Citizen Pulse: What Leadership Style do you want?

[classical_hero]

If I'm not mistaken, the pendulum is on its 2nd or 3rd swing between direct democracy (poll it to death) and representative democracy (leaders and polls on the most important decisions).

The leaders are meant to do what they are called. We voted them into office, so they should be doing their job. They represent us and therefore they should only come to us if their is an emergency that will effect us greatly. The Polls that we have seen certainly have too many options. I think that if you are to give people the choice, then you should either limit them to 3 or 4 options, or have a preferencial voting system. My emphasis on the quote is what I believe is how our leaders should be leading our nation. Sometimes leaders do have to make unpopular decisions for the good of this nation. I hope that the leaders we have will be couragous in their leadership. Remember, it's not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.

 

[blackheart]

My cents is: poll less use your own leadership skills more often. We didn't simply elect ministers just so they can poll us to death and not decide things for themselves. On major major decisions should the citizens be consulted. Leave the mundane beauracracy out.

 

[ravensfire]

Any leader can adopt a more representative style - they simply have to DO it. It will cause some heartache, as micromanagers can't get their hands into eveything, but it can be done.

I hope to see some of our leaders doing just that - lead.

-- Ravensfire

 

[mhcarver]

My two cents:
that a leader should be able to make his/her own deciscions since we elected them to do just that I think they should listen to a citizens opinion and in some cases poll when the last 2-4 options have been narrowed down in a deciscion. let the leaders lead, thats why we elected them , thats why they debated and were questioned about their policies .

 

[Sarevok]

I beleive my duty is to make sure that Japanatica will have a good future in the area of arms and military preparation. Though I enjoy holding discussions, I have little taste to be a slave by making polls for every issue I bring up, and I will not do that. Ultimately it is the victory, not the path that is looked at in the aftermath.

 

[Civman2004]

I wonder if there's an extent to which we should stop looking at this like a government, and start looking at it like a cross between business and government. With a business, the shareholders (in theory) choose the CEO, who has fairly broad powers to implement the strategic vision that the shareholders hold (a narrow vision of more money, yes, but a strategic vision none the less). The CEO has the power to implement that vision as he sees fit, but if he fails, or tries in a way that is inconsistent with the will of the shareholders, he is removed. I think ministers should have power to implement their strategic vision, and if we don't like it, or they do it in a lousy way, then we either have a vote of no confidence, or vote them out at the next election. Polls are used to gain an idea of direction, but I would have no objection to a minister going against the "majority" if s/he felt strong enough about it - let the consequences be seen in the results

 

[eyrei]

I think it would make a lot of sense to make this issue an election issue...

 

[Provolution]

Well, the people hopefully got what they wanted.

 

[Michelangelo]

I'll have to go with the general idea in this poll (eh thread) for the leaders to show more leadership. The way DaveShack described it sound good. Draw up a plan, let the citizens comment on it, evaluate the comments, maybe add one or two optjions and then poll it.

However I must object a VETO-power for the leaders. If they find themselves wanting to veto a poll descision, that option shouldn't have been in the poll in the first place.

 

[Provolution]

Well, there is one problem with showing "leadership" is that you may be considering infringing on other ministries, or simply that the public does not read or comment the plan. Apathy seems to be the main problem.

I have a link with a vision almost noone commented on

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=97206

 

[Cyc]

However I must object a VETO-power for the leaders. If they find themselves wanting to veto a poll descision, that option shouldn't have been in the poll in the first place.

Exactly, Michelangelo. If a Leader wants to divine the will of he people from discussion, that's one thing. That Leader will have to take their chances they get it right and no one gets upset. But if that Leader polls a decision, then the people will show their will with the poll results. All Leaders must plan and act according to the WOTP. In other words, once the people have spoken in polling, discussion over.

 

[Provolution]

The decision is over, but the discussion may well continues

 

[Michelangelo]

Provolution: I hadn't read that thread yet (only back from hollidays today) but your vision is at first glance well thought out and greatly detailed and should get much more feedback, especially the different department leaders as it concerns them all.

However I have a feeling that your vision shows a little too much leadership as it concerns all departements and a leader should stick its mandate.

I'll try to come back to that thread after I've read up on the game.

M.

 

[Provolution]

To be a true strategic vision, it must integrate all ministries. However, this is what is best
from a foreign affairs perspective, so we can balance our relations at our own will.

 

[Cyc]

The decision is over, but the discussion may well continues

True, Provolution. Basically what I meant was that a Leader, after polling for a decision, could not post an Instruction with additional comment, such as:

"This poll shows result C, but in my wisdom I'm instructing you to do option B."

So you're right. I guess I should have worded it a little better.

 

[Sir Donald III]

Actually, I'm more into an "Instruct First, Dissent Second" model, as I expressed back in Post 19 of this very thread. The Ministers take the initative and come forward with their visions. If they conflict, or if the Populace has a better idea, then different ideas are tossed around. If a poll occurs, then a majority behind a specific idea, within the poll, is required to change the course.

 

[Civanator]

Maybe have less polling, but more decision making from the citizen discussions? We can poll the necessities, but back in DG1 we rarely polled some decisions in the Science Department, but changed tech researchings according to citizen input.

 

[Gunner]

I was just thinking that it might be cool if the amount of polling and such was related to the current government we have.

I mean, with despotism then the prez would make most of the decisions while with republic and democracy alot of stuff would be polled.

But that might go against the whole idea of having a DEMOCRACY game.