Play Nice BigNation - The newly founded land needs you!

[Taylor]

CURRENT LAW (post my initial setup):​

1. The currency will be called TABcoin (iluvparis) - 2/0 - PASSED
2. Women aren't allowed to be overweight (FireKraquora) - 2/1 - PASSED
3. All citizens must be self supporting (Lebbo73) - 2/2 - STALEMATE
4. All citizens must be self supporting Mk2 (Andrew Birch) - 3/3 - STALEMATE
5. Free Speech be absolute and can never be silenced,deleted,moderated or infringed upon in any way (WA ROO) 5/? - PASSED
6. Banning of religion - (iBeng) - 2/4 - PASSED
7. Judging Panel Act of 4/12/2019 - (The Speaker) - reached 5 votes



On Tuesday the 3rd of December we will be embarking on a new adventure and we need you on board.

This new nation needs to build a code by which all it's citizens are held to, a set of rules they all have agreed to or were agreed to by those who were there before them.

The rules of this game are simple:

To vote you need to be a citizen, to be a citizen you have to post in the game thread.
Every new citizen has to bring a new law with them, your first duty is the proposal for a new law.
--- Be careful of your wording because once it's law, it's law and you'll need someone else to propose a change and have it passed to change that.
Only those who were citizens when you joined the community can vote on your proposal.
You can propose anything you like.
Your laws cannot be omnibus collections of multiple issues, you propose a determination on a single issue at a time - unless that law is changed.
Voting will be in the form of likes or dislikes (or donkey votes of other), if you don't have access to those functions you can reply in writing.
Debate of the proposed laws are encouraged.

As the founding member of the community my proposal for a law is to code the above as the first law.
All citizens at the time of proposal: Taylor (Who votes for and it passes)

Where this goes is going to be entirely up to the community, there can be a winner in this if the law permits.

 

[Taylor]

It would put a threshold of articulation on democratic involvement.

 

[ShanDog]

No - will be a complete minefield

How so?

 

[Ben The Donkey]

Can I begin by remarking that I think you have a need to separate law from constitution, and I think you first need to enact a constitution prior to establishing laws.
This will help provide a basis for law, and hopefully prevent some conflicts. For example, point #5 above should be a constitutional right rather than a law (IMO), and would (or should) prevent #6 from being passed into law.

For my law -
I propose that any law found to be in opposition with the constitution should be immediately struck down regardless of whether or not it was passed by popular vote. Unless that is taken as an understanding as part of the constitution, in which case

Alternative law:
I propose that TABcoin be an electronic currency only, and that cash as a form of exchange should be made extinct.

 

[Taylor]

I propose that any law found to be in opposition with the constitution should be immediately struck down regardless of whether or not it was passed by popular vote. Unless that is taken as an understanding as part of the constitution, in which case

Agreed.

Sounds like we need a constitution first.

 

[iluvparis]

No to no cash law

 

[iluvparis]

How so?

Plain English will be too simple for many laws.

 

[Taylor]

Plain English will be too simple for many laws.

Isn't the intent of the law more important than the words?

 

[The Speaker]

We already have a constitution. A codified constitution is a separate matter.

 

[iluvparis]

Isn't the intent of the law more important than the words?

In which case there is no need to have the law specified - thanks for getting on board Tay Tay

 

[Taylor]

I think we should have a 7 day voting right expiration, where if a vote is called (there might need to be an official process for this where a user is tagged in the post) there is a conclusion called after 7 days.

Currently all votes are waiting open ended until either enough have voted to make the result beyond question, or everyone has voted.

 

[Taylor]

In which case there is no need to have the law specified - thanks for getting on board Tay Tay

How do we know the intent if it's not spelled out?

Or do we want it to be interpreted to suit the future arguments?

 

[ShanDog]

In which case there is no need to have the law specified - thanks for getting on board Tay Tay

The purpose would be to make the law accessible and understandable by laypeople - something that should be a basic human right. That they are written in plain English in comparison to some of the legalese that occurs now won't make the language any more or less open to loopholes, abuse or malicious interpretation by lawyers or people. When it's your job to pick holes in law, regardless of the style of writing, a lawyer will do it. The clarifying notes also go a ways to acting as a layer of protection too.

Ultimately, a legal system that is inaccessible to the average person is a catalyst for a social class divide and/or oligarchy.

 

[iluvparis]

I think we should have a 7 day voting right expiration, where if a vote is called (there might need to be an official process for this where a user is tagged in the post) there is a conclusion called after 7 days.

Currently all votes are waiting open ended until either enough have voted to make the result beyond question, or everyone has voted.

Yes

 

[Deaneus!]

