Constitution: Proposal to improve Article J Regarding Special Turnchats

GenMarshall · May 14, 2005

Original Copy

Code:

Article J.  All irreversible game actions must progress during a 
            scheduled game session while reversible game actions 
            (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can 
            be prepared offline before the scheduled game session. 
            
            1.  An instruction thread must be created at least 3 days 
                before the scheduled turnchat.
                a.  All official instructions must be posted in the 
                    current instruction thread. Instructions must be 
                    clear and defined.
                b.  Officials must post their instructions at least 
                    one hour before the game session. Offcials may 
                    make changes to their instructions up to an hour 
                    before the game session, so long as those changes 
                    are clearly noted.

Proposed changes (In Boldface), Please note that this is in the rough draft phase so changes and/or additions are much helpful to finalize this proposal and send the final draft to the Judicary.

First Draft of the Proposal:

Code:

Article J.  All irreversible game actions must progress during a 
            scheduled game session while reversible game actions 
            (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can 
            be prepared offline before the scheduled game session. 
            
            1.  An instruction thread must be created at least 3 days 
                before the scheduled turnchat.
                a.  All official instructions must be posted in the 
                    current instruction thread. Instructions must be 
                    clear and defined.
                b.  Officials must post their instructions at least 
                    one hour before the game session. Offcials may 
                    make changes to their instructions up to an hour 
                    before the game session, so long as those changes 
                    are clearly noted.  
                [b]c.  Special turnchat sessions are exempt from the
                    3 day creation rule, so long as no turns are played 
                    and should only be used for the purpose of conducting
                    trade and diplomatic deals[/b]

This would help better establish a special turnchat session (Aka the 0 turn session) when only dealing with diplomatic and trade affairs. Please discuss any improvements for this draft to make it better

.

Source: Demogame Consitution

classical_hero · May 15, 2005

Do we really need to have that last bit added in?

Furiey · May 15, 2005

classical_hero said:
Do we really need to have that last bit added in?

Well without something you can't squeeze in a special turnchat without scheduling it 3 days in advance. The wording is what is up for debate here.

It might be worthing looking at DG4, I'm pretty sure there's something about special sessions there as well.

Quick off the mark with this - thanks CG.

edit this is what was in DG4. It's not in the same style but perhaps something condensed from this (I've included the whole bit about scheduling sessions toshow how the special session bit fits in).

I don't propose we use this directly, but it may aid the discussion.

Code:

C.  Game Schedule
  1.  Regular Game Sessions
    a.  The turn chat schedule shall be created by the 
        President
    b.  The schedule shall always have at least two chats
        on the schedule, including the chat taking place on 
        the current date.
    c.  Once set, the schedule may not be changed expect for:
      1.  Correct a minor typing error.  This change must be
          done within 12 hours of the initial post for that
          turn chat.
      2.  Extenuating circumstances within the game requiring
          additional discussion time.  This change must be
          done within 24 hours of the end of the turn chat
          producing the circumstance, and may only delay
          the turn chat.
      3.  Extenuating circumstances outside of the requiring
          additional discussion time.  This change shall only
          be done by the Judiciary acting unanimously.
    d.  All changes shall be posted in the Schedule thread,
        the Presidential thread and as a new thread in the 
        Citizen's sub-forum.

Code:

  2.  Special Game Sessions
    a.  The President may schedule a special game session to
        accomplish a single, specific task.
    b.  The need for this task must be supported by either a
        poll or through significant support in a discussion.
    c.  The chat shall be scheduled no earlier than 24 hours
        from when the chat was added to the schedule.
    d.  A turn chat instruction thread must be posted for 
        this special session, and shall include only:
      1.  The date and time of the chat, in GMT;
      2.  A link to the save to be used;
      3.  The reasons and the support for the chat;
      4.  The specific action to be take.
      5.  No other instructions from the Executive or
          Legislative branches shall be posted.

Furiey · May 15, 2005

So taking CG's as a starting point, how about some thing like this:

Code:

                c.  A special sessions to achieve a single specific task is
                    exempt from the 3 day creation rule provided no turns are 
                    played.  Such sessions shall be scheduled and the TCIT 
                    posted no less than 24 hours in advance and only the 
                    single specific action to take shall be posted in the TCIT.

I see a couple of questions with this:

Question 1. Is 24 hours too much - considering the time zone differences we have, would a 12 hour minimum be better or is that not enough?

Obviously as it is to accoumplish as single task it needs the agreement with the Minister concerned otherwise there would be little point.

