16-06-2002 06:15									#61
	Remove this text

panag - i think that the participants are already a senate of sort.

	16-06-2002 06:15									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Sirotnikov :
So far, the responsibility over polling goes to the vice president, which hasn't much to do otherwise... You may have a point when saying a "supreme court" or something should be lected, but I guess it would need yet another poll... ugh. Could we wait some time before making yet another constitution poll ? (the more I think of it, the more I regret to have rushed my amendment poll)

	16-06-2002 06:17									#63
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov I actually do think that we should have some sort of a body which will regulate the govt. Perhaps a "supreme court" is a better title. Let's say 3-5 people who are elected once per month, who have the power to "administrate" this democracy. I think it's unreasonable that the executive branch, will be responsible for handling things like elections and polls and so forth.

hi ,

ones a month , , to fast , by the time the senators have learned their stuff , its to late , ...

3 , to little , 7 a max , 5 to start with , ....

admin , yes , but when lets say people call for impeachment of the president , his vice , and half of the cabinet post's , then the senate should check , is this just because an evil campain is mounted versus some people , ....and so on

what happens if this or that official take s this or that decision , but the people impeach him / her , before the big plan is revealled , ....



and of course the senate will have to watch the president that he does not smoke to much cigars , ....

have a nice day

	16-06-2002 06:19									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov panag - i think that the participants are already a senate of sort.

hi ,

allas , who else is in , ......

the big nice Cat is , the Rat also , so who else , ...

maybe Dal should be here , ....

have a nice day

	16-06-2002 06:21									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Keep it as a Senate. Courts are so... modern in concept.

They also denote a willingness to fly completely in the face of the will of the people.

The Senate threads can accomodate everyone, and their POVs, even if official status as senators is limited to a smaller number.

	16-06-2002 06:25									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Keep it as a Senate. Courts are so... modern in concept. They also denote a willingness to fly completely in the face of the will of the people. The Senate threads can accomodate everyone, and their POVs, even if official status as senators is limited to a smaller number.

hi ,

and most senators went to law school so , we can act also as a body with what the president can consult , if for one or the other reason , he can not , or does not want to consult the other members of the government , ..

the senate would be a neutral body , ....in the intrest of the people , ....

have a nice day

	16-06-2002 06:25									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

NYE :
I still don't get the use of having the official status of senator limited to a smaller number. Could you explain me what purpose it would serve, please ?

	16-06-2002 06:27									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov I actually do think that we should have some sort of a body which will regulate the govt. Perhaps a "supreme court" is a better title. Let's say 3-5 people who are elected once per month, who have the power to "administrate" this democracy. I think it's unreasonable that the executive branch, will be responsible for handling things like elections and polls and so forth.

That's a far better idea, in my opinion.
They would have to handle the administrative questions which may arise along the way, based upon the constitution.
To the effect of reducing corruption in the elective processes
( ballot stuffers, spam, etc. )
Giving them a duty to prosecute corrupt state officials, cancel illegal votings and... yeah, legal-stuff mostly.

	16-06-2002 06:28									#69
	Inflate your Upload Space

Spiffor.

From Siro's and your posts about a need from time to time for an elected body, other than the Executive.

	16-06-2002 06:30									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Siro: once again, a waste of time that just clutters everything up.

NYE: lol, i would support the people doing everything directly if total mayhem wasnt the result ! I mean an elitist body separate from the cabinet, which has alswyas been a part of demo games and everyone accepts. I would be impossible to run anything without some official positions like that.

	16-06-2002 06:31									#71
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Ah yes. Elitist bad, if it ain't you.

	16-06-2002 06:37									#72
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Supreme Court, Senate... tomato, tomatoe...

Except it should be part of the function of a democratic Senate to invite all citizens into all discussions so that they may be heard. I don't know of many courts that function this way. The only question is whether to limit voting rignts in the body to a limited number.

	16-06-2002 06:37									#73
	Got spare money?

I think that everyone are senators.

I think that if there is a malicious campaign, then it won't get enough votes.


Speaking of which - we need to set a regular time limit for such polls of impeachment and elections, which will always serve.

If I start a 1 day long poll to impeach the president and get all my friends to vote in it, then it'll have a majority.


Also, we have to decide is a majority a regular majority (of the voters) or the majority of the total number of players?

Also, how do we prevent non-players from voting and skewing results?

	16-06-2002 06:44									#74
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov I think that everyone are senators. I think that if there is a malicious campaign, then it won't get enough votes. Speaking of which - we need to set a regular time limit for such polls of impeachment and elections, which will always serve. If I start a 1 day long poll to impeach the president and get all my friends to vote in it, then it'll have a majority. Also, we have to decide is a majority a regular majority (of the voters) or the majority of the total number of players? Also, how do we prevent non-players from voting and skewing results?

All senators? OK. We all vote on these issues.

Time Limits? 7 days is probably too long, and 1 definitely too short. What about 5?

Majorities... For non constitutional issues it should be a simple majority of votes cast.

For constitutional issues, it should be a majority of a quorum. Quorum? 50%, 60%, 70%???

No way to limit votes. Any registered member of Poly is a citizen. Only registered members of Poly can vote in polls. It works. We have to rely on the Gods Ming and Mark to protect us from the evil spirits known as DLs.

/Edited for clarity and to add 50% to the options for quorum.

	16-06-2002 06:47									#75
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I am agaisnt a senate, here is why:

1: We are making a Demo game.. not a Republic game. A senate is a tool of a republic, where the nation needs representatives, because the MILLIONS of people can not gather at once, and all vote, on every issue.

2: We are only 100 or so.. and i dont think we will grow that much larger. Having votes of 100 people on every issue isnt that outrageous. Also, allowing everyone to vote on issues is a tool of Democracies....

