ELECTION: Judge

mapfi · January 15, 2003, 14:04

This poll will be open for 5 days until January 20th, approximately 7:05pm GMT

We have three candidates, Frozzy, H Tower, Devil of Truth

nomination thread

H Tower · January 15, 2003, 15:11

I guess I'll start the campaign debating.

I believe I am uniquely qualified for this position above all others because I have already served as a Judge. For the last month I have been the Senior Justice and have worked hard on the three cases we have been presented with. After working hard to interpret the constitution on these real cases and several theoretical ones i was presented with by other members of the game.

I believe in a strong court capable and willing to make decisions that will both uphold our constitution and make the game more enjoyable to the people. I don't believe that these two goals are against each other but can be done together to make this an incredible game.

Another benefit of returning me to the court is that the new Senior Justice (mapfi) and I have worked together very well, and have learned to guess how the other would react given an event, and while we don't always agree with each other, we manage to find an acceptable ruling for both of us.

As leader of the court last term I managed to keep the court running even though we were missing the third member of the court, we managed to drive through. Once I was 99% sure Gilgamensch wasn't coming back, I did the best thing I could for the court, I called for his impeachment, while we have proven that the court CAN function with only two judges, it doesn't mean that it should.

I guess I should close by pointing out that I have a reputation as a reliable poster, I won't dissapear, I visit the forum frequently and am not afraid to voice an opinion.

I of course await my fellow candidates for further debate

Frozzy · January 15, 2003, 16:21

I've learned to be patient in life, and not rush things. Although I was not elected last time, I didn't let that stop me trying again. Contrary to the saying "Do, or do not. There is no try", I believe that if you don't try, you won't do.

One thing that brings people down is fear. Fear of what? That is up to the person. Like most people, I have my own fears. But through life I have overcome a number of these fears, like most people.

Another one of my personal qualites, in my opinion, is my desire. If I wish for something to be done, I won't rest until it is done. When it is done, I go to number two on the list and drive for that.

Like my fellow candidate, I too am an active poster on Apolyton CS, and also like my fellow opponent I am active in a number of areas of Apolyton, not just the CtP1 section.

Lastly, I realise that this is a democracy, and you the voter get the final decision on which circle you click in. I can't make you do what I want you to do. However, I hope you take heed of what I have to offer, and focus on the positives of Lemuria, not the negatives.

I wish to see what Devil of Truth has to say as to his case.

Devil of Truth · January 16, 2003, 05:55

It is my great pleasure to be included among such worthy fellow candidates.

I too have much to offer, and I’ll offer it succinctly.

I believe in equality, reason, calm judgement, the rule of law, and the democracy that we have created. I believe in the remarkable cross-cultural experience these forums grant us. I believe that every poster, by they Settlers or Deities have a voice, and their voice must be heard. I believe in active participation, divergent opinions, and the uniqueness and flavour we all contribute. I believe that what makes an elected official great, is their ability to follow the people, and not the other way round.

I believe I can offer you these attributes.

Locutus · January 16, 2003, 08:49

None of these speeches really convinced me, so I am for now unable to vote (and judging from the total number of votes, I'm not the only one). To stir up debate a little, let's look at a hypothetical case:

Let's say I had messed up the 'Attitude towards Austria' thread by IW for good and would not have been able to recover it. If someone had filed a case against me for this screw-up, would you have accepted this case if you were Senior Justice or not? Also explain why (not). And if the case had indeed been accepted (by you or someone else), how would you have ruled on it?

mapfi · January 16, 2003, 08:53

yes Locutus, good question!

I'd also like to know if H Tower's two contestants would have ruled differently in any of the three cases so far or if they have at least some reservations about the rulings.

Devil of Truth · January 16, 2003, 09:49

Locutus:
As a fledgling democracy, it is vital that all participating parties contribute within the framework of the constitution. Every vote is sacrosanct, and as a judge, it is our duty to uphold that.

If the new poll falls outside the norms, or is deemed to fall outside the norms set by the constitution, then there is no question that I would accept the case.

I would rule that all previous polls are declared invalid and that the threads be closed. I would then call for a new poll. But beyond that, I accept as true that a judge’s duty goes beyond just ruling on cases. As a judge, we should act as guides and assist with the creation of the new poll to ensure that it complies fully with the constitution.

