Cliff notes version:
Constitution is the basic framework, CoL provides details
Focus on the Governors, not National leaders
Includes 5BC game structure limits
Provision for recall, with strong limits on recall
Seperates President and DP roles, allowing more citizens to do each

Constitution and Code of Laws will each be in seperate posts. I will try to keep them updated, and will post a changelog here.

Changelog
0.1 Posted.
.2 – Update
Con C – language on foreign civs clarified
Con E – gramatical change
Con G – Clarified duties of Judiciary
Con G – Noted Use of PD is optional
Con K – Removed “at any time”
CoL C.1 renamed to D.1
CoL G.1 creared – judicial procedures
CoL H.1 reorganized to a more logical format
CoL H.1 use of “regular” made consistent
CoL H.1 length of nomination period extended to 4 days
CoL H.3 language about directed duties clarified
CoL H.4 language about automatically vacating office inserted
CoL J.1 clarified official vs unofficial
CoL K.1 requirement to state a reason added.
CoL K.1. Quorum for Recall changed to ½
CoL N changed to N.1

.3 – Update
Con/CoL renamed House to Assembly, change references to People to Assembly
Con F – added reference to local civic government by Governors
Con I – clarified wording to include deputies and use simpler language
CoL H.4 – clarified wording about deputies and vacancies – offer is required
CoL H.2 – changed requirement for DP to greater than ½, not just ½

-- Ravensfire

We, the people of CIV_NAME, in order to create an atmosphere of friendship, cooperation, and pride, establish this Constitution of our beloved country. We uphold the beliefs that each citizen must have an equal voice in the government and ruling of our country, that government itself is a construct of and servant to the people, that rules, regulations, and laws should be established to facilitate the active participation of all citizens and to make possible the dreams and desires of the citizens.

Article A. Citizenship
All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen Registry are citizens of our country, and members of the Assembly. Citizens have the right to assemble, the right to free movement, the right to free speech, the right to a fair trial, the right to representation, the right to request an investigation into possible violations of law and the right to vote. Political parties are not permitted.

Article B. Laws of the CIV_NAME
Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be valid that contradicts these Articles.

These rules may not contradict the rules and regulations of the Civfanatics Forums. Moderators may veto any such rules.

Article C. Game Structure
No more than 5 cities built by CIV_NAME may exist at any time. In addition, only one city from each foreign civilization may be taken by any means. All other cities must be razed immediately.

Article D. Government Structure
The government will consist of the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch. All leaders must determine and implement the will of the Assembly.

Article E. The Executive Branch
The Executive branch is responsible for tasks and projects that affect the Nation and is headed by the President.

The President is responsible for control of the slider, worker allocation and resolving disputes between leaders, such as over use of gold. The President is also responsible for all tasks not assigned to another leader.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs is responsible for all matters involving treaties with foreign nations and all espionage activities. This includes Trade Embargoes, Military Alliances and the use of Spies to acquire technologies.

The Minister of Defense is responsible for the actions of all Military units.

The Minister of Trade and Technology is responsible for all trade initiatives and research goals. The
Minister also coordinates any plans for spaceship construction.

Article F. Legislative Branch
The Legislative Branch is formed of the Assembly and a Senate of Governors.

The House is made up of all citizens, and is responsible for the creation of new laws and Amendments. The House will present all such proposals to the Judiciary for review.

The Senate is made up of the 6 Governors, and is responsible for the well-being of the cities of CIV_NAME. Each of the 5 native cities will have its own Governor, and all captured cities will be controlled by the Expatriate Governor. Each Governor is responsible for the care, management, and use of cities they control.

Each Governor may also setup a civic government for the cities they control in any manner they see fit that does not conflict with CIV_NAME laws.

Article G. Judicial Branch
The Judicial Branch will consist of one Chief Justice, one Public Defender and a Judge Advocate. These three justices are tasked with upholding the Constitution and its supporting laws (if any) in a fair and impartial manner, upholding the rights of all citizens, reviewing all proposed laws and conducting all requested investigations.

The Chief Justice shall have the additional responsibility to organize and conduct the affairs of the Judicial Branch. The Public Defender will act as council to an accused citizen, if the accused citizen wishes. The Judge Advocate will act as the prosecution.

Article H. Elections
The Executive Branch positions, Governorships and the Judiciary positions are all elected positions with a fixed term of one month.

Article I. Multiple Offices
Citizens may hold only one elected office at any given time, or be a deputy to only one elected office. Citizens may not have more than one accepted nomination at the commencement of the general election.

Article J. Will of the Assembly
Elected Officials must plan and act according to the Will of the Assembly. The Will of the Assembly is the aggregate wish of the citizens of our CIV_NAME. It is determined by unanimity in a completed discussion, or by the majority vote in an official poll.

Article K. Recall of Elected Officials
Citizens may request a Recall of an elected official.

Article L. Game Sessions
All irreversible game actions must be made by a Designated Player during a game session using instructions posted in a game session instruction thread.