Perhaps we could say no less than 24 hours in advance or 12 hours if agreed with the minister concerned.

Question 2. Do we need to specify how we decide to have a special session, ie: that it must be polled or just that sufficient support is shown in the forum?

Polling would extend the time needed to schedule the session making it difficult to fit in and give sufficient discussion time before the next scheduled session. After all the whole point of these sessions is to get specific information needed to make decisions, so if there is no time to use that information afterwards then we lose the point of doing it.

Discussion obviously indicates a need, but is that enough? Do we need to allow dissenters to block it?

DaveShack · May 15, 2005

My (illegal) approach to this in earlier terms was to propose the session and ask for unanimous consent. If there were no complaints then I proceeded with the single action.

Looking at the intent of a special session, what happens is an event comes up which differs from the plan, and we don't want the DP to have to decide solo, and it is something which will affect other actions. Usually it is a trade, diplomacy, or espionage which the results are needed to know how to proceed.

For these common situations I can't think of any reason why the people have disagreed with one in the past. The original 24 hour period was to allow people in all time zones the chance to object. The rule from DG4, rewritten in today's style, is just what we need.

GenMarshall · May 15, 2005

I beleve 24 hours is sufficant enough to let others from all timezones the heads up about this to object. Also, I wish to thank the President and the CJ for adding in their $.02 to this to make it closer to a final draft

.

Nobody · May 15, 2005

2. No changes needed

this is the part that really worries me, when if no changes are need here how do we know all the other articles are not being chnaged if there is no specific sign telling us.

GenMarshall · May 15, 2005

Nobody said:
this is the part that really worries me, when if no changes are need here how do we know all the other articles are not being chnaged if there is no specific sign telling us.

The reason why I placed that in italics and listed as no changes since there is no sense of copying the part of the article that does not need to be changed. If you read carefully, I specificly noted that changes are in boldface text.

Bertie · May 15, 2005

This is a needed discussion. Thanks for starting it, CivGeneral.

I agree that modifying the Term 4 language should work. I think 24 hours would be appropriate (12 would be nice, but I'm not sure if that's realistic).

I'd also include an option for someone to block the special session if they think 24 hours isn't sufficient time for discussion. Perhaps the only person that could be allowed to block it would be a minister of a directly affected department. I doubt if blocking special turnchats would be common, though if it was a problem this rule could be revisited.

GenMarshall · May 16, 2005

Here is another draft for the law. Additions are in Boldface

Code:

                c.  A special sessions to achieve a single specific task is
                    exempt from the 3 day creation rule provided no turns are 
                    played.  Such sessions shall be scheduled and the TCIT 
                    posted no less than 24 hours in advance and only the 
                    single specific action to take shall be posted in the TCIT.
                    [b]An offical from which the department would be effected
                    can freely object if they find that there is not sufficient 
                    time for discussion[/b]

Nobody · May 16, 2005

An offical from which the department would be effected
can freely object if they find that there is not sufficient
time for discussion.

does this mean the relative department heads can veto the special turn chat? or just object. And if they do have the ability to veto what is an offical? is it leader or a deputy? or an appoint representitive? i am not trying to just pick wholes i am just saying that it is better to clear up loop wholes.

Maybe something like:

c. A special sessions to achieve a single specific task is
exempt from the 3 day creation rule provided no turns are
played. Such sessions shall be scheduled and the TCIT
posted no less than 24 hours in advance and only the
single specific action to take shall be posted in the TCIT.
d. If 5 citizens or more object to the Special session it shale be cancled. To offically object a citizen must post there reasons why in either the President thread, the Judiciary or the special turn chat instruction thread.

I know this sounds harsh, but normally when the president decides to have a special turn chat, there is alot of support, and since the special turn chat is not the norm and we dont want to encourage them to much, it would be good to have somthing like this.

GenMarshall · May 16, 2005

Nobody said:
does this mean the relative department heads can veto the special turn chat? or just object. And if they do have the ability to veto what is an offical? is it leader or a deputy? or an appoint representitive? i am not trying to just pick wholes i am just saying that it is better to clear up loop wholes.

Maybe something like:

c. A special sessions to achieve a single specific task is
exempt from the 3 day creation rule provided no turns are
played. Such sessions shall be scheduled and the TCIT
posted no less than 24 hours in advance and only the
single specific action to take shall be posted in the TCIT.
d. If 5 citizens or more object to the Special session it shale be cancled. To offically object a citizen must post there reasons why in either the President thread, the Judiciary or the special turn chat instruction thread.

