May 20, 17 / Can 00, 01 22:51 UTC

Re: Discussion of the draft Constitution  

People...  this almost not a trully monarchy , we chose our leader after the previous as died, if they remove the part of "HoS can dissolve the parlament" and decide better the way that the powers work, this gonna be okay. (i want anything,that is not a Democracy)

 Don't quit before June, they gonna show us the Constitution with a better text and i believe they gonna hear our suggestions, there a lot of Asgardians Ideas that as already Implanted in this draft.

I know that a lot of you is apprensive with the constitution now, but remember that this is a draft (that as translated from russian, so great part of the original significance of Igor words as lost in the translations...), and the constitution is a W.i.P. until 15/06(since they gonna post it officially in 18/06, 3 days for redo it).

So please, Asgardians, dont quit only because of this Draft...   :)

May 20, 17 / Can 00, 01 23:14 UTC

deleted...

  Last edited by:  Dirk Baeyens (Asgardian)  on May 27, 17 / Can 07, 01 08:24 UTC, Total number of edits: 5 times

May 20, 17 / Can 00, 01 23:28 UTC

Here is another input from what I can make of this so called "vote" which will prove this is only a charade in order to pretend hundreds of thousands human beings are giving legitimacy to Asgardia.

No one ever questioned the voting system. No one ever saw the mechanism of ensuring the votes are not being altered after the voting process and we have no guarantee whatsoever that the vote will actually be taken into consideration.

Another aspect, from the realm of mathematical probability: assuming the vote is correct, based on the logical crowd behavior and the number of comments so far, it is more than probable the Constitution will pass, regardless of what text is actually submitted for voting. Just think that the "Yes" voters will vote "Yes" but the ones who do not agree will split in two: "No" voters and absentees. Since the outcome is measured against the number of the actual votes, "Yes" will always be 50%+1 higher than the "No", unless there is a huge majority of "No". This doesn`t seem to be the case, since only a handful of people actually take part in the discussions, either here or on Facebook.

The third aspect is the fact that so far only the English version has been published (now I see the Russian one just added), but this accounts for less than 50% of the Asgardian population. What about the ones who don`t speak neither English nor Russian? Also, when submitted for voting, the final text has to be written in every single language spoken in Asgardia. This seems impossible, not to mention that there are subtle differences between languages, which might change the essence of a phrase. For example, comparing just the two published versions so far, I already found one inconsistency: in English, "National Bank" is not similar with "State Bank", term which is used in the Russian version.

So, I am truly sorry to say, but this seems to be the end of a nice dream, at least for me. I will stay around until the vote actually happens, but afterwards the best chances are I will be leaving this project. Good luck to all !

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 00:40 UTC

Dear fellow Asgardians,

at first, this is a draft which means that the final document which would be votable has not reached its final form. Literally, everything of the constitution can be changed until then. What I do observe here and at other platforms where the constitution is discussed is that a minority of people give up (or use to give up as a political weapon) on what they read because they consider this is the final thing, as set in stone. So please let me do a major recommendation, which should be taken into account when participating in this discussion and when choosing the right decision for your future (in Asgardia):

The society of a nation is who gives power to the government and the society of a nation is who chose the government and the context in where every single law lives: which is the constitution in the case of a constitutional government.

We the people are the society of Asgardia and what we do commit now will define who we are in the future. So, I encourage everyone who at least reads this topic, to not just read or reply his or her quit-decision when X or Y does not match their mindset, stand up for what you believe and bring us with your contribution to the constitution as a society forward, tell us and the maintainers of the constitution your point of view and refrain from proclaiming your personal last resort. We need you to be successful. I can assure you that every single word you do provide here as a contribution to the constitution will be worth it and taken into account when forming the next revision of the draft. I know that from my own experience how attentive Asgardia officials do operate, so please trust me.

So, if you don't want a constitutional monarchy, please tell us why or if possible provide an alternative to the currently chosen government and the constitution in general. At least: as more people invest time and effort and provide feedback here, as more society-driven will be our future. Don't fear to be ruled by the few when you can change that to be ruled by the many.

Thank you.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 00:53 UTC

The draft is awful!

1. Asgardia is Constitutional Monarchy and has a King, Royal Council of the Supreme Value 60-80 years old, Parliament (50 years old), Chairman of the government 40-65 years old, Judges 40-65 with a degree in law, Prosecutor (no age requirements), law enforcement (of course no age requirements), Taxes and fees, Central bank and commercial Banks.

Weak Spots/Vulnerability Points:

1. Constitutional Monarchy  is a common earth state, enough kings. New kind of humanity don't serve to Kings. NOT NEEDED!