A special session to accomplish a specific, short goal may be held by the President if there is significant public support. These special sessions do not count as a regular game session.

Article M. Playing the Save
Commission of any game action, by any person other than the Designated Player while carrying out their duties, which is not instantly reversible without reloading the save, is strictly forbidden.

Exception: Determining options in the renegotiation of Peace agreements requires an action of acceptance or war to exit the bargain screen. This may be done but the game must be immediately closed without saving.

Article N. Census, and Amending the Constitution
The Census is defined as the average number of votes cast, dropped fractions, in each of the contested elections in the most recent general election

Amendments to the Constitution must be posted as a Proposed Poll in the discussion thread for at least 24 hours prior to submission to the Judiciary. The discussion on the amendment must have lasted at least 48 hours.

Amendments must pass Judicial Review. If accepted, the Judiciary will post the poll. This poll will be open for 4 days, state the new text and the current text. To pass, an amendment must have a 67% majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, and have a total number of votes greater than 1/2 of the census.

Section D.1 Freedom of Information
All elected officials will create an official thread. This thread will be used to provide updates to the citizens about their office. The information in this thread should updated frequently in order to accurately reflect the current game situation.

Section E.1 City Placement and Naming
Discussions on city placement and names will be lead by the Governor of that city.

Section G.1 Judicial Procedures
The Chief Justice must post the Judicial Procedures by which they plan to run the Judiciary. These procedures are not binding until 2/3 of the Judiciary accepts the procedures. They may not be changed except through a unanimous decision by all members of the Judiciary. These procedures may not contradict the Constitution or the Code of Laws, but are considered law.

Section H.1 Elections
The Election Office, a citizen’s office supervised by the President, will perform all actions needed for each election cycle.

Each Governor position will be a separate election, and all will be held each turn, even if the city does not exist. In the event the city does not exist, the order of priority will be clearly stated in the election description (i.e. Gov. 1, Gov. 2).

The regular election cycle starts at the posting of the nomination threads, and concludes when the last poll, including runoff polls, closes. Nomination threads will be posted 8 days before the end of the current term. Election polls will be posted 4 days later, and will list all accepted candidates for each election. Election polls will be marked private, and last for 3 days.

Each position will be granted to the candidate receiving the largest number of votes in that election. In the event of a tie between two or more front runners, a runoff poll shall be opened between those candidates only. This poll shall run for 2 days, and be repeated as often as needed to resolve the tie.

Section H.2 Designated Player Pool
During each regular election cycle, a separate thread will be created during the nomination process for DP Candidates. Any citizen that wishes to be a DP must post in this thread. When the election polls are posted, a separate poll, in multi-choice format, listing each candidate will be posted. Citizens will vote their approval for a candidate by selecting their name.

Each candidate that receives a vote from more than ½ of the citizens that vote in the poll will be accepted as a DP for that term. The Election Office will put together a list of the Designated Players, ordered by the number of votes in support for that term. In the event of a tie, the order of posting in the nomination thread will be used. All DP’s that actually ran a game session in the previous term will be put below those that did not, regardless of the number of votes. This list will determine the order that the DP’s will be used for game sessions.

Section H.3 Deputies
All Executive and Governor positions will have a deputy. The Deputy is permitted to conduct the affairs of the office as directed by the elected official, or during a planned Absence of the elected official. If no instructions have been posted for an office within 24 hours of the upcoming Game Session, the deputy for that office may post the official instructions for the office.

The Judiciary does not use deputies. In the event of an Absence, a pro-tem justice(s) may be appointed by the Chief Justice (or Judge Advocate if the Chief Justice if absent) and confirmed by the President and the remaining justice if not also absent.

If both the Chief Justice and the Judge Advocate are absent, the Public Defender may appoint pro-tems to the other seats, with Presidential approval.

Section H.4 Vacancies
The President will appoint a citizen to any Vacant office. If a deputy exists for that office, the President must offer the appointment to that citizen. This appointment may be challenged by any citizen by that citizen posting a confirmation poll within 24 hours of the appointment.

If an elected official does not post in the DG forums in 7 days without prior notice, any citizen may request the Judiciary to investigate. The Judiciary, by a majority vote, may declare the office Vacant at the conclusion of the investigation.

Section H.5 Confirmation Polls
A confirmation poll is used, where permitted, to give citizens the opportunity to challenge certain actions. If a challenge poll does not exist for such an action, any citizen may create such a poll. This poll must be created within 24 hours of the action, should ask “Do you approve of <description of action”>, contain Yes, No and Abstain options, and run for 2 days. If the action concerns a citizen, the poll must be marked private. Otherwise, it must be marked public. When the poll closes, if the majority of citizens voted No, the action is overturned. Any other result confirms the action.

Section K.1 Recalls
Any citizen may create a thread requesting the recall of a specific elected official. This post must include the reason the recall is requested.

Should two additional citizens post in that thread supporting the recall within 24 hours of the initial post, the Chief Justice must create a Recall poll. This is a private poll, asking in Yes/No/Abstain format if the elected official should be removed from office. This poll should run for 4 days.

If 2/3 of the citizens voting support the recall, ignoring abstain, and the total number of votes is greater than 1/2 of the census, the citizen is removed from office, and the office is declared Vacant.

A Recall may be requested no sooner than 7 days after a previous attempt in the same term.

Section L.1 Game Sessions
All irreversible game actions must progress during a game session, while reversible game actions (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can be prepared offline. During each session, the designated player must provide a log of their actions in sufficient detail to replicate their actions.

A Game Session Instruction Thread must be created at least 2 days before the chat by the Designated Player for that session. Game Sessions must be at least 3 days apart.

All official instructions must be posted in the current game session instruction thread. Instructions must be clear and defined. Officials must post their instructions at least one hour before the scheduled start of the game session. However, officials may make changes to their instructions up to an hour before the chat, so long as those changes are clearly noted.

Section J.1 Polling Standards
Polls posted by an elected official on an area they control are considered official and binding unless specifically stated otherwise. Polls posted by citizens, by officials outside their area or by officials in their area explicitly noted as such are considered unofficial, and do not bind officials in any way. Officials should, however,take such polls into account during planning.

The description and initial post for all official polls should be stated in a clear and neutral manner.

The initial post should contain a link to all relevant discussion threads. Each option should be explained if not immediately clear. The time frame for the poll, and how the results will be interpreted should also be in the initial post.

All official polls must be open for a minimum of 24 hours to be binding. They are strongly encouraged to be open for at least 3 days.

Official polls should be flagged as “Public” unless directly concerning another Citizen.

Section N.1 Amending the Code of Laws
Amendments to the Code of Laws must be posted as a Proposed Poll in the discussion thread for at least 24 hours prior to submission to the Judiciary. The discussion on the amendment must have lasted at least 48 hours.

Amendments must pass Judicial Review. If accepted, the Judiciary will post the poll. This poll will be open for 3 days, state the new text and the current text. To pass, an amendment must have a majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain.

Ok, i just read this over (mostly) and i really like it. Just one thing jumps out at me (right now): If teh President and DP are different people, then can't you just call the "President" you have now a "domestic minister" and call the "DP" DP/President. This just makes sense to me.

Ok, i just read this over (mostly) and i really like it. Just one thing jumps out at me (right now): If teh President and DP are different people, then can't you just call the "President" you have now a "domestic minister" and call the "DP" DP/President. This just makes sense to me.
There isn't a single person that's the DP - there's a pool of people. Each game session will probably have a different DP.

The idea is to seperate the person who leads the game, who coordinates things and tries to make sure we're all working towards the same goals (the President) and the person that opens the save, runs through the instructions and saves the game (the DP).

More than a few people have refused to run for President because of the time commitment as DP that's involved. There have also been people that are willing to play the save, but don't want the coordination details that the President deals with.

So I split them. The DP pool is there to give the people a voice in who's playing the save. If there's a candidate that is obviously not worthy, they (hopefully) won't get approved. Likewise, those candidates that demonstrate time and again their skills as a DP will be approved over and over.

-- Ravensfire

There isn't a single person that's the DP - there's a pool of people. Each game session will probably have a different DP.

The idea is to seperate the person who leads the game, who coordinates things and tries to make sure we're all working towards the same goals (the President) and the person that opens the save, runs through the instructions and saves the game (the DP).

More than a few people have refused to run for President because of the time commitment as DP that's involved. There have also been people that are willing to play the save, but don't want the coordination details that the President deals with.

So I split them. The DP pool is there to give the people a voice in who's playing the save. If there's a candidate that is obviously not worthy, they (hopefully) won't get approved. Likewise, those candidates that demonstrate time and again their skills as a DP will be approved over and over.

-- Ravensfire


alright, the response actually makes sense to me. One of the few times i've been convinced by anyone of anything throughout the DG. What you just said there, IMO, could really solve a lot of our problems. :goodjob:

alright, the response actually makes sense to me. One of the few times i've been convinced by anyone of anything throughout the DG. What you just said there, IMO, could really solve a lot of our problems. :goodjob:

That's my hope. I'd love to run as President again, but I just don't have the time to run turnchats. So, to some extent, my idea is a bit self-serving ...

-- Ravensfire

Generally looks very good and reasonable to me. Thanks for all the hard work! Just some minor comments, mostly textual issues:

Constitution


C: second sentence. Is "captured" intended to include culture flips, trades, treaties, etc? Then maybe replace "captured" by "obtained" or "taken". Also, we may want to clarify whether the city should be originally built by that foreign civ or in the hands of that civ at the moment we get it.
E: very last sentence should be singular (should it?), something like "This Minister also coordinates..."
G: to "The Public Defender will act as council to an accused individual" please add ", if that individual so wishes" (preferably in better English). We don't want to force the PD on anyone, I think.
G (again): should there be some language here or in the CoL on CC's or JR's? They are not defined (but used in Article N and Section N).
J: first sentence is a repetition of Article D, second sentence. Doesn't really hurt, though...
K: "at any time" is contradicted by the CoL, which says "no sooner than 7 days after a previous attempt". Please remove "at any time".


CoL


C.1: should be D.1? Maybe change to "All officials except JA and PD". Also, governors of nonexisting cities do not need a thread until there is a decision (settling, capture) to be made.
H.2: are there also irregular election cycles? :)
Second paragraph: "in support for that term" should be "in support for that DP"?
H.3: "will have deputies" should perhaps be "may have deputies, at the discretion of the elected official"? I am getting the feeling that maybe I am misunderstanding the meaning of "will"....
"as directed" should be "as directed by the elected official".
H.4: needs some standard clause on when the office is vacant. Official not posting in DG forum for X days without note of absence seems ok to me.
K.1: maybe require the citizen to state a reason for the recall?
L.1, first paragraph: first appearance of "game session" could be replaced by "online game session" for clarity. Also, "their" should be singular?
J.1 (is in the wrong place btw): what does it mean for a poll to be "official"? In what way is an "unofficial" poll different?
N: should be N.1?

Nice comments!

"They" can refer to a singular entity - not entirely common, but is correct. Kinda. Interesting discussion here (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=they). Look for the usage comments on "they". Changed, however.

In the last DG, we required each Chief Justice to create their Judicial Procedures, within the context of the law. It proved successful, so I didn't see any reason to change it. I do, however, need to bring in the guidelines that we did create, and put them in the CoL. I did clarify the Judicial duties.

Good catch on the recall stuff - that would have been a huge "oops" as the CoL CANNOT override the Con. And the recall does need the restrictions.

Are their irregular election cycles - not right now, but why close the door on them.

Deputies - We want leaders to have deputies, but have to realize that not everyone position will have one. Deputies provide some transition if a leader goes offline unexpectedly, or resigns for some reason. I want to keep the requirement in there for that reason.

Official vs unofficial polls - clarified.

Game sessions - I'd like to leave this open to the DP. Maybe require DP candidates to post if they plan to run an online or offline session? Maybe require DP to state in the instruction thread if the session is on or offline, with the option of a confirmation poll if off line?

-- Ravensfire

I am going to have to be against this proposal for the following reasons:
1. I do not like the idea of a DP pool since I feel that the President (or equivilent title) should be the one that does the DPing (Unless he or she is not present then it moves down on the CoC)

2. Vacancies. Should the deputy be promoted to the leader possition if the original leader goes absent? I beleve deputies should have first priority of that leader possition once the original leader resigns or goes AWOL.

3. There is no clear definition on what process the deputy is chosen listed in the consitution.

Constitution and Code of Laws updated to v 0.2 - see the Changelog.

-- Ravensfire

Off the top of my head, rename that silly 'House of the People' to something like the 'Assembly.' Doesn't sound as bad, and we're playing Greece after all - that was the name for the body of all male citizens in democractic Athens.

That said, it would good to go ahead and reference the Assembly/House of the People in other areas of the Constitution, so it actually has a use and definition. Perhaps amend Article A to 'All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen Registry are citizens of our country, as well as members of the Assembly.'

The same could go for the Article J - 'the will of the Assembly' - and at other points in the ruleset.

I'd go ahead and remove the Senate and define governors as members of the executive. Since we're not going to use them as a legislative body, the Senate should not exist as one - it would only serve to confuse those reading the Constitution for the first time.

Lastly, I'll propose something I brought up in nobody's constitution. We should add a sentence to the governor's duties that allows them to create and manage civic government as they see fit. With a smaller-scale game like this, I bet we could get some interesting local government going on. Recognized as governors on the federal level, they could make themselves Presidents and Kings for their cities. I dunno, but it could be made interesting. :)

Oct - good ideas. 0.3 probably won't be until tomorrow, until this Hamidon raid I'm on goes really smoothly.

On the second point, that does just sound cool.

CG - I've got no problem saying the deputy should be given first shot at a vacancy. I guess I just assumed that would happen.

-- Ravensfire

Excellent...
I think that we should keep the senate in, we may later find some task to give them..

The best part is the DP pool, I may now actually run for president knowing I don't have to be the only Designated Player :goodjob:

To pass, an amendment must have a 67% majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, and have a total number of votes greater than 1/2 of the census.

Again, a thousand times no. I don't want to ever see another amendment fail to pass with over 80% in favor, just because 1 fewer than the census number voted. I also don't want to ever see an actual functional majority vote to be rejected because a very small minority can hold the nation hostage.

Let's use this perfectly valid alternative, which served us very well in DG6.
To pass, an amendment must have a majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, and have a total number of votes greater than 2/3 the census, or a 67% majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, with no minimum number of votes.

