Northern Regional Committee (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 03:39:56 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Northern Regional Committee (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Northern Regional Committee  (Read 18326 times)
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« on: July 17, 2016, 10:38:44 AM »

I strongly recommend a more centralized location for the regional capital than Boston or New York. Detroit would be an excellent choice because of its location and having the regional capital would do wonders for the city's struggling economy.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2016, 09:54:33 PM »

Cross-posting:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2016, 12:39:04 AM »

I respectfully introduce the following amendment to the Declaration of Rights. I hope that this illustrious committee at least takes up a debate on this amendment. I am willing to discuss this issue through PM if it means we can come up with a compromise.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2016, 01:46:38 AM »

I object to Gass's amendment and call it out in the most extreme way possible for its vagueness and lack of specifics.

Help me figure out a way to make it better. What specifics would you like to see added?
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2016, 09:15:47 AM »

I object to Gass's amendment and call it out in the most extreme way possible for its vagueness and lack of specifics.

Help me figure out a way to make it better. What specifics would you like to see added?

Define a law biased towards a certain region. Otherwise, "no! we can't have legal coastal ports! That's bias towards the coast!" could be an argument.

Well in that situation the argument would be that there should also be legal ports on the Great Lakes. I do think there is a compromise somewhere to be found on this issue.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2016, 12:12:44 PM »

How about this:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2016, 12:09:01 AM »

How about this:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Not to be rude, but if we're adding something to the preamble, I would prefer the phrasing to be more elegant. This reads like nails on a chalkboard.

In regards to your original amendment, would something like this:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

be an acceptable compromise?


Is there a way we can make it more general rather than explicitly on ports?
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,574
United States


« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2016, 11:49:12 PM »

I will withdraw my concern, if we can get a bill passed early in the first session that more explicitly deals with this issue. Would that be possible?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 11 queries.