Law Proposal: Chat-Stoppers

D

disorganizer

Deity
Joined
Mar 30, 2002
Messages
4,233
Now a fine new law proposal (to be worked out in detail):

I think we need a rule stating which conditions have to be met in order for a TC to take place:

a) 24h continuous uptime before the starting time of chat
b) at least 1/2 of the departments present at the chat
c) at least 1/3 of the provinces present at the chat

if one of those conditions is not met at the scheduled starting time, the chat shall be delayed for 15 minutes. if then still those conditions are not met, the chat is officially canceled.


what about that?
 
I think it's a waste of time, Dis. Even if the forum went down, people are still looking forward to the t/c at the scheduled time. If the forum doesn't come back up in time, the t/c is cancelled. If it does come back up in time, the t/c is held at its sceduled time. If a Leader hasn't posted their Instructions, they lose. They took a chance waiting and lost.

And if we went with the other two rules, we probably wouldn't have very many chats. Or people would sign on and go back to bed, which means they aren'r really present at the chat anyway. We do you feel we need to make these new rules?
 
I would also change the 1/2 to 1/3 of the Departments
 
Because we had 2 outages were polls were invalidated due to the outage which would have passed if the TC would have been canceled.

The other 2 will take care of the 0-0 problem. But i also think 1/3 should be enough. Maybe even 1/4.
 
how would someone know if the forums were down?

They may go down briefly, but then comeback up. Some would say they were down, but others wouldn't have known. It could be a mess.
 
Originally posted by Bill_in_PDX
how would someone know if the forums were down?

They may go down briefly, but then comeback up. Some would say they were down, but others wouldn't have known. It could be a mess.
Click to expand...

Sometimes TF makes an adnouncement about the server maintanace, but usualy when associated with the upgrading/moving of the server.
Most of the time the Forum Outage happens wihout any warning.
 
@bill: thats nothing compared to the situation we had often... the forum was down almost the whole day... so how could we defin that? we dont want to stop the chat because of a single citizens forum outage, but only when we have an outage like at the last chat (normally you would consider the people at the chat would be so sensible that they cancel the chat by themselves, but obviously this doesnt happen any more)
 
I would be (as always) against the change requiring the minimum attendance. Look at Apolytonia: they had to scrap their system of required attendance since no one was runnng for office. I know you propose a partial attendance. However, that would mean the a TC would have to be called off, even if 10 people are there, just because there aren't enough officials.
 
Yes. Whats wrong about that? The departments have chatreps and deputies. So its 3 persons per department. The risk of 2 out of 18 people not being there is really low.
We may come to a compromise about the governors. They are not needed propably.
But i think 1/3 of cabinet is ok...
 
Then, this plaecs increased restrictions on the presidency. If you recall, a certain contraversy began when no council members were present. If we had this kind of law in place a month ago, Shaitan probably would have never run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Future Civ Changing Mechanic Suggestion
Replies
0
Views
370
desk
D
Tekamthi
ancient era war/peace
Replies
4
Views
835
Fluffball
F
MarleysGh0st
BOTM 287 - Pacal, Monarch - Starts February 15, 2025
Replies
13
Views
941
MarleysGh0st
MarleysGh0st
MarleysGh0st
  • Sticky
BOTM 289 - Players Choice - Willem, Noble - Starts April 3, 2025
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Mitchum
M
Pipiskus
  • Locked
[DLL] (8-NS) Swedish medley proposal
Replies
6
Views
1K
Recursive
Recursive
Back
Top Bottom