Civ4 - Game of Democracy - Announcement

[ravensfire]

Sigma,

Here's a link to the discussion on the Flex ruleset. You'll find two fairly detailed proposals, both of which would require minimal tweaking. One was heavily influenced by the concepts in the Triumverate, the other was heavily influenced by the concepts in the Civ 3 DG.

-- Ravensfire

 

[I am the Future]

A wolf is not g "proven" guilty, correct?

But the other are? How can this be?

Isn't it perfectly possible that they were the real owners of the eMail and A Wolf is the trepasser. And if this is so shouldn't these other people get just as much time to respond as he does? It does all seem to be quite unfair to those other logins taht A Wolf would get to have a break. It does seem like a rather lucky conisidence that he would stop loging on around the time of the vote boom and the search for it's reason.

Moderator Action: This isn't about alphawolf, it's about the government type. We are dealing with Alphawolf as far as the forum rules are concerned. If you want to deal with it in terms of the demogame rules, then do so in the correct thread, not this one.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

I would also like to say that their is no wasy that we should try and rush this. WE should start over with every thing we need. That way we do not make mistakes. Virtually all decisions that were made through polls needs to be re polled.
That way we know that everything is done per real account.

 

[Blkbird]

I would also like to say that their is no wasy that we should try and rush this. WE should start over with every thing we need. That way we do not make mistakes.

LOL. Trust me, we *will* make mistakes, though unlikely the same ones.

Virtually all decisions that were made through polls needs to be re polled. That way we know that everything is done per real account.

Proper procedure for the sake of proper procedure itself, that's not very rational, in fact that's rather beaurocracy.

 

[I am the Future]

LOL. Trust me, we *will* make mistakes, though unlikely the same ones.



Proper procedure for the sake of proper procedure itself, that's not very rational, in fact that's rather beaurocracy.

I rather like beurocracy. And UI do belive that any poll where the difference between winner and second is less then 12 their should be a rePoll. At less we can sift through all of the polls and see who voted what and remove all of their votes and see what they end up being.

Technically according to current BoR I can set up the polls now and their results must be used. I will not do this without more support.

 

[Blkbird]

The way I see it, you can be:

- Either practical, in which case proceeding with Tri is the most efficient thing to do;
- Or staying with the principles, in which case you must acknowledge the consitutionality of Tri as the valid and effective Code of Law.

I'm holding my vote to see some rational and logical arguments for the switch. So far I haven't got any.

 

[I am the Future]

The way I see it, you can be:

- Either practical, in which case proceeding with Tri is the most efficient thing to do;
- Or staying with the principles, in which case you must acknowledge the consitutionality of Tri as the valid and effective Code of Law.

And sticking with the second one, this is a perfectly legal Poll in which we will be able to legaly switch goverments. Think of tri as the Articles of Federation, and Flexible as the constitution. Both newer and better

 

[Blkbird]

And sticking with the second one, this is a perfectly legal Poll in which we will be able to legaly switch goverments.

Agreed. "We should leave Tri as it isn't good enough" is OK, as opposed to "we should leave Tri as it is unconstitutional" (which would be false).

But now you have to prove how *much* better Flex is. In the original poll Flex and Tri has equal chances. Now Tri has the advantage of already being worked out, ratificated through and and voted under. This is a mistrust vote against Tri, much like an impeachment. It isn't enough any more for Flex to be just better, it has to be *much* better - "worth all that trouble", if you will. You can't simply impeach an office holder just because there is a slightly better candidate, either, can you?

And nobody has even *tried* to show just how much better Flex is.

 

[I am the Future]

Agreed. "We should leave Tri as it isn't good enough" is OK, as opposed to "we should leave Tri as it is unconstitutional" (which would be false).

But now you have to prove how *much* better Flex is. In the original poll Flex and Tri has equal chances. Now Tri has the advantage of already being worked out and voted under. It isn't enough for Flex any more to be just better, it has to be *much* better - "worth the whole trouble", if you will.

And nobody has even tried to prove that yet.

I can quite honestly not prove that their will be much of a difference with Flex then their is with Tri. BUt I can say that Flexible is just that , FLEXIBLE, it will get better then Tri, and quickly. We can skip useless voteing that we have now and go on with the demogame. IMHO this would be worth waiting till March even.

Changeing to flexible will allow the game to recoil from this much easier. And the fact taht this even happened shows the weeknes that teh Tri. has. It is more proof that it is an inferrior goverment.

We all know my oppinion, we all know your oppinion. What matters isn't what we think. Since our votes cancel out any ways. What matters is that other people think the same way.

 

[Blkbird]

I can quite honestly not prove that their will be much of a difference with Flex then their is with Tri. BUt I can say that Flexible is just that , FLEXIBLE, it will get better then Tri, and quickly.

I appreciate your straight-forwardness.

And the fact taht this even happened shows the weeknes that teh Tri. has. It is more proof that it is an inferrior goverment.

You must be kidding! Are you suggesting that poll/election fraud whould have been impossible if Flex had been adopted? Hello?!

 

[ravensfire]

And nobody has even *tried* to show just how much better Flex is.

Why do I feel the Flex system is better?

1. Simpler
2. Based on an established ruleset
3. Language is easier to read
4. More accountable
5. Simpler

My biggest issue with the Tri system is the sheer complexity of the entire system. Multiple layers, all of which can overrule other layers, sometimes. Requirements that almost certainly won't be met. I think the provinces section is needlessly complicated, and will cause problems.

