 |
Who should be our next President?
This poll is closed. |
| Trip (UFC) |
   |
73 |
48.99% |
| Ninot (DIA) |
   |
76 |
51.01% |
| Total: |
149 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Kramerman
|
 |
UT, Austin - The live music capital of the world
Jun 2002 time: 23:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Aro
Kman,
Very good posts. If I'm not wrong, in many democracies confidential issues and the 'need to see' are in the constitution or in the code of laws (in my country, for exemple), but only if the correct judicial process runs. We will need to define this (correct judicial process), of course.
It's a exceptional case and certainly, in our little and beatiful jungle country, will not happen very much, I hope so.
Oh no! Will we need lawyers???? 
BTW, when we will restart the game? |
As we speak, on another thread a Judicial branch ammendment is being developed by us citizenry. Hopefully it won't be too long before we have a court up and running, but I can say it probably won't be anytime soon enough to solve this problem.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
YuMMz
|
|
Wow, I am out of town for a couple days and all hell breaks loose. Took me forever to read through all 12 pages ;P. Firstly I am against 2 presidents (unfortunately voted prematurely for approving and the more I thought about it the less I liked my vote not counting), Secondly The court idea is a must, it would help resolve alot of these issues. I hope to see a good solution soon, have not had a chance to read Timeline's court thread thats next on my agenda. I am glad that we had alot of people stick to their guns *against* the 2 presidents decision and I hope this gets resolved.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
wervdon
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Trip
To avoid further chaos and confusion, I hereby officially concede defeat, and allow Ninot the full position of President. I had not anticipated such problems, and therefore, he who reaps the wind must harvest the whirlwind. |
I appreciate what your trying to do, and I think its currently a valid choice, but in the long run I think it should be made impossible for the winner of an election to concede defeat resulting in the loser winning. It doesnt look like you'll win this anyways (but it could change), but I dont like the idea of a possible future scenario where someone takes office with only a small fraction of the vote because the more popular guy stepped down at the last minute. In those situations, I think it should result in a "invalid poll" (since one of the options on it was no longer an option) and a revote. In any case, its just something else to address in our election reform ammendment 
Oh and if I didn't say it before Trip, I also appreciate what you and Ninot tried to do by settling this, I didn't agree with it, but I know you both had the best of intentions.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|