Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 03:32:13 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections
| |-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Gustaf, MasterJedi)
| | |-+  Lose ends with the Constitution -IMPORTANT...PLEASE READ
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Lose ends with the Constitution -IMPORTANT...PLEASE READ  (Read 3100 times)
Gustaf
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26922


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: April 03, 2004, 04:36:21 am »

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


1. Important votes should be done in a way that no confusion can arise, etc and I'm not sure the 2 contested votes were done this way.

2. It's all messed up... (I had another point 2 originally I think, but I forogt it...)
true
we said it, they wouldn't listen and  we accepted the majority decision. now when one only posted the voted upon maps (that one didn't vote for) they blame us for that.

Well, Demrepdan did specifically say that he didn't mean to attack you...and he also maybe hadn't understood that you didn't back the maps. But I see your point.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
dunn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3080


P
View Profile
« Reply #26 on: April 03, 2004, 04:43:41 am »
Ignore

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


1. Important votes should be done in a way that no confusion can arise, etc and I'm not sure the 2 contested votes were done this way.

2. It's all messed up... (I had another point 2 originally I think, but I forogt it...)
true
we said it, they wouldn't listen and  we accepted the majority decision. now when one only posted the voted upon maps (that one didn't vote for) they blame us for that.

Well, Demrepdan did specifically say that he didn't mean to attack you...and he also maybe hadn't understood that you didn't back the maps. But I see your point.

ok
thanks
Logged

Keep your eyes on the stars, and your feet on the ground - TR
Harry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19090
United States


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: April 03, 2004, 08:10:29 am »
Ignore

THE MAPS ARE FINE LIKE THEY ARE!!!!!!!!!!!
THEY CANNOT BE ANY BETTER
[/color]
« Last Edit: April 03, 2004, 08:11:23 am by VP Harry »Logged
RG Fritz
JLD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5549
United States


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: April 03, 2004, 09:39:11 am »
Ignore

Another thing that is missing from the Constitution is, on what basis ratification would be accepted.  The U.S. Constitution had a clause requiring 9 of the original 13 states to ratify the Constitution before it went into effect.  A similiar clause is called for here, IMHO, and I don't think a simple majority is sufficient in this case.
Logged

JohnFKennedy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7509


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: April 03, 2004, 09:45:49 am »
Ignore

....
The Constitution does not say that regions must have 10 states.  This was only included in an Amendment which DID NOT PASS.  Instead, we passed an amendment under which regions did not have 10 states.  It is done.  

When was the amendment NOT passed? As far as I am aware...everyone voted FOR amendments 1 through 5.

We were asked which of four versions of Amendment IV we wanted, one of which was the version in your draft (The 10-states plan), another was the set of maps that won the vote that was taken among many possible maps (The "D&E plan").  The D&E plan was preferred by a clear majority of voters over your version of the amendment.

I was under the impression that just the STATES themselves were subject to change....not the whole amendment. I was fully aware (even when I was writting it) that those pretty little maps in the constitution were not going to last....(those were Supersoulty's maps of course.....not mine)......but I never knew the whole amendment went out the window. And for reasons no one has yet explained to me.


We can all admit this wasn't very clear.  But people voted for a map that didn't have 10-state regions.  I think we can infer that they we thus voting NOT to include the clause in the amendment that required 10-state regions.  It just wouldn't make sense otherwise.


It didn't say in the final ratification vote II that the regions plan that was D&E wasn't a 10 state region, I was under the impression we had already said it had to be a 10 state region and that the different maps were just different ways of dividing up the regions, I only glanced at the maps in that thread before I voted, I did not know about this.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7509


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: April 03, 2004, 09:51:16 am »
Ignore

THE MAPS ARE FINE LIKE THEY ARE!!!!!!!!!!!
THEY CANNOT BE ANY BETTER
[/color]


that is why 1 district has 8 people and another has 14?
« Last Edit: April 03, 2004, 03:02:05 pm by JohnFKennedy »Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20702
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: April 03, 2004, 02:55:43 pm »
Ignore

All I can say is that I put my proposal on the table 3 weeks ago.  This proposal included 10 state regions and ONLY 10 state regions for a reason.  I said that you could manipulate the map how you wanted as long as each region had 10 STATES  This proposal was voted on by all members voting and present.  The language was unambigous and it passed.  So it is therefore set that there should be 10 STATE REGIONS.  Any proposal that was put on the table contrary to that should not have been allowed because it goes against what was originally settled.
Logged

Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16062


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: April 03, 2004, 02:57:06 pm »
Ignore

We should not have new votes on an issue already decide. We should only have new votes if something was INHERENTLY contradictory. Otherwise we need to move on. Anything else can be dealt with by the Senate.
Logged

12th Doctor
supersoulty
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20702
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: April 03, 2004, 03:00:45 pm »
Ignore

We should not have new votes on an issue already decide.

Then why is the HELL did you bring up a new vote on my proposal that had already been voted on?
Logged

JohnFKennedy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7509


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: April 03, 2004, 03:03:09 pm »
Ignore

We should not have new votes on an issue already decide. We should only have new votes if something was INHERENTLY contradictory. Otherwise we need to move on. Anything else can be dealt with by the Senate.

