Auditorii wrote:Given the difficulty in enforcement, this would be considered an RP flavor law versus a Moderation enforced law.
I see, thanks again.
Moderator: RP Committee
Auditorii wrote:Given the difficulty in enforcement, this would be considered an RP flavor law versus a Moderation enforced law.
Zumoka wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=680651
hyraemous wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=680151
Hi there, I would like approval for the new constitution for Kundrati.
Auditorii wrote:hyraemous wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=680151
Hi there, I would like approval for the new constitution for Kundrati.
Moderation does not typically approve whole constitutions. Moderation will only review and potentially enforce executive authority that expands beyond what the game allows given sufficient justification. If there is something in there that provides executive powers beyond what the game allows you can post those respective items and I'll review from there.
Martinulus wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=682881
Please review the party bans provision, which has been in every Septembrist and the Mikuni constitution for the past IG millennium, and is arguably required to safeguard the treatment of Maerang.
I hope you can also overlook that I forgot to label it RP law in the proposal title, since the proposal text specifies it is a constitutional RP Law. If not, please let me know so I can pass it again.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests