18-10-2002 00:35									#1
	Poll -- Would you Ratify the New Con? Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

First off, we have been made aware of a grammar error and an ambigious phrase or two in Art I that are going to be fixed. There may be a few minor clarifications as well.

This poll is asking if you would ratify the New Constitution as it is currently written (with minor fixes that do not affect content).

If you would not ratify it, we need to know why. Please post below.

This poll is unofficial, but very useful to those of us on the Constitution Convention.

This poll will last 3 days.

--Togas, Secretary of the C.C.

	18-10-2002 00:53									#2
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I'm strongly in support of the Con Con in its current form.

As Togas has pointed out, there are clearly one or two minor fixes (that perserve the original intent and powers) to be made, but that can be delt with by the Con Con. Besides that, can we just let the thing go through? Personally, I understand that not everyone agrees on everything, but I think it's a solid document that addresses most concerns, and we CAN'T put out something that everyone'll like. No way it'll happen . As such, we've gotta ask you to understand that each of us have made compromises in writing this document and you may have to consider others points and the eventual affect on the game as well, in deciding if a given issue is worth striking the whole Constitution for.

Everyone, please do consider and vote wisely on this poll -- this will affect the Con Con's course of action, and its important we have a solid feeling for the public's thoughts before we see where we're going to go.

-- adaMada

EDIT: OPD/MWIA, can we get this topped?

Last edited by adaMada on 18-10-2002 at 01:04

	18-10-2002 02:09									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I look at this issue from a perspective of an unelected official who was selected by a minister with the onset of his tenure in office. I have come to the conclusion that under the current CoL, I have no power what-so-ever other than a normal citizen. All I do is come up with plans for the cities in my province to include WF allocation, building, defense, "Q's" and PW. I take these plans and post them on the Piña Colada thread and tell the CP to check them out. The CP does not have to accept the orders or even look at them. It his choice. I just help to aleviate the burden a little. In the NewCon, there would be no change. I will continue to create plans and post what I think should happen and refer what ever Minister to the post. I also feel, that as I am not an elected official, nor any of my suggestion have any more weight than just being good ideas, that the NewCon could do nothing to prevent me from continuing in this fashion (short of banning me altogether).

So, in short (too late), my official stance is that it is a well written document that is very conceice and to the point, but does not effect my way of playing so I will probably abstain.

The writters should all be commended on there fabulous efforts.

	18-10-2002 02:29									#4
	Got spare money?

Are you sure about that donegeal?

As things stand you have zero official standing in the game. If it ever became an issue during a turn chat, I am not sure where the court would go. We have not yet been tested on the issue. However, it is a very real possibility that your words in a chat could be made the same as any other citizen.

Under the NewCon, you have official status. You are given responsibilities by your minister. The only way to over rule you would be by the decision of your minister, or by some act of the Senate (perhaps) or order of the Court.

Furthermore, in situations where the minister is absent from a chat, the Vice minister posesses all of his authority. For instance, you may remember that incident where Togas was absent and peace with France was made. Had Togas' vice minister been there under the NewCon, there would have been no question about who had the authority to authorise the peace.

Which do you prefer?

	18-10-2002 02:40									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Under the NewCon, you have official status. You are given responsibilities by your minister. The only way to over rule you would be by the decision of your minister, or by some act of the Senate (perhaps) or order of the Court.

Are you saying that if I get appointed a RA in the NewCon by a Minister, that that minister has to do what I say (even though he was the one who granted me the power?)? Or are you saying that if appointed and I post orders that are not commented on be the Minister that put me incharge, that they would then be official and must be followed?

As it stands, I know I have no official power, and I like it that way. All I want to do is put out suggestions and see if I can't convince people that I'm right. I don't want any official power. (no, this is not a reference to Shakespears play, Julious Ceaser)

	18-10-2002 02:57									#6
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by donegeal Are you saying that if I get appointed a RA in the NewCon by a Minister, that that minister has to do what I say (even though he was the one who granted me the power?)? Or are you saying that if appointed and I post orders that are not commented on be the Minister that put me incharge, that they would then be official and must be followed?

The system is designed for flexibility.

Let's use this Term for example. GodKing has appointed you a Regional Administrator. What this means for you however, is up to GodKing -- he can officially grant you the power to give the orders or keep you as advisory role. Furthermore, the City Planner himself would only be a deputy of the Domestic Minister, and the Domestic Minister would need no City Planner if he didn't want one (and would have final say over the City Planner's appointments and delegation of powers -- the City Planner would really only be an organizer if it existed at all). Again, the base idea is that powers are granted to the highest level of government (elected Ministers), and then are delegated 'down' by those Ministers to their appointees/Deputies as they see fit. The elected Ministers are ultimatly responsible for the Deputies/Appointees actions (with the possible exception of the Vice President), but they have the power to delegate only what they feel is necessary to people they can trust.

quote: As it stands, I know I have no official power, and I like it that way. All I want to do is put out suggestions and see if I can't convince people that I'm right. I don't want any official power. (no, this is not a reference to Shakespears play, Julious Ceaser)

Again, it's very flexible. If you don't want to give the orders, then the CP/Domestic Minister has no need to grant you the power -- rather, he can just turn around and use you as an advisory position .

