Civ4 - Game of Democracy - Announcement

[Rik Meleet]

To make it perfectly clear: Alphawolf is not proven guilty; he is suspended from taking part in the Civ 4 Demogame because he didn't answer the questions asked by the staff in the timeframe that was set for it. He was offline from the beginning of the crisis till just before this thread was opened.

We are still unsure if Alphawolf is linked to this election fraud or that someone close to him (same university) played a mean trick on him.

So: Do not convict Alphawolf as long as he is presumed innocent. I remind the citizens of the Constitution; Article B - 1g "The Right to Presumption of Innocense unless proven guilty".

 

[Octavian X]

After everything we've been through to actually get things up and running, it would be a shame to throw it away because of one (potentially) manipulated poll. We've got an approved CoL ready (one that has undeniably passed). Who knows what we might lose if interest in the game decays if we take the time to rewrite our government.

I withhold my vote for now, pending any future facts brought up in this case.

 

[Blkbird]

seriously, flexible is what was fairly voted in. we cant go ahead against the people's wishes.

I consider this argument invalid, too. Flex *was* the choice of the people *at that time*. The circumstances have changed, and so will the choice of many. That the whole point of renewing decisions, which is common practice in every political system, democratic or not.

 

[Blkbird]

So: Do not convict Alphawolf as long as he is presumed innocent. I remind the citizens of the Constitution; Article B - 1g "The Right to Presumption of Innocense unless proven guilty".

You're right. Thanks for emphasizing it again.

 

[RoboPig]

I don't see why. If we stay with Tri, we can start right now (with Secretary of the State assuming presidential power). There is no need to wait until 1 Feb. or anything.

The question therefore is, is Flex so much better than Tri that the difference is worth three, four weeks of time?

feb 1st is the game start. terms always start on the 1st of the month

 

[Ginger_Ale]

After everything we've been through to actually get things up and running, it would be a shame to throw it away because of one (potentially) manipulated poll. We've got an approved CoL ready (one that has undeniably passed). Who knows what we might lose if interest in the game decays if we take the time to rewrite our government.

I withhold my vote for now, pending any future facts brought up in this case.

As I've said however, that CoL wouldn't have been approved if it wasn't for those 'fake' results in the election. You don't poll options that have lost earlier polls, now do you? We've never tried to approve the Flexible, even if it won the polls. As ravensfire and others have said too, there are some versions of the Flexible governments that, while rough, are a good point to work off and would be pretty simple to turn into a working ruleset. I'm more about fun and ease of play than a ruleset that covers everything and limits everything.

 

[DaveShack]

feb 1st is the game start. terms always start on the 1st of the month

Not quite always, we started mid-month before and just had the term end at the end of the month.

There is nothing saying we can't have a term of say from Jan 25 thru Feb 28. All it has to be is a term of fixed length which is specified in advance. I personally saw to that when the Constitution was written.

 

[DaveShack]

There are two fairly well done proposals here for the Flexible ruleset. Neither would take significant development to finalize.

Hard to argue with that given I'm the "editor" of one of the proposals.

If we did stick with the current ruleset, make the runner up in the Prez election the new Prez and we can start pretty darn soon.

I think we'd be stuck with either a new election or proceeding according to the existing rules, but that's not an official judicial opinion just yet.

If we reset and go back to Flex, we'll need to redo the elections, and start in 2 weeks.

Let's think in terms of 3 days for discussion and fine tuning, 4 days to ratify, 3 days for nominations, 3 days for elections. Yup, that means generating the game on Saturday 2 weeks from tomorrow, if we want maximum participation at the chat.

I'm still keeping an open mind for a bit longer, in part to see if there are any vehement opinions either way.

 

[Blkbird]

You don't poll options that have lost earlier polls, now do you?

Of course we do! Our constitution says specificly: "C. 3. - If two or more polls or discussions occur on a matter, the last one to complete shall prevail."

 

[Ginger_Ale]

So are you saying I can go put up another poll about government style and if Flexible wins, we change?

What if in the middle of the game I put up a poll saying "Should we switch to Flexible?", and Flexible wins? Do we just trash the Triumvirate??

What I was saying was, we wouldn't and we didn't poll a Flexible ratification because it 'lost'. Now that it appears Triumvirate 'lost', why would we have polled it? Therefore, it should've been as if that poll hadn't happened, since if the course of events went the right way, that poll would've never been made.

 

[Blkbird]

So are you saying I can go put up another poll about government style and if Flexible wins, we change?

This poll here *is* nothing else than what you're suggesting, don't you see?

What if in the middle of the game I put up a poll saying "Should we switch to Flexible?", and Flexible wins? Do we just trash the Triumvirate??

If you do it without proper reason, it would be an act of political vandalism and subject to judiciary charges. If you do have a sound reason to do it, I don't see where the problem is.

What I was saying was, we wouldn't and we didn't poll a Flexible ratification because it 'lost'. Now that it appears Triumvirate 'lost', why would we have polled it? Therefore, it should've been as if that poll hadn't happened, since if the course of events went the right way, that poll would've never been made.

"Would", "should", etc. There is no fictiveness in politics, because history is irreversible. Things have happened, and you can just act as if they had not.

Strictly constitutional speaking, the ratification of Triumvirate as Code of Law remains valid despite all the circumstances because there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits ratification of a set of rules as Code of Laws even if it has not gained majority in an earlier "choose between drafts" poll. The fact that more citizens have voted "yes" than "no" for Tri as CoL speaks for itself and cannot be denied. Plus that poll was *after* the "Tri vs. Flex" poll and therefore has precedence anyway.

 

[5star_US]

Wow. Very interesting stuff, here. It's almost like actual government scandal!

 

[I am the Future]

I don't see why. If we stay with Tri, we can start right now (with Secretary of the State assuming presidential power). There is no need to wait until 1 Feb. or anything.

The question therefore is, is Flex so much better than Tri that the difference is worth three, four weeks of time?

Of course it is worth the time.

Besides we have to wait for the next elections to make sure that every thing is fair.

 

[RoboPig]

Of course it is worth the time.

Besides we have to wait for the next elections to make sure that every thing is fair.

future is right. we might as well wait. there is no rush. people can play a bit more civ4, while we straighten things out. plus, why are you so eager to start. would you rather start quick but shaky or late and steady?

 

[Blkbird]

would you rather start quick but shaky or late and steady?

That is a suggestive question. In my opinion, switching to Flex is likely to be more shaky than proceeding with Tri. So the answer is, I like quick and steady rather than late and shaky.

For clearification, I originally voted for Flex, too - as you can see for yourself. It's not Flex itself I am reluctant to, it's the cost of redoing things without any significant benefit in sight.

 

[Blkbird]

@Rik: When is this poll scheduled to end?

 

[RoboPig]

We are still unsure if Alphawolf is linked to this election fraud or that someone close to him (same university) played a mean trick on him.

So: Do not convict Alphawolf as long as he is presumed innocent. I remind the citizens of the Constitution; Article B - 1g "The Right to Presumption of Innocense unless proven guilty".

didnt he say he had a friend on the dg? perhaps it was him? i doubt anyone else knows that he plays a demogame. however how long until we can pinpoint him guilty. sooner or later he would see his e-mail and reply right?

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Strictly constitutional speaking, the ratification of Triumvirate as Code of Law remains valid despite all the circumstances because there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits ratification of a set of rules as Code of Laws even if it has not gained majority in an earlier "choose between drafts" poll. The fact that more citizens have voted "yes" than "no" for Tri as CoL speaks for itself and cannot be denied. Plus that poll was *after* the "Tri vs. Flex" poll and therefore has precedence anyway.

Blkbird's point is a valid one, constitutionally speaking. I vote that we stay with what we have, as the Triumvirate ruleset has gone through an official process and we have spent time electing citizens under it. Add to that that the Flexible ruleset isn't even written yet --- even the Flex sponsor (Ginger_Ale) agrees with that.

I am absolutely beside myself with amazement that no one questioned the results of either ruleset poll. Just think of the mess we could saved ourselves now if someone --- anyone! --- would have taken note of the abundant list of no names supporting the Triumvirate proposal. This could have all been behind us weeks ago.

Oh well. No sense living in the past, I guess. Let's stay with what we have.

 

[Blkbird]

I am absolutely beside myself with amazement that no one questioned the results of either ruleset poll. Just think of the mess we could saved ourselves now if someone --- anyone! --- would have taken note of the abundant list of no names supporting the Triumvirate proposal. This could have all been behind us weeks ago.

I don't see how. Passive members are typical for every online community. And by their very nature of passiveness they may tend to have a different opinion than the active ones.

In fact, some of the DL - e. g. Slim_Chance - weren't even passive. This is like the Matrix: If the scam is big enough, it appears real. And the scam is without a doubt big enough. 12 DL, that's a quarter of those who voted in the elections.

 

[Sigma]

I'm rather new to the demogame, in fact I joined up after the Triumvirate government had already been "agreed" upon. I think it is a good Code of Laws, and in the interest of moving forward, it would be easiest if we just stuck with it. However, if someone could kindly point me in the direction of the most complete version of the Flexible government, it would allow me to make my choice without bias. Thanks in advance.