AMendment IV: BIll of RIghts

[civman2000]

1. No one shall be banned permanently from participating in the democracy game, excluding those who are permanently banned from apolyton.
2. No one shall ever be restricted from any poll, unless after the poll it is found that non-members may have significantly altered the vote. In elections, this is only the case if the winner has under 55% support and the people vote to discard nonmember votes by a >50% vote.
3. No member shall ever be denied the right to vote in any poll.
4. No one shall be denied free speech unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or (only if it a a new thread that is posted) it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.
5. No one shall be denied the right to post an unofficial poll, unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.
6. THe right to associate into any form of organization shall not be denied.
7. In the absence of any specific rule concerning a poll in the constitution, it is won by the option that wins the most votes. Thus, until an amendment is passed concerning a type of poll, those polls may be posted without any special rules about how the results determine our actions. However, if an amendment is passed that would change the results (say make it require 2/3 when it only got 60%) it may be repolled without the 3-week waiting period.


DIscuss!

[Harovan]

The 5th point has already been discussed and was denied by a majority.

[civman2000]

When?? GIve me a link

[civman2000]

ARe you talking about this?: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=55066

If you are, that cannot be used. Although allowing them in all circumstnaces did not have a majority:
1. It got more votes than any other option.
2. The other two options combined did not get the required 67% to make any change (because any change of that nature would be a constitutional change).

Thus if anything, gallup polls were allowed. THe fact that there was no followup to try to include the "under certain circumstances" option in a 2-option poll (as spiffor actually said he would in the first post) implies that no rule limiting polls was created.

[Harovan]

If so, I deny your amendment as a whole.

[civman2000]

Um, I'm not sure what you mean. By the way, I plan on making the final poll for this a checkbox poll, so each section individually gets voted on.

[mtgillespie]

2. No one shall ever be restricted from any poll, unless after the poll it is found that non-members may have significantly altered the vote. In elections, this is only the case if the winner has under 55% support and the people vote to discard nonmember votes by a >50% vote.

You can't have a vote where the "electorate" may change afterwards, depending on the result. The criteria have to be stated beforehand, whether in the constitution or the poll itself, and adhered to.

5. No one shall be denied the right to post an unofficial poll, unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.

Why should the people be denied the ability to ban certain types of poll in the future? It will still take a 2/3 majority, as it would need to be an amendment. Personally i can't think of many types of poll that we might feel the need to ban, but that doesn't mean they won't come up. This is an unecessary set of handcuffs.

6. THe right to associate into any form of organization shall not be denied.

ANY form of organization? Again, i don't agree. I think with both 5 and 6 you're (over)reacting to current polls, i.e the ones to ban pre-election gallup polls, and political parties. But both are being defeated, by the will of the people, and that should be the deciding factor on these issues. Leave it up to us to decide, as each issue comes up.

As for the rest seems OK to me.

[Ninot]

I partly agree with SirRalph, this ammendment DOES need some work, but it is something we will need for the future, and its work worth having.

[Sheik]

This is a great idea civman I especially like point 6.

[Kuciwalker]

I'm more concerned about not being capable of voting. The stupid thing ALWAYS says that my session is invalid!

[GodKing]

interesting. Have to think about this....
Good concept.

[Spiffor]

Overall, a very good bill.

Of course, the one problem is :

5. No one shall be denied the right to post an unofficial poll, unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.

But if Apolytonians consider unofficial "gallup" polls to "violate Apolyton rules" (I wanted the elections to end before suggesting the amendment), then the 5th point of the bill isn't a problem anymore.

[Captain]

Originally posted by civman2000
1. No one shall be banned permanently from participating in the democracy game, excluding those who are permanently banned from apolyton.

2. No one shall ever be restricted from any poll, unless after the poll it is found that non-members may have significantly altered the vote. In elections, this is only the case if the winner has under 55% support and the people vote to discard nonmember votes by a >50% vote.

Non-members should not be allowed to vote.
Canadians do not elect the American President, and vice versa (except for those with dual citizenship).

No-member votes should always be discounted, but since that is a hassle, we will only check where there are grounds for suspicion.

Plus, statement #2 is overly complex and applicable to only limited circumstances.

