DG4 - Constitutional Framework

Constitutional Framework Proposal for DG4


EDIT:
10/14 - Numbered outline; revised Amendment section

That is nice, Ravensfire. However, I would still prefer the (simpler) re-adoption of the full DG2 set of rules. Your constitution is good, but I think that the one from DG2 is more complete and game-proof.

And note that I would still be in favor of a political-parlementarism leadership style as I have already proposed two times.

As we are beginning to get serious about DG4, I have a few requests.

First, please remember that DG3 is still going on, and we are currently in a tough situation. Focus on getting through this spot, then on this.

Second, for now, let's discuss the framework of the Constitution - that is the general structure. Don't worry about the exact wording, but concentrate on the idea.

-- Ravensfire

Originally posted by Fier Canadien
That is nice, Ravensfire. However, I would still prefer the (simpler) re-adoption of the full DG2 set of rules. Your constitution is good, but I think that the one from DG2 is more complete and game-proof.

And note that I would still be in favor of a political-parlementarism leadership style as I have already proposed two times.

Click to expand...

Just wait a few minutes - the other two works are being posted. Remeber, DG2 used three documents. So did I.

-- Ravensfire

Originally posted by Fier Canadien
And note that I would still be in favor of a political-parlementarism leadership style as I have already proposed two times.

Click to expand...

Fier,

I went back and found at least one of those times.

Reading through it - I'm really, really confused about how it works, specifically related to actually playing the game. Could you create a more detailed proposal? From what I read, I can't tell how many offices are actually elected, who develops build queues, etc.

I have my reservations, but I will keep an open mind. Right now, I just have too many questions.

-- Ravensfire

Originally posted by Fier Canadien
That is nice, Ravensfire. However, I would still prefer the (simpler) re-adoption of the full DG2 set of rules. Your constitution is good, but I think that the one from DG2 is more complete and game-proof.

Click to expand...

That is simply not true. DG2 had as many problems as both DG1 and DG3. The best thing that was done in DG3 was not carrying those old rules over.

Originally posted by ravensfire


Fier,

I went back and found at least one of those times.

Reading through it - I'm really, really confused about how it works, specifically related to actually playing the game. Could you create a more detailed proposal? From what I read, I can't tell how many offices are actually elected, who develops build queues, etc.

I have my reservations, but I will keep an open mind. Right now, I just have too many questions.

-- Ravensfire

Click to expand...

Basicaly, we have the same elected people as of today. That is the President, the 6 leaders, their 6 deputies, the governors and their deputies, but the legislative branch is removed.

Out of that, I drew this:


The Chamber of commons: everybody that is elected, exept the President.
What they should do?: Basicaly, the department leaders do the same thing as they do today. But, when a proposal is made (law, amendment, declaration of war, …), it goes to the Chamber of commons to be voted (theoricaly in a chat one day prior to the TC).

The Prime Minister: In the CoC, there is presence of parties. The leader of the party that has the most elected personnel is given the "Prime minister" status (he must be elected to some office, tough). He must appoint a group of 4 to 6 CoC members (we could make this party reprensentative) to form the senate. He has the tie-breaking vote for the Chamber of Commands.

The senate: They are basicaly the re-incarnation of the Judiciary. They lead PI or any other inquieries. They are all from the CoC.

The President: The DP, he must not be member of a party. He can appoint a few (a number can be determined) partyless people to form the Presidential Office.

The presidential office: the president and his Presidential advisors. They are all partyless. When a law, act, anything, is voted in the CoC, the Presidential Office can call for a referendum is they feel that the CoC's opinion differs from the people's opinion. And that's about it..

Around that basis, it would be possible to write a constitution. Then we could adapt the DG2 Code of Laws and Code of Standards to refect the parlementarism reality. The reason for such a system is that it would make anything more interesting. You basicaly get two TCs in the place of one. Of course, we should define a quorum for any CoC assembly to be valid.

I think the idea of leaders and governos is good - but the power must be more equitably divided. Give the minister of culture something to do!

Also, we need beaurucrats (sp). I miss the old map office we had in DG2. This game desperately needs a history office and mapmakers and others to put information up on the forums so those of us with no time to look at the save can see what is going on. These kinds of things do not need to be done by elected people. Anyone should be able to do them if they desire. Our leaders should be able to appoint citizens to some of these jobs. One of the original purposes of having mayors was just this. We envisioned mayors who would open and maintain threads about their city - threads that gave information about the city. Cyc was the greatest demogame mayor ever. His city threads always had info about the city and he was also able to put alot of story telling into the city threads.

That leads me to suggest (once again) local elections and local politics. One of the the original demogame ideas that never took hold was the idea that citizens would live in different cities. It never happens (other than the mayors and a few citizens) because there is no point to it! Now if we made governors elected by the citizens who live in their province's cities then we could get this idea going.

Again, I find I must agree with the Honorable donsig.

I think the parlementary system may be a bit to confusing for the Democracy Game and I feel the current system is better.

I too would like to see maps and recorded history.

Local elections were never a problem for me as I agree that separate elections for Mayor by citizens residing in a city would draw more involvement from the citizens. I do think that Gubernatorial elections should remain National, though.

Again, I'm not real sure about the 4 Leader deal. I hope it works for you.

Cyc - great to see you posting here!

I'm a bit of a troublemaker at heart - and that's where this idea of mine came from. It's also recognition that we have some offices that just don't really do that much, and that we have a declining base of citizens.

It also came from hope that more emphasis will be placed upon individual Governors. In my term as President, my biggest complaint was the lack of vision and responsiveness from some Governors. Time and time again I posted that we had a large cash surplus, please use it. It didn't happen. I figure Rik and I spent a combined total of at least 8 hours doing something that should already be done.

With fewer Executive Branch offices, I hope that the provinces will be smaller, allowing more localized management of each province.

However, shaking things up was my main purpose! We've had the same structure for a while - time to try something new. donsig, you mentioned various offices. I included about 6 in the CoL framework. In addition to the ones we have now, I'd like to see a Historical Society, a Map Office and a Budget Office. We have some very talented people who could fulfill a gap in knowledge we currently have. By making these offices, these gaps can be consistently handled.

Keep the comments coming folks. Fionn has a proposal as well - don't ignore it. Let's give ourselves a good framework to work from.

-- Ravensfire

The Map Office and History Office both sound like fun to me. I also think they are needed.

There are currently lots of nice maps and screen shots created by the various govenors and other elected officials, but they are scattered here and there. If there was a single thread it would make them easier to find.

As a citizen, I would be more interested in the game if I could hold one of these offices, rather than the relativly boring task of being a mayor of an outlying city.

Can I find the time? That is the real question.

I'm all for something new. I've been suggesting new things for quite awhile now. I'm not so sure the map office and history office are a good idea. These are offices that require much work yet have no power. Once you make something like this an *office* then you get people who want the title but not the work. Just find someone who likes to make maps and write history and let them do it. In addition to history, how about some newspapers? We desperately need something that gets info out to the people. I actually liked writing Die Fanatischen Zeiten back in DG2. I would not have done that however if it had been a state run establishment.

Here we have a newcomer who wants to get involved and already he sees there is not point in being mayor. Why couldn't we try letting each mayor set his or her city's build queue? That would take alot of power away from the governors but they could still fill in for those cities without mayors.

Well, I want to take a look at the forum vs. chat based thread.

Glad to see you around Cyc!