Journal TheSandBox's Journal: VOTING: Prop #00: The Rules 55
EDIT: Voting will remain open until more member nations have cast their vote. Currently only 33 votes have been cast out of 81 member nations.
According to the provisions of the proposed rules, voting shall remain open for a period of no less than 3 days and require 3/4 of votes from all members of The Back Yard and approval by The Empress to be The Rules of The Back Yard.
I will perform the Roll Call for this initial vote. I realize several people have already voted in the discussion JE, sorry for the confusion. I felt obligated to allow for debate, seperate from voting, in case there were objections to any of the previsions in the proposal.
Since no objects were raised, regarding the amended version of The Rules...
Voting will proceed according to Section 2 Articles 1, 9 & 13 which can be generalized as the following:
- One vote per person using logged in slashdot user accounts. Please only one post per person in this journal.
- Vote with "yes" or "no" or any variation that adhears to your local customs.
- Insert a link to your nation on nationstates.net to aid in verifying membership in The Back Yard
- 3/4 of all members of the region must vote in favor of the proposal for The Rules to be ratified.
- Voting will end when a) all votes are cast, b) voting time expires c) 3/4 of the members in The Back Yard have voted for the proposal d) Jan 27th ~ 17:15 Pacific / 1:15 (Jan28) GMT
El Jefe de Caffeinastan
Yes (nm) (Score:2)
Re:Yes (nm) (Score:1)
Re:Yes (nm) (Score:2)
Aye (Score:2)
Re:Aye (Score:1)
El Jefe de Caffeinastan
jason
Re:Aye (Score:2)
Yea (Score:2)
Sure thing, buddy! (Score:1)
Si (Score:1)
Mmm... mmhmm... lower, lower... that's right.... (Score:2)
Oh... excuse me. We're voting now. Well... same answer stands.
Dominatrix of Lubriscia [nationstates.net]
Re:Mmm... mmhmm... lower, lower... that's right... (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but only one of your "yeses" will apply towards a vote. But if you like, I can underline it when I tally up The Roll Call.
El Jefe de Caffeinastan
jason
Re:Mmm... mmhmm... lower, lower... that's right... (Score:2)
Opportunitys [nationstates.net] votes whatever Lubriscia's voting. Is it just me or is it hot in here?
Qingwa votes yes (Score:1)
robi2106 = Caffeinastan = yes (Score:2)
The Nomadic Peoples of Caffeinastan [nationstates.net]
Aye (Score:1)
Aye on #00 (Score:1)
Aye! (Score:2)
-MT.
Eh (Score:2)
Dahlink (Score:2)
Oh, and as for the rules, da, dahlink.
Yours,
Father Knows Best Socialist Dictator
Re:Eh (Score:1)
Re:Eh (Score:2)
Aye (Score:2)
Yup (Score:2)
The delegate from Icicleia... (Score:2)
Yes (Score:2)
nay (Score:2)
-Ab
Re:nay (Score:1)
El Jefe de Caffeinastan
jason
Re:nay (Score:1)
El Jefe de Caffeinastan
jason
Re:nay (Score:2)
I am, however, so vain (or unoriginal) that my country is named after me: The Grand Duchy of Abmoraz.
-Ab
yes (Score:1)
Sean D.
Grand Inquisitor of Noelopolis
Seregel (Score:1)
yes (Score:2)
DaShizzle votes... (Score:2)
We vote yes (Score:2)
yes (Score:1)
Negatory, tower! (Score:2)
Specifically [slashdot.org] Article 4, Section I; Article 10 and 11, Section II, which we motion to hereinafter refer to as the "Granting of Slashdot Editor-like Powers acts"
The brave citizens of Safetonia, having weathered the evil Editors in this realm, do not willingly install another in the other!
Re:Negatory, tower! (Score:2)
Re:Negatory, tower! (Score:2)
I object to the fact that there will be no debate, no recourse for someone getting kicked out. I understand that SD's power is a function of the programmer, but it doesn't mean that we can't agree that there must be some kind of vote or discussion before banishment. If SD chooses to be a tyrant (def #1 [reference.com]), then what is to stop her?
If SD's power is an absolute and cannot be changed, why codify it? That's like passing a law that says, "Anyone who jumps
Re:Negatory, tower! (Score:2)
I'm confused. Wasn't that the point I was making?
If you don't trust the region founder to not become a tyrant (and you'd be upset if they did), you shouldn't join their region (or just be prepared to abandon it, I guess).
If SD's power is an absolute and cannot be changed, why codify it?
The same could be asked of many of these rules (e.g. those describing the nature of the UN). I think the point is to make sure there are no surprises
Re:Negatory, tower! (Score:1)
Section 1: Article 4 is part of the setup of the NationStates.net game and cannot be changed, period. We have no authority or ability to change this property of the game.
Section 2: Articles 10 & 11 is no different than the Presidential or Prime minister veto powers found in modern democratic societies and is a check & balance against domination of The Back Yard by a vocal and active minority or majority of regional members.
If you would like
Re:Negatory, tower! (Score:2)
I disagree with your reference for 2, article 10 & 11, as Presidents/PMs are all electable. SD is not electable, therefore her power is absolute and corruptable. By putting in a "check and balance" to her power, will limit spur-of-the-moment decisions/banishments that will hopefully induce thinking about consequences and reprocussions of those decisions.
Now, because she has the power to crush anyone, she still can, but if is "against the rules" the consequence of her
Re:Negatory, tower! (Score:1)
Roome says "Yes" (Score:1)
Aye say the Carbonia Lificans! (Score:1)
Affirmative (Score:2)
Aye (Score:2)
Re:Aye (Score:1)
Re:Aye (Score:2)
Too late, I think, but Yes (Score:1)
Sloppy, President of Zapitronia
vote (Score:1)
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/tar
Yarrrgggh! (Score:2)
No. (Score:1)
If voting's still on... (Score:2)
Aye (Score:2)
Why the hell not? (Score:2)