Please choose one which goverment structure to use in Demogame #6.

Striders Modified Tradational (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2536131&postcount=1) - Based off the DG5 constitution, contains several modifications.

Daveshacks Alternative (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=2531442&postcount=1) - Contains Strategic and Tatical leaders, designed to force leaders to do long term planning..

ummm 7 days strider? CT will just pass this poll straight over by then

also: please sticky this mods

After reading through both proposals, I am going to choose Strider's proposal. While DaveShack's alternative is commendable, there are a few things I disagree with:

1. DP as elected position
2. Administative official besides the Judiciary being part of the Constitution

Hopefully, this poll will supercede the other polls currently being opened in this subforum, but don't count on it. ;)

After reading through both proposals, I am going to choose Strider's proposal. While DaveShack's alternative is commendable, there are a few things I disagree with:

1. DP as elected position
2. Administative official besides the Judiciary being part of the Constitution

Hopefully, this poll will supercede the other polls currently being opened in this subforum, but don't count on it. ;)
#1 was already struck down in a seperate poll, but that discussion was closed so I couldnt change it...
the main idea of DS's plan was to split strategic and tactical, i just made an example of it since everyone wanted to see details
#2 has yet to be discussed.... and we dont have overly much time to do so

I'm voting, but I disagree with this poll. It should include a compromise position.

I'm voting, but I disagree with this poll. It should include a compromise position.

Considering the looming deadline on March 1, we simply don't have enough time to hammer out an acceptable compromise. At this point, we need to choose one style or the other and stick with it.

Why vote for the Alternate Government?
1. It is something new for once, we have played 5 DGs with 'traditional' offices
2. People without conquests can hold strategic positions, instead of forcing them to no office
3. You can choose a position that meets your fancy exacty, if you like discussing and polling then strategic is for you! if you like micromanaging and making your own decisions then tactical is for you!
4. More fiercely fought elections, because of #3
5. All long term decisions are discussed and polled while few nonimportant small things are polled
6. We actually get to use 'long term planning'

2. People without conquests can hold strategic positions, instead of forcing them to no office

This is the reason I voted for DS's alternative.

Why vote for the Alternate Government?
1. It is something new for once, we have played 5 DGs with 'traditional' offices
2. People without conquests can hold strategic positions, instead of forcing them to no office
3. You can choose a position that meets your fancy exacty, if you like discussing and polling then strategic is for you! if you like micromanaging and making your own decisions then tactical is for you!
4. More fiercely fought elections, because of #3
5. All long term decisions are discussed and polled while few nonimportant small things are polled
6. We actually get to use 'long term planning'

1) I'll give you this one, but with the introduction of Conquests, I think we have enough "new."

2) While if we use the tradational government, they may not beable to hold "strategic" poistions. They will beable to hold any poistion (except DP) they want to. Overall... I think the tradational structure wins on this one.

3) I'll give you this one also, the only real bonus I can see from the alternative government.

4) I doubt it, and espicially not because of #3. The Alternative government creates more elected poistions, so the elections will be less fierce.

5) They both share the quality, the only differance being that tradational leaves it up to the citizens on wether or not they want to plan long-term or just wing it.

6) We've used it in DG1 and DG2.... it was okay.

1) I'll give you this one, but with the introduction of Conquests, I think we have enough "new."

2) While if we use the tradational government, they may not beable to hold "strategic" poistions. They will beable to hold any poistion (except DP) they want to. Overall... I think the tradational structure wins on this one.

3) I'll give you this one also, the only real bonus I can see from the alternative government.

4) I doubt it, and espicially not because of #3. The Alternative government creates more elected poistions, so the elections will be less fierce.

5) They both share the quality, the only differance being that tradational leaves it up to the citizens on wether or not they want to plan long-term or just wing it.

6) We've used it in DG1 and DG2.... it was okay.

2. The thing is you can discuss strategy without having the game, you cant micromanage the game unless someone gives you lots of screenshots. In a traditional government long term and short term are mixed meaning you can only hold judiciary
5. We are going up to emperor or demigod, we cant just skip long term

Several reasons to vote for the Tradational Government:

1) It is what we've used for five demogames, it's tested, it works. How do we know the alternative government is even going to work, and even if it does work, there will still be many things that needs to be fixed in it. Do we really want to spend all game fighting over the constitution?

2) It allows our leaders freedom, they control every aspect of there respective department, and they can do whatever they want with it. While the leaders will be forced to goto the citizens VIA polls etc. it does give our leaders a certain amount of power, enough anyway to make running for one actually useful.

3) Freedom of Information Act. The Alternative government lacks an article requring leaders to post enough information for citizens to make an informed decision on a topic. With the switch to conquest and the save being out of reach of many people, this is a huge benefit.

4) The Alternative government is vague and missing several key features. Including the Naming commission, the Election office, and many other important factors.

2. The thing is you can discuss strategy without having the game, you cant micromanage the game unless someone gives you lots of screenshots. In a traditional government long term and short term are mixed meaning you can only hold judiciary

Wrong, you can hold any poistion you want to, all you need is knowaledge of how Conquests works. You do not need it. I've been Science Leader before without a copy of Civ3, there have been govonors who have managed the same feat. There is nothing stopping our citizens from repeating that.

