If you were given only these choices and had to vote today, which Constitution would you be most comfortable to live under?

•   Asgardia.Space - Constitutional Monarchy
•   Asgardia.Constitution.Proposal.txt - Democratic Technocracy 
•   The Skieswanne Constitution - Democratic Parliamentary System

Please select your choice and discuss your motivations for your choice.

** IT has occurred to me that some of you on mobile devices with non-modern web browsers may not get the best viewing experience for reading my proposed draft. Please see this link for the raw text version: 
(redacted)

You may also be interested in the ongoing poll for the type of government:  What is the type of governement that you want? 

For the current poll on the type/name of currency, click here:  What is the currency what you want for asgardia? 

(Please note that both of these polls will be closed by May 28, 2017.)

Finally someone that put taxation and put in the RIGHT way !!

I gonna read it 2 times more to say my opinion

I strongly support a democratic Technocracy. It not only discourages special-interest groups, but approaches the challenges of society as an engineering problem. Positions in government are appointed by the technical qualifications of the candidate rather than their personality traits or economic standing. In the model I propose, the lower echelons of government are directly elected by citizens. The Head of State is also elected, but each candidate must first pass the qualifications rounds before being presented to the general public for election. All positions are filled for and by Citizens.

I hope you will consider my proposed constitutional replacement over the draft presented by Asgardia.Space. 

Cool thread, LoreZyra! Thanks for putting this up. 

One thing is certain, the Asgardia.space constitution is currently the least favourite!

I must clarify that my document is a democratic parliament system, I'm aiming for a near-direct democracy with the parliament simply managing referendums. The Skieswanne-Ghodrati Document is heavily based on the people's suggestions. In fact, the "references" is full of the names of those whose inputs have been integrated into the document. 

-----

31/05 Edit: I am done integrating the people's suggestions into the document, update of the doc now complete! 

My Democratic Parliamentary System promotes the nearest thing to a direct democracy, and does not discriminate HoN (or any high positions) candidates based on royalty lineage or technological knowledge. I personally believe a great leader is not necessarily one which has inherited the throne or one that has a certificate in engineering. I believe anyone who has the dedication, the will, the vision has the potential of being a great leader. 

Glad to see that the democratic technocracy is getting such good support. We've nearly cleaned it up all the way.

I was reading through the forum and saw someone's post that made a good point. Maybe, when the time comes, we should vote on the draft Article by Article? It would be a much more taxing voting process, but it would help to show where the grievances lie?

@BloodyClean(Asgardian) on 26 May 2017, 8:42 p.m.

... we should vote on the draft Article by Article? It would be a much more taxing voting process, but it would help to show where the grievances lie?

I agree! However, I seriously doubt we will be given such opportunity as it appears we are being forced to swallow whatever they post on Asgard 1 (June 18). If this date must serve any significance to the foundation of a Space Nation, then I propose we continue our debates, flesh out a superior Constitution, and perhaps start on construction of the common Laws until next year!

GRRRRR... @LoreZyra... let me say I hate you!!! ;-)))
I'm definitely for a Democratic Parliamentary System but, if you put that "Technocracy" in a "Democratic" form... I can't avoid choosing it (translation: I support Democratic Technocracy).
Hope tomorrow (27/5) will have the time to read and to give some feedback, at last. But ok, just reading others' forum feedbacks I'm quite sure it's a good work which I can't add nothing. ;-)

In the short time before 28 we can't do more on that side but... 28/5 is not the last time to speak about the other concerns we (unofficially) raised!
(I'm meaning things like "votes/IDs certification", "quorum", etc.)

EDIT

+1 @BloodyClean proposal.

Out of curiosity, does anyone on this forum actually in favor of a true direct democracy where there is no parliament but all citizens participate as that function? I ask because I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out how that ours feasible, as I've seen it mentioned a couple times on the main thread. 

I didn't want to bog down the other forum though because it's supposed to be about the official draft "constitution".

I think in principle I like the idea of a direct democracy, but I can't see feasibility. There is no way that, even in a small nation of 175k, the vast majority of people would be heard. Imagine if you tried to pay attention to every comment on Reddit; it's just not possible and people's ideas will invariably be missed. 