And, well, its not like the US system, where the senate votes on things cuz not everyone can live in Washington. We have a VERY accesible and convenient form of gathering, that would allow for votes from all of the citizens of the nation.

So a Senate would be nothing more than an excessive layer of government, and a way to keep people feeling important and elite... That we do not need.

	16-06-2002 06:49									#76
	Get a bigger avatar today!

now i understand. Essentially the senate is a body to make polls with official results that no cabinet member will support ot make it foocial. In that case, I'm all for it! I never liekd the idea of only ministers being able to make official polls. As long as people dont jsut post polls and call them official and instead the senate has debated a little, it should work fine!

	16-06-2002 06:51									#77
	Put an end to popups!

Still, I don't liek the idea of making it anything official...maybe make the "Citizens' Debate Thread"?

	16-06-2002 06:52									#78
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Ninot,

Senate does not mean US style senate. Think Rome, or revolutionary France.

If direct is good, and we are small enough for direct democracy, then why ministers? The only reason to limit voting rights in the senate, not polls, would be if a more commited, better informed, and/or readily available group were needed in rare cases of disagreement between the govt and the constitution.

	16-06-2002 09:40									#79
	Inflate your Upload Space

Okay, let me lay things down here more clearly. The reason an elected Senate is formed, is because there are too many people to represent in the government. This is clearly not the case, and thus is not necassary. There are nearly as many senators in the entire USA as there are citizens in our game. Clearly, our population is not too large to run things as it is.

	16-06-2002 09:50									#80
	Put an end to popups!

Why are there ministers?

	16-06-2002 10:10									#81
	Remove this text

Ministers do not represent the people - rather they represent the current chosen leaders.

A Senate Court should represent the people's interests against the government, which can't always explain it's immediate motives.

Also, a Senate Court should act as a judge between the government and the people. And it's a non executive official body.

	16-06-2002 16:56									#82
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Why are there ministers?

Ministers are the executive power. It means doing many menial jobs, with a limited margin of decision. If you take the example of the minister of trade (my post), its concern is to haggle the best possible deal. I don't see myself posting a poll saying "will you trade literacy for 3 gpt + territory map, or for 5 gpt ?". I don't see Eli posting a poll "Would you prefer a road at 51.25 or at 51.26 ?". These menial decisions have to be made by a few people to have at least some efficiency.


Except if breaking the rule becomes a permanent issue in our DemoGame, I don't imagine 30 polls per day saying "is this decision unconstitutional ?". Such polls should arise once in a while, where everybody should be able to vote.

NYE : what I feel awkward about is that you seem to confuse the role of a senate (representing the interests of the people) and the role of a "rules-authority", whatever its name (supreme court, polling commission etc.).
A "rules-authority" shouldn't represent the interests of the people. It should work for the sake of the rule itself. It's possible to think (as I do) that a "rules-authority" has no relevance, and that the interest of the people is the most important value. Then, it would mean the people would have to judge themselves if the government is breaking the rules. I still don't understand why we'd need another layer of bureaucracy for this.

Again, as opposite to day-to-day decisions, which are the lot of the ministers, the problems involving breaking the rules will happen not so often. It's perfectly reasonable to think that everyone can state his own opinion then.

	16-06-2002 18:20									#83
	Increase Your PM Length

hi ,

, a senate court , .....
allas , the senate should be formed , ...

have a nice day

	16-06-2002 18:23									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Ninot, Senate does not mean US style senate. Think Rome, or revolutionary France. If direct is good, and we are small enough for direct democracy, then why ministers? The only reason to limit voting rights in the senate, not polls, would be if a more commited, better informed, and/or readily available group were needed in rare cases of disagreement between the govt and the constitution.

hi ,

agreed , and the senate should serve as a body , that would act when called upon by the government , to settle things by minister's , and to listen to the president when he needs to talk to a neutral group , ...

have a nice day

	17-06-2002 02:43									#85
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor Ministers are the executive power. It means doing many menial jobs, with a limited margin of decision. If you take the example of the minister of trade (my post), its concern is to haggle the best possible deal. I don't see myself posting a poll saying "will you trade literacy for 3 gpt + territory map, or for 5 gpt ?". I don't see Eli posting a poll "Would you prefer a road at 51.25 or at 51.26 ?". These menial decisions have to be made by a few people to have at least some efficiency.

Why doesn't the President do all this?

quote: Except if breaking the rule becomes a permanent issue in our DemoGame, I don't imagine 30 polls per day saying "is this decision unconstitutional ?". Such polls should arise once in a while, where everybody should be able to vote.

The role of the Senate or a Court would be to decide disputes about the results of a poll in rare cases. Would you prefer to have another poll to decide such questions, and then another...?

quote: NYE : what I feel awkward about is that you seem to confuse the role of a senate (representing the interests of the people) and the role of a "rules-authority", whatever its name (supreme court, polling commission etc.). A "rules-authority" shouldn't represent the interests of the people. It should work for the sake of the rule itself. It's possible to think (as I do) that a "rules-authority" has no relevance, and that the interest of the people is the most important value. Then, it would mean the people would have to judge themselves if the government is breaking the rules. I still don't understand why we'd need another layer of bureaucracy for this. Again, as opposite to day-to-day decisions, which are the lot of the ministers, the problems involving breaking the rules will happen not so often. It's perfectly reasonable to think that everyone can state his own opinion then.

Well. I don't see why the Senate can't do both. Provide a forum for public discussion for everyone, and have 3 or 5 or 7 senators who would decide disputes when and if they occur. Disputes will occur at some time or other. We could have ugly public floggings of each other, or we could have a mechanism for deciding things in an efficient and civil fashion. Right now, we have flogging each other publically.