Mapfi:
I have no reservations or problems with the rulings on any of the cases. I believe the court, and H Tower in particular, acted with absolute decorum.

Frozzy · January 16, 2003, 14:45

Locutus,

Since the screw up had nothing to do with you purposely disobeying the constitution, and it was exprerimental within ACS, no.

If someone else had accepted it, I would like to hear their reasoning first before making my decision.

Mapfi, I can't really answer that question, but H Tower was in power at the time. The first elections was a blunt mistake, due to under reading of the constitution, and we needed to get the game started.

The Austria poll was full of controversy, but it was around 1 month after the constitution was set out. Sure, there was the wording flaw, but if you took common sense into account, then I believe the previous judges performed superbly.

H Tower · January 16, 2003, 16:57

For locutus' hypothetical case: Based upon the fact that you stated that the problem was that a problem with the apolyton database, i would not accept the case. We can hardly fault you for problems that occur with apolyton in RL, not our little role playing world.

DoT,when you say :

Quote:

I would rule that all previous polls are declared invalid and that the threads be closed. I would then call for a new poll. But beyond that, I accept as true that a judge’s duty goes beyond just ruling on cases. As a judge, we should act as guides and assist with the creation of the new poll to ensure that it complies fully with the constitution.

do you understand that by your wording you are declaring EVERY poll we have EVER had invalid? An ambigous ruling like this could throw our nation into complete chaos, such reports need to be carefully thought out and loopholes closed.

HuangShang · January 16, 2003, 22:10

im still deciding...

H Tower · January 16, 2003, 22:13

do you have a question for the candidates that we could answer? something to help you decide?

HuangShang · January 16, 2003, 22:17

uh....

H Tower · January 16, 2003, 22:39

any question at all

Do you like George W. Bush? No
Are you a space alien? No
Have you ever had a PCR before? Yes
Have you ever met someone from poly in RL? Yes(Ming, rah, theben, loinburger. chegitz guevera, -jrabbit, barry, bunnygryl)
Do you own CtP2? No
Pentium or athalon? Pentium
How old are you? 20

EDIT: If you want to see some of my work, go look in this thread where i went over the constitution with a fined toothed comb and found several sections that I believe need to be altered. http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=74289

Devil of Truth · January 17, 2003, 04:14

Quote:

Originally posted by H Tower
DoT,when you say :

do you understand that by your wording you are declaring EVERY poll we have EVER had invalid? An ambigous ruling like this could throw our nation into complete chaos, such reports need to be carefully thought out and loopholes closed.

I think it’s too early here to think straight, but I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at. Would you mind clarifying your statement?

But before you do, allow me to explain again:
Article IV of the constitution defines what a poll should look like. Right? So if it doesn’t comply, or is deemed to be incompliant, then it is invalid. It is irrelevant who creates it. If that was not so, I could create the unconstitutional poll, and hide behind a cloak of general amnesty because “Hey, I didn’t know better.” In the end, only chaos will reign.
Also, if Citizen 1 creates an unconstitutional official poll, and Citizen 2 repeats his effort, I wouldn’t hesitate to close them down and declare them both invalid. I cannot foresee any reason why this shouldn’t be so – they are not constitutional. If I start picking bits and pieces of the constitution I like best, and discard the rest (even for the sake of game play) – by all means – impeach me – hell, I’ll impeach myself.

Why would doing this, blight all constitutional polls that have gone before, and ruin the game for everybody?

Names have been changed to protect the innocent.

H Tower · January 17, 2003, 19:09

Locutus, did you make a test for us? That Resolution poll is not Constitutional IMO.

Article IV section 3(c) They have to be Yes/No polls. Multiple choice polls are not allowed as resolutions.

Your options are Settler/warrior/abstain

Of course, I can't file a case since I'm still a judge.

Locutus · January 17, 2003, 19:45

The question can be rephrased to be a Yes/No question...