3. No member shall ever be denied the right to vote in any poll.

I'd like to clarify by adding:
Members becomes citizens at the time of their posting in the JOIN thread. Either (a) they are eligible to vote for any polls created after that time or (b) they are eligible to vote for any polls created 24 hrs prior or (c) they are eligible to vote for any polls whatsoever.

I prefer (a), consider it to be something of a 'maturing period'. All democracies discriminate somewhat by limiting the voting age (18 in Canada but the age is arbitrary) so I consider this an acceptable practice.

4. No one shall be denied free speech unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or (only if it a a new thread that is posted) it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.

I am wary of the term "free speech" as differing interpretations exist, some dangerous.

5. No one shall be denied the right to post an unofficial poll, unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.

We should be able to pass laws banning certain types of polls if we choose. For example, the pre-election opinion polls. It doesn't mean we will, I just think we should have that option.

6. THe right to associate into any form of organization shall not be denied.

7. In the absence of any specific rule concerning a poll in the constitution, it is won by the option that wins the most votes. Thus, until an amendment is passed concerning a type of poll, those polls may be posted without any special rules about how the results determine our actions. However, if an amendment is passed that would change the results (say make it require 2/3 when it only got 60%) it may be repolled without the 3-week waiting period.
DIscuss!

This is not an issue for a "Bill of Rights Amendment". #7 should be removed. This should be in a separate amendment, considering how important the issue is. Poll results, electoral results, etc... require more thought and should be voted on itself, not piggy-backing on other ideas.


However, all in all, great work civman! (note: I did not capitalize the c)

[jdd2007]

i would vote yes for all amendments, though im sure the bill will change by the time it is voted. it needs some tweaks...

[Aggie]

Captain beat me to the punch so I'll keep it short
1)Good
2)Needs to be in election rule. Persanlly I think ONLY citizens should vote, but it must be uniform across the board and not dependent on anything else
3)Lets change to
3. No member shall ever be denied the right to vote in any poll, that begins AFTER their joining.
4) Not necessary, but I'll give it a, this way we insure that the court won't sleep through their terms
5) Kinda redundant with 4, and might belong in election amendment so no
6)Good
7)election amendment not for this bill
Overall good work
Aggie

[MrWhereItsAt]

Points 4 and 5 are not really handled by us at all. These are subjects within the domain of moderators, and whatever their ruling is, is at the foundation of all that we can legislate here. We do not need these clauses at all, since they are already taken care of no OT, no violation of 'Poly rules). As for the "redundant with pre-existing polls/threads" part, we cannot actually stop this from happening, merely inform the poll starter of where to find the earlier thread, and collectively ignore such a thread/poll if it refuses to die.

1, 2 and 3 are terrific. I wish I had thought of them so I could take the credit. 6 seems a little iffy to me... although unlikely, it legalizes the foundation and operation of a group designed solely to impede progress or overly criticize the Government etc. Perhaps we can leave this out, and make a ruling on a case-by-case basis if there is ever any issue with an organization here.

[Will 5001]

Originally posted by Captain
Non-members should not be allowed to vote.

I totally agree non-members should NOT be allowed to influence votes , well it isn't hard to join is it?!!

[Kloreep]

I'm only commenting on the clauses I disagree with. Those I leave out I give a to.

Originally posted by civman2000
2. No one shall ever be restricted from any poll, unless after the poll it is found that non-members may have significantly altered the vote. In elections, this is only the case if the winner has under 55% support and the people vote to discard nonmember votes by a >50% vote.

IMO opinion, non-members should always not be be allowed to vote. And there definitely shouldn't be a post-election decision on whether or not to discount non-member votes this way; too much possibility of political maneuvering of the votes.

5. No one shall be denied the right to post an unofficial poll, unless it violates apolyton rules, is off topic, or it is redundant with a pre-existing thread.

As many others have said, this should be left open to case-by-case decisions. (Like gallup polls.)

6. THe right to associate into any form of organization shall not be denied.

I think this should also be left to case-by-case.

