Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: November 5471
Next month in: 01:38:07
Server time: 10:21:52, April 19, 2024 CET
Currently online (4): AethanKal | burgerboys | itsjustgav | Moderation | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.

Bill: Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993

Details

Submitted by[?]: Darnussian Unionist Party

Status[?]: defeated

Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: November 2994

Description[?]:

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date18:11:50, September 02, 2010 CET
FromParty for the Republic
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageWe are not for unregulated drug use; otherwise, we support the proposals set forth wholeheartedly.

Date18:12:07, September 02, 2010 CET
FromParty for the Republic
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageAlso not for bestiality.

Date18:26:54, September 02, 2010 CET
FromDarnussian Unionist Party
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageIts maximum civil liberties, whether other people agree with it or not. When parties say that they are not 'for' something like this they shoudl realise that not many people do it anyway and that people wont suddenly start doing it either if it became legalised.

Date16:16:13, September 03, 2010 CET
FromRerum Novarum Party
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageSex with dogs, progressive thought!

Date20:02:18, September 03, 2010 CET
FromDarnussian Unionist Party
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageWhy prevent people from doing it if that is what they wish to do? Its not harming anyone even if it is obscene to many.

Date06:48:13, September 04, 2010 CET
FromRerum Novarum Party
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageIt's harming the animal, no?

Date10:29:45, September 04, 2010 CET
FromDarnussian Unionist Party
ToDebating the Omnibus Progessive Bill of 2993
MessageI'm quite sure that an animal, whether it be as small as a dog or larger, would react in a way that would show it.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
    

Total Seats: 82

no
    

Total Seats: 90

abstain
 

Total Seats: 3


Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context.

Random quote: "I have no faith in political arithmetic." - Adam Smith

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 83