Constitution Discussion. Article C-E

[LeeT911]

Thank you, mad-bax. I think you have some really good ideas in there. I'm a big fan of making Infrastructure the DP, and the President actually has a real job now! However, I must say that hierarchy always brings with it the possibility of conflict. Are we going to end up with everyone running for the power seat (President)?

Good point about the VP too. In the current DG, haven't seen the VP do much of anything at all.

Question: Who does trading? I think you probably meant to include it with Foreign although it doesn't say that.

Comments:
1) I think Foreign and Intelligence should be lumped together. Foreign can handle emabassies, investigations, and espionage. However, I also think that the Foreign (macro) Office should not handle defense. That should be left to the military (which is the deputy anyway if I'm reading correctly). Military should also handle exploratory units. That way they have control over all military assets. CivGeneral has raised the point elsewhere that Military should also handle Settler escorts. I think that's a reasonable request.

2) You gave specialist allocation to Interior. Might that be better suited to Governors? They handle their own cities anyway.

3) Might as well put all the settler related issues in one office. I don't like how the macro office decides settlement density, rate, direction and then someone else sets the actual sites. I think one person can handle all that, but that might just be me. I mean, look at the current game, Domestic had one poll about settlement density and then we never heard about it again. Let the people managing the settlers handle that one decision also.

 

[Bertie]

Mad-bax, I’m impressed. Thanks for taking the time to fully state the problems with the game as you see them, and thanks for describing more fully the thinking behind your recommendations for how to reorganize our “governmental” structure. I’m particularly glad to see your reasons for the Intelligence Office. I was kind of scratching my head over that one, but I like your thinking (though I still may suggest we not include that office).

I largely agree with your analysis and solutions. I’ll have more comments later, much later I’m afraid: I’m swamped in RL at the moment and shouldn’t even be posting now. I won’t have time to do more than glance at the forum until after Wednesday at the earliest.

One quick suggestion for an addition to the Constitution: I suggest we scrap the Preamble. It carries very little meaning and too much treacle. Instead, I suggest we adapt some of the wording from the FAQ that Rik Meleet used in prior demogames. One of the advantages of putting this stuff at the beginning of the Constitution is it’s easier to draw the connections between what the game is all about and how we’ve decided to organize ourselves to play it.

One last matter. Although I hate to feed your enormous ego please reconsider your resignation from the External Consul’s office; or at least resolve to run for office next term. It’s clear you aren’t yet finished putting in the crops, and you can be more effective in office rather than out. Or at least I think so; I say that even though I much prefer the role of active citizen to that of officeholder. But even I have been wondering whether I should reconsider my stance.

Part of your mission here has been that “some assembly is required” and that we’re all here to do the assembly. I embrace that. Still, someone needs to be able to read the instructions so we know what we’re doing. You don’t know it – and Strider may not have realized the consequences of his statement at the time – but Strider in DG5 actually summoned you to join the game when he said “maybe it will take a hero to save us. Maybe it will take someone with the dedication to say what needs to be said, to all of us. Maybe there watching us right now, waiting for us to get our chance to fly away. Just one person, or thing. Wouldn't that be something?”.

 

[mad-bax]

Are we going to end up with everyone running for the power seat (President)?

Hopefully, we will have more than one candidate for President, and for all the other positions. I hope that each position will have enough content to make it interesting and challenging. Yes, as I have described it, the Presidents position is the most powerful, but this is as it should be isn't it? The real power still resides with the offices however. The President can only decide which of two or more conflicting policies to adopt, and that must be by public poll. The other stuff like switching Government etc. is also definitely poll material. Having a method to resolve conflict in policy, and having a single coherent strategy are the big points here.

Question: Who does trading? I think you probably meant to include it with Foreign although it doesn't say that.

I've left out quite a few things. This is a major one. Really, I want to leave room for balancing the workloads and for other peoples input. I really don't want this to become my personal crusade. I just want to move the process on a bit. I hope that someone else will take up the baton and drive it on. Trading would fall naturally to the Foreign Office, that is clear. But it could go elswhere if it evened the workload out a bit.

Comments:
1) I think Foreign and Intelligence should be lumped together. Foreign can handle emabassies, investigations, and espionage. However, I also think that the Foreign (macro) Office should not handle defense. That should be left to the military (which is the deputy anyway if I'm reading correctly). Military should also handle exploratory units. That way they have control over all military assets. CivGeneral has raised the point elsewhere that Military should also handle Settler escorts. I think that's a reasonable request.