-- adaMada

	18-10-2002 03:02									#7
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

donegeal,

Your minister can over rule or replace you at any time. You serve at his pleasure.

Yes, your instructions would be official orders in the area your minister assigned you to. You could still post a proviso that the President could do otherwise if he sees fit.

Also, in a chat you would have the final say over what happens in your area of responsibility. Except for your minister, of course. He or she could still over rule you on the spot.

Also, some ministers may appoint you to simply advise him or her. Then you would not have the power to post orders yourself (they would be suggestions).

The point is that we have tried to erect a framework that will allow maximum flexibility with enough stability that this game, or any other can flourish.

A good general rule to go by is that if it does not say you cannot, then you can. So there is nothing preventing you from serving your minister in the same way you have served to date.

	18-10-2002 03:31									#8
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither ...you may remember that incident where Togas was absent and peace with France was made

* MrWhereItsAt shudders

Please let's not bring that up on my first day back.

And I have to vote undecided - the NewCon has been up for, what a day and a half? I haven't nearly had the time to read both the NewCon thread and all the discussion yet!

	18-10-2002 04:03									#9
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

If I had to vote now... NO. Simply because I have not had the time to thouroughly read, let alone digest, this document.

On quick exam, it appears OK. I agree with what I have seen unortho saying regarding abstains.... but that I think can be minor.

One issue I have been thinking of... how many "official" people are on the roster? Anybody and everybody who has signed up since term 1. Over 300 by now I would guess. Yet we get how many in a typical election? 50 is a good turn out. We should either get rid of the whole sign up thing, or have a method of re-signing up every month, to determine who is a citizen/senator.....

OK. Enough rambling. I will make inteligent comments later once I get the chance to read it over.

GK

	18-10-2002 06:49									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I have read it fairly thouroughly. As a judge I think that this clears up a lot of things and eliminates a lot of confusion. The Quorum thing is interesting and I am not sure if I agree with it. Although if I had to vote right now I would probably vote Yes because what the citizens dont like they can change at anytime.

	19-10-2002 19:45									#11
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

We need with some way of determining who is currently an active participant if we are to have a quorom requirement. How many people have signed up and then stopped participating temporarily or permanently for one reason or another, or just don't do elections? I'm sure quite a few, judging from Godking's comments. As written, we need 2/3 citizen majority for amendment. With 338 listed citizens that means 254 yes votes are required. If at some point >1/3 of the "citizens" aren't participating it will be impossible to pass any amendment including one to change the quorom. This would essentially then make it un-amendable

If we consider everyone who has signed up to be a citizen and >1/3 even now are not participating, it will be impossble to even ratify it. Maybe a poll to determine number of active members before attempted ratification.

This poll could even be written into the constitution with laguage like this..

"On the first of every month, a poll shall be conducted to determine the number of present citizens in Apolytonia. The poll shall be open for at least 5 days, but not more than 6. The number of responding citizens shall be used to determine the number of citizens neede for a quorom. The lack of any person's responce to such a poll, however, shall not by itself preclude that person from acting as citizen of Apolytonia again at any time, or preclude them from holding any position, current, or future"

Last edited by CiverDan on 19-10-2002 at 19:53

	19-10-2002 20:00									#12
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by CiverDan We need with some way of determining who is currently an active participant if we are to have a quorom requirement. How many people have signed up and then stopped participating temporarily or permanently for one reason or another, or just don't do elections? I'm sure quite a few, judging from Godking's comments. As written, we need 2/3 citizen majority for amendment. With 338 listed citizens that means 254 yes votes are required. If at some point >1/3 of the "citizens" aren't participating it will be impossible to pass any amendment including one to change the quorom. This would essentially then make it un-amendable If we consider everyone who has signed up to be a citizen and >1/3 even now are not participating, it will be impossble to even ratify it. Maybe a poll to determine number of active members before attempted ratification. This poll could even be written into the constitution with laguage like this.. "On the first of every month, a poll shall be conducted to determine the number of present citizens in Apolytonia. The poll shall be open for at least 5 days, but not more than 6. The number of responding citizens shall be used to determine the number of citizens neede for a quorom. The lack of any person's responce to such a poll, however, shall not by itself preclude that person from acting as citizen of Apolytonia again at any time, or preclude them from holding any position, current, or future"

We gave the senate the option of reastablishing the quorom if it becomes a problem. To be honest, I don't think it will be, but we did see that the system we proposed wasn't ideal, and (as such) gave the Senate the power to set it themselves if need exists. Furthermore, the quorom isn't 25% of the total citizens in the game -- it's 25% of the citizens who posted in the last election. Admittedly, this isn't the best indicator all the time, but it should work most of the time, and if it doesn't, the Senate can reset the quorom to something more reasonable .