How does one join this nation?

 

[iluvparis]

How does one join this nation?

You are now in - welcome friend

 

[Leeda]

Tempting but all so unreliable... never let it be said that people can't change their minds and also that
people can't work together...

We all work together but we also sometimes want to play with no rules..
Nonsense will be easily worked out..

 

[Carringbush2010]

The purpose would be to make the law accessible and understandable by laypeople - something that should be a basic human right. That they are written in plain English in comparison to some of the legalese that occurs now won't make the language any more or less open to loopholes, abuse or malicious interpretation by lawyers or people. When it's your job to pick holes in law, regardless of the style of writing, a lawyer will do it. The clarifying notes also go a ways to acting as a layer of protection too.

Ultimately, a legal system that is inaccessible to the average person is a catalyst for a social class divide and/or oligarchy.

You'll have to excuse my naivety and presumptuousness, but I though the whole (or at least part there of) premise of Big Nation was to do away with 'loopholes' that allow blatant activity that is not the interests of the majority of it's citizens.

Taylor was this at least part of your premise with BigNation?

 

[Taylor]

I wanted to see what motivations rose to the top, anything could happen

 

[Carringbush2010]

I wanted to see what motivations rose to the top, anything could happen

Again you'll have to excuse my naivety, by very human nature wouldn't that be what the majority of BigNation citizens want? Would it not be pointless to create a faux society unless it has utopian ideals?

 

[ShanDog]

Again you'll have to excuse my naivety, by very human nature wouldn't that be what the majority of BigNation citizens want? Would it not be pointless to create a faux society unless it has utopian ideals?

There's no such thing as a Utopia. The etymology of the word itself is a play on words that acknowledges its own impossibility. All societies have to contend with human nature and could therefore never be perfect. You can only strive to be better.

 

[Taylor]

Not to mention that the utopia for each person would be different enough that one person's paradise would be another's nightmare.

 

[Carringbush2010]

There's no such thing as a Utopia. The etymology of the word itself is a play on words that acknowledges its own impossibility. All societies have to contend with human nature and could therefore never be perfect. You can only strive to be better.

Yeah I know and you know that and I imagine the bulk of the citizens of BigNation would know that, if I may rephrase then using my original reply regarding lawyers 'bypassing the law through loopholes' then.

How about ideal ideals that suit the majority of BigNation - was that not the whole point to begin with? So we don't have to accept as we do in the real world things like lawyers getting obviously guilty people off through loopholes.

 

[Leeda]

Can anyone of us have any say in how all this gets done?
or are we just doing it with what we purport to do whenever we log on and post?

Maybe better not answer this but just give me an inflection with other posters..

concept of a newline with a new land. and we all get together is particularly inspiring.. go at it...

 

[Taylor]

The rules can be shaped and will dictate where it goes.

 

[Leeda]

CURRENT LAW (post my initial setup):​

1. The currency will be called TABcoin (iluvparis) - 2/0 - PASSED
2. Women aren't allowed to be overweight (FireKraquora) - 2/1 - PASSED
3. All citizens must be self supporting (Lebbo73) - 2/2 - STALEMATE
4. All citizens must be self supporting Mk2 (Andrew Birch) - 3/3 - STALEMATE
5. Free Speech be absolute and can never be silenced,deleted,moderated or infringed upon in any way (WA ROO) 5/? - PASSED
6. Banning of religion - (iBeng) - 2/4 - PASSED
7. Judging Panel Act of 4/12/2019 - (The Speaker) - reached 5 votes



On Tuesday the 3rd of December we will be embarking on a new adventure and we need you on board.

This new nation needs to build a code by which all it's citizens are held to, a set of rules they all have agreed to or were agreed to by those who were there before them.

The rules of this game are simple:

To vote you need to be a citizen, to be a citizen you have to post in the game thread.
Every new citizen has to bring a new law with them, your first duty is the proposal for a new law.
--- Be careful of your wording because once it's law, it's law and you'll need someone else to propose a change and have it passed to change that.
Only those who were citizens when you joined the community can vote on your proposal.
You can propose anything you like.
Your laws cannot be omnibus collections of multiple issues, you propose a determination on a single issue at a time - unless that law is changed.
Voting will be in the form of likes or dislikes (or donkey votes of other), if you don't have access to those functions you can reply in writing.
Debate of the proposed laws are encouraged.

As the founding member of the community my proposal for a law is to code the above as the first law.
All citizens at the time of proposal: Taylor (Who votes for and it passes)

Where this goes is going to be entirely up to the community, there can be a winner in this if the law permits.

Boldly where no man has gone before.. scratch hat.. where no one is not to lazy to go on with..