Yes, because it's likely that RO powers will change down the road. We may not want those powers to automatically go to people. For instance, under this law, those with the Appearance power can't legally change the flag, even though that's a power on the gameside.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply

Speaking as Minister of Regional Affairs, I would like to point out that certain activities (like Coup Tuesday) involve the temporary change of the regional flag. I would ask that such circumstances be taken into account by the above draft.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Reply

I'm still not certain those restrictions are necessary. At best perhaps just directly defining what they can't do with a specific power, which makes the purpose of the section much more clear (also making it easier to avoid forgetting to change it) and avoids regulating potentially useful changes ahead of time. It's a lot of unnecessary extra bureaucracy.

Overall, does the Assembly preference prefer an integration into existing documents (not necessarily my draft) or a separate document as proposed by Glen? We need to decide what will go to vote.

Reply

I prefer that our laws remain flexible. This desire to bloat the Charter with things that aren't all that important only makes our system more difficult to change. The Charter should be reserved for creating a framework for our systems. Everything else should be written as basic laws that can be changed by a simple majority.

Reply