|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 17, 2005 14:41:52 GMT 7
I would like to propose before the Republican Parliament of the Republic of Karnali here assembled that
1) the official acceptance of Triumvirate positions be taken before the Republican Parliament.
2) the Triumvirate be required to repeat the Oath of Office* before being officially accepted.
*I, (candidate's name), vow to devote myself to the service of the people and nation of the Republic of Karnali for the betterment of the individual and collective in the future and to defend the principles of freedom, justice, and well-being for us all. In order to meet these goals, I accept the position of Tribune of the Republic of Karnali which has been entrusted to me by the Karnali people.
|
|
|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 17, 2005 14:42:12 GMT 7
I vote AYE
|
|
|
|
Post by andelarion on Oct 17, 2005 17:21:10 GMT 7
Aye.
|
|
|
|
Post by extreme007 on Oct 18, 2005 2:07:20 GMT 7
I would suggest:
I, (candidate's name), vow to devote myself to the service of the people and nation of the Republic of Karnali for the betterment of the individual and collective in the future, to defend the principles of freedom and well-being for us all and to unite peace, justice and strength in our Republic. I will fullfill my vows by accepting the position of Tribune of the Republic of Karnali which has been entrusted to me by the Karnali people.
|
|
|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 18, 2005 2:13:36 GMT 7
Have you ever thought of voting and then if it gets turned down THEN revise?
|
|
|
|
Post by extreme007 on Oct 18, 2005 2:25:15 GMT 7
No... simply because I had to do the changes, when I introduced my first bill.... remember the National Symbols thing which I had to edit simply because the third person (neph!) wanted to edit..
|
|
|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 18, 2005 2:53:50 GMT 7
The rewording of an oath that comes to mean the same thing as before is no reason to revise a vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by extreme007 on Oct 18, 2005 3:02:28 GMT 7
No.. you could simply edit it and let yours and ric's vote stay as they are...
|
|
|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 18, 2005 3:21:25 GMT 7
nope, we'd have to wait 3 more days because the vote was modified and revote. Just deal with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by extreme007 on Oct 18, 2005 4:15:39 GMT 7
3 more days?? its just a few more hours... you still have to wait for three days no matter what..
|
|
|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 18, 2005 7:03:45 GMT 7
what the heck are you talking about? I never know what you're talking about. The vote is in progress, if I revise the legislation than the vote has to restart, do you get that? The way the oath is now is fine, if it is not than I am sure it will be voted down.
|
|
|
|
Post by extreme007 on Oct 18, 2005 9:00:41 GMT 7
i was saying that you would have had to wait for 3 days no matter what.... you introduced this legislation today... so, if you had edited it, it wouldn't have mattered more than a few hours (between the edit and the original)... so, it was really a question of waiting the extra few hours..
|
|
|
|
Post by airim9x on Oct 20, 2005 15:35:52 GMT 7
This legislation passes by a vote of 2-0-0.  |
|