Several reasons to vote for the Tradational Government:

1) It is what we've used for five demogames, it's tested, it works. How do we know the alternative government is even going to work, and even if it does work, there will still be many things that needs to be fixed in it. Do we really want to spend all game fighting over the constitution?

2) It allows our leaders freedom, they control every aspect of there respective department, and they can do whatever they want with it. While the leaders will be forced to goto the citizens VIA polls etc. it does give our leaders a certain amount of power, enough anyway to make running for one actually useful.

3) Freedom of Information Act. The Alternative government lacks an article requring leaders to post enough information for citizens to make an informed decision on a topic. With the switch to conquest and the save being out of reach of many people, this is a huge benefit.

4) The Alternative government is vague and missing several key features. Including the Naming commission, the Election office, and many other important factors.
Do NOT hold 3 and 4 agains the alternate government. I just made an example constitution, that is not a good constitution, it was an example. When we are voting on this, we are basically voting for the offices.

Do NOT hold 3 and 4 agains the alternate government. I just made an example constitution, that is not a good constitution, it was an example. When we are voting on this, we are basically voting for the offices.

Yet, still it proves that it needs much more work. Whereas the tradational government is completed. This just inforces #1, and proves that the alternative government is not capable. It is not even finished! With very few days remaining untill the start of the game, we'd be much better off chosing the one that is done, instead of having to worry about actually have to build a brand new constitution anyway.

Yet, still it proves that it needs much more work. Whereas the tradational government is completed. This just inforces #1, and proves that the alternative government is not capable. It is not even finished!
the alternate government idea is not an entire constitution, it would basically use yours and just modify the executive and legislative branches.

the alternate government idea is not an entire constitution, it would basically use yours and just modify the executive and legislative branches.

Which is even more a reason not to chose the alternative government. I built the articles to work together. Just ripping one part out and putting a completely differant part in would never work. You still have much to deal with, and your have to make heavy modifications inorder to get them to work together.

Modfications that will take time to complete, time that we don't have.

3) Freedom of Information Act. The Alternative government lacks an article requring leaders to post enough information for citizens to make an informed decision on a topic. With the switch to conquest and the save being out of reach of many people, this is a huge benefit.


The alternative government was inititally proposed as a means of allowing people without conquests to participate in a meaningful way. A critical aspect of the proposal is to ensure that all leaders are responsible for ensuring that complete information about their area is kept up to date. I'm not the first person to come up with the idea of leaders posting information, so I will not take credit for it, however I will point out that the only reason you have it in your document is that people who wanted the alternative style started pushing it.

The draft constitution based on the alternative style might not contain an article for freedom of information, but this poll is not about accepting one draft or the other as is, it is about how we want the leadership to be structured.

Will you abide by the people's decision, whatever it might be, and work together for the good of the game? I most assuredly will, and hope the sentiment is mutual.

The alternative government was inititally proposed as a means of allowing people without conquests to participate in a meaningful way. A critical aspect of the proposal is to ensure that all leaders are responsible for ensuring that complete information about their area is kept up to date. I'm not the first person to come up with the idea of leaders posting information, so I will not take credit for it, however I will point out that the only reason you have it in your document is that people who wanted the alternative style started pushing it.

The draft constitution based on the alternative style might not contain an article for freedom of information, but this poll is not about accepting one draft or the other as is, it is about how we want the leadership to be structured.

Will you abide by the people's decision, whatever it might be, and work together for the good of the game? I most assuredly will, and hope the sentiment is mutual.

Last time I checked, Donsig has not been seen inside of the demogame for several weeks... if not months. So this crap about people who wanted the alternative style pushed for it is false.

Still my point still stands, if we were to chose the alternative government, you will still be building a completely new constitution.

I will abide by my decisions, as I always have, and that is of no concern to you.

No problem, Some of us will present an amendment for the government offices in a strategic and a tactical layer, and pass this article of as a constitutional amendment.
This coup to avoid a compromise solution will be contested.

No problem, Some of us will present an amendment for the government offices in a strategic and a tactical layer, and pass this article of as a constitutional amendment.
This coup to avoid a compromise solution will be contested.

No idea what the heck your talking about, care to elaborate?

Well, the compromise option will be presented as a constitutional amendment proposal, and the runoff between the two leading options will still be subject to a constitutional debate during Term One. Traditional Government set-up or the DS setup may still be contested. However, either of Striders or DS''s proposal would serve well as a base.

Well, the compromise option will be presented as a constitutional amendment proposal, and the runoff between the two leading options will still be subject to a constitutional debate during Term One. Traditional Government set-up or the DS setup may still be contested. However, either of Striders or DS''s proposal would serve well as a base.

Not enough time, and not enough support. A large amount of people did not want a compromise. Needless to say, it wouldn't have gotten that far anyway.

Not enough time, and not enough support. A large amount of people did not want a compromise. Needless to say, it wouldn't have gotten that far anyway.
hes basically saying that if alternate government doesnt win now, an amendment changing the offices to the alternate goverment style will be pushed through

Last time I checked, Donsig has not been seen inside of the demogame for several weeks... if not months. So this crap about people who wanted the alternative style pushed for it is false.

