. It was a bit late last night when I started bumping threads to get people to start posting again

[Gilgamensch]

As Locutus pointed and as we are experiencing in the moment, we sometimes can't agree on simple things...........

[Pedrunn]

Originally posted by Pedrunn
IV. Amendments:
(...)
(e) If more than 2/3 of the voters votes in favour of the Law, at least 1/3 of all Citizens vote in the poll and the Court does not declare the poll invalid, the Ammendent is considered passed. All Citizens must from that time on obey it.

Why 2/3 and not 1/2?

I think the majority of the community is fine, dont you?

[H Tower]

i think 50% is good for making amendments. I also still think that the 50% of the population needed to vote should be taken away, the length of the poll should be long enough to allow all citizens to vote if they wish too.

another idea i've been thinking about after looking in the thread about when people come around is that polls need to be at least 4 days long, OR no three day poll may be made on a thursday, friday or saturday. This would give everyone two days to vote, even if they are not around on the weekend.

(I included thursday because some people's thursdays are really people's fridays)

[Gilgamensch]

I thought we 'agreed' on 50% of the votes with 1/3 of the # of citizens? Which I still back up.........

Having no minimum of voters in, might make it possible to pass something, which really no-one supports........

Although, could be changed afterwards, but that I think would create too much problems.

As pointed out somewhere else, we'll never have 2/3 agreeing on anything laterone


That was what I was thinking off, and looks like most people are here anyway during the weekdays........