I am willing to negotiate the census on a 67% majority, but for me it is unacceptable to ignore a simple majority which is large enough to reflect the collective will of the citizens.

The argument in favor of making the constitution hard to change has some validity in RL, where life and death are involved, however I'm pretty much against the RL argument too. It has no place in a game where the objective is to have fun.

Again, a thousand times no. I don't want to ever see another amendment fail to pass with over 80% in favor, just because 1 fewer than the census number voted. I also don't want to ever see an actual functional majority vote to be rejected because a very small minority can hold the nation hostage.

Let's use this perfectly valid alternative, which served us very well in DG6.
To pass, an amendment must have a majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, and have a total number of votes greater than 2/3 the census, or a 67% majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, with no minimum number of votes.

I am willing to negotiate the census on a 67% majority, but for me it is unacceptable to ignore a simple majority which is large enough to reflect the collective will of the citizens.

The argument in favor of making the constitution hard to change has some validity in RL, where life and death are involved, however I'm pretty much against the RL argument too. It has no place in a game where the objective is to have fun.
but, I am not for a simple majority changing the constitution...

btw, another minor comment RF, I think that players for the DP pool should have more than 1/2 approval, not 1/2... Just a small nitpick...

I am going to have to be against this proposal for the following reasons:
1. I do not like the idea of a DP pool since I feel that the President (or equivilent title) should be the one that does the DPing (Unless he or she is not present then it moves down on the CoC)

2. Vacancies. Should the deputy be promoted to the leader possition if the original leader goes absent? I beleve deputies should have first priority of that leader possition once the original leader resigns or goes AWOL.

3. There is no clear definition on what process the deputy is chosen listed in the consitution.

I have to admire you for your steadfast position on these issues, however I'd also like to debate them with you.

1. What is so special about the CoC? For that matter, what's so special about the President being DP? In DG6 we had several people who would have wanted to be President, to lead national discussions and use the position to advocate a certain course. They were not willing to sign up for dozens of hours a month as DP, and there have been very few Presidents willing to schedule play when they know they're not available. (I'm one of the few exceptions to that rule) Forcing the DP to be the President or one of the CoC ignores a good turn player who doesn't want to lead discussions or post instructions saying "follow poll xyz".

2. There is a tradeoff on deputy promotions. Promoting the deputy is usually a good idea, but what about the case where someone agrees to be deputy because s/he isn't ready to be the leader, but then gets "automatically" appointed? Also what about new citizens, and people who don't run at the beginning of the term due to RL but then are available after the vacancy comes up? I don't know the right answer, because it's a tradeoff between respecting the feelings of the deputy vs. equal opportunity.

3. At least you're just asking how deputies are chosen instead of being right back up on the "runner up in the election" soapbox. ;)

I have to admire you for your steadfast position on these issues, however I'd also like to debate them with you.
I hope you dont mind that I play Devil's Advocate on a few of the debate issues ;). (I do that often times)


1. What is so special about the CoC? For that matter, what's so special about the President being DP? In DG6 we had several people who would have wanted to be President, to lead national discussions and use the position to advocate a certain course. They were not willing to sign up for dozens of hours a month as DP, and there have been very few Presidents willing to schedule play when they know they're not available. (I'm one of the few exceptions to that rule) Forcing the DP to be the President or one of the CoC ignores a good turn player who doesn't want to lead discussions or post instructions saying "follow poll xyz".
Truely I see your point on that, But I feel that the President should have the responsibilities to handle the DPing. I would sympathize with the past presidents who used the possition to lead national discussions and advocate for a possition but on the other hand would feel tired because they have to play the game and run the risk of making a :smoke: move. Beleve me, I went through that as President in one of the past demogame and I certanly did not enjoyed playing the game since so much responsibilities were weighed on my shoulders (not to mention that CT is around watching behind my back :eek: ). On to the CoC, I felt that it is a good back up system in the event the president fails to show up for his or her's TC for what ever reasons that would prevent them from getting online.
I dont have a full confidence on a DP pool because of a few reasons:
1. How can I trust that person from the DP pool will not pull a Donsig and turn the game upside down?
2. Will that person from the pool be playing in the hours that I am online? Since I do enjoy attending TCs when I am not busy.