Still my point still stands, if we were to chose the alternative government, you will still be building a completely new constitution.

I will abide by my decisions, as I always have, and that is of no concern to you.

I'm not sure what you mean by the first point. All I said was that I wasn't the first person ever to ask for leaders to post information, because I do not take credit for ideas unless they are actually my own. However, your implication that the alternative does not consider a FOIA is completely false. A FOIA was part of the alternative structure as I first proposed it, and it is still a required part of the alternative. There is absolutely no doubt of this, nor is there any doubt that it will be required if the traditional method is chosen.

It's not the whole constitution that has to change if we choose the alternative, there are significant parts which get reused no matter which way we go.

Not sure what you mean about abiding by your decisions -- that's not what I asked, and the way you wrote it implies that your mind is made up, just like you said in previous threads that you would do everything in your power to destroy the alternative . Are you going to go along if the people choose the alternative structure, or is this a threat to engage in virtual terrorism if you lose? If you are considering anything of the sort, a little advance warning, it definitely won't be allowed.

My position remains that no matter the outcome I will be a positive participant in the process. You seem to have forgotton that I started off this whole interregnum period by posting DG5's rules, as amended and updated to account for JRs, as the starting point for DG6 rules. I didn't even post the alternative until some people I had PM'd it to asked whether it was going to be introduced. I could switch back to the traditional horse in about 30 seconds if that was what the people wanted. We were headed for a slam-dunk ratification of the traditional rules (DG5 as amended) with no changes at all.

I'm not sure what you mean by the first point. All I said was that I wasn't the first person ever to ask for leaders to post information, because I do not take credit for ideas unless they are actually my own. However, your implication that the alternative does not consider a FOIA is completely false. A FOIA was part of the alternative structure as I first proposed it, and it is still a required part of the alternative. There is absolutely no doubt of this, nor is there any doubt that it will be required if the traditional method is chosen.

You said that the "idea" for the leaders to post information was pushed ahead by alternative strucuture supports. I said that was false, the orginal person to launch a campaign for this was Donsig, and I have seen no efforts, from you or anyone else to do this. The fact that it was completely left out here, is even more support than you or your supporters thought it a minor thing.

It's not the whole constitution that has to change if we choose the alternative, there are significant parts which get reused no matter which way we go.

Not sure what you mean about abiding by your decisions -- that's not what I asked, and the way you wrote it implies that your mind is made up, just like you said in previous threads that you would do everything in your power to destroy the alternative . Are you going to go along if the people choose the alternative structure, or is this a threat to engage in virtual terrorism if you lose? If you are considering anything of the sort, a little advance warning, it definitely won't be allowed.

I abide by my decisions, and I decided long ago that I prefer the Tradational government. I have neither the motivation, will, or knowaledge to deal with the alternative government. I did not create it, I was not one of the minds behind it. As such, I have no right to do anything with it, even if it is making a compromise between the two. It is likely that if the alternative government passes, I will most likely continue my crusade to use the tradational government. If that then fails, then I will have no choice then to leave the game. I do not like the alternative government, and I would rather find something else to do with my time, then to play under rules I hate.

My position remains that no matter the outcome I will be a positive participant in the process. You seem to have forgotton that I started off this whole interregnum period by posting DG5's rules, as amended and updated to account for JRs, as the starting point for DG6 rules. I didn't even post the alternative until some people I had PM'd it to asked whether it was going to be introduced. I could switch back to the traditional horse in about 30 seconds if that was what the people wanted. We were headed for a slam-dunk ratification of the traditional rules (DG5 as amended) with no changes at all.

A partcipant doing what? Tell me, if the tradational government does win, do you have the right to come in suggesting changes? No, unless you were able to read mind over the internet, you have no idea what or why I made something the way I did. Even if I somehow did decide to waste the time explaining it to you, there is so many differant purposes or varaitions for anyone thing, that I doubt I'll be able to explain it justly.

No, you have no more right messing with the tradational government, then I have messing with the alternative government.

OK, before anyone gets any wrong ideas about this conversation, you're witnessing a debate not a flame war, so put away those extinguishers! :lol:

Also, since I've said it 3 times and you don't seem to want to recognize it, maybe larger type will help:
I don't mind if traditional wins, and I plan to be fully involved in the game either way


No, you have no more right messing with the tradational government, then I have messing with the alternative government.

Huh? You copied my DG6 starting point (which was itself modified from DG5), and then made changes to it. Why would it need "messing with"? :confused:

You answered what I was asking -- I'm perfectly willing to play by your rules (especially since they are also my rules), but you're not willing to play by mine, and will carry on the fight to overturn the people's decision if you lose. If you are reasonable about it, you're certainly welcome to try, just don't go overboard. :D

Whatever the people choose, we play. After a while we'll look at the results. If it's a good idea we stick with it, and if it's a bad idea then we fix it.

