Minorities protected and residency

[minificelle]

What happens when a party in power has residency (only main culture vote) and the political reform minorities protected is enabled (everyone can vote according to the tooltip) ?

[Naselus]

Party policy has no effect on voting rights for minorities in PDM.

[Clendor]

Didn't know that. You should notify it somewhere...

[keynes2.0]

It's noted in the mouseover tooltips.

[minificelle]

It's noted in the mouseover tooltips.

Not really...http://hpics.li/e5bf013

[Vorlend]

Party policy has no effect on voting rights for minorities in PDM.

Then how it works in PDM?

[keynes2.0]

Not really...http://hpics.li/e5bf013

Yes, that tooltip notes the effects of party policy. The political reform tooltip notes the effect of the political reform.

Then how it works in PDM?

The political reform is all that matters. Party policy just affect militancy a little bit.

[Rylock]

I think his point is that the description offered by the localization does not match the effects shown in the tooltip.

[keynes2.0]

I think his point is that the description offered by the localization does not match the effects shown in the tooltip.

The party policy tooltip says the effect of party policy. The political reform tooltip notes the effect of political reform. What doesn't match?

[Vorlend]

The political reform is all that matters. Party policy just affect militancy a little bit.

So i can have Libertarian ruling party and still deny human rights, and Reactionary who hates other cultures but give them full citizenship? Nonesense!

[Rylock]

The party policy tooltip says the effect of party policy. The political reform tooltip notes the effect of political reform. What doesn't match?

Because the localized description of Residency, which is a party policy and not a reform, says "only members of your primary culture are allowed to vote." That's not true.

[Rylock]

So i can have Libertarian ruling party and still deny human rights, and Reactionary who hates other cultures but give them full citizenship? Nonesense!

You think it's nonsense that a reactionary party coming into power in a liberal democracy couldn't simply undo all laws and reforms by virtue of them being voted in? Or, conversely, a more progressive party coming into power in a barely-democracy doesn't immediately grant enfranchisement? The party policies determine the government's stance-- you can discriminate against minorities plenty without necessarily changing the laws already existing, which is much harder to do.

[keynes2.0]

Case in point, the Obama administration in the US right now favors immigrant friendly policies like the DREAM act. No way in hell they're getting passed.

[Naselus]

So i can have Libertarian ruling party and still deny human rights, and Reactionary who hates other cultures but give them full citizenship? Nonesense!

Certainly not as nonsensical as parties whimsically switching whether minorities can vote every election. Voting rights are constitutional reforms - just as the franchise is. Unless you also feel we should remove the effects of all political reforms, and just attach them to the party policies in the lower house?

[Vorlend]

Certainly not as nonsensical as parties whimsically switching whether minorities can vote every election. Voting rights are constitutional reforms - just as the franchise is.

Well, i was to quick in my judgement... you implement better system than vanilla was. But will AI handle this system well?

[keynes2.0]

Well whats to handle?

[minificelle]

Well, lets say thats the game rule you choose for your mod

Because, really, going residency after having been full citizenship is no more strange than going jingo after having been pacifist or planned eco after laisser faire...

I asked the question first because there isnt any indication than the reform will override the party policy...Perhaps, it would be good to indicate that somewhere (reform text or whatever).

[Naselus]

Well, lets say thats the game rule you choose for your mod

Because, really, going residency after having been full citizenship is no more strange than going jingo after having been pacifist or planned eco after laisser faire...

Yes, but can you name a single instance in history where a party have been able to randomly decide, the same day that they take power, to extend the voting franchise with no debate whatsoever to include an extra X% of the population? In a democracy, the extent of the voting franchise is not determined by the party calling the election. It equally makes no sense that a party can unilaterally decide to allow all the minorities to vote, but cannot unilaterally decide to let the poor do so.

Voting rights are constitutional, and so should be handled by the UH in every particular, rather than the LH deciding who's entitled to elect it.

I asked the question first because there isnt any indication than the reform will override the party policy...Perhaps, it would be good to indicate that somewhere (reform text or whatever).

It's not 'overriding' it, the party policy has absolutely no effect on voting. It represents the attitude of the party toward minorities - so, for instance, while a residency party is powerless to simply change the voting rights of minorities overnight, it can make their lives more difficult with legislating id cards, curfews etc. We'll change the localization on citizenship policies to remove any reference to voting, tho.

[GAGA Extrem]

Although we can add events that might force the player to change the current reforms or suffer MIL/CON from the opposing issue pops (like other reform events).

Something like:
If ruling party policy = residency AND current minority law = all_can_vote AND 15% think residency is important
-> OPTION A: change the current minority law.
-> OPTION B: 3 CON and 3 MIL for all in favor of residency, 2 CON and 2 MIL for all in favor of limited citizenship, 3% more pop support for residency.