2. Royal Council of the Supreme Value from immortal white beards. NOT NEEDED!

3. Chairman of the government 40-65 years old, Judges 40-65 with a degree in law, Prosecutor (no age requirements), law enforcement (of course no age requirements) NOT NEEDED SUCH OLD MEN! ABSOLUTE AGE DISCRIMINATION, PROHIBITED IN THE EUROPEAN LAW AND WORLD LAW! ASGARDIA POPULATION IS A LOT OF YOUNGER!

4.Prosecutor (no age requirements), OF COURSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT YOUNG MAN ALREADY! NOT NEEDED!

5. Taxes and fees. YOU GOT VERY WRONG. WE ARE NOT A FARM FOR OLDMEN MASTERS! NOT NEEDED!

6. Central bank and commercial Banks. ENOUGH BANKS. WHAT IS THIS SPACE STATE, A COMMON EARTH STATE WITH SUPREME NEGATIVE! NOT NEEDED!

7. SUGGESTION: THIS AWFUL DRAFT MUST BE VOTED ARTICLE BY ARTICLE, NOT AT ONCE. A FEW ARTICLES ARE TYPICAL FOR THE SLAVE EARTH SOCIETIES.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 01:04 UTC

cepenik something is wrong with your shift-key or your caps lock is fluctuating.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 01:32 UTC

I'll state again I feel as though a major part of this, the government, is something that was either decided upon before hand or something , someone outside the community who submitted parts to be included in the draft added without checking with us

I personally feel a little duped , I believed the government was going to be a Head of Nation with powers similar to a prime minster or president with the 13 heads directing activities related to their fields. The major question was whether we voted directly or had a representative government that voted for things proposed by the heads. Instead the Head of Nation being relinquished and a new vote to determine the next Head is now being scrapped for a Head of State who seems to automatically take the position without a vote and is able to wield a variety of almost unchecked power in the government , able to veto individuals and assign in the positions that would act as a check and balance against them with ease. 

Again I can't recall anyone suggesting this type of government, however it seems from previous decrees there was an idea of how the government was going to be even before discussions began so I'm lead to believe our suggestions for the type of government were irrelevant to writing the constitution.

Its small details such as motto , taxation without any form of specifics , the fact HoS can nominate based on hereditary etc. that makes me worried that even if we did propose something else we're not going to be listened too.

I honestly thought we'd get a meritocracy or a technocracy , but I'd like to have seen a Futarchy (basically voting on a measure of success rather than a method) but unlikely to see that now 


May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 01:36 UTC

@nihylum by any chance do you actually have any arguments or do you know something more than us, the "commoners", since you are so optimistic and faithful in Asgardia`s officials, who came up with the idea of creating a draft to propose space slavery in the first place? The very first "brick" of this draft ... is a non-sense ... people are equal but not so equal when it comes to the King / President / etc. A, one more non-sense ... Art. 15 which "guarantees and protects all types of property" is not enough for the HoS, since he needed an extra Art. 32 / 11 provision to say "The HoS enjoys immunity .... the safety of his / her property after leaving the role". And the examples continue all over.

Yet, you say "don`t worry", "trust them", "everything is OK", "there is time", "no need for negativity" and so on. Well ... sorry to say I`ve heard this before, and it didn`t turn out so well in the end. But hey, everyone is free to voice their opinions, either pro or against.

PS. Still didn`t see any answers from the officials about the voting process and it`s integrity ... or that is OK as well, if they say so? :)

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 01:51 UTC

@petrv I know this but since now they have an advocate, I thought is worth asking. About the letter, honestly I think is another waste of time. We don`t even have a State / Nation yet and already ask ... sorry, beg for the mercy of one person, when the discussion is here and obviously there are so many opinions and arguments against the proposed draft?

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 02:28 UTC

  I'm seeing many talking about "democracy", even @LoreZyra, who did that wonderful review. Now, try opening the draft PDF and do a simple search for "democracy".
  I found 0 (zero) occurrences of the word throughout all the document. If you shorten the search term to "democr" (like to include "democrat", "democratic", "democracies", etc.) you'll can find 1 (one) occurrence, at pag. 15, chap. 5, art. 16, sub. 5: "State bodies and officials may not intervene in elections, put pressure on citizens or falsify elections during democratic procedures." this may mean there will be some kind of "democratic procedure" at least (even if I may prefer to see some "democratic result" instead).

  This could mean we'll not take part into "a democracy"... in fact we're going to take part into a monarchy, Asgardia is going to be a reign, exactly as into the Norse mithology. Odin was "the God King". We'll have Igor as a king (maybe a decree will establish him as a "God" too... this may explain why no reference to religions).