I was thinking about having the citizens object to the special session TC, but I was afraid that it would be abused in a filibuster tactic. Five citizens should be sufficant to ensure that there is no filibuster tactics that would abuse this system.

I know this sounds harsh, but normally when the president decides to have a special turn chat, there is alot of support, and since the special turn chat is not the norm and we dont want to encourage them to much, it would be good to have somthing like this.

Click to expand...

There is no need to be harsh, I welcome all comments and criticisms onto this proposal. Hense why they call it a rough draft since it is not finalized. Having a team work on this proposal to make it closer to the Final Draft is what is making me happy to see that all of us are working twards a common goal, which is a final draft of this proposal which will eventualy head to the Judcary and then to the polls.

Nobody · May 16, 2005

but I was afraid that it would be abused in a filibuster tactic.

yeah some people might (the la cosa nostra would love this tatic) but in those cases the president could juts ignor then get CC'ed and be found innocent.

GenMarshall · May 17, 2005

Since there has not been a discussion in 24 hours, I plan to present the draft to the judicary if no one objects

.

DaveShack · May 17, 2005

The process is to post a mock poll showing old and new law fragments. After 24 hours without significant comment, then repost the same mock poll in the Judiciary thread for review.

GenMarshall · May 17, 2005

Here is the proposed poll.

Proposed Poll
Do you approve of the following changes to the Consitution?
Yes/No/Abstain and will run for a maxumum of 96 Hours

Original Text of the current consitution

Code:

Article J.  All irreversible game actions must progress during a 
            scheduled game session while reversible game actions 
            (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can 
            be prepared offline before the scheduled game session. 
            
            1.  An instruction thread must be created at least 3 days 
                before the scheduled turnchat.
                a.  All official instructions must be posted in the 
                    current instruction thread. Instructions must be 
                    clear and defined.
                b.  Officials must post their instructions at least 
                    one hour before the game session. Offcials may 
                    make changes to their instructions up to an hour 
                    before the game session, so long as those changes 
                    are clearly noted.

New changes (In Boldface)

Code:

Article J.  All irreversible game actions must progress during a 
            scheduled game session while reversible game actions 
            (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can 
            be prepared offline before the scheduled game session. 
            
            1.  An instruction thread must be created at least 3 days 
                before the scheduled turnchat.
                a.  All official instructions must be posted in the 
                    current instruction thread. Instructions must be 
                    clear and defined.
                b.  Officials must post their instructions at least 
                    one hour before the game session. Offcials may 
                    make changes to their instructions up to an hour 
                    before the game session, so long as those changes 
                    are clearly noted.
                [b]c.  A special sessions to achieve a single specific task is
                    exempt from the 3 day creation rule provided no turns are 
                    played.  Such sessions shall be scheduled and the TCIT 
                    posted no less than 24 hours in advance and only the 
                    single specific action to take shall be posted in the TCIT.
                    An offical from which the department would be effected
                    can freely object if they find that there is not sufficient 
                    time for discussion[/b]

Double Stack · May 18, 2005

For the record, I vote Yes.

GenMarshall · May 18, 2005

Double Stack said:
For the record, I vote Yes.

If you have no objections for the poll, please dont say anything. Wait untill the Judicary reviews and they post the poll. Since you are new, Ill let you slide.

Remember, if you have no objections. Dont post

.

classical_hero · May 18, 2005

There seems to be nothing wrong with the poll. Have the members of the Judicary okayed this poll? I'm too lazy and tired to bother to find out.

GenMarshall · May 18, 2005

classical_hero said:
There seems to be nothing wrong with the poll. Have the members of the Judicary okayed this poll? I'm too lazy and tired to bother to find out.

@CH - Here is what the Judicary said:

DaveShack said:
The process is to post a mock poll showing old and new law fragments. After 24 hours without significant comment, then repost the same mock poll in the Judiciary thread for review.

On May 18, 2005, 11:21 PM, I pass this mock poll to the Judicary and they handle the rest. Not to worry, as a Judicary Student, Ill keep my $.02 out of it to keep in respects with not conflicting with the conflict of interest

.

Constitution: Proposal to improve Article J Regarding Special Turnchats

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

In whom I trust

No Longer Just Lurking

No Longer Just Lurking

Inventor

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Gangster

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Prince

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Gangster

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Gangster

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Inventor

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Prince

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

In whom I trust

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Similar threads