Also, since I've said it 3 times and you don't seem to want to recognize it, maybe larger type will help:
I don't mind if traditional wins, and I plan to be fully involved in the game either way

You may not, but I do. As I said above, I do not like the alternative government, and have no wish to play under it. It is my decision wether I want to or not, regardless of which way the poll goes.

Huh? You copied my DG6 starting point (which was itself modified from DG5), and then made changes to it. Why would it need "messing with"? :confused:

You answered what I was asking -- I'm perfectly willing to play by your rules (especially since they are also my rules), but you're not willing to play by mine, and will carry on the fight to overturn the people's decision if you lose. If you are reasonable about it, you're certainly welcome to try, just don't go overboard. :D

Whatever the people choose, we play. After a while we'll look at the results. If it's a good idea we stick with it, and if it's a bad idea then we fix it.

I didn't copy any "DG6 starting point." I looked at the poll (the one over which constitution we should base DG6's off of), then copied and pasted the DG5 ruleset from the thread in the main forum. I fixed the text alignments and then start making modifications to it.

Am I suppose to be willing to do something I do not want to do? As I've said many times already, I simply do not want to play under the alternative government. I do not like for the reasons I have stated for the pass couple of weeks. Why do you think that I'm willing to play by rules that I don't like?

Am I suppose to be willing to do something I do not want to do? As I've said many times already, I simply do not want to play under the alternative government. I do not like for the reasons I have stated for the pass couple of weeks. Why do you think that I'm willing to play by rules that I don't like?

If I gave the impression that I wanted to force you to play in the alternative style, please accept my apology. Anyone is free to come and go at will. I would miss your input and would hope for your return.

My concern is allowing the people to play the way they want without interference from others who won't give up on changing things back the way they were. If a majority wants to change back, then we change back, plain and simple, and suggesting it once in a while would be perfectly fine -- but I don't want to see continuous efforts to get it changed, to the detriment of the game.

If I gave the impression that I wanted to force you to play in the alternative style, please accept my apology. Anyone is free to come and go at will. I would miss your input and would hope for your return.

My concern is allowing the people to play the way they want without interference from others who won't give up on changing things back the way they were. If a majority wants to change back, then we change back, plain and simple, and suggesting it once in a while would be perfectly fine -- but I don't want to see continuous efforts to get it changed, to the detriment of the game.

What if those continous efforts were always shy one or two supporters? Would you not allow them the ability to try to gain those last couple of votes? Dropping things from memory does nothing except prolong the troubles. If the demogame is split to far down the middle, then it would be much better to resolve the situtation, than to ignore it.

Whatever the people choose, we play. After a while we'll look at the results. If it's a good idea we stick with it, and if it's a bad idea then we fix it.

That's really all that needs to be said. All this bickering is needless. Let's just wait to see what the people decide and then move on from there. We've been having the same arguement for the past 2 weeks and nothing has gotten resolved. It's time to let the voters decide and we can continue this discussion when we're looking at how the government is performing in the coming terms.

It'd be a shame if you did leave just because of the governmental strucuture of the game, Strider. As the last few days have proven, you do bring some vitality to this whole process. :)

My support for the use of the alternate goverment strucutre remains, really. I've come to view the DG as a grand forum to both participate in an interesting political structure and to better the Civving skills of it's participants. To that the latter end, I truly believe the alternate government strucutre to be the better of the two.

With the traditional government, planning is at the whim of that particular elected leader. A leader could choose to develop plans a few turns or hundreds of turns in the future. Usually, fewer turns were planned for, and I believe our playing of the game suffered as a result. Yes, we won, but we could've done a better job with better planning.

The alternate government, as I see it, uses the strategic layer to actually plan ahead. In CivIII, it's better planning that will almost invariably result in better playing. The strategic layer would have to also use broader strategies for planning. These plans and the strategies behind them would have to be discussed and polled among the people, who will hopefully learn something for bettering their own games.

Last time I checked, Donsig has not been seen inside of the demogame for several weeks... if not months. So this crap about people who wanted the alternative style pushed for it is false.


If I'd have thught for a moment anyone would seriously listen to any of my prposals I'd have been right here in the thick of things. ;)

Strider, if you're linking me to the alternative propsal I'm assuming it's because I've harangued for so long about the lack of game information in the forums. That is something that can be accomplished under any government structure. All it takes is enough people (elected or appointed or neither) to post information. It can be done officially or informally or as part of role playing. How it gets posted is not really that important. Until it does get posted regularly the demogame will continue to lose the participation of those of us who (for what ever reason) do not look at the save nor attend the chats.

It's really a demogame *cultural* decision regarding which is more valued, the chat or the forums. The chat has been more valued than the forums since the middle of DG1. Most of us who refrain from attending the chat don't really mind you all having a chat and having a blast so long as you give us a chance to play, too! You don't s we lose interest and drift off to do things that are more fun.

