CoL L.1 Amendment Discussion

[Donovan Zoi]

People of Fanatikos,

In a recent unanimous ruling by our Judiciary, it has been discovered that we as a nation have no way to resolve potential problems with game session instructions in the forum. Of course ,we are still allowed to take every step to ensure that instructions are posted with timeliness and clarity, but in the event that unclear, or even worse, no instructions are posted, our current laws dictate that such a decision must be handled by the DP within the game session itself.

Our current law as written raises two major issues:

Non-Forum Decision Making: Long considered an unfavorable way to conduct affairs of any DemoGame nation, our current law takes participation in decision making from where it belongs --- the Forums.

Accountability: Right now, our law grants some potentially hefty decision making power to a part-time unelected official, the DP, while the President currently has no power to ensure that all instructions are available for this volunteer assistant.


My amendment puts accountability where it belongs --- with the highest-ranking official in Fanatikos. But only once the President has taken the proper steps to contact a negligent official in-forum.

My amendment also allows the people of Fanatikos to see and understand all instructions in-forum before the game session begins.

For those who feel that this amendment will give too much power to the President, please make your case here. My intention here is not to irrationally inflate the powers of my current office; only to bring stability back to our government.

Please review the following changes and join the discussion. I would like to put this amendment to poll in 48-72 hours if we have exhausted all discussion.


Respectfully,

Donovan Zoi
President of Fanatikos

Section L.1 Game Sessions
All irreversible game actions must progress during a game session, while reversible game actions (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can be prepared offline. During each session, the designated player must provide a log of their actions in sufficient detail to replicate their actions.

A Game Session Instruction Thread must be created at least 2 days before the chat by the Designated Player for that session. Should a thread not be created in a timely manner, the President may create one. Game Sessions must be at least 3 days apart, no more than 7 days apart. The initial post should contain the date and time of the game session, a link to the save to be used for that session, and if the game session will be on-line or off-line. If the game session is off-line, a citizen may post a confirmation poll for that session. If the confirmation poll fails, the DP must reschedule the game session as an on-line session.

All official instructions must be posted in the current game session instruction thread. Instructions must be clear and defined. Officials must post their instructions at least one hour before the scheduled start of the game session. However, officials may make changes to their instructions up to an hour before the chat, so long as those changes are clearly noted. Officials that do not post instructions for a game session are considered to have given the DP complete control over their area for that game session.

The game session may last for as long as there are relevant instructions, until a posted instruction says to hold the session or when the DP decides to end the session. Once a game session is over, the DP must post a summary of that session, a detailed log of their actions, and a save in the instruction thread and in the summary thread.

If the DP for a session does not show up, or is unable to continue, a substitute DP can be chosen for that session. This substitute is chosen from the President, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defense and the Minister of Trade and Technology, in that order.

Section L.1 Game Sessions - Amended
All irreversible game actions must progress during a game session, while reversible game actions (i.e. build queues) that adhere to legal instructions can be prepared offline. During each session, the designated player must provide a log of their actions in sufficient detail to replicate their actions.

A Game Session Instruction Thread must be created at least 2 days before the chat by the Designated Player for that session. Should a thread not be created in a timely manner, the President may create one. Game Sessions must be at least 3 days apart, no more than 7 days apart. The initial post should contain the date and time of the game session, a link to the save to be used for that session, and if the game session will be on-line or off-line. If the game session is off-line, a citizen may post a confirmation poll for that session. If the confirmation poll fails, the DP must reschedule the game session as an on-line session.

All official instructions must be posted in the current game session instruction thread. Instructions must be clear and defined. Officials must post their instructions at least one hour before the scheduled start of the game session. However, officials may make changes to their instructions up to an hour before the chat, so long as those changes are clearly noted. The President may resolve any outdated, unclear or incomplete instructions, provided an attempt has been made to alert the official of the issue via the official's government thread. Officials that do not post instructions for a game session are considered to have given the President complete control over their area for that game session. Any decision left unresolved after Presidential instruction can be made at the DP's discretion.

The game session may last for as long as there are relevant instructions, until a posted instruction says to hold the session or when the DP decides to end the session. Once a game session is over, the DP must post a summary of that session, a detailed log of their actions, and a save in the instruction thread and in the summary thread.

If the DP for a session does not show up, or is unable to continue, a substitute DP can be chosen for that session. This substitute is chosen from the President, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defense and the Minister of Trade and Technology, in that order.

 

[DaveShack]

I have mixed feelings on this amendment. It is true that the forum should be where major decisions are made, and it is also true that a strong chief executive is beneficial to the game, but there are also concerns about too much power in the hands of too few people.

This term we have had governors repeatedly abdicating their responsibilities by turning over (illegally) micromanagement and worker duties to the President. We have also had a minister who was technically absent but no effort was made to correct that situation. And no offense intended toward the current President, but even without this amendment the governors have been doing whatever the President wants. At one point we had plans for Olympus building workers just to send to other cities to join, and Priapos has had its build queue pushed around for most of the term.

We have a system which uses deputies as the first backup in case of leaders who cannot fulfil their responsibilities. Let's strive to use that system to its fullest before we concentrate power in the President's hands.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Dave,

I would like to start by saying that I sponsored this amendment during the election cycle as a show of good faith, so that those wary of my intentions could voice their feelings at the voting booth if they thought I went too far.

I do not feel that this amendent takes any power away from a deputy that posts instructions. If game session instructions are available, clear and complete, there would be no Presidential intervention. In fact, the addition of this clause is also meant to force leaders take more control of their domain, particularly if faced with handing over instructions to a President they may not agree with.

However, it also allows for the loose governace of one's domain, implying that the President can take care of the rest. I find it to be a travesty that we have no recource if a governor pretty much instructs his city into riot, or an FA Minister forgets an important direction that leads to an unnecessary war. There needs to be some way to monitor such a thing, and it shoudn't fall into the hands of a part-time unaccountable volunteer outside of the forum.

If not the President, then who? What is your alternative to rectifying this issue?

 

[Gerikes]

I think that many people might try doing the DP session are pretty confident that they will get instructions on what to do, and their job is only to follow those instructions. Their decision making process should be limited, as in a perfect scenario all clauses are covered (possibly with the exception of troop movements in enemy territory, as there are so many situations to be covered in the unwritten goal of 10-turns). Also, I think there may be a belief that any person who as a DP does not finish 10 turns should be frowned upon. In defense, any Officer whose instructions (or lack thereof) causes ambiguity and thus an ended turnchat should be the one who bears the responsibility.

If an action comes so out of left field that there is no way to distinguish what to do, then the problem would lie in the hands of the official in charge of that. If they (or in the case of their absense from the turnchat, their Deputy) are present, then the problem can be resolved. However, in most cases they are not at the turnchat, and reasonably so. In the example of a foreign nation declaring war outright, the chat should probably be ended, even if it happens just after hitting next for turn 0. However, since these instructions, like many that are considered "common knowlege", are not in the Code of Laws, they must be posted in every Defense Minister instruction set (note that I'm not banging on our Defense Minister for this problem, but that I'm just using it as an example).

To me, any ambiguity in any instruction is the fault of the officer that posted the instruction, and we should hold these officers higher in their accountability for their instructions. There should be a large reform into making sure that the instructions cover as many reasonable situations as possible, and that less-reasonable actions are taken care of in catch-alls that either ends the chat or sends the decision to the people in the turn chat.

Also, there will be the moments where an instruction set is incomplete and does not cover a certain event, no matter how complete an instruction set is. While these should be limited, I Personally think that the issue should be a vote by the turnchat. However, as turnchat turnout is very low, this may not be wise.

Finally, my conclusion which I hope others will build upon or throw out outright:

Any action that must be made that has no clear instructions from the Officer that covers that action should be then decided by the Officer in the turnchat. In the event that the respective Officer is not present, then the Deputy of said Officer will give the instructions. In the probable case where neither the Officer or the respective Deputy are not present, then the DP should give the decision to the participants of the turnchat by a vote. If no resolution is giving in the turnchat, then end the turnchat.

 

[DaveShack]

Here is the passage from the proposed amendment that I am concerned with.

The President may resolve any outdated, unclear or incomplete instructions, provided an attempt has been made to alert the official of the issue via the official's government thread.

With this proposal, the criteria for the President to step in and take over an office is set very low. All that is required is an attempt has been made to alert the official. I would like to see something about a minimum timeframe, and something mandating the deputy has to also be contacted and given a chance to handle the office's business before intervention.