2. There is a tradeoff on deputy promotions. Promoting the deputy is usually a good idea, but what about the case where someone agrees to be deputy because s/he isn't ready to be the leader, but then gets "automatically" appointed? Also what about new citizens, and people who don't run at the beginning of the term due to RL but then are available after the vacancy comes up? I don't know the right answer, because it's a tradeoff between respecting the feelings of the deputy vs. equal opportunity.
Well, the deputy can freely decline the possition if he or she wants to. If thats the case, then the president can select a citizen or open up an application for the office. I just feel that first the Deputy should have first dibs to being promoted to the leader possition if the deputy wishes. If the deputy wishes for whatever reason to not go for the leader possition and declines the offer, then the president would have to look other sources to fill the occupancy. This is the Logic/Flow chart I have created:


Leader resigns or has gone AWOL -> President asks the Deputy if s/he wants the possition -(Deputy accepts)-> Deputy promoted to Leader
|
(Deputy Declines)
|
V
President apoints a citizen via application -(Citizen accepts)-> Citizen appointed to leader


3. At least you're just asking how deputies are chosen instead of being right back up on the "runner up in the election" soapbox. ;)
Well, I gave up on fighting for the "runner up in the elections" docket since I felt that it was a hopeless cause and a waste of energy on my part. I felt that "runner ups in the elections" are a good idea but I dont want to run the risk of blowing my cyberbrain to pieces.

Again, a thousand times no. I don't want to ever see another amendment fail to pass with over 80% in favor, just because 1 fewer than the census number voted. I also don't want to ever see an actual functional majority vote to be rejected because a very small minority can hold the nation hostage.

Let's use this perfectly valid alternative, which served us very well in DG6.
To pass, an amendment must have a majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, and have a total number of votes greater than 2/3 the census, or a 67% majority of positive votes, ignoring Abstain, with no minimum number of votes.

I am willing to negotiate the census on a 67% majority, but for me it is unacceptable to ignore a simple majority which is large enough to reflect the collective will of the citizens.

The argument in favor of making the constitution hard to change has some validity in RL, where life and death are involved, however I'm pretty much against the RL argument too. It has no place in a game where the objective is to have fun.

DS - if you'll note, I did already change that section - census is at 50%, not 2/3. That's pretty easy to reach. These are the core rules - the "Roll one die, move that many forward" type of rules. Likewise, the 2/3 majority is there to make sure that we're not changing part of the core structure without being darn sure people like it. It would be absolutely disheartening to see core chunks of the rules change because 50.1% like that change. Change the CoL easy - oh yeah - that's a simple majority.

Look what's in the Constitution - the basics, the framework. Things that we shouldn't need to touch. The CoL is where things get a bit more interesting. In fact, the only really "new" concept that's in the Constitution is the recall provision, but all the details about that are in the CoL. If it proves unwieldy, changing that is simple.

I think dropping the census requirement to 50% is pretty darn low. We should be able to reach that on just about any given poll. The 2/3 majority is there to make sure that there is significantly strong support to alter the Constitution.

-- Ravensfire

btw, another minor comment RF, I think that players for the DP pool should have more than 1/2 approval, not 1/2... Just a small nitpick...

Hmmm - sounds good.

-- Ravensfire

I’ve been busy lately (RL overload; plus all my free time has been spent watching the Tour de France) so I haven’t been following Demo Game events. I just glanced through the three competing constitutions (this one plus Strider’s & Nobody’s), and prefer this one of the three. I hope to do a detailed read of this over the weekend and then will post some thoughts.

However, one quick observation: I think the preamble and opening of this constitution (as well as the other two) needs real work. What is the purpose of the Demo Game? Why doesn’t the Constitution spell that out? Right now all three Constitutions contain gratuitous and legalistic mumble jumble rather than clearly defining what the Demo Game is and why we’re playing it.

For instance, we’ve been arguing about the lack of role play (and what “proper” role play consists of), but if this concept is so important, why isn’t it in the Constitution? How we roleplay doesn't have to be spelled out; just the fact that it's an expected part of the game.

All three Constitutions are great if we intend most of our role playing to focus on simulating the roles of governmental officials and poll-crazed citizens; and we actually do role play that to perfection (at least I hope we’ve been role playing!). But I gather people want something way beyond that (although it would be interesting to run a poll to see how much role playing people actually do want). Anyway, if this concept is central to the DG it must be front and center in the Constitution. Remember, the role of the Constitution is to define how we as citizens are to conduct our gameplay. Playing at Government is just one of the actions that we citizens undertake; it isn't the entirety of the Demo Game.

Ravensfire, this criticism aside, you’ve done some good work here. More comments later.

Another thing I found, Article I doesn't specify deputies... So you could be a deputy and elected official or more than 1 deputy.... I am not sure if this was intention or accident...

Article I. Multiple Offices
No person shall hold multiple elected positions simultaneously, nor have more than one accepted nomination at the commencement of the general election.

Bertie,

That's an interesting idea. Hadn't thought of that before.

BH,

Yup - that should be in there too. My bad.

-- Ravensfire

Look what's in the Constitution - the basics, the framework. Things that we shouldn't need to touch.

Sorry, there is one item in the Constitution which is not "the basics". It threatens to hold 19 of us hostage if 10 people agree with it. It is something which might be the best thing ever for the DemoGame -- or it could be a complete, unmitigated disaster. I am not willing to allow 1/3 of the people here to destroy the DG by refusing to remove this possible poison pill. I'm not willing to sacrifice the DG on an altar of sticking to principles which were decided before most of the people show up.

