Join the new world

Already have an account? Login



What is this?

You are reading an article written by a citizen of eRepublik, an immersive multiplayer strategy game based on real life countries. Create your own character and help your country achieve its glory while establishing yourself as a war hero, renowned publisher or finance guru.

[Congress] Proposed change MoNC procedure

Day 4,164, 03:53 • Published in Netherlands

• by UNL Congress

Greetings, citizens of Netherlands,

All non private debates will be done here in this newspaper. You can use the comments to join.

Topic: Proposed change MoNC procedure
Requester: Janty F
Text:
Greetings,

now that we have experienced MoNC vote (atleast I am being told, because I have not seen results yet), I belieeve it is time to return back to my proposal on MoNCs. As stated previously by numerous Congress Members, launching debate and vote at the same time is not exactly the best idea, as the opposing side of MoNC has no time to defend itself. That's why I believe debate and vote should not be necessary to launch at the same time.

As last time, the proposal was rejected due to "at any time" missing, I am now adding it back to the proposal. So I expect people (and parties), who claimed to reject the proposal only because of those three words, will now support the proposal, when these words are added "😉".

Proposal:

Change current Chapter II, Article 8, Paragraph 2 to:

The Congress of the eNetherlands can at any time propose a Motion of No Confidence. In this procedure, a debate and vote can be opened at the same time. In case of a two-thirds majority withdrawing confidence, the official(s) in question are discharged from office immediately.

MaartenW and Mael Dunbar
CoC Team

Comments

ElGorro Day 4,164, 04:03

I am in favor of this change. Would have chosen that path in the last but I understand the Chairman team wanting to follow the Law.

odan Day 4,164, 04:31

"The Congress of the eNetherlands can at any time propose a Motion of No Confidence. In this procedure, a debate and vote can be opened at the same time. In case of a simple majority withdrawing confidence, the official(s) in question are discharged from office immediately."

FTFY.

Janty F Day 4,164, 04:43

So after taking your feedback, you now demand more and more concessions. Typical. I guess you need to find a reason, why to vote NO, because you benefit from the current version of the Law 🙁 .

MoNC should follow in-game mechanics of impeachment in terms of majority. All in all, it should be (even though it rarely is) a tool used only for serious cases, when it is obvious the official(s) in charge should be discharged. And not for trolling purposes, or causing drama.

Mael Dunbar Day 4,164, 04:49

He is not demanding concessions, he is voicing his opinion. No one is asking you for anything, you decided this needs a debate. You want congress to agree, not the other way around.

Janty F Day 4,164, 04:52

Well, Mael, I only hope Iron and Wine will follow their claims made during last vote of this proposal, that they only vote NO, because "at any time" is missing. You have asked for that, and I have now delivered 😉 . So I expect your support, together with the rest of the Congress, who also shared the now-fixed issue.

odan Day 4,164, 04:54

i didn't comment on the previous vote. and what is posted above, is more akin to how our MoNC procedure was for years.

Janty F Day 4,164, 06:50

What is posted as a proposal, is more akin to the actual related in-game procedures. I would say we should follow the in-game rules as much as possible.

Mael Dunbar Day 4,164, 04:52

I can see this point of view, but like Janty says it could be misused (more easily) with regular majority.

odan Day 4,164, 10:27

it worked quite fine for years that way.

Janty F Day 4,167, 08:16

As the discussion does not continue, I believe the proposal can be voted upon 🙂 .

Post your comment