Just trying to see if I missed any points that could possibly turn me. 

BloodyClean

@LoreZyra
As promised, I reviewed your Constitutional draft and made my "comments" in terms of amendments: approve or refuse them at your will. They're mostly cosmetic, but something is took from my country's constitution.
The only problem, now, is it's the very first time I'm using git-hub, so I'm not sure I succeeded, committing to your repository, after forking on mine: I suspect I committed on mine only. :-/
So, please, feel free to grab the file from my repository, if I didn't succeeded into committing on your for review, and try integrating amendments into your one, if you think they worth the effort.
https://github.com/ElweThor/Asgardia.Government/blob/master/Asgardia.Constitution.Proposal.txt

@BloodyClean
For the few that I know, Direct democracy can be adopted when not that big number of citizens is involved (e.g. 2-300 persons... even if I know Switzerland is of 8.400.000 people): past that low level, government/parliamentary-related activities differentiate so much which need constant application, and citizens have usually other to do (trivially said: they have to work to stay alive). But I'm not a lawyer nor a government systems' student, so I can be wrong.

I'm sorry I had no way/time to review Skieswanne's Constitutional draft as, for the few I've been able to read, it's valid too (from my limited point of view).

@Bloodyclean

In my document (which will be finished on the 1st of June) I'm actually aiming for a near-direct democracy system. I'd like the Parliament to be more like a staff (like us constitution volunteers) in charge of taking in the people's suggestions, and managing and reporting the results of referendums. 

I have also already written that parliamentary members are elected by the people, because I think that the HoS electing the parliament opens too much risk of the people's will getting ignored. 

My vote is for you my dear friend @skieswanne Democratic Parliamentary System... ;-)

@skieswanne

I've been having a hard time finding a copy of your draft. Would you mind linking to it? While I have been working closely with LoreZyra on his version of the constitution, and I am quite happy with it, I'm definitely open to looking at other options.

BloodyClean

@BloodyClean(Asgardian) on 27 May 2017, 11:29 p.m.

I've been having a hard time finding a copy of your draft. Would you mind linking to it?

Try here (Google Doc) :  The Skieswanne Constitution 

@Elwe Thor(Asgardian) on 27 May 2017, 9:25 p.m.

Thanks Thor! I found your fork of my repo.
https://github.com/ElweThor/Asgardia.Government/commit/246bdeff0b569525f9768cc95501a36d3219b29f 
I'll review and incorporate the best parts in to the master branch.

I've invited you to be a collaborator on my project. If you accept, then you can do a "Pull Request" and make changes. Once you commit your Pull Request, I will be automatically notified of pending changes. I can review and discuss or accept the changes to merge directly into the "master" branch. 

@LoreZyra
Ok, I'm sorry I know git-hub that few: had in mind to study it as I've some projects to place, there but, you know... ;-)
If I'm not wrong I tried pulling, the first time, but it didn't work (or it produced things I've been unable to edit, not sure) so I tried the fork way... I gues the pull is the better way so, now that we have so much time (lol), I'll retry it.
My concern was to give you my edited text: if you successfully took it, half of the work is done. :-)

EDIT #1

Oopsss... I understood what it went wrong: I wasn't a "collaborator", the first time I pulled. :-D
Sorry me: I had to imagine there was some mediating mechanism, with some kind of authorization. ;-)

EDIT #2

Ok... I can't bear to damn'd git-hub. It seems most "nonsense" how it works, to me (don't take me too seriously: I'm only frustrated I can't find a way to answer sentence by sentence to your comments... and I even can't understand if I'm looking at my fork or at your repo) -__-"
I managed to create the pull(*) request only by checking diffs with my forked (and edited) one: I thought to ease your work, making the fork going back to your repo... but if I did wrong, please, close/delete my pull.

(*) I know a little how CVSs work, used cvs and svn time ago, so I think I should understand how git works... but no. I mean: if I "pull", there should be "something" from an "external repo" (yours) which should go into my repo but, reading git's comments and help, it seems the "pull" works more like a "push"... argh!