Amend our Laws to Add Minister of Finance & Labor

zorven · Apr 18, 2004

This is a proposal to amend the Constitution, Code of Laws, and Code of Standards. This proposal is being present as one vote due the the nature of the changes being made. Therefore, since this is one vote, the most stringent test of passage will prevail, that being the requirments needed to make a change to the Constitution: a majority of yes votes and the number of yes votes must be greater than or equal to 12.

If this measure passes, the changes will take effect May 1 GMT. However, elections should be held for the new Minister during the normal Term 5 election process.

The proposed changes you are voting on:

Code:

[b]Ministry of Finance and Labor[/b]

[color=darkred][b]Constitution Changes:[/b][/color]
[i]Article D:[/i]
Add: 5. The Minister of Finance and Labor is responsible for all financial matters and 
managing the Fanatican worker units (including captured workers), as prescribed by law.

Change:  Change the number of advisors from 4 to 5.

[color=darkred][b]Code of Laws Changes: [/b][/color]

[i]Section B.1:[/i]
Remove:  1.d  Is responsible for worker activities.
Renumber all succeeding sections.

[i]Section B.2:[/i]
Change:  a. ... Leaders of the 5 Departments

Add: i.  Ministry of Finance and Labor
1.	 Is responsible for determining the slider settings
2.	 Is responsible for determining all uses of cash
3.	 Is responsible for all Fanatican worker unit activities, including captured workers

[i]Section C.1[/i]
Remove:  a.2.A. At-Large Governors
	    a.2.b  VP votes on ties
    c.  Slider votes
	    d.  Cash Requests

[i]Section C.3[/i]
Remove:  entire section

[i]Section F.3[/i]
Add:  f.  Minister of Finance and Labor
Renumber:  all sections below (starting with Chief Justice)

Remove:  i.  At-Large Governors

[i]Section G[/i]
Add:  g.  Minister of Finance and Labor

[color=darkred][b]Code of Standards Changes: [/b][/color]
[i]Section J.3.d[/i]
Remove:  2  At-Large Governors

This poll will remain open for 4 days.

tao · Apr 18, 2004

No for reasons given in the previous discussion.

Chieftess · Apr 18, 2004

Accept. It will help to streamline the redtape a bit.

zorven · Apr 18, 2004

I voted no because I think these responsibilities should be handled by the President.

Bootstoots · Apr 18, 2004

Sarevok · Apr 18, 2004

Yes to this proposal.

Octavian X · Apr 19, 2004

YES.

It's the best proposal so far.

donsig · Apr 19, 2004

No.

Having someone other than the DP responsible for workers in the manner prescribed in the proposal is unworkable.

Sarevok · Apr 19, 2004

Originally posted by donsig
No.

Having someone other than the DP responsible for workers in the manner prescribed in the proposal is unworkable.

why is it unworkable?

donsig · Apr 20, 2004

Originally posted by Sarevok
why is it unworkable?

Try being DP once and you'll see.

It is difficult enough for the DP to process all the instructions as it is, now you all propose to saddle the DP with potentially minute worker instructions. Also, consider what happens when this new minister gives vague or partial worker orders. Will our DP freeze up due to fear of getting CCed? It is no wonder there aren't many people running for President. :rolleyes:

Sarevok · Apr 21, 2004

Originally posted by donsig
Try being DP once and you'll see.

It is difficult enough for the DP to process all the instructions as it is, now you all propose to saddle the DP with potentially minute worker instructions. Also, consider what happens when this new minister gives vague or partial worker orders. Will our DP freeze up due to fear of getting CCed? It is no wonder there aren't many people running for President.

Believe me donsig, I never want to be DP.

The thing is that the DP has the job of making all of the worker instructions themselves. Its a probelm for the DP in terms of work load as that is quite a task to pull. And what if the DP is not neccesarily good at those kinds of things? It would be better to have someone that is good at that area giving advice on what to do. Also, the instructions do not have to be so immensley elaborate as "Irrigate this square, rail that square, etc". They would most likely be general instructions that tell them to rail up certain areas or fix pollution. Early-game it would be an issue due to all of the development, but were not in the early game anymore...

If this minister gave bad instructions, it would be most unfortunate. But how would it be different from if other ministers gave bad instructions? Say... the governors for instance. If we are at war, a costly error in instructions could cost us the war or at least weaken our force in it. Such an occurance can happen, but (and for once its for a good thing) our ruleset makes them fear reprisal should that happen. A minister in this job would most likely have to be someone ready to devote their time to this and understand that faliure is not an option. That may seem a little harsh, but in some degree that is how it is with every position here, especially the President.

It is that overwhelming workload in my opinion that makes the job of president not a favored one. It looks good to be "El Presidente", but the immense amount of time at TC's is time most do not have at all. Like I said above, I never want to be the DP for a TC, because ive already seen a hint of what that is like without actually holding the reins myself. President is a tough job, without question. That is why few run for it, as unfortunate as that reality is.

- Sarevok
Minister of Internal Affairs

GenMarshall · Apr 21, 2004

I voted yes for this proposal.

Chieftess · Apr 22, 2004

Originally posted by donsig
Try being DP once and you'll see.

It is difficult enough for the DP to process all the instructions as it is, now you all propose to saddle the DP with potentially minute worker instructions. Also, consider what happens when this new minister gives vague or partial worker orders. Will our DP freeze up due to fear of getting CCed? It is no wonder there aren't many people running for President.

You have just nominated yourself!

Keaka26 · Apr 22, 2004

Aye on this vote.

donsig · Apr 23, 2004

Originally posted by Sarevok
Believe me donsig, I never want to be DP.

The thing is that the DP has the job of making all of the worker instructions themselves. Its a probelm for the DP in terms of work load as that is quite a task to pull...

The DP does not have to make instructions for workers. He or she only has to give the workers thier orders as they play the save.

GenMarshall · Apr 23, 2004

Originally posted by zorven
If this measure passes, the changes will take effect May 1 GMT. However, elections should be held for the new Minister during the normal Term 5 election process.

At least I dont have to worry untill the Term 6 Elections comes around

.

Chieftess · Apr 23, 2004

Why doesn't it take effect now? i.e., for the nominations. It would seem logical... By that time, there will be no point for half their duties, since the game would be nearly over.

zorven · Apr 23, 2004

What I basically said is that the new minister will take office May 1. Therefore, there needs to be an election,during the normal Term 5 elections, for this position.

Oh, and by the way, this measure has passed.

Chieftess · Apr 23, 2004

So, where's the nomination thread?

Black_Hole · Apr 25, 2004

so does this basically remove congress?

Amend our Laws to Add Minister of Finance & Labor

Shall these changes be adopted?

Yes

No

Abstain

12,000 Suns

Deity

Moderator

12,000 Suns

Deity

Civ3 Scenario Creator

is not a pipe.

Low level intermediary

Civ3 Scenario Creator

Low level intermediary

Civ3 Scenario Creator

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Moderator

Chieftain

Low level intermediary

High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent

Moderator

12,000 Suns

Moderator

Deity

Similar threads