Well, Strider may refuse me to do so, with or without moderator backing. However, some of us would still present a constitutional amendment for Article D and E, within our rights of the Constitutions both Strider and DS has presented as a base. I find it extremely arrogant to reject the compromise group and write us off without a fair chance to consider this solution. Everyone knows that the constiutional government alternative poll
was not polled by good standards, and that many was open to more than one proposal. In a multiple choice poll or a spectrum poll this could have fared very differently, and I am certain more than a third of us think that way. Yet, the extremist
supporters of either the Strider or DS proposal supporters did not want the middle-ground alternative, and wanted a head on head duel of the options, not even trying to bridge the gap with a fair compromise. Many players asked for having the action to post and poll in such a compromise, but fascistically enough, this was vehemently and inconsiderately denied. Still, with the constitutional base in place, we will still see a rematch on the alternate government structure, and after that, we have explored all fair democratic options in this debate, and not before.

Regardless of the outcome of the runoff between the two proposals, I will present this constitutional amendment as a compromise solution. The advantage with this option is that it has more offices than the DS option and less offices than in the Strider option.

Additionally, fields of responsibility has both balance of powers and clear mandates, and is a flexible model regardless of length of turnchats and so on. This model will also reduce the power of the super-ministries Domestic and Military and increase those of the remaining ones through mergers and redistribution of powers. The advantage with this setup to Striders, is that it has a strategic and an operational layer, yet reducing the learning curve from traditional to a new setup, remaining relatively close to traditional and that it fuses offices that should have been merged ages ago.

Another major advantage is that this set-up obliterates the spurious ministry of culture, and makes it Governor responsibilities as well as ministerial responsibilities to maintain cultural integrity of the realm. This set-up also clearly divides the slider from the territorial roles, which creates a deeper clarity of responsibilities in the game.

I will also post a petititon asking for the compromise solution to be reconsidered.

Article D. The Executive Branch
The Executive branch is responsible for determining and implementing the will of the People, and is headed by the President. The President is charged with organizing and monitoring the affairs of the Ministers and Directors, and is also the primary designated player. The President shall take direction from a council of ministers and from other elected and appointed officials via the turnchat instruction thread, including worker actions. The President is also charged with appointing citizens to uncontested elections, the election office, and the Vice President position (including city naming). The President will lead the ministers and provide the overall focus for their strategy planning and take the necessary measures to integrate their planning.

The Vice President is legally responsible for the City Naming Office, Unit Naming Office, Province Naming Office and Geography Naming Office. The Vice President provides summary of every play session for the forums.

Section 1.
Minister of Interior Affairs (Roads, Mining and Agriculture) is legally in charge of planning all long term infrastructure developments, inclusive defensive land improvements, and is also in charge of all Major Wonder construction and enforcing cultural integrity of the nation. Minister of Interior Affairs is also responsible for opening up new territories for colonization as well as setting up new provinces.

Section 2.
Minister of Finance and Science (Slider management policy "Slider Czar", taxmen and scientists, long term research plan for one term), Minister of Finance and research is in charge of all fiscal policies related to sliders and rushes as well as setting up rules for all gold related activities such as upgrades, embassies and other financial actions for one term. Minister of Finance and Research is also responsible for Capital location and Forbidden Capital location, watching corruption levels and finally would be in charge for planning the Space Race builds in case that eventuality occurs.


Section 3.
Minister of Military is in charge of all military land and air units, except settler escorts. In wartime, the Minister of Military would also take control over the Navy. The Minister of Military is responsible for long term strategic planning for the military, which includes force composition, upgrade unit plans, military groupings and organization, rules of engagement, war strategy objectives (target cities) and advocating all military Wonder constructions.

Section 4.
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade is responsible for all treaties and agreements signed with foreign nations, including trade in resources and science. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade needs to consult the Minister of Finance and Science on all technology transfers and the governors on all resource trades for their approval.

Section 5.
Director of Colonial Office is in charge of all operational scout, settler and military escort movements and the localization of cities as prescribed by the opened territory by the Minister of Interor Affairs. Director of Colonial Office is responsible for city planning per turnchat, and would consider the placement of future borders as well as operationally lead the navy in peacetime. Director of Colonial Office would also become the Director of Intelligence, deciding upon all espionage missions and embassies tasks. Colonial Office is also the nominal governor of non-provincial cities until these are included in a new province.

Section 6.
Director of Labor and Research Office is responsible for all worker movements and actions on an operational level as prescribed by the Minister of Interior Affairs, and is also in charge of deciding on tactical amendments of the Term Science Plan.

Section 7.
Chief of Staff is in charge of all military operation level plans and tactical decisions as prescribed by the strategy objectives and military structure, formations and force composition planned by the Minister of the Military.
In wartime, the Chief of staff would also take control over the Navy.
Finally, the Chief of Staff is responsible for cooperating with the governors in meeting the needed defense requirements as prescribed by the Military Ministers long term plan.

Section 8.
Director of Central Bank is in charge of operating the slider within the scope prescribed by the Minister of Finance and Science, as well as approving and disapproving all gold requests from other Directors and Governors.

Regardless of the outcome of the runoff between the two proposals, I will present this constitutional amendment as a compromise solution. The advantage with this option is that it has more offices than the DS option and less offices than in the Strider option.

Additionally, fields of responsibility has both balance of powers and clear mandates, and is a flexible model regardless of length of turnchats and so on. This model will also reduce the power of the super-ministries Domestic and Military and increase those of the remaining ones through mergers and redistribution of powers. The advantage with this setup to Striders, is that it has a strategic and an operational layer, yet reducing the learning curve from traditional to a new setup, remaining relatively close to traditional and that it fuses offices that should have been merged ages ago.

