OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: Government Structure, Branches & Duties

[Chieftess]

This is the discussion to determine how the government (elected officials, deputies, governors) should look like. We can continue with prior demogame set ups, or a new one like ones being discussed already.

 

[Black_Hole]

shouldnt some of these"OFFICIAL DISCUSSIONS" wait until after we decide on a variant?(especially this one)

 

[GenMarshall]

We should keep the same government structure we have. I quote an old saying, "If it aint broke, dont fix it"

 

[Chieftess]

shouldnt some of these"OFFICIAL DISCUSSIONS" wait until after we decide on a variant?(especially this one)

Then why did we bother with the other government structure discussion then? We already had a "standard or variant" poll, and a standard game was the winner. No need to drag things out over 3, 4, 5 etc. polls.

 

[Black_Hole]

Then why did we bother with the other government structure discussion then? We already had a "standard or variant" poll, and a standard game was the winner. No need to drag things out over 3, 4, 5 etc. polls.

sorry I misspoke, I meant alternate government....
sorry

 

[Strider]

We should keep the same government structure we have. I quote an old saying, "If it aint broke, dont fix it"

I have to agree with this.

 

[DaveShack]

I beg to differ, it is broken.

• DG5 had lots of comments about the leaders being nothing more than glorified polling secretaries.
• Leading to: a high percentage of uncontested elections. I don't have time to spend on calculating it, but there were a lot.
• Lots of places where a true strategic plan would have made all the difference.
• Everytime two leaders disagree over how a decision should be made, we get a JR and sometimes days or even weeks of discussion. Let's just have the President be the decider.
• Culture has absolutely no power without the Governors.
• Science polling tech by tech instead of a strategy
• We need offices that people without conquests can hold, or about 4-6 of our most active citizens will get forced out.

 

[Provolution]

Ashburnhams elaborated proposal

Prime Minister In charge of coordinating and mediating between conflicting Ministries. In charge of all Mobilization and War Economy decisions and sanctions military Drafts. Head of City Naming Office, Unit Naming Office and Province Naming Office. Provides summary of every play session.

Minister of the Interior (Roads, Mining and Agriculture plan, all non-city tiles to be worked. Also head of all Major Wonder builds and Cultural advancement)
Minister of Finance and Research(Techs and research, head of Sliders, taxmen, All fiscal policies related to sliders and rushes, setting up rules for all gold related activities for one term to be discussed and polled, responsible for Capital location and Forbidden Capital location, watching corruption levels and the Space Race builds)
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Everything negotiated in the Diplo-screen)
Minister of Military (All military land and air units, except escorts, plus navy in wartime, long term strategic planning, force composition, upgrade plans, military groupings and organization, War Strategy Objectives, All Military Wonder builds)

Director of Colonial Office (Settlers, City planning, considering future borders, navy-peacetime), also becomes Director of Intelligence (espionage and embassies)
Director of Infrastructure Office (responsible for all worker movements and actions within term, making financial decisions throughout term within rules)
Chief of Staff (All Operation level plans and tactical decisions within term)
Director of National Office (fighting cultural wars by working with governors and promoting science in the process in terms of builds, as well as making necessary amendments in the science queue throughout the term, additionally, approving and disapproving in all science deals with foreign powers proposed by FA/Trade)

Governors (I would like to see governors receiving a gold budget based on traded resources and the tax income of the province, maybe also run a separate provincial label worker team, as well as existing build queues and tile management).
Governors should be responsible for their own local cultural wars. I would also like to see a council of governors agreeing on provincial tax levels as well as trade resource lists and other issues.

Judiciary The same as we've always had it.

 

[Ashburnham]

I would suggest we hold off on this particular discussion until we've nailed down a final version of the "alternative government". As it stands now, we're comparing the structure of the past 5 Demogames to a promising, yet unfinished, proposal. That doesn't seem entirely fair. If we are indeed starting on March 1, then we can hold off on our "official" decision for a little while yet.

 

[GenMarshall]

No alternative Government. I am still set against it since it would create more beurocracy as Mr. Strider has placed forward in other related threads.

Tell me in an essay form why the alternative government is good and maybe I would support it and not be driven away. (Yes I said an 1-2 page essay ).

 

[Black_Hole]

No alternative Government. I am still set against it since it would create more beurocracy as Mr. Strider has placed forward in other related threads.

Tell me in an essay form why the alternative government is good and maybe I would support it and not be driven away. (Yes I said an 1-2 page essay ).

if you wish for info read the 5 pages of discussion

 

[Strider]

I beg to differ, it is broken.

• DG5 had lots of comments about the leaders being nothing more than glorified polling secretaries.
• Leading to: a high percentage of uncontested elections. I don't have time to spend on calculating it, but there were a lot.
• Lots of places where a true strategic plan would have made all the difference.
• Everytime two leaders disagree over how a decision should be made, we get a JR and sometimes days or even weeks of discussion. Let's just have the President be the decider.
• Culture has absolutely no power without the Governors.
• Science polling tech by tech instead of a strategy
• We need offices that people without conquests can hold, or about 4-6 of our most active citizens will get forced out.

Coming from some person who was almost never seen in DG5, sorry if I I don't take you that seriously.

The first three are easily fixed, give the leaders more power to decide on which way the country should head. This gives people a reason to want to run, helps remove uncontested elections, and should result in less polling, and as a result more strategic planning.

Throughout this entire game, heck, throughout any of the games, we have never had a problem with two leaders disagreeing over an issue. How that is a problem I have no idea.

Culture may not have any power, so why don't we give them some? Not much harder than that, allow culture to put cultural buildings inside of a govonors queue, or if your not willing to do that much, atleast allow them to insert wonders/small wonders inside of a govonors queue.

