Search results

http://z13.invisionfree.invalid/TNP/index.php?showtopic=5092

Official Court Ruling on Election Eligibility The clause in question, for reference, is: The Court finds that the current wording and original intent of the Constitution is such that all candidates for the relevant positions must be RA members for a continuous 30 Days in the period immediately...

Aren't there supposed to be, like, platforms and stuff posted in the campaign forums about now?

The original language could be justified either way, but I think it's clear that the original intention behind it was 30 days directly prior, not cumulative. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing someone do away with that requirement but it is there and I don't think that the extra-judicial RA votes...

30 days directly efore the election, yes. Though, is this meant to replace that law or just add to it? I assumed the first, but I can't find anything about getting rid of the current law. If that does come nto effect before the election and is taken as replacing the current law, then the 30 day...

I just sent myself a PM now to check, and I got an email (thenorthpacific.nationstates@gmail.com) right away. I didn't get an email for the PM about 12 hours ago (probably the same one Blackshear got), so yea they must have just fixed it this evening.

I lost track of the date. But it seems that the most effective solution would have involved two votes, one way or another, and it has seemed that way all along. The result of diluting the vote and basically handicapping the "yes" side wasn't exactly difficult to foresee.

Truly, we need more men of your conviction. Keep up the good fight.

Courts still here. Just....not much to do. Someone wanna sue someone or something? Challenge the constitutionality of the constitution? Ahwell.

Would probably be best, yes. Easiest (don't have to bother with a substitute unless really needed) and would "preserve the integrity" of the court better, too.

I'd be okay with that (3/5ths).

Sure, though if we want to avoid issues later....yea I don't really care if you announce it publicly or not.

I don't really feel that 2/3rds is necessary. A simple majority should be fine. The rest I like.

Right, you won't get Ivan's attention until you've relocated at least half the region to the RR.

He has his aptitudes, I'll admit. Unfortuantely, mathematical proofs and weather forecasting aren't really key to this game. Tragedy.

Simple enough, makes sense.

I'll never quite understand the contempt so many people hold for JAL when there are so many other people floating around this game that seem to be at least as bad, if not worse. le shrug

I associate Recall with Arnold Schwarzenegger, mostly cause of that movie and also I guess that election thing. So I get vague imposing pictures of mars. Anyway, I'm good with this.

Regardless of any legal issues or whatnot, defining the line of succession on elected positions that have no inherent relation to one's nation (other than that you have one and it's in the region and it's in the RA) would just be a practical nightmare. I mean, even if we did want to put the...

Presumably because it wouldn't pass. I'd vote for it, but not everyone can be me. I've come to terms with this over the last few years, though it hasn't been easy.

I think 3/4ths is a bit excessive, really. The 10 days thing obviously needs to go. I'd support both changes.

ohok. Alright then.

My biggest problem with NS2 (assuming the technical server lag issues get sorted out) is simply the layout of the site. I have trouble finding things easily. I still don't know how to switch between my nations that I've created, and that strikes me as kind of important. And it took me like ten...

With the servers drowning I couldn't do a whole lot, so not much criticism, positive or negative, from me just yet. From what have I seen, it could work, but I'm not sure it's living up to its potential.

Now let's not go too far. BW, that's the most mellow and confusing Black Power salute ever. Breathe, sniffles, breathe. The condescending presumptuous arrogance thing doesn't help so much.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue anymore. There is a substantial difference between ejecting WA and non-WA minnows. This system works. All you are doing at this point is distracting the topic from legitimate discussion. Most everyone except you seems to understand and accept that...

Your argument is that instead of doing this, we should do that, which kind of ignores the option of "do both." It also ignores that this would provide a sizable deterrence to anyone considering going rogue, because there would be an organizated entity within the region that would prevent them...

In terms of countering rogue delegates, running a coalition of massive influence nations, such as this body, is the only way to effectively fight back.

I thought innovation was generally considered something deserving of respect. Perhaps they had the opportunity to do whatever it was before you simply because they happened to get here first, but that's not particularly relevant. That you didn't have the chance to invent the printing press...

Allow the two sitting justices to pick a temporary third justice if the third is unavailable? Allow two justices to formally remove a third justice and initiate a replacement vote within the RA? Allow the Speaker and/or Delegate to appoint an interim judge? Allow the Delegate or Speaker to be an...