Another major advantage is that this set-up obliterates the spurious ministry of culture, and makes it Governor responsibilities as well as ministerial responsibilities to maintain cultural integrity of the realm. This set-up also clearly divides the slider from the territorial roles, which creates a deeper clarity of responsibilities in the game.

I will also post a petititon asking for the compromise solution to be reconsidered.

isnt this your proposal that lost badly in the first poll?

Lkost badly Blackhole.... Well, posters from both DS and Striders were happy with a compromise. And losing badly 9-8-4 is not a bad loss as such. Only a shift of two-three votes would make this very different, so enough propaganda from you Blackhole. If 2 votes moved from Striders and one vote from DS, it would stand 7-7-7.
Also, the poll was badly flawed, and you know that too, even you pointed it out.
Strider said this was an informational poll. Interestingly enough, only Blackhole, CT and Strider wanted this option out of the loop, where many called for a compromise.

Lkost badly Blackhole.... Well, posters from both DS and Striders were happy with a compromise. And losing badly 9-8-4 is not a bad loss as such. Only a shift of two-three votes would make this very different, so enough propaganda from you Blackhole. If 2 votes moved from Striders and one vote from DS, it would stand 7-7-7.
Also, the poll was badly flawed, and you know that too, even you pointed it out.
Strider said this was an informational poll. Interestingly enough, only Blackhole, CT and Strider wanted this option out of the loop, where many called for a compromise.
but those 3 votes didnt shift... :confused:
plus you got half of either of the top 2 options. I dont think we plan on doing a compromise...
Its not really propoganda provolution, your government lost.....

Let us see how this works out Blackhole, let the compromise run its course, if it works, fair enough, if it fails fair enough. But I refuse to let the flawed poll without multiple options work out. You even questioned the poll yourself.

Let us see how this works out Blackhole, let the compromise run its course, if it works, fair enough, if it fails fair enough. But I refuse to let the flawed poll without multiple options work out. You even questioned the poll yourself.
i questioned the poll because it had too many options

If I'd have thught for a moment anyone would seriously listen to any of my prposals I'd have been right here in the thick of things. ;)

I know you've complained in the pass about this being a "turnchat only" game. Although I disagreed with you on that aspect, I do see the logic of forcing leaders to post information for the citizens. If information was more easily accessible, it will decrease the time needed to actually "play" the game for your standard citizen, and (hopefully) increase the amount of citizens who actively partcipate. Not only that, but with the switch to conquests information will be almost impossible to get for several citizens.

If you noticed, alot of things that I've inside of my constitutional proposal embraces ideas that I've opposed often. Trust me, this is not a change of mind. For once I'm (shockingly) trying to aid demogame instead of my side of it, well up to a point anyway. I refuse to see 2 years of trial and error go down the drain, because we want a chance to rearrange our bedroom.

Strider, if you're linking me to the alternative propsal I'm assuming it's because I've harangued for so long about the lack of game information in the forums. That is something that can be accomplished under any government structure. All it takes is enough people (elected or appointed or neither) to post information. It can be done officially or informally or as part of role playing. How it gets posted is not really that important. Until it does get posted regularly the demogame will continue to lose the participation of those of us who (for what ever reason) do not look at the save nor attend the chats.

I'm not linking you to the alternative government, Daveshack was just saying that it was the alternative government supporters who pushed for more information, rather than yourself.

It's really a demogame *cultural* decision regarding which is more valued, the chat or the forums. The chat has been more valued than the forums since the middle of DG1. Most of us who refrain from attending the chat don't really mind you all having a chat and having a blast so long as you give us a chance to play, too! You don't s we lose interest and drift off to do things that are more fun.

I have attended a chat (fully anyway) sense about DG3. I lost interest in them about the same time that Ehecatl_Atzin, Zarn, and many others stopped coming. They use to be a "blast" (and maybe still are for some), but I lost interest in them long ago.

Lkost badly Blackhole.... Well, posters from both DS and Striders were happy with a compromise. And losing badly 9-8-4 is not a bad loss as such. Only a shift of two-three votes would make this very different, so enough propaganda from you Blackhole. If 2 votes moved from Striders and one vote from DS, it would stand 7-7-7.
Also, the poll was badly flawed, and you know that too, even you pointed it out.
Strider said this was an informational poll. Interestingly enough, only Blackhole, CT and Strider wanted this option out of the loop, where many called for a compromise.

I doubt you'd get many votes moved from mine, you'd more likely be sucking many more from the alternative government. I'm not an idoit, if I thought I would have beable to get away with it I would have added your option for the simple fact that it aids myself.

Also, sense you did not notice, I was one of those 4 who voted for your proposal in the last poll, as was CivGeneral who is also a strong supporter of the tradational government. That would be 2 votes that would have been lost from your proposal already.

BTW, I did support your proposal as both the government structure and a compromise. I left it out to be fair to the majority, not the minority. Your doing nothing, but losing allies.