7. In the absence of any specific rule concerning a poll in the constitution, it is won by the option that wins the most votes. Thus, until an amendment is passed concerning a type of poll, those polls may be posted without any special rules about how the results determine our actions. However, if an amendment is passed that would change the results (say make it require 2/3 when it only got 60%) it may be repolled without the 3-week waiting period.

As others have said, this should be a seperate amendment.

[Harovan]

What I don't understand at all is, Civman2000, wasn't it you, who founded this 3AC... (whatever) party, which was meant to be against a constitution, because it "sucks the fun out of the game like a leech"? If so, why do you now care so much about it?

[Togas]

I would prefer (but that's just me) to have broad, dramatic language in our Bill of Rights, and if necessary, we could later define the specifics. But ignore me if you disagree.

For example:

No person shall be denied the right to become a citizen of Apolytonia.

No citizen shall ever be denied the right to vote in any poll.

The right of free speech, in all it's form, shall not be unreasonably restricted or denied to all citizens of Apolytonia.

The right of all citizens to associate and organize shall not be infringed upon.

No citizen may be denied to right to participate in this game without due process.

etc.

--Togas

[Ninot]

Togas is right. We should have some fun with the bill, make it dramatic and such.

But, we can't leave out TOO many specifics, thats how we ended up with a loophole that almost got you a co-presidency

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
What I don't understand at all is, Civman2000, wasn't it you, who founded this 3AC... (whatever) party, which was meant to be against a constitution, because it "sucks the fun out of the game like a leech"? If so, why do you now care so much about it?

I can't officially speak for civman here, but as I was a cofounder of the AAAC in the Civ2 game and also in the 3A2C3 here, I feel qualified to say that, since our anti-Constitutional views are meaningless now, we must adapt to suit our environment. Therefore, since we have a Constitution, we must make it say exactly what it needs to say.

The Constitution, IMO, leads to confusion, and I thinklooking at almost any thread will provide evidence of such. Thus, the Constitution must be made the least confusing possible.

[Switch]

I too like Togas' idea. Let's make this interesting, and fun. But the idea also allows for more case-by-case judging, and loosens the handcuffs compared to the original suggested bill.

All in all, though, I think this bill is necessary to avoid confusion.

[Togas]

Originally posted by Ninot
Togas is right.

Hey, Ninot! Can I put this in my sig file?

--Togas

[Robber Baron]

I support Togas' language -- and I actually like the fact that it is broad and abstract. State the principles; let judges work out applications.

Some modest editing:

No person shall be denied the right to become a citizen of Apolytonia.

No citizen shall without due process be denied to right to participate in this game

No citizen shall be denied the right to vote in any poll.

The right of free speech, in all its forms, shall not be unreasonably restricted or denied to any citizen of Apolytonia.

The right of citizens to associate and organize shall not be infringed upon.

[Captain]

I like this version, but with one modification and a re-ordering:

Originally posted by Togas

No person shall be denied the right to become a citizen of Apolytonia.

No citizen may be denied to right to participate in this game, including voting in unregistered polls, without due process.

The right of free speech, in all it's form, shall not be unreasonably restricted or denied to all citizens of Apolytonia.

The right of all citizens to associate and organize shall not be infringed upon.

By unregistered poll, I mean all other polls besides an official poll whereby previous registration (provided by signing up on the topped member list) is required for your votes to count. (Albeit a small danger, this prevents unethical "recruiting" of "ringers" after a poll has been posted. Therefore, if you didn't join/register before a registered poll was created, you are not elgible to vote on that.)

Well, that was a long explanation, but maybe someon can help refine it.

[Captain]

oops, missed RB's version, that's good too.

[Kramerman]

Im just now geeting a chance to check out this proposed bill. I would love to give my assistance in any way I can... Im sure you will be hearing alot from me very soon.

Kman

We need a right to bear arms... I don't want the king of England coming in here and pushing me around. I'll cap his ass

[Ninot]

Originally posted by Togas


Hey, Ninot! Can I put this in my sig file?

--Togas

lol, sure have fun with it.

[civman2000]

I like Togas's vversion, I suppose that unofficial polls could fall under "free speech" .

Clause to add due to patch discussion:

No president shall ever use a version of the game which is not available to all players.


If this gets included, that would mean you should not get 1.29 if you plan on running for president in the next 2 months.