ARTICLE CREATION - Turnchats

[ravensfire]

MOTH,

Just as a note, the confirmation poll stuff is all in the CoL. It's defined as something that exists in the Constitution, but fleshed out in the CoL. For your article (which looks good, btw!), just mentioning it as you did is perfect.

Good work!

-- Ravensfire

 

[Black_Hole]

Moth i forsee a problem with the approval poll of a confirmation poll, first of all i think the DP should be able to choose the exact time and style(offline/online) without the ppl saying no, but that isnt the real reason....

now lets say Jim wants an offline chat while the people want an online one so they start up a confirmation poll and it goes through and Jim cannot have an offline chat. So guess what? Jim doesnt do any new chats until an offline one will go through. This is a perfectally legal stalemate. Or even worse, the Dp wants to have a chat during Saturday Night LIve and everyone wants to watch the Bush impersonation so they post a confirmation poll because they dont like the time of the chat, and Jim is forced to forgo his visit to his grandmother just saved from a fire to play this game...

Basically that gives the people power to choose the style of chat and time, even though the DP could just stalemate it and o my no chats for half a month... We cant let the DP just be a puppet!!! Then who are we going to find to be a DP that doesnt get to choose the style of time of the TC

 

[DaveShack]

Again, the whole point of having more than one elected DP comes up. We should have play sessions every n days, say 3 or 4, and whomever is available to play carries on.

 

[Chieftess]

Again, the whole point of having more than one elected DP comes up. We should have play sessions every n days, say 3 or 4, and whomever is available to play carries on.

There was never anything stopping the DP from passing the game to the VP, or Domestic, or otherwise before. The old way was every 3-4 days, and sometimes the President and VP would alternate turns. (i.e., one does it in the morning, one does it in the evenings).

 

[MOTH]

@Black_Hole,
Basically, I'm proposing a compromise article that allows for both experimentation and a method to stop an experiment run wild. Do you have an alternate proposal?

I personally agree that letting the DP choose would be ok. The poll deciding this was far from providing overwhelming support for our position. A lot of discussion in this thread was that to allow offline turnsets would allow an untrustworthy DP to cheat. Another argument is that offline turnsets would turn this into a "glorified SG". Yet another argument is that it would reduce the social opportunity that the turnchats provide.

My proposed article allows for the DPs to propose offline chats and if people feel its being abused then to shut them down. Yes, it does open the possibility of filibustering to prevent all progress, but there are other ways that can happen as well (contradictory orders, and unreasonable "stop chat" instructions being a couple).

Just call me mr. compromise these days... I just want to see the game start, as I have little interest in all this legal jockeying.

 

[Provolution]

MOTH same as you, I am in the compromise wing. However, we badly need a restructuring of government posts, so regardless of the outcome, I would like to see mergers and redivisions.

 

[Cyc]

Just so we don't forget the past, I would like to repost the Game Summary Law proposal.

 

[ravensfire]

How about this:

Constitution:

"All irreversible game actions must take place in a scheduled game play session. These actions must follow the instructions as posted in the Instruction thread by the appropriate leader. These instructions must be posted at least one hour prior to the start of the session, and be clear and definite. All edits to previously posted instructions should be conspicuously noted."

CoL:
"The instruction thread will be created by the President at least 3 days before the session is scheduled. The initial post should include the time and date of the session, the save to be used and note the style of the game play session.

The DP for each session must create a log of their actions that would enable a player to substantially recreate the actions during that session. This log, and a more descriptive summary of the session, must be posted upon the conclusion of the game play session. In addition, the save after all pre-turn instructions are carried out, the save after each 5th turn and the final save must be posted.

The DP may execute all reversible game actions (e.g. build queues) prior to the scheduled start so long as they provide a save that includes only those reversible actions.

Game play sessions will last a maximum of 10 turns. An extension of 1-3 turns is permissible to finish researching a tech or exiting an anarchy period so long as no other major activity during those turns takes place.

The DP may end the game play session at their will, or pass the save to another player."

I tried to take the concerns raised along with the viewpoint of the poll and get something that should work.

EDIT: DOH! Game summary law. Errr, umm, heck yeah! New clause in CoL:
"The President will create a post in a Game Summary thread that will provide a link to the starting save for each session, the Instruction thread for that session and the ending save for that session."
Thanks for the reminder, Cyc.

Thoughts?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

Looks very good, Ravensfire. I believe the only change I would make on the first run through would be to the Constitutional Article. Instead of -

"All edits to previously posted instructions should be conspicuously noted." I would put "All edits to previously posted instructions should be noted in BOLD." Conspicuously noted is kind of a judgement call and we should stay away from Judgement calls for this type of Article (very difinitive for the Constitution). Actually even though the Constitution is subject to interpretation, this way will make it easier for the Judiciary to interpret. Down with judgement calls.

 

[Cyc]

Oh, and another one. In the first paragraph of the CoL part -

"The instruction thread will be created by the President at least 3 days before the session is scheduled. The initial post should include the time and date of the session, the save to be used and note the style of the game play session."

- should have an extension added to it like, "the last of which may only be change by a vote of the people." I'm not sure that should be added, it's just that I believe we need to prevent a DP from changing at the last minute from a Public to a Closed play session.

 

[ravensfire]

Good points. The second point I'm not too worried about, because it would happen once, maybe twice before a CoL change got hammered through. And I'd be part of that hammering. I don't think any DP would pull something like that.

My biggest concern, however, is have I created a monster. We have this odd penchant for large and huge maps. Big, massive games - lots of cities, provinces and units. Lots of instructions. I put a requirement in that the DP keep a detailed log. Heck, often on the on-line chats there isn't a lot of detail in the logs. This would apply to all sessions - on and off line, and could really get to be annoying in the larger games.

Ah well - we'll see.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

I see what you're saying there, but maybe if we defined "detailed" it wouldn't or couldn't be seen as a monster. Mentioning important highlights or events that one would normally process mentally in a single player game should be done in a T/C, standard. "The French have crossed the border in the North," or "GPT is spiraling downward," or "The Russians have beaten us in completing the Sistine Chapel Wonder" are all comments that need to be made in a T/C, therefore recorded in the Chat Log. This is the Log I suppose you're referring to, and if a DP decides to do one of those ghastly Closed sessions, the same principles should apply. Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[ravensfire]

Cyc,

That's absolutely the concept I have. If a DP wants to play a session off-line, I'm fine with that, so long as the information flow is basically the same. Things like city production, trades, battle results, general movement (exploring to the south, stationing extra troops near Bait City), wonders, etc.

My wording stinks - any thoughts?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Chieftess]

Poll is here.