Strider

Well, I am not thinking about myself here, I try to find a middle ground that people can live with, I have no conflict with you Strider. I more disagree on the dirty tactics used by Blackhole to sabotage every single poll I present, and his interests to squash people like MOTH, Ashburnham, you , CG and several others who may like a more fair middle-ground solution. Frankly, I prefer your Constitution as a base Strider, as it is better written and done than Blackholes. However, where we disagree, and I hope you respect that, is on the merger and division of ministers and so on. I think you are a good constitutionalist Strider, and your craftsmanship is better than Blackholes here, however, the alternate government people do have a very valid point on the accessability and the long term planning in the game.

So my biggest frustration here is with CTs polls and Blackholes dirty argumentation to stop any sort of compromise. We do not even know how many that could go for a compromise due to this tilted process. If the compromise is presented in a fair manner and polled fairly, and loses, I will be happy and stick with the end-result. However, I do not approve of tilted polling. In fact, this run-off poll is not tilted, but as an end-product of CTs tilted poll it is unjust. I set up a compromise poll (attempted sabotaged by Blackhole, as usual) to test this out. And if we do not see the need for a compromise, that has truly shown the opinion of people, and we will see a bipartisan system develop, which I hope not will happen.

Strider, I know you wanted me to split votes for political reasons of the other alternative, but the reason I chose yours as a base over blackholes was the craftsmanship and the finished nature of the product. However, it is a broad support for a reform of government structure, and even your solid work cannot change that.

So abstain is a dirty tactic provo? What is the DG coming to...

Well, I am not thinking about myself here, I try to find a middle ground that people can live with, I have no conflict with you Strider. I more disagree on the dirty tactics used by Blackhole to sabotage every single poll I present, and his interests to squash people like MOTH, Ashburnham, you , CG and several others who may like a more fair middle-ground solution. Frankly, I prefer your Constitution as a base Strider, as it is better written and done than Blackholes. However, where we disagree, and I hope you respect that, is on the merger and division of ministers and so on. I think you are a good constitutionalist Strider, and your craftsmanship is better than Blackholes here, however, the alternate government people do have a very valid point on the accessability and the long term planning in the game.

If your willing to let me interfere, I will be willing to make the needed edits to your constitution. Ripping one part out and putting another one in, doesn't work exactly as good as you might think it will.

So my biggest frustration here is with CTs polls and Blackholes dirty argumentation to stop any sort of compromise. We do not even know how many that could go for a compromise due to this tilted process. If the compromise is presented in a fair manner and polled fairly, and loses, I will be happy and stick with the end-result. However, I do not approve of tilted polling. In fact, this run-off poll is not tilted, but as an end-product of CTs tilted poll it is unjust. I set up a compromise poll (attempted sabotaged by Blackhole, as usual) to test this out. And if we do not see the need for a compromise, that has truly shown the opinion of people, and we will see a bipartisan system develop, which I hope not will happen.

Well, CT is doing all of the right things the wrong way. She's got the right idea in mind, she just isn't carrying out that idea very well. Needless to say, she is forcing us to move forward, which we do need to do. I don't share many peoples mindset of CT, I believe she is really trying to help, I just think that her ways of helping has grown abit out-dated lately. Add in the fact that her help has been unwanted alot lately and you've got a fairly big mess.

Strider, I know you wanted me to split votes for political reasons of the other alternative, but the reason I chose yours as a base over blackholes was the craftsmanship and the finished nature of the product. However, it is a broad support for a reform of government structure, and even your solid work cannot change that.

As I said above, I will be willing to try and duplicate that "craftsmanship." As you are likely to be using several of my ideas anyway, I have no regrets to making the needed edits, and possibly additions.

Well Strider, what if you made those revisions in another draft, we still have time, seeking to bridge the gap with merged/divided ministries as many called for. "Provolutions" alternative is as much a Strider, DS, MOTH, Ashburnham and several others product. The proposal on government structure was a middle-ground reform where they key was limiting domestic and military, merging science and finance, merging FA-Trade and omitting culture (now governors mission to run culture wars from their provinces).

I know the compromise proposal holds a strong potential support, so abridging DS and Striders proposals with this middleground proposal could give us the needed peace and cooperation.

Personally I plan on being an opposition figure in the newspaper "The Purgatory", so my interest is in a stable system with clear responsibilities.

provo you only have 5 hours before nominations start, and it looks like we will be using the alternate government...

Well, the compromise faction will work through amendments, and I concede that this dirty American style way of running political processes won. Well, mistakes will take place, and we have one term to make adjustments to those positions in amendments. The first term is not that critical as FA and culture has almost nothing to do, and the real burden of work is better represented in what will be future amendments. Also, the legitimacy of this process has been far from acceptable, so we will certainly see amendment proposals to the existing government structure on a term basis.

this poll is way more legitimate than your poll provo, heres why:
1. Multiple choice, bad for polls that decide one thing.
2. You stripped everyones name off the proposals in your poll, now it is hard to figure out who's proposal is what
3. The language of your options in your poll is complicated
4. Striders poll is simple, yet good

Well, I folded my cards, but we will see in the amendment session. Term one is as we said a no-brainer Term, and we have plenty of time to rectify a couple of legal/poling mishaps. Also, I questioned CTs poll , not Striders poll, but striders poll was based fully on CTs poll



Besides, many of us missed a compromise option.