All military activity comes under the jurisdiction of the Foreign office in this proposal, whether it be offensive or defensive. All movement of units would fall to the Commander in Chief - who in turn reports to the Foreign Office. The exception would be the Intelligence agency who would be responsible for all information and intelligence gathering - and this might include exploration too. By pairing up the jobs and making the micromanagement function responsible for the TCIT instructions then it should force the two officers to talk to each other and at least provide a single unambiguous instruction.
The Intelligence agency could in fact become a second micromanagement arm of the foreign office. I would have no problem with this personally. It is a little light on responsibility. I was aiming at having around 12 to 14 positions including the Judiciary, making up about one third of the total number of people who apply for office. It would be good to have hotly contested offices IMO.

2) You gave specialist allocation to Interior. Might that be better suited to Governors? They handle their own cities anyway.

Quite right. Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly enough. I wasn't really talking about specific specialist allocation. I was more talking about in general saying that we should make taxmen rather that scientists because we need the income, or we need scientists rather thatn taxmen because we are researching hard, or saying that we will go to single scientist research for a while. The governors would still decide where to make specialists and may make some policemen and engineers and so forth for specific cities for specific reasons.

3) Might as well put all the settler related issues in one office. I don't like how the macro office decides settlement density, rate, direction and then someone else sets the actual sites. I think one person can handle all that, but that might just be me. I mean, look at the current game, Domestic had one poll about settlement density and then we never heard about it again. Let the people managing the settlers handle that one decision also.

Again, this is all part of the Home Offices remit. The Home Office decides density, direction and rate whilst the Director of the Interior (who reports to the Home office) maintains the specific dot map. This means we do not need to stop a chat for each settler since we can specify a dot map for an entire session, and just vote on a new map whenever it is updated. It's more efficient and clearly sets the boundary between the two roles.

As I say, all of this is just my 2 cents. I hope that it is considerably improved before any attempt is made into translating it into the legalese that seems to be de-riguer here. I would like that everyone has an input and feels involved in it's creation. The sooner I become uninvolved the better.

 

[mad-bax]

Bertie:
Thanks for your comments. Of course, I don't have a monopoly on righteousness yet, and I hope and expect much will change in the future. The Intelligence Agency is conceptually weak, but I don't have anything better to offer ATM.

I agree that the constitutions Preamable is at best waffle, and at worst damaging since it propogates confusion and ambiguity. As part of my RL job I check Engineering Drawings, and I cannot abide ambiguity. Makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up. However, I don't want to try to eat the elephant here, and just want to focus on the division of labour as it were. Once this is sorted, we can turn our attention to the rest of it. It would be nice to have the constitution written in plain English as a start. From there it can be dissassembled and re-assembled so that it's intention is captured and ambiguity is removed. The poor-mans legalese that is used presently could be the source of many of our problems. Why can't the FAQ form part of the constitution? The constitution provides a framework in which the game can be played, that's all. That framework should be accessible, easily understood and unambiguous. It should mean the same thing to everyone. If the legalese prevents that, and the FAQ facilitates it then which is best?

I'm quite enjoying watching you take over the External Consulates job. You are very generous in your comments, but we both know that you will do it at least as well as me and though I hate to admit it, better in fact. It is you that needs to reconsider taking the job, not me! I would like to think that I could repair my standing in society enough to apply for a post later in the game. It is only that OctavianX is such a nice bloke and let's people work within the intention of the present arrangement that we can run the game at all. If a different commercial guy was elected who decided to take all the powers afforded to him by JR9 then things would be difficult. Until this is fixed I'd rather stand back.

 

[LeeT911]

I think we agree on most points, mad-bax, we're just getting lost in the language. We could have 3 branches to the Foreign Office: Trade, Military, and Intelligence. But then what would the guy at the top do? (Other than be the ringleader of the circus that is. )

The sooner I become uninvolved the better.

I wouldn't say that. I think it's the fact that you want to not be involved that makes you the best candidate. There's a theory out there that the best rulers are always those that don't really want the job, the ones that would rather do something else, because to them it's not about power or perceptions, it's just about getting the job done properly.

 

[mad-bax]

Well, We have two positions reporting to the President, and we have 1 position reporting to the Home Secretary and by your suggestion 3 positions reporting to the Foreign Seecretary. If we placed trade with the Home office we would have 3 postions for each office along with 3 positions for the Judiciary. This is aesthetically pleasing to my (small) mind. The President, Home Secretary, and Foreign Secratary would be mapping out long term plans. "Long term" needs to be nailed down, and I would suggest letting it mean anything that is further away, or lasts longer than a scheduled 10 turn chat. Just a suggestion.

