| 310. Revision of 212. | |
|
|
Author | Message |
---|
Daniel277
Posts : 174 Join date : 2011-03-16
| Subject: 310. Revision of 212. Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:28 am | |
| "212. Potential citizens will stay in the Gulag for no less than one week."
into
"310. Potential citizens will stay in the Gulag for no less than one week. This period may be shortened or removed by a unanimous CPC vote." | |
|
| |
Ignus Admin
Posts : 364 Join date : 2011-03-13 Age : 38 Location : London
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:02 am | |
| | |
|
| |
Artemis
Posts : 79 Join date : 2011-06-14
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:34 am | |
| The miner's union votes no | |
|
| |
Belletor
Posts : 89 Join date : 2011-05-26 Age : 32
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Tue Oct 04, 2011 2:13 pm | |
| Sure sure, more power to me and whatnot.
I vote yes. | |
|
| |
Alexander Matusik
Posts : 25 Join date : 2011-06-12
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:19 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
Kaizuul
Posts : 64 Join date : 2011-07-10
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:29 pm | |
| - Artemis wrote:
- The miner's union votes no
This is the first I've seen/heard of this revision. I like the idea, personally. | |
|
| |
Artemis
Posts : 79 Join date : 2011-06-14
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Sat Oct 08, 2011 10:15 am | |
| - Richard Head II wrote:
- Artemis wrote:
- The miner's union votes no
This is the first I've seen/heard of this revision. I like the idea, personally. The vote was placed when a decent amount of time had passed, and all miners had either submitted votes or abstained (Aka, only I voted). | |
|
| |
Daniel277
Posts : 174 Join date : 2011-03-16
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Sat Oct 08, 2011 5:48 pm | |
| did you offer a chance for the miners to vote in the miners union section at all? | |
|
| |
The Grue
Posts : 14 Join date : 2011-04-14 Location : A place
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Sat Oct 08, 2011 8:33 pm | |
| Clothier's Union sees the value here and votes yes. | |
|
| |
Kaizuul
Posts : 64 Join date : 2011-07-10
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:36 am | |
| - Daniel277 wrote:
- did you offer a chance for the miners to vote in the miners union section at all?
Could be my fault.. I did just recently return. | |
|
| |
Ignus Admin
Posts : 364 Join date : 2011-03-13 Age : 38 Location : London
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. Wed Oct 12, 2011 3:45 pm | |
| Passed
This has been done in accordance with:
113. A citizen's non-participation in a law-change will result in the forfeit of their vote. A citizen always has the option to forfeit a vote.
216. Votes are formally submitted as a reply to the thread concerning and containing the prospective law change(s) and can be altered until the final vote is submitted or a second parliament passes, whichever is sooner. | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: 310. Revision of 212. | |
| |
|
| |
| 310. Revision of 212. | |
|