Initiative: Amending the Playing the Save Act of 4000 BC

dutchfire · Mar 15, 2007

Citizen's Initiative - The Playing the Save Act of 4000 BC

Section 1 - Instructions

All official instructions must be posted in the current game session instruction thread. Instructions must be clear and defined. All sessions, including special sessions, must have an instruction thread. This thread must be started at least 24 hours before playing commences. This instruction thread must at least contain the name of the Designated Player, the date and time of the session and the purpose of the session.

Officials must post their instructions at least one hour before the scheduled start of the game session. Officials may make changes to their instructions up to an hour before the session, so long as those changes are clearly noted. Officials that do not post instructions for a game session are considered to have given the DP complete control over their area for that game session, even should they be at the game session.

Citizens may post instructions based on the results of completed initiatives. These instructions must be posted at least one hour before the scheduled start of the game session.

If an instruction thread has not been created for a scheduled game session when a citizen is ready to post instructions, that citizen may create a instruction thread for that session.

Section 2 - Playing

The DP for each game session, including special sessions, must maintain a log of their actions in sufficient detail that another citizen may generally recreate their actions.

During a game session, citizens are encouraged to comment and offer advice to the DP. The DP may also seek comments from citizens. The DP is not required to do so, and is not required in any way to follow any such advice.

The game session may last for as long as there are relevant instructions, until a posted instruction says to halt the session or when the DP decides to end the session. Once a game session is over, the DP must post a summary of that session, a detailed log of their actions, and a save in the instruction thread and in the summary thread.

I suggest adding the bolded line to this initiative and (if it gets approved) removing the Game Play Session Scheduling Initiative. The purpose of this initiative is to keep the law organised and simple.

Do you think some of the other clauses of the Game Play Session Scheduling Initiative should be included in this amendment as well?

Game Play Session Scheduling Initiative

Any game play session must be publicly announced in the CivFanatics Civ4 - Democracy Game II forum at least 24 hours before the scheduled start of said game play session. Said announcement must include:

The date and time the game play session will start
The Designated Player for the session
A link to the sessions's game play instruction thread
The purpose of the game play session

There has been some discussion on this subject in this thread, from post 24 onwards.

Changelog

v.3
Removed a "will" that shouldn't be there.

v.2
Added "This instruction thread must will at least contain the name of the Designated Player, the date and time of the session and the purpose of the session."

DaveShack · Mar 15, 2007

If you want this initiative to repeal the Game Play Session Scheduling Initiative, then include that in the poll question and description of the mock poll here, and in the actual poll.

I think the other clauses are good things but everyone does them anyway so a rule isn't needed.

Hyronymus · Mar 15, 2007

DaveShack said:
I think the other clauses are good things but everyone does them anyway so a rule isn't needed.

Maybe not but I don't think there is any harm in carving it in stone anyhow. You can better be more precise than less precise.

ravensfire · Mar 15, 2007

If the current initiative passes - let's keep it. It adds a few things that this proposal doesn't, that aren't currently required.

Specifically, that we know who the DP for the session, the type of session and the date/time of the session. Oh yeah, and a link to the instruction thread. Posting an instruction thread that follows the template I've posted meets all of those requirements.

That short list are good things to know up from. If the session is on-line, people do like to know when it's supposed to start. And to prevent any foolish alarm-raising - that's the scheduled start date, it doesn't require ANYWHERE that you have to start on time, or even close to it. Running late happens and nobody will complain about it.

People also like to know what the DP would like to do in that session - is it regular or special? How long does the DP plan on playing? These elements help the leaders determine what discussions they might need, and most importantly what instructions should be posted. Instructions for a 5 turn sessions are different from a 15 turn session.

Currently - the DP can say "I've got it.", and that's it. The Game Play Session Scheduling Initiative makes sure that all of us have a bit more information. And this proposal will remove that, eliminate the extra 30 seconds of work. For what? Nothing. Not a single valid reason has been made - just a lot of scare tactics.

This proposal simply isn't needed.

-- Ravensfire

dutchfire · Mar 15, 2007

@Ravensfire: I'd like to have this all in one initiative so it will be easier for the DP, this way they don't have to search for the specific rules in various threads. I've added the other clauses too, are you still against it then?

ravensfire · Mar 15, 2007

Honestly - yes. It just simply isn't needed if the Game Play Session Scheduling Initiative passes! Repeal something just to put it in some other place? Come on.

We don't have to post exact copies of the rules in most cases. I think that's an old custom, and one that will fail in this environment. We should be posted better organized and more comprehensive summaries of the rules where needed. Ideally, the only time we'd look at the actual initiative is when creating those summaries and if there's a matter before the Judiciary.

DP stuff is already fairly spread out - Constitution and at least 2 initiatives of the top of my head. It's the same with elections as well. That won't change, and it shouldn't change! That degree of seperation gives us tremendous flexibility and power.

The DP Pool manager can put together a quick summary of what is required, and what is suggested. I know that in the DP Pool thread I linked to something I put together for a previous DG. With a few modifications, that stayed consistent throughout that DG. That opportunity is still here, to create a summary of requirements and guidelines that defines how the DP Pool is run for the rest of the game.

What we've got now is a start, but I think it can be much, much better. This proposal is just clerical busywork. There hasn't been a single reason put out in support of it beyond just that - clerical busywork.

-- Ravensfire

Methos · Mar 15, 2007

dutchfire said:
This thread must be started at least 24 hours before playing commences. This instruction thread must will at least contain the name of the Designated Player, the date and time of the session and the purpose of the session.

The underlined statement above is very confusing to me. I'd suggest taking out either the word "must" or "will".

Methos · Mar 15, 2007

ravensfire said:
The DP Pool manager can put together a quick summary of what is required, and what is suggested.

I like this idea. So far I've only included the Playing the Save Act, but I'll look around and see what else is required too.

ravensfire · Mar 15, 2007

Methos,

Great! Here's the link I mentioned.

That basic format went through eight terms with minor changes - the first post was continually updated to make it easy to find out what was going on. We probably could have added a link to the current TCIT, but that's hindsight for ya! We had a nice guidelines post, and the template post.

Suggestions on what to look at in terms of relevant laws:
-- Article E of Constitution
-- Playing the Save Act of 4000 BC
-- Election Act of 4000 BC
-- The Designated Player Act of 4000 BC

I'd suggest glossing over the election stuff, and focus on the first two.

Good luck - I'm interested to see what you put together!

-- Ravensfire

dutchfire · Mar 16, 2007

Methos said:
The underlined statement above is very confusing to me. I'd suggest taking out either the word "must" or "will".

Done (XCL)

Initiative: Amending the Playing the Save Act of 4000 BC

dutchfire

Deity

DaveShack

Inventor

Hyronymus

Troop leader

ravensfire

Member of the Opposition

dutchfire

Deity

ravensfire

Member of the Opposition

Methos

HoF Quattromaster

Methos

HoF Quattromaster

ravensfire

Member of the Opposition

dutchfire

Deity

Similar threads