(But I think allowing multiple-choice (not selection

) polls should be considered as amendment: if there had been 4 options to choose between, I would have had to ask the same question in 3 seperate yes/no polls)

Immortal Wombat · January 17, 2003, 19:54

Then rephrase it

H Tower · January 17, 2003, 21:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
(But I think allowing multiple-choice (not selection

) polls should be considered as amendment: if there had been 4 options to choose between, I would have had to ask the same question in 3 seperate yes/no polls)

i would be happy to colaborate on the writing of that amendment with you if you so desire

mapfi · January 18, 2003, 08:37

Am I the only one who thinks Pedrunn did a marvellous job when writing our polling rules?!
There are good reasons why resolution polls are not allowed to have more than 2 options. Have a look at the current Austria poll, while friendly is winning, there are actually more people who lean towards an agressive stand. Now because it's an offical poll, IW can interpret it the way he thinks it makes sense. As a resolution it's law making and so possibly deciding against the majority of the voters.
No parliament in RL (that I know of) votes for lists of options - it always votes yes or no, or option 1 vs. option 2 and then if 2 wins option 2 vs. 3. Democracy is after all not so easy as it seems...

J Bytheway · January 18, 2003, 10:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
The question can be rephrased to be a Yes/No question...

I take objection to this. It cannot be rephrased as a yes/no question. There are other things we could do with our build queue besides these two (even if there are no other things we can build, we could concievably leave it empty), so saying don't build a settler isnot the same as saying do build a warrior. I admit that in this case doing anything else is not particularly appealing to do anything else, but that doesn't mean it is impossible.

Locutus · January 18, 2003, 12:12

The problem is that there are in total 5 things to build and resolutions only allow for yes/no questions. The problem is that Wise Ass didn't seem to care too much about polling for this issue while I *did* (and judging from the current standing, the poll certainly isn't trivial). Wise Ass could have posted a poll with 5 options perfectly fine while I couldn't, that's kinda silly isn't it?

To rephrase the poll: 'Given the choice between Settlers and Warriors, should we build Warriors next? (Yes/No/Abstain)'.

But to cover all bases, this would have to be followed up by other polls to compare the winner of this poll with the other options, but that way it could take weeks to decide (esp later on in the game), while the turn-chat is later today.

mapfi,
No real-life parliament has multiple-choice bills, but no real-life ministers can propose such bills either, while our ministers *can*. CtP2 is not real life and the way we're playing the game, MC polls are very useful.

I'll agree that the interpreting the poll properly could be tricky and resolutions don't allow much space for that. Maybe we should add a new type of poll: Recommendations. Those are identical to Resolutions, except that they're not binding for the ministers and do allow for multiple-choice. This way they could be interpreted in a sensible way by ministers, while still allowing Citizens to make MC polls without it having to take weeks...

mapfi · January 18, 2003, 16:11

No RL minister would even have to ask the people what to do...

Anyway, if you just had asked: "Do you want to build a settler next?" Yes/No/abstain there wouldn't have been a problem with it all. A resolution poll is to decide a single issue, your preference lies on settler, but being against this doesn't automatically mean warrior - there might be some inexperienced newbies who want to build some wonder now!

Locutus · January 18, 2003, 16:21

But what if the answer would be No? In that case we'd need 3 more days to confirm that we indeed want to build a Warrior...

H Tower · January 18, 2003, 17:08

what's wrong with starting an unofficial poll? i know it won't be official public policy, but at ;east the president would get some idea of what the people are thinking. come to think about it, there isn't a whole heck of a lot of difference between unofficial and official except that official polls can only be started by the executive branch government members. And yes, I know i'll have to defend that statement down the line.

Locutus · January 18, 2003, 18:30

unofficial polls can't be used for decision making, so someone is bound to complain that it's not kosjer(sp?) to use that as prelimary poll. and quite frankly, he would be right...

Devil of Truth · January 21, 2003, 05:04

Congratulations Frozzy

. A well-deserved win! I look forward to serving with you when I win the next elections.

H Tower · January 21, 2003, 09:12

yes, congratulations frozzy.

Well, I suppose I should be a little bit bitter about losing a re-election campaign after such a successful (in my opinion anyways) term. But you know, I think frozzy will do an excellent job. I take a certain amount of pride from the fact that the judge position has been the most contested election in our history, and I won the head spot first. As I take my leave from active government, I can rest easy knowing our laws, our constitution lies in safe hands.