You should be able to deduce what I'm talking about. Put that in the CoL and I might consider dropping my objection.

Sorry, there is one item in the Constitution which is not "the basics". It threatens to hold 19 of us hostage if 10 people agree with it. It is something which might be the best thing ever for the DemoGame -- or it could be a complete, unmitigated disaster. I am not willing to allow 1/3 of the people here to destroy the DG by refusing to remove this possible poison pill. I'm not willing to sacrifice the DG on an altar of sticking to principles which were decided before most of the people show up.

You should be able to deduce what I'm talking about. Put that in the CoL and I might consider dropping my objection.

DS, I do, and I won't.

Sorry, that battle was fought, and fought, and fought again.

We'll fight it one more time, in proxy.

EDIT: Your main objection "principles which were decided before most of the people show up" is rather off. That's what the entire system is - principles that they buy into. People will be interested in this, in part, because it IS something different. Changing a principle like that in midstream WILL run people off. That's got to be hard to change, because people will leave over something like that.

Are you willing to risk losing citizens over a mere majority?

-- Ravensfire

0.3 posted.

Changelog:
Con/CoL renamed House to Assembly, change references to People to Assembly
Con F – added reference to local civic government by Governors
Con I – clarified wording to include deputies and use simpler language
CoL H.4 – clarified wording about deputies and vacancies – offer is required
CoL H.2 – changed requirement for DP to greater than ½, not just ½

Comments:
Some interesting ideas are out there, I'd like to see some more discussion on them first. In particular, Bertie's idea about some changes to the Preamble are interesting.

Oct, I left the Governors in the Legislature. Call it better reading, call it balance, call it keeping the control of the cities closer to the People. Or, just call it personal preference. If there's more people calling for it, might change.

DS, I left the Con. amendment stuff the same. I know you don't like it. Likewise, I cannot stand the idea of a majority, a simple majority, affecting the core rules of the Constitution. Let's see what others think. One comment though - look at the Constitution - it's pretty sparse in lots of places. The details are generally in the CoL. Only the really big things are in the Constitution.

I would suggest starting a seperate point about it, including your veiled reference. Let's thrash it all out. Again.

CG, the CoL always had the clause about deputies getting bumped up. I think you just missed it. I've changed it to make mandatory the offer of the office, not actually getting the office. The deputy can now simply and easily turn the offer down.

I'll be out all tomorrow - we'll see how the discussions go, and will update from there. In general, an idea that looks good to me get's included. One that I don't like, I will comment on, and see what happens.

-- Ravensfire

Excellent...
I think that we should keep the senate in, we may later find some task to give them..

The best part is the DP pool, I may now actually run for president knowing I don't have to be the only Designated Player :goodjob:


I wonder - why not keep the lower threshold for approval by popular vote of the citizens, yet add an additional requirement that the Senate must ratify the change?

Are you willing to risk losing citizens over a mere majority?


Worst case, the 1/3+1 who want to stick with it even when it's going bad will be the only ones left. I'd rather have 1/2+1 stay around than 1/3+1.

And where did this "mere majority" thing come from? Everyone here should be equal, and have an equal voice. Being "merely" a majority is a term which demeans all the people in that majority, like they are somehow less important than the 10 or so people who called all the shots while the game was being set up.

Don't misunderstand me, I want to stay the course, for now. I'll :dance: if it works out and the game goes well. But 4 months from now if it's not working out, we'll be stuck in a suicide pact because you're making it possible for a few diehards to force the rest of us to go down with the ship.

uh...DS and ravensfire, mind actually saying what you are talking about. obvioiusly this is something you've guys have fought over before, but seeing that DG6 was my first DG, i have no clue what's going on. an explanation would be nice. :)

uh...DS and ravensfire, mind actually saying what you are talking about. obvioiusly this is something you've guys have fought over before, but seeing that DG6 was my first DG, i have no clue what's going on. an explanation would be nice. :)
putting the 5BC requirements in the constitution

about the preamble thing: Strider posted a good thread a while back about describing the DemoGame. it sort of got lost, but we found a good description, written by zorven. maybe this could serve as the preamble. well, here it is (modified to include DG7 instead of DG4 and Conquests):

What is Game of Democracy VII?

When you play a game of Civilization III Conquests, you make all the decisions – where to build cities, what city improvements to build, who to attack. You are the sole decision maker. Now imagine that you are playing the game and 3 of your friends are sitting at the computer with you. All 4 of you are deciding together how to play the game. This is a democracy.

