an idea for transperency

Since I always wanted the council to be more transperant.

One of the possibility that offsite forum offer us, is to have two council room, one pirvate like the old one and this one.

And one open to public to see but not post. I ask longtime Emunah if that was possible for him to do in RK forum and said no. But here we can do.

So i ask you do you find a good idea, that all subject discuss and vote that are not security sensitive (inventory and trade, army and marshals) can be held in a public council room.

I am waiting your opinion

I am all for it.

Should we also have an opinion room where people can post their thoughts about a certain proposal or something that we are currently discussing?

Yes, I like the idea too.

It could have been done in the RK forum as easily as here.

Yes I like the idea and saj.

It was done in CoA courtrooms I believe.

To accomplish that we will need to modifiy this article in Book 3 of somerset laws:

Quote :

Art. 3.4.2. : All information given in the council room forum is private. The only persons that can get information out is the Spokesperson, or any other council member that receives authorization to do so by the Duke. Any councilor that violates this article will be charged with high treason against Somerset duchy and can be sentenced to death or exile.

By this:

Quote :

Art. 3.4.2. : All information given in the private council room forum is private. The only persons that can get information out is the Spokesperson, or any other council member that receives authorization to do so by the Duke. Any councillor that violates this article will be charged with high treason against Somerset duchy and can be sentenced to death or exile.

the big change is underline

And i think to add an article that fit this idea, need better wording:

Discussion and vote related to the following subject can only be help in private council room.
-Treaty
-Army, constabulary force, security info
-Trade
-Any subject that one counsellor ask to be private.

Although surprised I can't be but fully delighted by this idea. Not only people will have the opportunity to judge and help us but also you guys save me of a whole lot of trouble. Cause I was planning to start a debate over the article under revision in the open forum, accusing you of playing politically dirty I m happy that all this won't be necessary.

Politcally dirty? Sorry, but thats UWS style of play, not the Patrons . Cant speak for the other parties in the council though.


Regarding the proposed change :

Quote :

Art. 3.4.2. : All information given in the private council room forum is private. The only persons that can get information out is the Spokesperson, or any other council member that receives authorization to do so by the Duke. Any councillor that violates this article will be charged with high treason against Somerset duchy and can be sentenced to death or exile.

Discussion and voting related to the following subjects can only be held in the private council room :
i) All types of treaties
ii) Army, constabulary force, security proposals
iii) Trade
iv) Any proposal that the councilor who proposes it requests to be dicussed and voted on in the private council room

After what dani did is not dirty, is take several weeks and trontor get elected duke to have back some diplomaticy with worcester after is public talk about treaty with them

And like sajan i cannot talk for other party but uws is the only one with criminal and people that whip out other politic party forum ...

What I considered politically dirty play was the ability of the majority to announce whatever it seemed fit to them to the public and the minority's being under threat of prosecution for treason in case they backed up their arguments using data from the Council room. I hope that you abide with your promise and end this situation pretty soon.

Who are the majority who announce data from the council unless its under their purview?

I just post economic data each week, and that also in council from where it is posted by the Spokesperson. Allikath posts economic data as part of her reports. Who else? The Spokesperson posts votes, treaties, the economic report.... The Duke makes announcement.

oh yeah, so how about the majority can prosecute people in court, how abotu everyone can put sentence in a case, how about everyone can grant people,

How about that ???

The spoke person is there to announce the thing ... it's is job ... like your is to prosecute ... simple was that, but don't be to happy because opne council room that means people will see who really work and who don't

Talking of working i am still waiting this book 4

So any one have trouble of the with new article write it like sajan do, and the change of article like i said before?

Or we can put it to vote?

No prob with me.

I thought this thread was for ideas not a debate wether or not UWS are crooks or not.

We all have had our experiences with UWS but I for one say let the past rest and give Poliphilus a breake. I place just as much faith in him as I do in Hypno and Sajan.

Poliphilus is a man of honor and integrety and I am proud to call him a friend.

So please lets stop arguing about UWS and support Hypno's idea or find new ones.

* Poliphilus is deeply moved by his old friend's support*

"Thank you Bellos!" *is all he can utter"

I think it is important that we do this and soon. It is an excellent way to involve the other players more in the affairs of council.

budicca wrote:

I think it is important that we do this and soon. It is an excellent way to involve the other players more in the affairs of council.

Yeah i agree the trouble is the IG legal corpus is completly bugged for over a week, and none can add new laws project ...

So cannot change book 3 execpt if we all agree that the legal corpus IG is too much always buigged and forum laws is the one valid...

It's been my opinion long ago that laws of the forum can be valid (treaties, for example). But with one important exception: laws that found the character of a deed as punishable are not valid unless they are posted in game.

This law is in fact not adding any action to the index of actions punishable by the Law. So in my opinion it can be valid even if not posted in game.