It was contradictory, we ratified the constitution that said 10 states per region and then we voted for a regions map that didn't fit the description, therefore it was contradictory.
Logged
Demrepdan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1320


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: April 04, 2004, 08:22:45 pm »
Ignore

THE MAPS ARE FINE LIKE THEY ARE!!!!!!!!!!!
THEY CANNOT BE ANY BETTER
[/color]


Yes...........they can......
Logged

Moderately-Liberal Progressive Populist Libertarian Democrat.
Demrepdan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1320


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: April 04, 2004, 08:26:22 pm »
Ignore

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


I'm sorry if I offended you Dunn.....but what everyone doesn't understand....is it doesn't MATTER what the majority think! SURE they voted for those maps! BUT....those maps are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! So they shouldn't have been voted on.

If anything.....(and this may take a while)....I would suggest that everyone make as many maps as they want......and they must follow the constitutional guidelines. THEN we vote on those maps....that should all correspond to the rules set in the constitution....

You must remember......all this voting on maps crap......took place a LONG time ago.....even before the constitution was changed to included both Regions and Districts......
Logged

Moderately-Liberal Progressive Populist Libertarian Democrat.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35708
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: April 04, 2004, 08:27:02 pm »
Ignore

[size=48]hi[/size]
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35708
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #38 on: April 04, 2004, 08:27:20 pm »
Ignore

yay!  My font worked.
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
dunn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3080


P
View Profile
« Reply #39 on: April 05, 2004, 05:00:37 am »
Ignore

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


I'm sorry if I offended you Dunn.....but what everyone doesn't understand....is it doesn't MATTER what the majority think! SURE they voted for those maps! BUT....those maps are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! So they shouldn't have been voted on.

If anything.....(and this may take a while)....I would suggest that everyone make as many maps as they want......and they must follow the constitutional guidelines. THEN we vote on those maps....that should all correspond to the rules set in the constitution....

You must remember......all this voting on maps crap......took place a LONG time ago.....even before the constitution was changed to included both Regions and Districts......
there was a voting when we ratify rhe constitution
I don't thing the maps are perfect and the districts is bound to changes, I think we should pass the mud terms with this maps and let the senate change them
 
Logged

Keep your eyes on the stars, and your feet on the ground - TR
JohnFKennedy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7509


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: April 05, 2004, 06:21:19 am »
Ignore

Dan, you said before the amendments weren't amendments to the constitution as such, they were part of the original constitution and just called amendments as they are part of the Bill of Rights I think it was. If that is the case, then by ratifying the constitution we could not then choose maps that contradicted that amendment as it was part of the original constitution, so we can't accept that the constitution is ratified and these are the maps to use as that would be contradictory.
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: April 05, 2004, 07:47:49 am »
Ignore

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


I'm sorry if I offended you Dunn.....but what everyone doesn't understand....is it doesn't MATTER what the majority think! SURE they voted for those maps! BUT....those maps are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! So they shouldn't have been voted on.

If anything.....(and this may take a while)....I would suggest that everyone make as many maps as they want......and they must follow the constitutional guidelines. THEN we vote on those maps....that should all correspond to the rules set in the constitution....

You must remember......all this voting on maps crap......took place a LONG time ago.....even before the constitution was changed to included both Regions and Districts......
The District Map was perfectly constitutional. It should not be overturned.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7509


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: April 05, 2004, 07:49:04 am »
Ignore

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


I'm sorry if I offended you Dunn.....but what everyone doesn't understand....is it doesn't MATTER what the majority think! SURE they voted for those maps! BUT....those maps are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! So they shouldn't have been voted on.

If anything.....(and this may take a while)....I would suggest that everyone make as many maps as they want......and they must follow the constitutional guidelines. THEN we vote on those maps....that should all correspond to the rules set in the constitution....

You must remember......all this voting on maps crap......took place a LONG time ago.....even before the constitution was changed to included both Regions and Districts......
The District Map was perfectly constitutional. It should not be overturned.

The district maps are supposed to not have a difference in population greater than 2 voters, those do, therefore they aren't constitutional.
Logged
Emsworth
Lord Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #43 on: April 05, 2004, 08:31:07 am »
Ignore

Dan my fellow sec
I am offended
I merlly put up the maps that were voted upon (and I personally didn't vote foe them). I accept any vote of the people. some of you do not.
Emsworth, Lewis and myself told you this will happan.


I'm sorry if I offended you Dunn.....but what everyone doesn't understand....is it doesn't MATTER what the majority think! SURE they voted for those maps! BUT....those maps are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! So they shouldn't have been voted on.

If anything.....(and this may take a while)....I would suggest that everyone make as many maps as they want......and they must follow the constitutional guidelines. THEN we vote on those maps....that should all correspond to the rules set in the constitution....

You must remember......all this voting on maps crap......took place a LONG time ago.....even before the constitution was changed to included both Regions and Districts......
The District Map was perfectly constitutional. It should not be overturned.

The district maps are supposed to not have a difference in population greater than 2 voters, those do, therefore they aren't constitutional.
The differences were fine in terms of residents, I believe, at the time of creation. In any event, Demrepdan has yet to do something about the maps, though progress has been made on PV.
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: April 06, 2004, 01:00:44 am »
Ignore

That district map was created to be as equal as possible in the number of theoretically eligible voters, not registered voters...
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines