We do not currently detail the rights of Citizens in the Constitution. This proposal spells out the rights and puts them in one place. This would be the first or second section of the Constitution.

Proposal:
All people playing the Democracy game are citizens of Phoenatica. Some citizens are elected or appointed to positions with additional duties, responsibilities and powers.
Citizens are encouraged to vote in polls and elections and offer their views and opinions in discussions.
Citizens may start discussion threads and post in all threads, including departmental threads.
Citizens are welcome in the chat room when the game turn is played.
Citizens may vote in Citizen Polls in the chat room to determine game decisions.
Citizens may not post polls that deal with topics specifically under the jurisdiction of an official but may post opinion polls and game-play related polls.
Citizens may request that an official post a poll related to the official’s area of jurisdiction. If two other citizens agree with the request (motion seconded and carried) the official must post the poll.

This poll will run for 48 hours, ending at 16:35 GMT on Thursday, May 30.

This proposal was discussed and designed here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=296322#post296322).

you should also add that citizens are allowed to fully take part in polls and decisions in the chat. not only that they are welcome

i still voted yes though

I thought you were against restricting polls in any sense of the word, Shaitan. Number 6 would severely hinder the citizenry in their polling. Besides being a judgement call, (and now we know who the judge will be), it limits the citizens polls to those approved by the government.

That one 'no' vote is from me. I think citizens should be allowed to post polls.

Same here. The 'no' is because the citizen poll clause is ambiguous. Anything 'game related' would most likely FALL within a cabinet jurisdiction. Citizens should have a say and be allowed to create polls without worrying about if their poll falls within a jurisdiction. 99% of 'game related polls' will most likely fall into most, if not all of the cabinet posistions.

I would also think citizens would have the right to post any poll they want. Whether that poll would be binding or not is another matter entirely.

Did all of you not bother to read nr.7 It gives citizens extremely power over polls. All you need is 2 other people to support you on having a poll and then the elected official MUST post the poll in the related government thread.

6 and 7 are parts of the current Constitution. 6 was original. We added 7 ourselves. Duck and Duke explained that with free polling came massive confusion as citizens didn't know what was "real" and not real. There were duplicate binding and non-binding polls, poorly set up polls, etc. The object is to allow the citizens to call whatever poll they want but for the Council Members to do the actual posting for their departments in order to keep things neat and tidy.

Point #6 does not seem to inhibit the posting of polls. Let's say some citizen wants a wonder built in Washington. He can't post a poll on it because wonder building falls within the domain of the domestic department. But he can post an opinion poll on whether to build a wonder in Washington. What's the difference? The opinion poll isn't binding - which means government officials can ignore it without fear of impeachment. Since an opinion poll can be written about anything the only reason not to post one is that it doesn't count!

Point #7 seemingly makes it easy to get a poll posted but in reality it leaves the actual writing of the poll in the hands of the government official! The citizens calling for the poll don't get to write the question or possible answers to be voted on. If this is supposed to be a mechanism to get a recalcitrant official to post a poll on an issue he or she disagrees with then it is certainly an uphill battle for the citizens since the power remains with the official.
I do not like the idea of binding and non-binding polls. A poll is a poll is a poll. Taking power away from the citizens because they wouldn't exercise that power in a tidy fashion is not a tenet of democracy.
While we should try to learn from the Civ 2 Demo game experience we must be careful to ferret out the real lesson to be learned. Did they cut back on polls in that game because of untidyness? If so, did they lose citizens due to lack of interest?
Sure, letting anyone post polls will lead to conflicting, duplicate and even poorly written polls. The answer to this is not to take the power from the people but to come up with standards by which all polls can be judged so that citizens and government officials alike can decide for themselves the value of each individual poll.
Finally, I think we need to rethink our impeachment clause. Officials can be impeached only for not following citizen's polls. There's nothing in the constitution that says ignoring the constitution is impeachable. An official can break the constitution but not go against a poll...

All citizen created polls are non-binding. #6 specifies that Citizens have the right to post opinion polls that do not deal with topics specifically under the jurisdiction of a Department.

For #7 there is nothing that would prevent the citizen from designing the poll to be posted. If citizen A designs the poll question and responses and citizens B and C agree, the Department head must post the poll.

Discussion on poll standards/procedures should be mentioned in this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22586).

I think the original intent was for the Mods to smack down a Leader that violated the Constitution itself. I would definitely support modifying the impeachment clause to specify Constitutional violations as well as ignoring polls as impeachable offenses.

Maybe it would help to clarify the definitions. Donsig said it correctly with "a poll is a poll is a poll". A poll is a guage of opinion. However, certain things are more than polls, such as the elections. I think "poll" should be reserved for opinion polls. And if we want a binding vote of the public, ask for a "referendum", which could be set up by any council minister, or maybe our council-member-at-large if they are petitioned by enough citizens.

I see that this gives us only basic... pathetic rights. We need to be able to post polls and begin impeachment proceedings

CONSPIRACY! Placate the citizens and then enslave them.

Who is your puppet master *? the starter of this poll?

the point is: there is no change with the citizen polls. if you read the constitution, at the moment the citizenry IS NOT ALLOWED TO POST POLLS FALING INTO THE DECISION AREA OF A DEPARTMENT!!!
this was not changed.

CYC! you shoot at this proposals without any point in your arguments. and it was not the first time. there will be NO CHANGE AT ALL to the citizen rights with this proposal, its just they are kind of summarized.
And this part of the constitution will point out what citizens are allowed to do. not like now, as the constitution only points out what citizens are not allowed to do. The rights of the citizens are now kind of hidden in the constitution, which caused many citizens to leave the game.

OMG. Real citizens talking about poll procedures. Even our bow and arrow armed admiral wearing a mini-skirt is getting involved. No, i don't believe it. I'm going back to bed....

And Dis, I just reread my first post in this thread (just for you), and the point I make is very clear. If you want I can go find Shaitan's complaint of one of my earlier posts, in which he stated exactly what I said he did. If he is just "summarizing", why does it sound worse now than before? 5 posts back he clarifies his first statment in the thread, which substantiates my claim.

Originally posted by Shaitan
All citizen created polls are non-binding. #6 specifies that Citizens have the right to post opinion polls that do not deal with topics specifically under the jurisdiction of a Department.

For #7 there is nothing that would prevent the citizen from designing the poll to be posted. If citizen A designs the poll question and responses and citizens B and C agree, the Department head must post the poll.

re #6: As Chieftess pointed out earlier, what poll can be posted that isn't covered by a department's jurisdiction? And no matter what topics citizens can post polls about, if their polls are inferior to 'government' polls why should a citizen post a poll to begin with?

re #7: While there is nothing that says a citizen can't call for a specific poll written by a citizen there is also nothing that requires the official being petitioned to use the citizen's poll verbatim. The official would be free to change the poll to make it better because of the underlying assumption that citizens can't post useful and proper polls whereas officials can. Officials become the judges of what are good polls.

Take it all one step further and we get:

Officials can only be impeached by not following citizen polls but the officials themselves control the citizen polls!

Conspiracy theories, indeed...

What is wrong with this Bill? I thought we were not "giving rights", just outlining the current rights, which weren't spelled out before.

About citizen polls. I think they should not be binding (current system). I can't see how an advisor would get re-elected based on going against many opinion polls, especially without good cause. Remember, these are the same people who won your votes earlier. I like the current system with the addition of the proposed bill. Terms are only a month, not forever.

Originally posted by Cyc
And Dis, I just reread my first post in this thread (just for you), and the point I make is very clear. If you want I can go find Shaitan's complaint of one of my earlier posts, in which he stated exactly what I said he did. If he is just "summarizing", why does it sound worse now than before? 5 posts back he clarifies his first statment in the thread, which substantiates my claim.
Calm down, folks...please.

For the record, I am against restricting citizen rights, including polls. I am not saying that the current rules should be changed, only that I would campaign against anything more strict. To my knowledge I've never penned a statement contrary to that. If Cyc can produce one, I'd be interested to see it.

As I (and several others) have said, the rules in question are already part and parcel of our game. My clarifying these in my previous post in no way indicates that I want to restrict citizen polls.

The idea here is to promote Citizen Rights by making them clear and concise so that newbies (and even people who've been here a while) will know what they can do. People have left the game because they felt they couldn't do anything even though they could. This is not intended to be the last word on Citizen Rights, only the first step.

well, thats what i say cp. there was no change at all. i wonder how ppl see things different in this proposal as it is ONLY A SUMMARY. if you would have read the constitution more careful (well, abviously most ppl dont read it at all), you would have noticed all these things were stated before. we do not want to change anything, just summarize it. the missing summarization caused the situation that nobody at the moment knows how to post polls conforming the constitution, and most of our polls are obsolete if the take the constitution and slam it on them.

Originally posted by donsig


re #6: As Chieftess pointed out earlier, what poll can be posted that isn't covered by a department's jurisdiction? And no matter what topics citizens can post polls about, if their polls are inferior to 'government' polls why should a citizen post a poll to begin with?

re #7: While there is nothing that says a citizen can't call for a specific poll written by a citizen there is also nothing that requires the official being petitioned to use the citizen's poll verbatim. The official would be free to change the poll to make it better because of the underlying assumption that citizens can't post useful and proper polls whereas officials can. Officials become the judges of what are good polls.

Take it all one step further and we get:

Officials can only be impeached by not following citizen polls but the officials themselves control the citizen polls!

Conspiracy theories, indeed...

#6 - Currently there are a couple out there from Disorganizer that fit the profile nicely. There are a slew of them for Honors and other topics.

#7 - "Citizens may request that an official post a poll related to the official’s area of jurisdiction. If two other citizens agree with the request (motion seconded and carried) the official must post the poll."

As this reads, it says the the official MUST post the poll. So if the citizen takes the time and effort to design the entire poll, and it gets seconded and carried, the official MUST post that poll.

Quote from Dis:
the missing summarization caused the situation that nobody at the moment knows how to post polls conforming the constitution

Thank you Dis, for pointing that out. But I believe the real reason is because no one cares about poll procedures enough to talk about them. And that's the state of the nation. Shaitan can attach a poll rule to any poll he writes until he has the rules the way he wants them and they are law. And the people will follow them. So be it.

Nothing in this proposal is new! NO POLL PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN ADDED!
Cyc, what size brick has to connect to your head before you can understand this?

When I suggested a bill of rights I meant we discuss what rights citizens should have and then summarize them and put them into the constitution.
Summarizing what is already there is not a good thing to do because it highlights the whole poll dilemma.
There's no point in formulating poll procedures if only a select few can post *real* polls. Sure, citizens can post polls on things like awarding honors to deserving people but citizens can't post a poll about whether or not to build a wonder.
What do we mean when we talk of empowering citizens? Is Phoenatica to be driven by polls or by elections? Until we answer these questions there is no point in working on a bill of rights.

Originally posted by Shaitan
#6 - Currently there are a couple out there from Disorganizer that fit the profile nicely. There are a slew of them for Honors and other topics.

#7 - "Citizens may request that an official post a poll related to the official?s area of jurisdiction. If two other citizens agree with the request (motion seconded and carried) the official must post the poll."

As this reads, it says the the official MUST post the poll. So if the citizen takes the time and effort to design the entire poll, and it gets seconded and carried, the official MUST post that poll.

#6: Not one of disorganizer's polls is about Phoenatican policy. Not one will impact how Phoenatica uses it resources or what direction it takes.

#7: If a citizen can write a poll, get it seconded and carried and the official *must* post the poll as written what is the point of making the citizen jump through the hoops of seconding and carrying? This mechanism will not prevent conflicting or duplicate polls under this interpretation.

Thank you for the concern, Shaitan. You can always tell which are the true Leaders because the always turn to violence.

To make my point, oh great one, there is quite a bit of diffrence between the constitution and your proposal. See below:

Article 3: Citizens can't hold polls on rule changes or any matter of state covered by a department.

and....

Citizens may not post polls that deal with topics specifically under the jurisdiction of an official, but may post opinion polls and game-related polls.

Every time you defend yourself you confine your arguement to the current thread. You completely ignore the fact that you have been doing this kind of thing for a while now. Each time it's the same way. A consistant trail of poll procedure modifications tucked away neatly in polls and laws under a different heading.

Donsig - Bravo. You seem to have noticed Shaitan's methods also.

so, you 2, go forward and write a proposal for the new constitution, with the rules that should be there and the separation of law and constitution and all what we still discuss while the coresponding discussion thread was long come to a hold.
we would run on with the same crap for the next months without a change to the better. stating the rights how they are right now will point ppl to the reality.
we can then still change things. but we should take small steps, unless we find someone who does all the steps at once, which is a heavy work load.
if both of you have the time, bring up a proposal for discussion. i would be happy to discuss with you and vote for it if conclusive.

Disorganizer, we can't write up any new proposals until we decide as a nation what we want citizen's rights to be and until we decide the proper roll for polls in our society.

so start a thread and a poll. propose some rights in a discussion thread. summarize them in the first post of your thread, if the thread finishes post a poll
start it, dont only complain. it makes no sense waiting. all good improovements have been implemented by ignoring burocracy.

Why must this be so difficult? This is a 1st step, not a final objective.

And why, oh why, weren't these concerns brought up in the discussion thread? That's why we had the discussion thread! I even preposted the poll there for review.

Cyc-

You were subscribed to that discussion thread but did not make these comments until the poll was posted. Larger audience in a poll maybe?

I doubt Donsig has noticed my "methods" because there aren't any and he's quite bright and imaginitive, without the need to invent such things. I also value his opinion highly, somthing I used to be able to say to Cyc as well.

I will continue to address the issues at hand. Regarding your overriding concern for poll discussion that doesn't occur in the thread you started: tough. Your approach to poll reform failed badly. My method is working. It won't get things fixed as quickly or efficiently but at least the issues are being dealt with. I've tried to get traffic back to that thread as well. It seems to be anathema to the populace. Let it go.

The brick comment wasn't a thread of violence. It was an allusion to normal mental function returning after an impact to the cranium. It's a common vehicle in comedies and amnesia based dramas.

Originally posted by disorganizer
so start a thread and a poll. propose some rights in a discussion thread. summarize them in the first post of your thread, if the thread finishes post a poll
start it, dont only complain. it makes no sense waiting. all good improovements have been implemented by ignoring burocracy.

Who is waiting and who is complaining? A poll was posted, I voted and stated why I voted the way I did. I do not expect nor ask that things be put on hold just because I don't agree with everyone else who voted in this poll. I have only been trying to contribute to empowering citizens not complaining.

Originally posted by Shaitan
Why must this be so difficult? This is a 1st step, not a final objective.

And why, oh why, weren't these concerns brought up in the discussion thread? That's why we had the discussion thread! I even preposted the poll there for review.

It's not difficult Shaitan unless you expect expect everyone to vote the same way in this poll. The fact that this isn't passing unanimously just shows we haven't reached the point we want to be at.

I can only speak for myself as to why these concerns weren't brought up earlier. I've been busy with duties as domestic leader. I've not had the time to get in on all the discussions taking place. Once a poll is posted, especially about a rule change, it tends to get my attention and I speak up. I apologize if it seems like I'm complaining, I'm just trying to contribute.

At the risk of continuing the violent metaphors (or whatever, I wasn't an English major) I'd really like to see Cyc and Shaitan bury the hatchet. Very often I see both sides to their discussions. They are headed for the same place merely taking different roads.

While I commend Shaitan for his tireless work in attempting to bring order and consistency to our constitution, I am extremely disappointed in the personal attack on Cyc. Shaitan, that is well out of character for you, and I chalk it up to frustration.

The three key players in this thread to date (Shaitan, Cyc, and donsig) are three of Phoenatica's finest citizens, and I hope we will keep the discourse on a level befitting the fine reputations you all have earned.

Enough soap boxing from me then (and goodness knows I hardly have room to point fingers), on to the point:

I agree with donsig, the bigger issue is the intention of polls and elections, vice the mechanics of how they are accomplished. Whatever the good intentions of a current cabinet, I feel that the current system is intended to provide a final check and balance against corruption or non-responsive leadership.

I am swayed by the argument that this proposed change might actually further disable the citizen's ability to maintain that check, though I personally do not find Shaitan's efforts to be agenda driven.

I will be changing my vote to NO. I hope we can continue to explore solutions to this problem.

Bill
...in PDX

donsig: i think our comments were not meant for your proposal.

bill: i think you should interpret this as an answer to an ongoing accusition assault of cyc againt shaitan. (at least what i saw on the threads i contributed to)

My efforts have never been a personal attack on Shaitan. He believes it to be, but it is not so (you too Dis). They are, and always have been a plea to slow down this process of changing everything all the time. Constant polling by officials is one of the issues I key on. Shaitan just happens to write 90% of the polls we have. I have tried from the beginning to express myself to him directly and rather than slow down and discuss things, he accuse's me of personal attacks. I have never said that Shaitan wasn't intelligent and hard working. I'm glad we have someone in a Leadership position who is willing to take the time to do the work he and Eyrei produce. But that doesn't mean the opinions and contributions of a normal citizen about something as intrinsic and powerful as polling should be shunned and ignored. Like Donsig said, Polls get my attention. As a devoted citizen, if I didn't speak my mind, I would be failing the rest. As a TEXT based game, discussion is the way to work out or problems. Not polling. Polling is the confirmation of ideas. I would be more than happy to work with Shaitan on any level. If he wants me to call him sir, I'll call him sir. As long as we can slow this onslaught of polling and changes to our Revolving constitution, and discuss each matter openly before the citizens. Even if we were to create drafts of the New Constitution from suggestions posted in the discussion (that is bound to arrive) by email. Hey, I'm all for working together. Citizens need to be heard.

Vote changed from 'yes' to 'no by request.

Please don't make me need to get into the middle of this. You guys are all trying to make the game better. You don't have to all agree on everything. Some changes are good, some are not. Please try to work it out and if you can't..... [Arnold Voice] 'I'll be back.' [/Arnold Voice]

lol

I have been out of town lately, and so I am still catching up on a lot of this, but Donsig said something that I think we are missing, and maybe this is partly what Cyc is referring to also. I actually remember this conversation a couple of weeks ago, but it never took hold. We need a broad based, "deep thoughts" kind of conversation on what our goals are in this game, how we want the government to function, before we can really decide the method we will use.

Is this supposed to simulate a true democracy, ala ancient Greece or Switzerland, where every issue is decided by poplular vote? (In which all polls, citizen or government, are really "referendums" allowing the public to set policy)

Is this a simulated Republic, where we elect our leaders, but then they mostly run the game, with input from citizens on specific issues or critical decisions? Similar to most modern governments(In which case citizen polls are just gauges of public opinion, like the Harris polls in the U.S., so officials know which side of an issue to get on as they vie for re-election)

Is this like a social studies simulation, where we are trying to work together governing by consensus, not always arriving at the optimal policy, but the one with the most overall support?

I am not sure if everyone understands my comparisons, but I think it is important that we all agree on, or at least understand, what the basic model we are working toward is before we decide how to define and structure polls.

Personally, I have seen it as somewhat of a cross between two and three, but I also think there are many who are more closely in line with the first approach, and they may be closer to the original intent. I honestly don't know what that intent was, or even if there was an "original intent". It is like we are having the Constitutional Convention after we have been governing for two terms (like 8 years in America, 5000 years in Phoenatica!). I would still play under any of these interpretations, but I think we need to get a better sense of what the purpose is before we decide on a method.

Precisely Justus II. Discussion is needed. As far as I'm aware, citizens are supposed to voice their opinions and influence the Leaders through discussions and then a poll. The Leaders take the general consensus of the public and move the nation forward according to this consensus (as you say, if they want to be re-elected). Instead we have polls coming out of our ears, and changes to the constitution weekly. Discussions are at a bare minimum, sometimes between two people. And this is for Constitutional changes. We do need to slow it down and discuss not only the future of Phoenatica (and the next demo games), but where we are now, who we are, and what we want to be. I believe we should cut back on Government polling, except on vital concerns, until we are "knee deep" in these conversations. Then citizen polls can be put up to test the basic theories. I don't mean to slow down the game at all, as the basic functioning of our government can be a completely different world than that of our basic game play. Both can be discussed at the same time. We don't have to have this done by yesterday. Let's take our time and discuss. BTW, excellent post Justus II. That's why I nominated you and voted for you for the Presidency.

Originally posted by Cyc
BTW, excellent post Justus II. That's why I nominated you and voted for you for the Presidency.

Yes, Justus II, an excellent post and I have a couple comments. But first...

Cyc, you were the one vote I thought I could count on! Oh, the agony of it all.:cry:

You know, I think this did happen in America. We started with the Articles of Confederation, they weren't quite up to the job so we wrote the constitution. Even then we had to add the bill of rights.

This game is different things to different people. Add to that the fact that people come and go and are looking for different levels of participation and it gets very complex indeed. We have to find a balance that keeps both citizens and government officials interested. At the same time we need a workable system for actually playing the Civ 3 game.

I don't think it's practical to try to play the demo game as if we were an Athenian democracy. First of all that would make being in government all work and no play. Secondly, I don't think we've been able to get all the big issues before the people for a vote. I can't imagine trying to get poll votes on what every city should build next. That doesn't sound like fun for anyone.

We need a government to administer the playing of the Civ 3 game. Government 'jobs' must have a measure of power in order to entice people to want to do the 'jobs'. At the same time we have to protect the power of the citizens and ensure they are able to participate to their chosen level. I see us as a representative democracy very similar to that in the US. We have an elected executive branch. What we lack are legislative and judicial bodies. I think we are on the verge of defining the former. To me the entire citizenry is our legislative body. Polls are analogous to bills and resolutions. That's why I think anyone should be allowed to open polls. Sure, we'll get bad polls and conflicting polls but many will be spotted as such by the citizenry. I don't think polls should be 'binding' simply because we may just end up with conflicting polls that are 'passed' by the people. We need a mechanism for a poll to become a law and our government needs flexibility to continue in the face 'bad' polls.

I'm not sure if this is the proper place to make this post. It is off topic but on the other hand, if we've got a good discussion going here we should continue it here.:)

I apologize for losing my cool yesterday. Cyc has an ability to infuriate me that is unparalleled. I think the reason I lost it so badly is because I specifically slowed things down as he requested. Each of the polls up now had been discussed for over a week or longer. Prepolls had been submitted in those discussion threads so the polls themselves could be edited before being posted. Each had a conversational null for a day before the polls were posted. Exactly how much slower does this need to be? It is incredibly frustrating to do exactly what a detractor demands and have it shoved back in your face with the same exact demand repeated.

Another thing that really pissed me off is that Cyc chose to wait for the poll to bring up points about the topic. In the entire discussion thread, which he was a part of, his only comments were that I was trying to "slip in" poll reform with other issues instead of using his poll reform thread. No comments on the actual content, just that I was being sneaky and underhanded and was on some sort of power trip.

The third thing is this. Cyc makes constant comments accusing me of underhanded deeds, forcing legislation, hoodwinking the other players and advancing my own agenda to the detriment of others. He puts these up all over the place any time I disagree with him. He then claims that he's not attacking me. These are attacks, plain and simple. Baseless accusation and inuendo are ALWAYS attacks.

Okay, I'm done. I'm taking the day off (my last as Foreign Minister ;) ).

Originally posted by Strider
lol

i agree

i also agree to shaitan, as we very rarely do.

all points proposed here were brought up and proposed by me. without help of shaitan, without knowing any other discussions about those themes. i got to post a thread about this (for discussion) about 3(!!!) weeks ago. this started a discussion of shaitan and me. as we often posted, the thread were ALWAYS on top. so they should have been seen. and i crosslinked ALL of my proposal thread to the thread were we discussed those things. there were NEVER brought up any cons or additional point to this proposal. the only things cyc brought up was a constant accusation of shaiton for having indirectly implemented his poll procedures. which is definitely NOT the case and a false accusition, since this proposal does not change anyting, just states the situation at the moment more clearly than the constitution is today.

i do NOT see ANY way of getting to a consensus with this discussion, so i will stop it. it goes on my nerves and makes me annoyed, what i dont like.

i will come back to discussion if shaitan and cyc start to discuss their problems with real arguments, not just phrases and accusitions.

btw:
cyc: maybe shaitan posts so many polls because ppl ask him to write constitutional articles because of his good english?
it was this way in my case. i think you did not think about this.