If you'd like a longer list of my concerns with the Tri system, review the various Tri threads.

Flex is a simpler system that allows for expansion as needed. It's faster than the Tri system, and puts more power at the local level. It's by far easier to read than the Triumverate system is.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Blkbird]

2. Based on an established ruleset

So is Tri, isn't it?

4. More accountable

How?

Flex is a simpler system that allows for expansion as needed. It's faster than the Tri system, and puts more power at the local level. It's by far easier to read than the Triumverate system is.

And that's enough to compensate the cost of switching because...?

 

[I am the Future]

You must be kidding! Are you suggesting that poll/election fraud whould have been impossible if Flex had been adopted? Hello?!

I am not saying that it would have been avoided I am saying taht it would have been les of a problem.

 

[Blkbird]

I am not saying that it would have been avoided I am saying taht it would have been les of a problem.

How could it be less of a problem?! Doesn't the Prez in Flex have even greater authority than in Tri? And when he is excluded from the game, how much "less" of a problem is it then?

And that is a question I like to ask ravensfire, too: Do you agree with me that the Prez has more power in Flex? If yes, why is that a good thing; if no, why not?

 

[Octavian X]

Well, nothing says we have to decide right now. Why don't we start with the Triumviriate and it's already organized government (using normal procedures to fill-in for the absent President), while continuing the discussion of the Flexible ruleset? Work on a new Flexible government can continue concurrently with the game under the Triumvirate. The Flexible plan, when finished, can be submitted as a proposed CoL amendment. If people like it, we make the switch.

Quite frankly, I believed the Flexible to be the best choice, and I still do, but that doesn't say that the Triumviriate doesn't have some good ideas (the duties assigned to the Censor's office, for example, are ones that should have been included a long time ago) - my hope would be that playing with one and working with the other synthesize a better system altogether.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

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.

Perhaps you are correct. It would have taken someone with extrasensory awareness to have predicted something like this over two weeks ago, let alone take the time to investigate and correctly identify who all of the culprits were. In fact, I believe that if a moderator were presented with such evidence at that time, it would have probably been dismissed as some sort of meaningless ruse.

 

[ravensfire]

So is Tri, isn't it?

No, it isn't.

How?

Two areas. First, the layout is much simpler. There are too many overlaps in the Tri system, giving leaders built-in excuses. Second, the flex system applies a recall process to all elected officials. The Tri excludes the Judiciary and Governors, meaning terrible leaders can not be removed from office so long as they post every 7 days.

And that's enough to compensate the cost of switching because...?

Staying with an inferior system is better because ...?

Do you agree with me that the Prez has more power in Flex?

Yes in some area, no in others.

If yes, why is that a good thing; if no, why not?[/quote]
The flex system is based on the ability to create and remove positions, and transfer responsbilities around in a simpler manner than an amendment. This makes it easier to keep the leadership roles clearly defined and useful. By definition, that means that initially the President will have a great many powers that they cannot use (espionage - no spies!). After all, even though the power isn't used, someone must have it.

Ultimately, the Flex President has two powers - slider control and dispute resolution. The other powers from the catch-all phrase (all tasks not assigned to someone else) are there to be given to others as needed and where they make the most sense at the moment.

The Tri system suffers from rigid barriers and limitations guised in the veil of control. In reality, many of those will be ignored, introducing the danger of a citizen seeking to "enforce the rules" and bring things to a halt.

The Triumverate focuses on the process. The Flex focuses on the task.

-- Ravensfire

 

[ravensfire]

I am not saying that it would have been avoided I am saying taht it would have been les of a problem.

No, the problem would have been the same. At this point in time, in each system, only a handful of leaders are relevant. Key leaders are the President, the Military leader, Settler leader and the Judiciary. Note that at least 3 of those election (Military and 2 of the 3 Judiciary elections) appear to have been tampered with.

As others have commented, fraud on this scale is nearly unheard of, and dismissed because "nobody would do that!". There are several real-life example, Enron being a partial example. People ARE inherently trustful of others - it's part of our nature.

Indeed, one could use public libraries and open wireless networks to gain access to multiple, radically different IP addresses and perpetuate a fraud that is nearly impossible to detect.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Pie-es-Tasty]

My biggest issue with the Tri system is the sheer complexity of the entire system. Multiple layers, all of which can overrule other layers, sometimes. Requirements that almost certainly won't be met. I think the provinces section is needlessly complicated, and will cause problems.
-- Ravensfire

I actually think the Triumvirate reads well (although a few places might use some more clarity), or mabye I'm just good at reading legalese. However, it seems that most of your other issues could be solved in the form of amendments. With enough passing amendments, the Triumvirate could morph into a mix, but stronger than either would be individually. Is it worth the trouble to scrap a whole Code of Laws, when the same could be acomplished by admentments? Of course I could have missed something that can't just be amended in, so if there's anything, point it out to me.

 

[Blkbird]

[...]

The Triumverate focuses on the process. The Flex focuses on the task.

Thanks. And congratulations, as this is the first insightful comparision analysis in this thread.

 

[DaveShack]

In response to Blkbird's implied question on why the flex is based on an "established ruleset" and tri is not...

The assertion is that the flex system is based on the Civ3 DG system, which has been basically unchanged for 6 of the 7 DG's. This makes it "established" in comparison to tri, which has not been used in a previous DG.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to call it an "experienced" ruleset.