An alternative system would be to have a system of mutual backups, for example:

Olympus <-> Expatriate
Civatonia <-> Augean Stables
Styx <-> Priapos

T&T is backup for FA
FA is backup for Defense
Defense is backup for T&T

Another item which is missing from this proposal, but actually stands closer to the center of the problem than the propopsal itself, is the concept of someone to coordinate the National Plan. This is the task which is better suited to the President, and I would prefer to see the President have overall responsibility for the long-term direction our nation takes, with the Assembly acting as the check on that direction.

 

[Cyc]

I actually like the intent of this amendment as stated in post 1 of this thread. The actual wording of the Constitution is such that interpretation rests with those in power. I'm sure once a President stepped on someone's toes a little too hard, there would be an immediate negative response from the citizens. Overall, this is a good effort to cure an age old problem.

 

[mhcarver]

wow cyc, haven't seen you here in a while, is this a long term thing or just a drive by posting?

 

[ravensfire]

I saw this last night, but didn't have the time to really look through and think about this.

Essentially, this is replacing the role of the DP with the President. For a highly active President that can attend each game session, this might correct the problem. I don't feel it really fixes the problem the way I think it should.

The problem is two-fold. First, we have elected officials that don't do their job adequately. They post infrequently, with minimal discussions and give vague, useless instructions. We, the citizens of Fanatikos, need to hold those officials accountable. We need to review what they post as instructions, we need to demand discussions on the issues that face us, we need to push our officials to get their best.

Our Designated Players also need to review their instruction thread periodically, and post questions and comments to the elected officials. To be blunt, DP's are playing 1 or 2 game sessions a month, that will take a few hours to complete. Checking that thread a day or two before their session is 15 minutes of work that can make life much easier.

Our President also needs to become more active in this. The role of the President HAS changed in DG7. The primary job of the President is now to make sure that things are happening - they are the leader of Fanatikos. Part of that should mean double-checking instructions, asking questions if there are vague aspects and prodding deputies to fill in if needed. For example, how Donovan Zoi handled the peace with Persia matter is perfect.

I certainly appreciate the position that DZ is in, and he's right, there is a problem here. The best solution, by far, is to be pro-active. Post requests for instructions early and often, and review what's there. Part of the requirement for the minimum time for instructions is to allow for peer review. Maybe that needs to be changed as well.

Conceptually, I don't have a problem with giving any elected official the ability to correct missing or vague instructions. I think that to really fix things, we needs a few more elements.

Change the requirements for leaders to post instructions to 6 hours. Allow them to make minor corrections up until the start of the chat.

I'm tired of leaders not posting until just before the session. There is NO excuse for that in general. Post a link to a poll - I'm happy with that. I'd love to those results then copied (as a minor correction), but the bulk can be done up front.

Allow the President to post missing instructions so long as a reminder was given to the official at least 1 day in advance.

No offense, DZ, but the "attempt has been made to alert the official" clause is way to easy to abuse. The idea should be to push the officials to doing their job.

Allow the President to correct vague or incomplete instructions so long as a timely reminder was given to the official.
For vague/missing, I think a standard of "timely" is workable. It's a bit general, but that's about the only way. For example, if the instructions are up for 3 days, and the President posts 1 hours before the sessions with questions, that's not timely. If the instructions are posted 6 hours before the session, and the question is posted 4 hours later, that's timely.

These corrections must be based on discussions/plans if they are available.

Rather than give the President carte blanche, they need to try to conform to the strategies and goals as supported by discussions or polls, if any. This is to prevent the President, who might radically oppose the strategies and goals, from making drastic changes. It will also push leaders to having discussions on their objectives. If they just post them without discussions, they aren't covered by this clause.

EDIT:
All corrections must be in the instruction thread

I honestly don't care if the President makes the call in the game session or not. The change need to be documented, however, and the best place IS the instruction thread, with everything else. There is no reason why someone should have to go wandering through a chat log to find the changes. Either the President or the DP needs to copy the changes they make into a post in the instruction thread.

Sometime after the turnchat, I'll try to write a version of DZ's proposal with my suggestions in it. I just can't get to it right now.

-- Ravensfire, candidate for President