Jun 21, 17 / Leo 04, 01 05:24 UTC
Jun 21, 17 / Leo 04, 01 06:04 UTC
Wait. I want to he sure I've got the facts right here.
First there is a "vote" that offers a single choice. Then the "voting" period is extended beyond the stated close date (at this stage, indefinately). Now, as recent as yesterday, an official / officals of Asgardia (or someone with access to an Asgardia email address) is actively soliciting the acceptance of the draft constitution as a "civic duty".
is there such a thing as tripling down? If so, I think this is it.
Edit: And now Lorezyra has made me aware of changes made to the draft constitution during the voting period without consultation or notification. Quadrupling down???
Jun 21, 17 / Leo 04, 01 06:59 UTC
You can express your concerns by supporting this petition:
Jun 21, 17 / Leo 04, 01 16:34 UTC
Actually the non-vote is a 'no' vote. In my opinion it reduces confusion about the vote showing only the supporting vote number.
Jun 21, 17 / Leo 04, 01 17:04 UTC
And this is where I fail to see the logic.
When you have three groups: "yes", "no" and abstain, you can determine if the population that have voted support / don't support the constituion and those too lazy or disinterested to do either.
The data you currently have only tells you that 48k "voted" in favour of the constituion. The remaining 190k could all be opposed, all be too lazy / disinterested to vote or a varying mixture of the two. But, with how the process has been set up, this can never be determined.
Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 00:31 UTC
To be clear, I HAVE NOT and WILL NOT accept the constitution in its current form. It seems that unlike 48k or so of other people, I actually read legal documents before accepting them.
BTW, even if you left the box blank and hit "submit" you were counted as a yes.
Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 00:57 UTC
Seems like a big rush to accept the constitution, eh?
Honestly I have accepted it without reading it, since all of this still looks like a game to me.
Scarbs, would you explain what did you read in the constitution that makes you not to accept it?
Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 01:15 UTC
Where do I start? How much detail do you want? If I was to put it in a few points:
Then there is the apparent abandon that is apparent in breaching decrees, natural justice and plain old common sense.
Someone wise once told me that government should not exist for its own sake, but to facilitate the goals and aspirations of citizens. An objective read of the constitution, for my mind, does not pass this test.
Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 01:22 UTC
Again, I didn't read the constitution, but I do agree with you if all of this is true.
I just raised another question in this forum about showing an Earth globe with "CCCP" text on it. In my opinion all of this is either out of stupidity, or we're intentionally tested how much would we accept at this time. Not sure which one is worse. In general, I'm a bit disappointed.
Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 01:28 UTC
Now that the constitution has been changed while we are still voting for it, it says a non-vote is just not participating so doesn't matter.
Asgardia’s Constitution shall be adopted if, in the period of the vote, more than half of the Asgardian citizens who took part in the vote, voted in favour and, for the adoption of the first Constitution, the number of persons pursuant to Article 42 of this Constitution.
Without a "No" option it is guaranteed 100% approval now.
Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 01:38 UTC
That's funny. I'm sorry, but I can't stop making parallels between Asgardia's government and communist government in my country about 30 years ago.
We had elections and one could only vote "yes", or doesn't vote, just like for Asgardian constitution. People who didn't vote had a lot of problems with authorities and cut off from some services.
Oct 5, 17 / Sco 26, 01 13:53 UTC
I know I'm late here, but it seems all the forum posts are old. If you don't accept the constitution (by not voting) it counts as a no. I agree in that instead of that, it should have a "no" button.
I also agree that the Constitution has flaws, but since it states that citizens can revoke their citizenship I decided to agree and try to change it by petitions.