Navigation section

Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Nº 049 - Councillor Privilege Act

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agree with all except 3.1 which is seniority by gender. Such is not viewed in the Union eye who views all as equal and believes they must prove themselves.
 
2.5 is irrelevant, 3.1 doesn't make sense, but the rest is based
 
lemon said:
2.5 is irrelevant, 3.1 doesn't make sense, but the rest is based
Click to expand...
2.5 Provides IC roleplay
3.1. Makes sense in the fact that there's seperate tiers of Councilmember depening on loyalist rank. It states that these reward are equal among them
 
Vinyl said:
2.5 Provides IC roleplay
3.1. Makes sense in the fact that there's seperate tiers of Councilmember depening on loyalist rank. It states that these reward are equal among them
Click to expand...
All votes are equal. idk what you mean by making a "hierarchy"
 
lemon said:
All votes are equal. idk what you mean by making a "hierarchy"
Click to expand...
I didn't say the votes are unequal, You have observers, advisors, Security councillors and the chairman.
It states the rights and privileges given are equal among the members.
Or for whenever a future hierarchy is set in place, this act takes possible future clauses into mind
 
Cloudbucket said:
Agree with all except 3.1 which is seniority by gender. Such is not viewed in the Union eye who views all as equal and believes they must prove themselves.
Click to expand...
what are you talking about
 
So what is the point of ranks if all the votes are equal? The Security Council does not meet enough to warrant rankings.
 
Hierarchy among parliaments are stupid.

And it gets even more stupid if one of the parameters to rank up is:

'The background, gender, origin, connections' (just think about it)

Idk what's up with these CCA players but some of you be acting really sus with these racist / segregation laws
(Hl2rp isn't supposed to reflect the IRL society you wanted but never got)
 
lemon said:
Hierarchy among parliaments are stupid.

And it gets even more stupid if one of the parameters to rank up is:

'The background, gender, origin, connections' (just think about it)

Idk what's up with these CCA players but some of you be acting really sus with these racist / segregation laws
(Hl2rp isn't supposed to reflect the IRL society you wanted but never got)
Click to expand...
I literally had a black character and got called racist shit all the time. CCA players got it the worst though considering they think of themselves as Nazi Germany politicians.
 
lemon said:
Hierarchy among parliaments are stupid.

And it gets even more stupid if one of the parameters to rank up is:

'The background, gender, origin, connections' (just think about it)

Idk what's up with these CCA players but some of you be acting really sus with these racist / segregation laws
(Hl2rp isn't supposed to reflect the IRL society you wanted but never got)
Click to expand...
literally 1984
 
lemon said:
Hierarchy among parliaments are stupid.

And it gets even more stupid if one of the parameters to rank up is:

'The background, gender, origin, connections' (just think about it)

Idk what's up with these CCA players but some of you be acting really sus with these racist / segregation laws
(Hl2rp isn't supposed to reflect the IRL society you wanted but never got)
Click to expand...
What are you talking about?

This act has nothing to do with segregation and the clause you are referencing (3.1)
Simply states that the privileged gained by this act:
DO NOT CHANGE depending on your status
Female, Male, Old, Young, Observer, Chariman, Councillor.

The rewards are the same
 
Page 3 is expanding upon/elaborating what certain statements mean, 2.4 says Irrespective of seniority of rank or privilege, page 3 elaborates on what seniority of rank or privilege means, that being the age/loyal status/gender/age of the councillor, basically saying you will gain the same reward no matter your rank or race/loyal status/gender/age etc.
 
Metrotider said:
Page 3 is expanding upon/elaborating what certain statements mean, 2.4 says Irrespective of seniority of rank or privilege, page 3 elaborates on what seniority of rank or privilege means, that being the age/loyal status/gender/age of the councillor, basically saying you will gain the same reward no matter your rank or race/loyal status/gender/age etc.
Click to expand...
Vinyl said:
What are you talking about?

This act has nothing to do with segregation and the clause you are referencing (3.1)
Simply states that the privileged gained by this act:
DO NOT CHANGE depending on your status
Female, Male, Old, Young, Observer, Chariman, Councillor.

The rewards are the same
Click to expand...
Screenshot_7.png

I'm sorry but you said exactly the opposite. (its simple English)
 
I agree with everything but the ranking system... I completely agree with the suit dress code, but the ranking system kind of counters this. I do not understand what each rank would do...? You talk about ranks but do not go into specifics about what each rank entales.

Edited: What is the point of ranks if there is nothing that comes with them? You said they all receive the same rewards so what is the point of having ranks...?
 
Last edited:
Vinyl said:
What are you talking about?

This act has nothing to do with segregation and the clause you are referencing (3.1)
Simply states that the privileged gained by this act:
DO NOT CHANGE depending on your status
Female, Male, Old, Young, Observer, Chariman, Councillor.

The rewards are the same
Click to expand...
Ah I see, the way it is formatted seems like it is part of the act. I now see the irrespective.
 
2.1
Council members are to not be relieved of their duties as citizens. Their participation in the council is a voluntary one, it is a privilege, not a right.

2.2
Under no circumstances do I wish to see clothing privileges that do not support their tier holding. Loyalism and its privileges do not equal the work provided voluntarily by the council members.

2.5
There is no reason to allocate office space for the council members.

3.1
Amend "gender" as a variable. This section needs to be improved. Under no circumstances do I believe that a tier-four holder, an advisor, is to be on the same terms as an observer. Improve the rights and power that each rank holds in the security council. Especially those with Tier-6, the Security Councillors.

3.2
Referencing Section 2.1 as a response here. Discouragement of their civic duties is not advised and will not be accepted.​
 
Pawlu said:
2.1
Council members are to not be relieved of their duties as citizens. Their participation in the council is a voluntary one, it is a privilege, not a right.

2.2
Under no circumstances do I wish to see clothing privileges that do not support their tier holding. Loyalism and its privileges do not equal the work provided voluntarily by the council members.

2.5
There is no reason to allocate office space for the council members.

3.1
Amend "gender" as a variable. This section needs to be improved. Under no circumstances do I believe that a tier-four holder, an advisor, is to be on the same terms as an observer. Improve the rights and power that each rank holds in the security council. Especially those with Tier-6, the Security Councillors.

3.2
Referencing Section 2.1 as a response here. Discouragement of their civic duties is not advised and will not be accepted.​
Click to expand...
3.1 and 3.2 are not clauses,
they are Interpretation Provisions to explain certain phrases used.

2.1 we can vote on it
2.2 we can vote on it
2.5 we can vote on it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top