Civitates System, what do you think?
Voters Bill - Proposal that specifically goes against the Spirit of Curial Democracy
Damn right it does! But now that I have your attention and the anxiety of a Strategos posting such a statement as the heading of his bill has gradually turned into dread, probably indicating some plot to steal power by use of numerous political tricks such as bribery and abuse of mod powers, we can move on. Cant we? Maybe there is a paradox seeing as the intent of this bill is to prevent similar scenarios to the one above. Not that Hex would ever do such a thing, but you thinking we would does cause a few giggles. Don’t worry your safe! Probably
Anyway, some time ago Mimirswell and I had a debate about why supporters should be listed, whether voters should be able to state what they voted and some such related debates. Mimirswell won the proposal because I could not argue against the fact that my idealist counter-proposal was unworkable in an institution where most probably voted blindly. But this is not that system, no this is an even more mature and elitist group that are elected for their contribution to the community. What is this group afraid of? There is no corruption here? No blind voting? This is the new Curia! I hope. Thus I think that people that proved their interest to the betterment of the community should not only be trusted to see the vote before, not only be trusted to state what they voted, but that the complete opposite should be established thus defeating the Achilles heal of democracy.
This is the basis of my Proposal –
- I trust the new patricians to be smart enough to not be influenced by anything but a valid argument regardless of the poster.
- I trust that the Patricians all take their voting duty seriously and realise the impact of some votes on the community
- I trust that no Patrician is scared to reveal what he voted for, or why because corruption does not exist in this system.
- I trust that the Patricians have the ability to not only perform rights similar to those performed in democracy but surpass it, a renaissance of democracy maybe?
- I trust that a patrician that does not have time to vote and read the argument to know that he should not vote on an issue that he does not know about thus he should use his right to abstain.
Now, yes I know the arguments that will be presented and I might as well state them now, but please after I do so do not be disheartened by the magnitude of their supposed validity, they might indeed show that the current system is simpler and faster, but if the Curia is to prosper as an institution it must further establish trust and but the minds at rest that every decision made by the curia will Only be based on arguments. In the short term there might not be any significant advantages, but, coupled with a bill to be posted by a members soon, its like Algebra, pointless when starting it, tells you nothing about Bras and is a pain – but – The doors it opens for an individual regarding their future means it is well worth it.
Onto the Arguments –
- A voter should have their right to privacy.
Yes, I agree with this, and when this bill will be voted on I want each voter to ask themselves these questions – What do I have to fear from my vote being public? and is it worth voluntarily loosing this right for the possible advantages of a totally open and honest system where corruption is not only nonexistent but also the suspicion of it will be dispelled once and for all, a true new Age!
- What disadvantages are there with a system of private voting that is common in all democratic votes?
I will answer this with one practical example –
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Squeakus Maximus