In Game of Democracy VII (Democracy Game, DemoGame), there are many people involved with making the decisions on how the game is played. Instead of all sitting at the same computer, we use the forums to discuss the game with each other. To manage many people playing the game, a government has been formed to provide a structured way for everyone to be involved in the decision making process. This government is much like real life. It has a Constitution, a Code of Laws, and elections to select Leaders that are responsible for managing certain aspects of the game. Continue reading and you will find all you need to know to participate in the DemoGame.

also, is there any chance you put an Information Office in there? you voted yes on the poll, yet i don't see it in your constitution or CoL. (unless i'm blind here)

also, is there any chance you put an Information Office in there? you voted yes on the poll, yet i don't see it in your constitution or CoL. (unless i'm blind here)

I think that should be something done by a group of citizens - not done by force of a rule. I like the Info Office idea, but would prefer to see it completely outside the ruleset. Let the people just, well, do it!

-- Ravensfire

I think that should be something done by a group of citizens - not done by force of a rule. I like the Info Office idea, but would prefer to see it completely outside the ruleset. Let the people just, well, do it!

-- Ravensfire


I like that idea, that could work...

putting the 5BC requirements in the constitution

..:thanx:..

Couple of changes I'm looking at:

First - modification to allow the first term to start as soon as we're ready, and last for less than a month.

Second - modification of preamble as Bertie suggested. It just seems cool. Maybe second para only?

Third - game session stuff. Require the DP in the Instruction Thread to post date, time, save to be used and format of the game session. Allow confirmation poll to challenge format. Allow DP to perform before the start all reversible actions. Explicitly state the DP may play as long as instructions, if present, are relevant. Explicitly state that any leader can, through TCIT, limit the length of the game session. Explicitly state that DP may unilaterally end the session. Create a CoC to allow for cases where DP does not show, or cannot continue - order is Pres, Military, FA, Trade/Tech.

Thoughts?
-- Ravensfire

Couple of changes I'm looking at:

First - modification to allow the first term to start as soon as we're ready, and last for less than a month.

Second - modification of preamble as Bertie suggested. It just seems cool. Maybe second para only?

Third - game session stuff. Require the DP in the Instruction Thread to post date, time, save to be used and format of the game session. Allow confirmation poll to challenge format. Allow DP to perform before the start all reversible actions. Explicitly state the DP may play as long as instructions, if present, are relevant. Explicitly state that any leader can, through TCIT, limit the length of the game session. Explicitly state that DP may unilaterally end the session. Create a CoC to allow for cases where DP does not show, or cannot continue - order is Pres, Military, FA, Trade/Tech.

Thoughts?
-- Ravensfire
looks good

looks good

This is going to be a huge shock to some people, but I'm strongly considering mandating that all game sessions be on-line. We allow the DP's to set the date/time of their game sessions, so why not require them to be on-line?

Thoughts?

-- Ravensfire

Third - game session stuff. Require the DP in the Instruction Thread to post date, time, save to be used and format of the game session. Allow confirmation poll to challenge format.

Also please the save at the end of the TC. Format means online/offline? I'm ok with mandating online sessions.

Explicitly state that any leader can, through TCIT, limit the length of the game session.

Fine, as long as it's within reason. We don't want too many 0-turn TC's.


Create a CoC to allow for cases where DP does not show, or cannot continue - order is Pres, Military, FA, Trade/Tech.


Could also be used in case there are not enough DP's in the pool to get through a term.

Also please the save at the end of the TC. Format means online/offline? I'm ok with mandating online sessions. Correct - format is online vs offline.
Fine, as long as it's within reason. We don't want too many 0-turn TC's.That's going to be hard to write down. There's a recall process - if we've got a leader obviously and intentionally delaying the game for no reason, use that.
Could also be used in case there are not enough DP's in the pool to get through a term.My idea here (and needs to be stated) is to loop back through the DP list again.

I'm also working on a basic FAQ for this DG. Usual stuff - what's a DG, how to play, how do I start, etc. Also added - 5BC concept, DP pool, etc.

-- Ravensfire

This is going to be a huge shock to some people, but I'm strongly considering mandating that all game sessions be on-line. We allow the DP's to set the date/time of their game sessions, so why not require them to be off-line?

Thoughts?

-- Ravensfire
which on-line or off-line? you said both at different points

which on-line or off-line? you said both at different points
Doh - ClearCase frustration setting in.

On-line. On-line. On-line.

Post will be edited.

-- Ravensfire

This is going to be a huge shock to some people, but I'm strongly considering mandating that all game sessions be on-line. We allow the DP's to set the date/time of their game sessions, so why not require them to be on-line?

Thoughts?

-- Ravensfire

Why? If the DP is able to set time and date at his preference, his choice of session format should be his choice for his own convience. I'd only require that, irregardless of format, that the DP provide a detailed, turn-by-turn account of the play session (chat logs excluded).

.... only require that, irregardless of format ....

Would you like to run for president? :lol:

OK, time's up on the which constitution poll, please wrap it up and get it ratified.

OK, time's up on the which constitution poll, please wrap it up and get it ratified.

Aye, aye!

Works been annoying today (ClearCase, again!) - new thread coming up with the full ruleset (including changes mentioned above) for review and tweakage.

Also, checklist post will be updated, and timeline will be reviewed.

-- Ravensfire