  No doubt why "[Asgardia] has no place for political parties": there will be just one "political party", our king's one who, by decree, will establish the political directions for the year to come (by any chance, those directions will be mandatory).

  Another point worth noting is I read in no part of this wonderful Constitution who is the State body in charge to "make laws"... yes... there is an evanescent reference (art. 34, sub. 12, lett. a) to the Parliament, which should "adopting Asgardian law", which doesn't seem to me it will "make", or "create", or "write", or "vote for" laws: just "adopting". So, I've to imagine, the laws will be written by someone else (let me guess: the king? maybe helped by the Real Court and the Real Council of Supreme Values).
  This is not something new, for us, as we're used to receive (mandatory) decrees, even if someone tells "that's not mandatory: it's a proposal" (ref. the Calendar).

  @LoreZyra, as others, noted we spent many efforts to give suggestions while not even full constitutions, to the suggestions gathering thread, the same as we did for the Unity document. Now we're seeing a Unity document which is nearly exactly the same as the one we received to comment (and, hopefully, amend). I did a rapid check with an online Diff utility: the two documents, apart very small differences in grammar and punctuation, are exactly the same (do it yourself: the results will be amazing to see).
  And, despite all the suggestions I read, about the Constitution, I found in no part any reference to a "monarchy". So this is the exact degree in which our suggestions are held... I would not like to think the degree in which we'll be taken in the future, then, with the king busy in writing all the laws, promanating all the decrees... collecting all the taxes.

  I thought we was treated a little "marginally" as we are users (so guests, legally speaking) but our status would be improved, after becoming citizens, but now I'm seeing how things will get worse, not better.

  It's not a secret I'm from Italy: despite the fact we, like the great majority of the people around the world, came from a monarchy, we left it behind more than 70 years ago (1946) and it's likely not coming back. I born free, not having to bow to any "king": my President is "one of us", a citizen like many others, with a special degree in constitutional law, but it's clear that I pay for his bread (and butter), not that him is paying for mine.
  I can believe that, for many in this forum, is not that great burden to stay under a monarchy, as they're even out of Asgardia (yes, even if it's 2017, monarchies are still around).
  That said, I'm not ready to become a subject, not by my will at least.

  As a last consideration, I was very curious to see how a company could have become a State: now I know it.

  Have to thank @LoreZyra for his fantastic review, which helped me into understanding some obscure parts of the text, @Scarbs, @ekampp and @bluecloud to have expressed my exact feelings, leaving me free to add something few than the tons of things I was writing.
  I've to tell @petrv that there is no need to delay the constitutional referendum: one month is more than enough to digest (AKA "to take note") the fact you'll vote for this one, the same as you'll vote for the exact Document of Unity we received in March.
  There is a company, AIRC, which is striving to become a State, a CEO which is striving to become a king... and kings need subjects to pay taxes. Are we going to see some kind of Robyn Hood riding a rocket to flee from king's tax collectors, into Sherwood's asteroid belt? Will the main colony's module be named Nottingham? ;-)

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 03:26 UTC

@petrv
Absolutely!

You (and all we) have to undestand we're essentially speaking of a company... with some (but not that much) candies here and there.
If you ask to yourself if you can disagree with your company's CEO (assuming you're not self employed ;-)), you'll have the answer about Asgardia as well.
If you ask to yourself who is in charge in defining your company's policy and guidelines for the future, you'll have the answer about Asgardia as well.
Try thinking if you, by any chance, can make your CEO to leave his own company, if you don't agree with his policy: far better to be realistic and just leave.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 03:34 UTC

AIRC is not running Asgardia. Asgardia NGO is composing Asgardia and a single person (the head of state) is (currently) running an empty nation (with 0 citizens). That's a fact.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 03:46 UTC

@nihylum
That could be a fact if we had any detailed information about NGO Asgardia (as someone told they had to give us "in a few").
But maybe I missed the details' announcement: if you have more detailed informations feel free to share them and enlight me.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 03:58 UTC

I am sorry, I am forced to not disclose the information that I have no matter under what condition. That fact I did publish in the previous reply is simple logic: None of us got a certificate of citizenship yet. We are not at that stage, this will happen when we voted on the acceptance and agreement to the final document. That fact that there is currently only one citizenship given (to the head of nation) is based on the information that he has announced and agreed as the head of the nation in the past.

The fact that I am not allowed to disclose any information is based on common rights which protect private communication for being exposed to the public. It's also common sense.

  Updated  on May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 03:59 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 04:13 UTC

So a fact with no evidence... some kind of faith-reated one.
This will go to the pile of "behind the scenes" built things, like nearly all others.

Just to think we'll have to vote on things built "behind the scenes": when it happens in my country someone will resign his political career and, sometimes, newspapers writes he was taken into jail also.