-- adaMada

	19-10-2002 23:11									#13
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by CiverDan As written, we need 2/3 citizen majority for amendment. With 338 listed citizens that means 254 yes votes are required. If at some point >1/3 of the "citizens" aren't participating it will be impossible to pass any amendment including one to change the quorom. This would essentially then make it un-amendable

This is not exactly true. The meaning has always been 2/3rd of the citizens who voted, but I can see where there might be some confusion. That phrase will definately be fixed to better reflect our intent.

--Togas

	19-10-2002 23:14									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Besides fixing the constitution, I think your sig is broken Togas

	20-10-2002 08:59									#15
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Probs with the new constitution:

quote: 4 The Senate has the power to declare war.

Shouldn't the SMC have to approve this or there be some sort of executive consent neccessary. It seems to me that the citizenry can declare war whenever and on whoever they choose despite the nation's preparedness or the minister's plans.

quote: (a) Elections shall end 72 hours later on the 15th of every month.

Too short to insure that everyone gets a chance to vote.

quote: Immediately after winning the election, the President-elect must appoint a Vice President.

I like to elect my vice-presidents.

Why have you combined the president and the economic minister? These are two very divergent roles. It just doesn't make sense.

Overall, not bad but still flawed.

	21-10-2002 08:01									#16
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I agree with trevman in some issues...
e.g. about the role of the President/VP

I would not vote to ratify it yet.
The points we made in the discussion thread should be included.
Especially diverging power between Senate and Cabinet.

Yeah, some flaws there are...
Otherwise, con con has done a fine job!

	21-10-2002 13:04									#17
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Please take some time and read the thing. Then think about the way we do things now.

Then take into account that none of the 4 members of the Con Con got what we wanted in every case.

Then consider whether you would prefer to keep what we have now.

Will things be adjusted due to issues brought up? Yes. But do you really want to pick an issue and make it a hill to die on? If we all do that for our pet issue, the thing will not get done.

Up to you.

	21-10-2002 22:03									#18
	minister of economy? Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

it was whispered of elsewhere and now I can't find the thread, but what has become of the minister of economy?

Article I : Section 1(j) states the president "MAY" appoint advisors as he feels necessary.

IMO, we need the graphical and statistical information that this position (with acknowledgement to Reddawg for his tireless effort) provides. Even if only in some sort of advisory capacity to the executive branch, it needs to be a specified position empowered to recommend actions and influence decisions (at least).

I would prefer an elected position but in such case as it would be a required position chosen by the president, the graphical and statistical data compiled should be open to the public so as to guarantee healthy debate, provide a check against presidential impunity, and insure we continue to retain the benefits that this type of economic analysis provides.

	21-10-2002 22:11									#19
	minister of economy? Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: to guarantee healthy debate, provide a check against presidential impunity, and insure we continue to retain the benefits that this type of economic analysis provides.

sorry if that was a little dramatic

	21-10-2002 22:24									#20
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Will things be adjusted due to issues brought up? Yes. But do you really want to pick an issue and make it a hill to die on? If we all do that for our pet issue, the thing will not get done.

Before I vote, I'll see what's being adjusted and figure how power will be distributed in practice.
By now, things look almost good.
But how pure can democracy be implemented ?

This should be the final constitution (ever) ,
and should include all democratic principles.
If it does, I'll vote to ratify it.

Then other things can be sorted by different amendments.

	22-10-2002 00:05									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Hello everyone again, just had a quick look through it, very americanised! Hmmm, I don't know, I suppose I will abstain, we don't desperately need to change the current code of laws. The senate has way too much power, in fact I have just convinced myself to vote no !! (Has anyone ever thought that a Communist system would work quite well in this size game?)

P.S Is there anything like the Jungle Gazzette around?

	22-10-2002 00:07									#22
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Oh, I just realised, it's closed!!!

	22-10-2002 00:34									#23
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

'The senate has way too much power'

Gah...

	22-10-2002 00:57									#24
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Anything like the Jungle Gazette?

No, there is nothing else like it. Just stick with the original, and you will be fine.

	22-10-2002 00:58									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Will 5001 the Jungle Gazette is still here and is apparently better than ever before!

