Citizen's Initiative - The Gameplay Scheduling and Session Act of 1695 AD

[Hyronymus]

I believe I included all changes we reached an agreement on sofar. Everyone please reread the initial post and comment on version 2 of this act.

 

[donsig]

Section IV: Gameplay Session Obstruction
Gameplay session instructions under investigation by the Yasutan Supreme Court automatically ajourn the scheduled gameplay session if the objection(s) to the instructions are found to have merit. After the ruling, regardless of the outcome, the DP must reannounce the new gameplay session date + time at least 24 hours before the gameplay session is held in a new GPIT. The new gameplay session date may not be any sooner than 24 hours after the court ruling though.
Instructions that were declared illegal by the Yasutan Supreme Court must be revised and posted in the new GPIT, together with all other instructions from the original GPIT.

I think this should be changed to:

Section IV: Gameplay Session Obstruction
Gameplay session instructions under investigation by the Yasutan Supreme Court automatically adjourn the scheduled gameplay session if the objection(s) to the instructions are found to have merit. In order for an adjourment to occur within 24 hours of a scheduled session start the judiciary must be unanimous in finding the objection(s) to instructions to have merit.
After the ruling if there is less than 24 hours to the scheduled session, and regardless of the outcome of the judicial ruling, the original session is cancelled. The DP must reannounce, in a new GPIT, a new gameplay session date + time at least 24 hours before the gameplay session is to be held. The new gameplay session date may not be any sooner than 24 hours after the court ruling though.
After the ruling if there is at least 24 hours to the scheduled session, and regardless of the outcome of the judicial ruling, the original GPIT is still valid and the session can proceed as scheduled assuming no other objections are found to have merit by the judiciary.
In all cases of adjourment, instructions that are declared illegal by the Yasutan Supreme Court must be revised and posted in the proper GPIT. Any member of the judiciary is authorized to post the revised instructions though they may also be posted by the appropriate official.

This is another step towards a compromise DaveShack. The change is that any adjournment within the 24 hour sensitive period needs the unanimous approval of the judiciary. This is as far as I will go. This is a very good proposal overall. You can accept it, pass an initiative concerning adjournments or just vote against this proposal.

@ everyone: I did change much of the wording in this section so feel free to suggest improvements that do not change the gist of the revision.

 

[DaveShack]

Yes, this works, thanks for finding something which would address the root concern.

 

[Hyronymus]

I made the changes to the original post, donsig. The current initiative version now is version 3, please continue discussing that version.

 

[ravensfire]

donsig,

In your revision, consider replacing

... the original session is cancelled. The DP must reannounce, in a new GPIT, a new gameplay session date + time at least 24 hours before the gameplay session is to be held. The new gameplay session date may not be any sooner than 24 hours after the court ruling though.

with

... the original session is cancelled. The DP must announce a new gameplay session in a new GPIT. This session must be at least 24 hours after the new GPIT is posted and the court's ruling.

-- Ravensfire

 

[xr006]

In light of this event I feel that something should be added to this initiative. The DP should be required to open the save and verify he / she will actually be able to play it before posting the GPIT.

The DP should be required to state in the GPIT that he / she did this.

Gameplay session, Tuesday, August 28, 2007, 1530 GMT.

Turn 0, 1695:

I open the save and get this message:

The save file you have selected is protected to ensure that the assets in your mod folder have not been changed.

Well, I'm on vacation and don't have access to all my discs so I cannot reinstall vanilla at this time. Maybe it's for the best given the lack of instructions. Sorry folks, but I have to cancel this session.

 

[Provolution]

I agree with xr006, the player should have a pre-run of the computer 3-4 hours before, to see if the thing works or not.

 

[Hyronymus]

I wonder if we really need this. This seems like an incident and not like a structural problem.

 

[DaveShack]

Let's avoid knee-jerk reactions to what should be an isolated incident.

I think I'll go research the utilities subforum to see if there is a technique for unlocking and upgrading a SP game, similar to how a MP game is upgraded.

 

[donsig]

Thanks DaveShack. I also do not think we need to have the DP pre-check the save. If I hadn't scheduled that session DaveShack planned one for Thursday. He's also patched and might have run into the same problem.

Why didn't anyone mention you can't play the save with the new patch?

Ravensfire's revision looks ok to me.

 

[xr006]

To me, avoiding any avoidable gameplay delays would be a good idea. I don't see why anyone would disagree with that.

 

[xr006]

Why didn't anyone mention you can't play the save with the new patch?

why place blame?

 

[Hyronymus]

Why try to immunise this game to any possible incidents? Incident management isn't what I'm after and (I think) we are all human.