As for science polling tech by tech, that was mainly the elected official at that time, when Classical_hero and I took over we started creating the queues etc. for science. That's not a problem with the department, that's a problem with the elected official.

We have acouple, Election Officials, Judiciary, etc.

 

[blackheart]

Here's the fundamental question: How much power and what scope of power should elected officials have?

Some people view officials as poll pals, others expect them to be autonomous and only present decisive polls, and if either group are please, then a CC or hatnot comes up.

 

[Cyc]

Here's the fundamental question: How much power and what scope of power should elected officials have?

Some people view officials as poll pals, others expect them to be autonomous and only present decisive polls, and if either group are please, then a CC or hatnot comes up.

How much wood would a Leader swing if a Leader could swing wood? Gee I don't know, but should we be restricting this? Do we want to blindly curtail a Leader's potential?

 

[Ashburnham]

Coming from some person who was almost never seen in DG5, sorry if I I don't take you that seriously.

Yes, we all know what a meaningless position President is.

The first three are easily fixed, give the leaders more power to decide on which way the country should head. This gives people a reason to want to run, helps remove uncontested elections, and should result in less polling, and as a result more strategic planning.

So, you are in fact agreeing that we should change the government. If we're all in agreement that that should happen, I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic towards change.

Throughout this entire game, heck, throughout any of the games, we have never had a problem with two leaders disagreeing over an issue. How that is a problem I have no idea.

Culture may not have any power, so why don't we give them some? Not much harder than that, allow culture to put cultural buildings inside of a govonors queue, or if your not willing to do that much, atleast allow them to insert wonders/small wonders inside of a govonors queue.

I believe we had this conversation several times over the course of DG5. The simple fact is that building queues are solely the territory of the Governors. It's been that way every Demogame, and it should continue to be that way. However, the powerlessness of Culture can be solved without taking power away from the Governers by instituting "Planning" positions that chart where the nation should go. The Culture Planner would be in charge of deciding what Wonders to build and what level of Cultural advancement to set; the Governors would then be tasked with implementing those plans.

As for science polling tech by tech, that was mainly the elected official at that time, when Classical_hero and I took over we started creating the queues etc. for science. That's not a problem with the department, that's a problem with the elected official.

True, but what's wrong with instituting policy that works? If Ministries work better when long-term planning is used, why shouldn't we make it a part of running the office?

Again, I'm forced to conclude that your adherence to the traditional system of government is due to a fear of change and nostaglia to the past Demogames rather than logic.

 

[Strider]

So, you are in fact agreeing that we should change the government. If we're all in agreement that that should happen, I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic towards change.

You obviously do not listen, I am a traditionalist, pure and simple. I want to change it back the way it was in DG1, with the leaders being more powerful. For the last time I will also repeat this, I suggest you listen as this is the third time now:

I am in no way against changing the government, what I am against is changing the layout of the government.

I believe we had this conversation several times over the course of DG5. The simple fact is that building queues are solely the territory of the Governors. It's been that way every Demogame, and it should continue to be that way. However, the powerlessness of Culture can be solved without taking power away from the Governers by instituting "Planning" positions that chart where the nation should go. The Culture Planner would be in charge of deciding what Wonders to build and what level of Cultural advancement to set; the Governors would then be tasked with implementing those plans.

This has to do with what I said in what way? Except for including Culture, It has nothing to do with what I said.

True, but what's wrong with instituting policy that works? If Ministries work better when long-term planning is used, why shouldn't we make it a part of running the office?

Again, I'm forced to conclude that your adherence to the traditional system of government is due to a fear of change and nostaglia to the past Demogames rather than logic.

As I said before, it's a problem with the elected official, not the government poistion. What's wrong with it? Your doing the exact things I don't want, your creating more poistions, and your not given the elected officials enough freedom to do anything.

Also, As you haven't used your "logic" to figure this one out yet, I will repeat this for the fourth time, the second time I might add in this post alone. The only differance is that I'll take my exact words from the other thread:

"Also, may I try to clarify something? I am in no way close minded to a new concept, as long as it continues to stay with the old layout. It is a changing of the layout I am against, for reasons I have said already."

 

[blackheart]

Strider, what you're saying makes sense, but appears to be contradictory. You'll accept new things but as long as they remain on par with the old, right? I don't see a big difference that would make; a few wrinkles creased here and there, that's about it. I agree we should keep what works, but holding on to what doesn't is a no. Maybe this time we'll be a different shade of red to satate your tastes

 

[Strider]

Strider, what you're saying makes sense, but appears to be contradictory. You'll accept new things but as long as they remain on par with the old, right? I don't see a big difference that would make; a few wrinkles creased here and there, that's about it. I agree we should keep what works, but holding on to what doesn't is a no. Maybe this time we'll be a different shade of red to satate your tastes

What I don't mean the same thing by "Concept" and "Layouts."

What I mean by concept is things like how the Judiciary works, how elections work, amendment process, leader duties, etc.

What I mean by layout is things like how many leaders we should have, wether we should have democratic elections or not, if we should replace the Judiciary or not, etc. The basic layout of the Constitution, 6 departments, President & Vice President, 3 Judiciary, etc.

I hope this clarifies it up abit.

 

[snipelfritz]

A quick comment on the proposal that Provo posted. It appears that the director of infrastructure office is simply redundant of the ministers of interior and of finance and research. It doesn't seem to be a necessary position and as I see it, simply cause confusion when it is decision time.

 

[WeaponX]

I beg to differ, it is broken.

I have to go with DS on this. The govt. in DG5 was full of problems. We need a change to bring a new perspective to the game. Who wants to play the same ole' game all the time. Change is good.