	22-10-2002 01:48									#26
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Will 5001 The senate has way too much power, in fact I have just convinced myself to vote no !! (Has anyone ever thought that a Communist system would work quite well in this size game?)

Yeah, why don't we just call it the C3CG ?
Sorry, but I'm into democratic philosophy right here...

	22-10-2002 05:48									#27
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I thought I poster here already?

Am I losing my mind? Did I respond in another thread? Is Monday Football a releif to watch this year with out Dennis Miller? Will ther Here It Is Winos win another game? Wil Underdog get back in time to save Sweet Polly Purebread?

These and other questions...but back on topic:

I would like to thank those who have worked on this constitution, I'm sure it took a lot of time. However, I still see no reason to change the old one. The old one allows itself to be changed by amendment when need be and allows itself to be interpreted when unclear by the Court or by practice. The new constitution is very long and will take time to get used to, and we still have ministers who can't even follow the simple polling rules in place now (how can you forget a time limit?!).

Also, if you do continue forward, do something with the Senate idea, like scrap it. We don't need a Senate, everyone in the game is already a Senator unofficially, since we all can post polls, discussions, vote, etc..

So, I voted no. Obviously I am outnumbered, but that isn't the first nor will it be the last time I;m on the short end of the vote.

Thanks again, adaMada, Apoc, nye & Togas.

BTW, old or new con, my services are available for legal consultation and/or representation, free of charge. Just dial 1-800-Jungle Law (please wait till we discover the dial first, until then PM me).

	22-10-2002 06:39									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by jdjdjd I thought I poster here already? Am I losing my mind? Did I respond in another thread? Is Monday Football a releif to watch this year with out Dennis Miller? Will ther Here It Is Winos win another game? Wil Underdog get back in time to save Sweet Polly Purebread? These and other questions...but back on topic: I would like to thank those who have worked on this constitution, I'm sure it took a lot of time. However, I still see no reason to change the old one. The old one allows itself to be changed by amendment when need be and allows itself to be interpreted when unclear by the Court or by practice. The new constitution is very long and will take time to get used to, and we still have ministers who can't even follow the simple polling rules in place now (how can you forget a time limit?!). Also, if you do continue forward, do something with the Senate idea, like scrap it. We don't need a Senate, everyone in the game is already a Senator unofficially, since we all can post polls, discussions, vote, etc.. So, I voted no. Obviously I am outnumbered, but that isn't the first nor will it be the last time I;m on the short end of the vote. Thanks again, adaMada, Apoc, nye & Togas. BTW, old or new con, my services are available for legal consultation and/or representation, free of charge. Just dial 1-800-Jungle Law (please wait till we discover the dial first, until then PM me).

jdjdjd,
You've gotta remember, it was only our intention to make about three major changes to the Senate (the name we came up with for the players):
1) Allow the Senate to pass 'laws'. Makes changing minor things about the way we play the game possible without full-fledged amendments.
2) Prevent the elected officials from proposing laws. Considering the amount of power they already have, that they can vote, that they can convince someone else to propose for them, and that there are only four, it seemed like a good idea .
3) Allow the Senate to figure out it's own way of organizing itself, so it can deal with number one.

SOME organization is clearly needed for number one to be successful -- as UnOrthO has pointed out, someone's gotta compile the laws). Having said that, the Con Con members never intended the Senate to be complex, or even much different from what we have now. I don't mean to say that radical changes to the Senate aren't possible within the framework we've laid out -- but we didn't create the framework with the intention of a complex system. Voting for NewCon isn't voting for a complex senate -- it's voting for the power to decide how to use your new powers best yourself.

I personally feel that our proposed system is much better than the one we have now. By streamlining the ministers, giving the players to make changes in government without changing the CoL itself, and by clearly either dealing with the important issues or delegating them to a body to deal with, we've solved many of the conflicts we've encountered so far.

Of course, your vote is your own, and I you make several very good points. Having said that, I'd urge everyone to spend a bit of time thinking about the day to day positive affects of this CoL, and not the negative ones.

-- adaMada

	23-10-2002 02:02									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

adaMada,

I still beleive that if it ain't fixed don't break it. I've been against this thing from the start, so I'm jaded.

....however....since it is inevitable that it will pass, I will review again and keep as open a mind as possible and see if I have addl criticism/acolades, and all you have to is give me your best Jungle Ball player



Oh all right, I'll do it anyway

	23-10-2002 03:32									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

jdjdjd, why should we fix what we've got 1 amendment at a time? What was the point of the Revolution of the recent past?

Who controls GLs? Is the Executive or the Court supreme in interpreting polls? Who controls pop rushing? What happens when a Minister goes AWOL?

You of all people must be aware that there are significant gaps, contradictions, and anomolies in the CoL as it stands. What is the problem with plugging and fixing as many of them as possible in one go?