![]() |
Article 5: Treason - Printable Version +- TSP Archives (https://archive.tspforums.xyz) +-- Forum: Archives (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Forum: The Cat-Tribe Hall of Records (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=172) +---- Forum: Government Workings (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=215) +----- Forum: Assembly Archive (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=189) +----- Thread: Article 5: Treason (/showthread.php?tid=2794) |
Article 5: Treason - Todd McCloud - 10-13-2010 This is the current Article for power of expulsion, taken verbatim from the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showtopic=8043'>Charter</a>: Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 5 - Treason</em></strong> Please state your opinion on this article, including any revisions you would like to see. You may also argue over the necessity of said article and any other directions this article should take. Discussion for this article will end on <strong class='bbc'>Wednesday, October 20th</strong>, or on a later date if the Minister of Region determines the debate to require more time. Article 5: Treason - Guest - 10-14-2010 I have never been a fan of this part. I don't think we need it at all, or if we do, we should define treason as something like behaving purposefully against the charter, although I think that might be covered in the earlier articles (it's late and I'm too lazy to go through entire charter and see if I can find anything ![]() Article 5: Treason - Todd McCloud - 10-14-2010 What about this? Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 5 - Treason</em></strong>Really, most of the stuff in point one is a recount of Article 2. I also didn?t really get the subdivision stuff, so I omitted it. Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Article 5 - Treason</strong>[*:n49hj6j1] Treason against The South Pacific shall be defined as any violation of <strong class='bbc'>Article 2.3</strong>. Article 5: Treason - kloister - 10-14-2010 Given well documented history, I would not like to see it lost all together...Granted it will not be very often that it is dusted down and used in anger, however it has it's value and credit for the re-write...Looks good to me... Article 5: Treason - Guest - 10-20-2010 Hm, I like your rewrite, but that's already covered under art. 3 I think. I still say we scrap this article in its entirety. K, This was introduced by "someone" during the last Grand Assembly, and I don't think we ever used this since. We considered using it once, but also then we ejected under violation of Art. 2 (duties of citizenship) and not for treason, as with all others(But I might be biased and more inclined to strike or revise texts not written by me :whistle: ) Article 5: Treason - Todd McCloud - 10-21-2010 Hmmm... I'll add a 'remove' option to the voting options now XD. I feel it's necessary just because it outlines the process well - it points to it, so there's no gray area. It's all black and white pretty much, lol. |