 

[dutchfire]

Why didn't anyone mention you can't play the save with the new patch?

Actually, I did mention it in a thread in the citizens sub-forum together with instructions for a dual-install. You must have missed it.

I wonder if we really need this. This seems like an incident and not like a structural problem.

Agreed. Besides, there are about a gazillion other things that could go wrong, and you can never prevent all of them.

 

[DaveShack]

This seems to be finished. I'd suggest posting a mock poll format here at the end of the thread, including the full final version text.

 

[Hyronymus]

Mock poll
Do you approve of the Gameplay Scheduling and Session Act of 1695 AD as proposed in the following Citizen's Initiative:

Citizen's Initiative - The Gameplay Scheduling and Session Act of 1695 AD

Section I - Gameplay Session Announcement
Gameplay sessions must be announced in the Civ4 - Democracy Game II forum section by the active Designated Player (known as DP hereafter). The announcement must be made at least 24 hours before the active DP plans to commence the gameplay and must contain the following information:

• Date and time of the planned gameplay in the subject as well as in the announcement
  • format of gameplay announcement's subject: GPIT - <starting save date> <gameplay session date + time> <time in GMT>
• A link to the previous gameplay session
• The name of the DP and allowed back-up DP's (if any) in the order they are allowed to play
• Type of the gameplay session (online/offline) and expected amount of turns to be played
• A link to the savegame that will be used as starting save

The announcement thread will subsequently be used as the official Gameplay Instructons Thread (known as GPIT hereafter).


Section II - Gameplay Session Instructions
Instructions must be posted in a single post in the relevant GPIT. Changes in the instruction(s) must be made in the original post and be marked. Instructions can be posted by:
1. All officeholders for the office they occupy
2. Any citizen for an instruction or set of instructions that was succesfully supported by a poll
If no instructions are posted at least 1 hour before the scheduled gameplay session starts, the DP is allowed to make decisions during the gameplay session. Changes to instructions are allowed up to 1 hour before the scheduled gameplay session is scheduled to start.


Section III - Playing The Savegame
For all types of gameplay sessions the DP must maintain a log of their actions in sufficient detail that another Offical or citizen may generally recreate their actions.

A gameplay session may last for as long as there are relevant instructions, until a posted instruction says to halt the session or when the DP decides to end the session. Once a gameplay session is over, the DP must post a summary of that session, a detailed log of their actions and the final savegame of the gameplay session in the GPIT within 24 hours after ending the gameplay session. For online sessions a chat log of the IRC channel must be provided too, although not necessarily by the DP.
During an online gameplay session the DP may ask advice from anyone attending the online gameplay session. The DP is not required to ask advice however and is also not required in any way to follow any advice given during the gameplay session. Any instructions given by Officials during a online gameplay session are not binding.


Section IV: Gameplay Session Obstruction
Gameplay session instructions under investigation by the Yasutan Supreme Court automatically adjourn the scheduled gameplay session if the objection(s) to the instructions are found to have merit. In order for an adjourment to occur within 24 hours of a scheduled session start the judiciary must be unanimous in finding the objection(s) to instructions to have merit.
After the ruling if there is less than 24 hours to the scheduled session, and regardless of the outcome of the judicial ruling, the original session is cancelled. The DP must reannounce, in a new GPIT, a new gameplay session date + time at least 24 hours before the gameplay session is to be held. The new gameplay session date may not be any sooner than 24 hours after the court ruling though.
After the ruling if there is at least 24 hours to the scheduled session, and regardless of the outcome of the judicial ruling, the original GPIT is still valid and the session can proceed as scheduled assuming no other objections are found to have merit by the judiciary.

In all cases of adjourment, instructions that are declared illegal by the Yasutan Supreme Court must be revised and posted in the proper GPIT. Any member of the judiciary is authorized to post the revised instructions though they may also be posted by the appropriate official.


Jurispudence
This Gameplay Scheduling and Session Act of 1695 AD supercedes the current Gameplay session scheduling initiative.

The discussion on this iniative can be found here.

Poll question:

Do you approve of the Gameplay Scheduling and Session Act of 1695 AD?​

Poll options:

Yes
No
Abstain​

Poll interpertation:

The poll option with the most votes wins. Abstain votes are not counted towards Yes or No.​

Poll duration:

This poll will run for 2 days.​

 

[grant2004]

I agree with that poll, I don't see any changes to make.

 

[Provolution]

go for it ggggggggg

 

[Hyronymus]

I'll wait with putting the poll up until 23:30 GMT to give more people the chance to reply to the mock poll.