Party President Election Law
Tyler F Durden
In real life, citizens have easy access to the laws which govern their conduct.
This is not so in eCanada, unfortunately. Even my detractors cannot prove otherwise.
_____________________________
The CPF has learned that there exists an eCanada Law which forbids a Party from not running a candidate for Party President.
I have posted a topic on the eCanada Forums which has garnered both support and
virulent opposition.
So far, I cannot find this law, nor can anyone else.
I have been told to "shut up and pay the gold" on the eCanada Forums - which I don't mind parting with since it goes right into the CPF Ad Fund.
Nonetheless, I still await for someone, ANYONE to show me this law.
The CPF takes great pride in it's solidarity and committment to the Party. Until this law was brought to our attention, we were the only Party which did not contest it's leadership - and this made both myself and the Party proud. While the other 4 Parties wrestle eachother for the Party Presidency, the CPF is focused and engaged upon achieving a clear vision.
The usual suspects it would seem would like to drive the thin edge of the wedge into the CPF, but understimate our organization and solidarity.
We are one.
We are Family.
Some have been quite virulent and unneccessarily aggressive on the eCanada Forums (Board index » CANADIAN FORUMS » Government Discussion - Party President Elections Law ) regarding this issue, yet they themselves cannot produce this law for viewing.
It seems to me that eCanadians have little access to the laws which govern them.
As of this moment, I DEMAND that ALL laws be made easily accessible for viewing. That is the job of the Government - to instruct the people as to legal, and illegal conduct, so that the citizenry can be law abiding citizens.
Lets look at this law from a different angle for a moment...
Can you imagine if the Stephen Harper Government tried to enforce a law which forced the Liberals to run a candidate against Michael Ignatieff? There would be such a firestorm of controversy that not a single Canadian would be ignorant of it. THAT is democracy - when the Government cannot interfere with the machinations of Political Party organization.
Show the law which intentionally interferes with Party organization.
Comments
Voted! This is just Scorp playing party politics, we do not need this right now!
Scorpius is now trying to dig up the law.
This raises a serious issue:
Why are eCanadian Laws so hard to find?
Scorpius is weird, ignore him.
On that note, I did make a note that our forums are FUBAR. But the Acts Registry IS where the law should be. If it isn't, there is a slight problem.
Hey, I'm just a Moose.
Seriously, look at the size of my antlers.
I am one big mofo.
Join me.
Agreed.
I agree with the statement of the Moose 😉
I also agree with the Statement of the Moose.
We also agree with the Big Moosey's statement.
We like Big Mooseys.
And no - his name is NOT Robert Paulson.
lol
The Literary Award supports this issue 100%
BPV Projects endorse this article 😃
orgspamaxxxx
CIBC agrees with Octavian_F.
We are 100% behind Octavian_F.
Yep, Octavian_F is always right...
Octavian_F is unstoppable.
Octavian_F FTW!
Its time like these when I don't regret spending 25 gold to create you all. 🙂
Listen to the Moose!
In Big Moosey We Trust!
Moose!!!!
Octavian_F is...
I'll stop myself right here.
GO MOOSE 🙂
Tyler has now seen the vote in which this law was passed.
This law, or act, was written by myself, after the Hungarian TO in eCanada (not the one during the war, the one before). It is named the "Anti-Takeover Act", and was made to prevent any TO to happen in eCanada again.
"Every party will have to have at least 1 canadian candidate for the party elections.
If by the 10th of the month, there is no candidate, the government would choose a citizen to run for presidency (with congress approval)"
It has been in effect for many many months.
here are some links that might help:
http://ecanada.forumotion.com/open-door-archives-f48/for-more-security-t1536-20.htm?highlight=for+more+security" target="_blank">http://ecanada.forumotion.com/open-door-[..]urity (original thread)
http://ecanada.forumotion.com/congress-voting-f15/for-more-security-t1773.htm" target="_blank">http://ecanada.forumotion.com/congress-v[..]3.htm (the original vote)
http://ecanada.forumotion.com/closed-door-archives-f75/anti-takeover-act-reminder-t3131.htm?highlight=anti+-to+act" target="_blank">http://ecanada.forumotion.com/closed-doo[..]o+act (one of the reminders I used to give to congress, and I still give)
Then, there was another vote to rename the Acti "Anti-takeover Act", but I can't find the link to it.
Thank you marcchelala.
Clarity has been established.
Octavian_F cracks me up.
...
Obviously, I support this cause, on principle even if the specifics are too silly for words. I genuinely believe that eCanadians, orgs, investors and allies should know what our laws contain. (I can't really believe this is actually an issue.)
I submitted an amendment which would establish that "If a law is not published in the The Canadian Act Registry on the active eCanada forum, then the law does not exist;" and "No person, organization or party may be guilty of violating a statute which he, she or it is not allowed to access;"
I think these are common sense principles, but not everyone agrees on such matters. 😃