It's really a demogame *cultural* decision regarding which is more valued, the chat or the forums. The chat has been more valued than the forums since the middle of DG1. Most of us who refrain from attending the chat don't really mind you all having a chat and having a blast so long as you give us a chance to play, too! You don't s we lose interest and drift off to do things that are more fun.

Well said, as were your comments regarding getting information to the people in the forums being independant of the government in place.

Well Strider, what if you made those revisions in another draft, we still have time, seeking to bridge the gap with merged/divided ministries as many called for. "Provolutions" alternative is as much a Strider, DS, MOTH, Ashburnham and several others product. The proposal on government structure was a middle-ground reform where they key was limiting domestic and military, merging science and finance, merging FA-Trade and omitting culture (now governors mission to run culture wars from their provinces).

I know the compromise proposal holds a strong potential support, so abridging DS and Striders proposals with this middleground proposal could give us the needed peace and cooperation.

Personally I plan on being an opposition figure in the newspaper "The Purgatory", so my interest is in a stable system with clear responsibilities.

Okay, I am completed with a fully operational form of the constitution. I've made all the needed edits, modified many parts, and made several additions.

I would send it VIA PM, but unluckily it would take 7 PM's to send. So I'm just going to tell you that it is for the most part done.

Sorry Strider, it seems the Compromise attempts was overrun with unfair practices.
All we can do, is to be fair to the Daveshack-Blackhole solution, and see how it works, and then make some amendments within Term One.

Question: does this poll alone imply ratification of the winning Constitution? Or do we still have to endure a ratification process?

When you consider this poll ends on the second-to-last day of the month, this could be a major isue. Or at least it should. Then again, this is such a divisve issue that we may not be able to reach ratification levels anyway.

Add to this that we have ratfification of a completely different set of rules going on at the same time, and you see where there is cause for confusion. Which rules will prevail?

It's also interesting to note that we have 4 voters who are not signed onto the Citizen Registry.

For Strider's Plan: Lecky
For Alternative Plan: Luxborg, Vietcong, eyrei (!!) :eek: :lol:

If this is not resolved, then the results go from 21-15 to 18-14. Not too significant, but something worth mentioning. ;)

It's also interesting to note that we have 4 voters who are not signed onto the Citizen Registry.

For Strider's Plan: Lecky
For Alternative Plan: Luxborg, Vietcong, eyrei (!!) :eek: :lol:

If this is not resolved, then the results go from 21-15 to 18-14. Not too significant, but something worth mentioning. ;)

Yes, but remember that this poll started when we were still on the DG5 Citizen's registry. I think that at least Luxborg and Eyrie were both registered on that list at the time they voted.

Question: does this poll alone imply ratification of the winning Constitution? Or do we still have to endure a ratification process?

When you consider this poll ends on the second-to-last day of the month, this could be a major isue. Or at least it should. Then again, this is such a divisve issue that we may not be able to reach ratification levels anyway.

Add to this that we have ratfification of a completely different set of rules going on at the same time, and you see where there is cause for confusion. Which rules will prevail?
no way, who would want that piece of crap constitution I created as the actual constitution? :mischief:

Question: does this poll alone imply ratification of the winning Constitution? Or do we still have to endure a ratification process?

When you consider this poll ends on the second-to-last day of the month, this could be a major isue. Or at least it should. Then again, this is such a divisve issue that we may not be able to reach ratification levels anyway.

Add to this that we have ratfification of a completely different set of rules going on at the same time, and you see where there is cause for confusion. Which rules will prevail?

Well, either way we are in a jam. If we were to follow the rules we set out before the game starts, then one of the proposals will have to reach atlest 60% of the current census. Currently, neither proposals have 60% of people who voted, so I doubt either of them even has half of the current census.

Edit: Also, I'd consider this official enough. A yes vote for one proposals is a no vote for the other one.

Actually, the 60% was that 60% must vote in the poll and a 50+% for an option would pass, not that an option needed 60% of the census to vote for it.

Edit: looks like you already note that.

I did the math real quick, currently among the current census it stands like this:

Daveshacks alternative with 38.48% of the vote
Striders Tradational with 24.19% of the vote
Abstain with 6.45% of the vote.

So 30.88% of the population still has not voted. Enough either proposal to win.

both structures seem good, but I'm up for something different.

So, then, given that nominations will be closing up at the same time as this poll (nominations, I might add, for the DaveShack plan), when will be done if the poll's result is found to be unacceptable, or turns out in favor of the traditional plan?

Again, this race is so close that we need a compromise solution, and many of us saw several inconsistencies in both proposals. The good news, both platforms are good, but need more tweaking before Term 2.

Again, this race is so close that we need a compromise solution, and many of us saw several inconsistencies in both proposals. The good news, both platforms are good, but need more tweaking before Term 2.

So use term one to tweak. That should give everyone something to do and allow the pace of the early game to be slow.

Im going with Strider's plan here.