Project: charter revision sketch

The judiciary, for settling disputes and feudal contracts

Moderator: CJ Miller

Post Reply
User avatar
Daniel Farewell
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:49 am

Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Daniel Farewell »

I'm gonna go through the charter and then recommend some changes to the Kaiser and Prætor once I'm done.

You are all welcome to chip in.

The Charter needs changes. The language is vague at parts, the charter lacks certain elements that we still bicker about... etc.

I'm going through each section, paragraph by paragraph.
IMPERIAL CHARTER OF SHIREROTH

Article I: The Kaiser.
Section A: Definition of the Kaisership.
a. The Kaiser of Shireroth is the supreme ruler, and noble, of Shireroth.
b. The Kaisership may be held by both male and female rulers. A male ruler shall be known as a Kaiser, a female ruler shall be known as a Kaiseress. The term "Kaiser" may be used to refer to the Kaisership without regard to gender.
Suggestions for improvement, come!

User avatar
CJ Miller
Posts: 716
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 2:35 pm

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by CJ Miller »

I(A) doesn't specify, for example, how the Kaiser is selected. Sure, we all know it's hereditary, but that's common law -- wouldn't it make sense for it to be constitutional law instead?

User avatar
Malliki Tosha
Posts: 2516
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:43 am

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Malliki Tosha »

Um...
Section C: Heir to the Throne.
a. Before the end of zir reign, the Kaiser must pick a successor from among all living individuals eligible by birthright.
b. Should the Kaiser die or abdicate the throne, the Kaisership shall pass to zir successor.
c. Should no heir have been chosen, the successor shall be the closest related living individual eligible by birthright.
A bit outdated and the DecreeBook is more specific, but you can't say that there is no specification.
Malliki Tosha
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC
Owner, Newport City FC

User avatar
Kaiser B'caw I
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Kaiser B'caw I »

Indeed so.

As for this one: as a section, this one seems pretty straightforward... unless there's some facet of the Kaisership that's actually missing, I'm not sure what else should be done to it.
Image

User avatar
Daniel Farewell
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:49 am

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Daniel Farewell »

The language needs to be de-vague-ized, exacted, and so on... :) But I leave that to a native speaker of English. Where's Ardy when you need him?

User avatar
CJ Miller
Posts: 716
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 2:35 pm

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by CJ Miller »

I'm a native speaker of English.

Erik Mortis
Posts: 7238
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:37 pm
Location: County of Monty Crisco
Contact:

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Erik Mortis »

The language should remain vague. If made exact we are trapped by those exactitudes. By remaining vague we can make them clear in the Decreebook and elsewhere. I see no need to bind out hand for needless precision.

My general view on Charter revisions is well known. Nor is it the place of the Judex to suggest revisions. (do it as a Duke if you really wanna, but not as the Arbiter)

User avatar
Malliki Tosha
Posts: 2516
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:43 am

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Malliki Tosha »

Erik, anyone can suggest revisions to the Charter. There is no law barring the Arbiter from doing that.
Malliki Tosha
Owner, Mortis Mercatoria FC
Owner, Newport City FC

Erik Mortis
Posts: 7238
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:37 pm
Location: County of Monty Crisco
Contact:

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Erik Mortis »

I'm just saying. If he wants to do it.. he should not do it as Arbiter, doesn't that seem a bit odd seeing as we use the Judex to interpret law, not create it?

User avatar
Daniel Farewell
Posts: 1104
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:49 am

Re: Project: charter revision sketch

Post by Daniel Farewell »

I'm not trying to create law. I'm trying to codify our interpretation of the law.

Post Reply

Return to “Imperial Judex”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests