Guys. I hope you have come to at least respect me, if not trust me, so when I say this I hope you believe me. I am on the Constitutional Suggestion committee, so I know stuff.

The Constitutional suggestions are still being assembled in coherent form for being sent to the lawyers. That should be finished by Friday. Then the lawyers have their chance at it. That might take weeks to a month, I don't know.

It is my hope that we will get something to look at before May, but I say that's a hope, not a certainty. Trust me when I say I want to see the Constitution so I can start finding weaknesses and poke holes in it as well, and know if I am wasting my time and energy in participating in this project. I think we all feel that way. Unfortunately, matters of law are very, very VERY detailed and pedantic and argumentative and SLLOOOOOOOOWWWW. I personally hate it, but that's how it works.

So, I am asking for some time, out of respect.

Please.

I can't speak for others, even if I'm sure they share my feelings, about me you've my respect for sure @Phicksur, and I thank you a lot for your work all over the forum, the one of your "independent information channel" (which sounds like gold to me), and especially into the Constitutional Committe.
I'm sharing @sammwich's feelings also, as I think a whole, so complex, document as a Constitution, can't be created "in a night"... and not even in a month: just to give an hint, italian's costitution had it's start on 2 june 1946 and have been approved by constituent assembly on 22 december 1947, one whole year and half not "three months".
I'm not asking "them" (us?) to be quicker, even if, after the (lawyers') redaction, public review, (again) lawyers' reshaping, we won't need more "delay". But at least we should go into the whole "constitutional iter". No one told which one this "iter" is, maybe we'll do all I told and even more... but... all that in three months? Allow me to doubt about the "democratic process" behind it.

Hi. I'm John Skieswanne, and I'm part of the team who's working on the Constitution.

I can assure you that you have NOT been "removed" from the drafting process. The team exists precisely to make sure that everyone's voice is heard, and that they all find their way into the drafts. The Constitution is a multiple phases process, and at each phases we're compiling you all's suggestions. And I really mean it: ALL suggestions. As a proof, the compilation is publicly available for you all to follow.

I pride myself in listening to the people's will, regardless of my own opinions. Believe me when I say, my priority is that your suggestions get included into the process. In fact, it is our duty.

I know some might get the impression that they are left out, but please, realise that we do in fact have your back.

:)

Thanks for having our back, skieswanne, but until the draft is published we have no idea what community contributions have actually been considered. I hope your prediction of the future is correct. No one here has both the answer to that question and the willlingness to answer it.

I thought our Constitutional suggestions document was open for the public, so they could even see what we were doing while we were typing?

Wait, I am sure it was. While I was typing someone even chatted with me about what I was transcribing and discussed it with me.

I mean, you can read the whole thing yourself.

AWO

@sammwich

Actually, in this thread from the Admin, you may follow on our work, and look for yourself at all the suggestions we have integrated into the official document:

https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/constitution-132/topic/working-thread-compilation-of-community-suggestions-for-the-asgardia-constituion-2993/

Here's a direct link to the document:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V0281V4LIhoRSQsZLJyS-ltMlBK3GefEMIlDxoJzCJE/edit?usp=sharing

:)

I was told the document you guys are referring to is simply a list of suggestions that is going to be submitted to the lawyers who will actually write the draft constitution. They are not under any obligation to include anything in the document and the document does not constitute a constitution or even a legal document.

No obligation, true. But so far I have seen the staff be highly fair and honest to the suggestions. And the drafting itself will be subject of several levels of approval. For instance, on the 2nd of April, I'll be starting to, once again, compile the people's suggestions regarding the Declaration of Unity. The Declaration of Unity is but a tiny portion of the Constitution, yet the admin has nevertheless invited us to work with them on this particular facet of the draft and integrate the people's take on the Declaration.

@skieswanne,

Perhaps the phrase "removed from the drafting process" is a bit strong even while accurate. I might suggest we declare "the document has escalated to the next level." Or, something along the lines that indicates progression rather than exclusion.

This is NOT to say that we will have no further participation. Rather, we need to proceed towards the final draft as swiftly and efficiently as possible.