 

[GenMarshall]

Eventhough the articles are still in polling, I still wish to express my disagreement with one particular one. I dont personaly beleve that the Domestic should be incharge of escourts. To me, its striping away more responsibilities away from the military leader.

 

[mad-bax]

Well CG, under this proposal I believe the question probably doesn't arise. There would be a maintained dotmap and the settlers would go to the dots. If the settlers have escorts then they would cover the settlers by definition. The Commander in Chief would merely decide it the settlers were escorted or not, since hostile risk assessment is in his remit - that is, he decides how to defend the nation. When settlers move by galley then it is the galley that moves and not the settler. The movement of the galley would therefore be the Commander in Chiefs responsibility. If the galley were empty and exploring, then it would be the Intelligence agency that controls its movement because exploration is an intelligence or information gathering exercise. The Commander would have more to do under this arrangement. Not less I think.

What do you think of the rest of it?

 

[DaveShack]

I've left out quite a few things. This is a major one. Really, I want to leave room for balancing the workloads and for other peoples input. I really don't want this to become my personal crusade. I just want to move the process on a bit. I hope that someone else will take up the baton and drive it on.

You're in the same place I was in mid January.

A word of advice, keep a very close eye on it if you want someone else to help drive. I tried that approach during the pregame due to extreme work pressures (my work computer was on from 6am to midnight most days) and we ended up where we are now. This is not to say that anyone did an especially bad job, it's just that the person with the vision needs to keep an eye on that vision or a surprise may result.

 

[GenMarshall]

Well CG, under this proposal I believe the question probably doesn't arise. There would be a maintained dotmap and the settlers would go to the dots. If the settlers have escorts then they would cover the settlers by definition. The Commander in Chief would merely decide it the settlers were escorted or not, since hostile risk assessment is in his remit - that is, he decides how to defend the nation. When settlers move by galley then it is the galley that moves and not the settler. The movement of the galley would therefore be the Commander in Chiefs responsibility. If the galley were empty and exploring, then it would be the Intelligence agency that controls its movement because exploration is an intelligence or information gathering exercise. The Commander would have more to do under this arrangement. Not less I think.

What do you think of the rest of it?

.

Well, as a recently converted citizen to the alternative government consitution, I do think the rest of the changes are good. I am still skeptical about the changes since I wonder how the Commander would do more under the arrangement? Eather that or there is something that I am not getting (Mostly on my fault by not accepting the new alternative government consitution on basis of ignorance).

 

[DaveShack]

In the interest of time I have attempted to capture as many suggestions as possible regarding the Director of Commerce position into this mock poll. As before, if ratified during term 2, this change would become effective for the term 3 elections.

Do you approve of the attached changes to Article D and Article E of the Constitution, regarding elimination of the Director of Commerce position and distributing its responsibilities among the other elected offices, and for clarification purposes?

Yes
No
Abstain

Old text (unaffected sections are skipped)

Article D.
            1.  President - Leads discussions crossing over multiple 
                areas of different Consuls. He/she will also decide on 
                any strategic tasks not designated to another consul 
                in this constitution. The President is the primary 
                designated player. He/she has the following 
                responsibilities, and may appoint a citizen to oversee 
                a responsibility: Naming of Cities and Units, 
                Elections, and Polling Standards. These appointed 
                officials remain in office until removed by a 
                President. The President also leads discussion on how 
                to use military and scientific great leaders.

            4.  Consul for External Policy - Oversees long term planning 
                of policy regarding other nations. This includes 
                military plans, long term foreign affairs, and long term 
                trading goals.

            5.  Consul for Cultural Policy - Monitors culture. Pushes 
                for culture improvements. Fits science and religious 
                improvements into the big picture. Plans wonder 
                strategy.

            6.  Consul for Resources and Technology Policy - Decides on 
                long term tech queues, long term resource policies, 
                long term fiscal policies.


Article E.
            2.  Director of Commerce - Decides on foreign affairs and 
                trading. Sets exact tech queue. Also decides on espionage 
                missions.

=============================================================

New text, changes are hilighted, bold for insertions / changes, strikethrough for major deletions. Unaffected sections skipped.

Article D.
            1.  President - Leads discussions crossing over multiple 
                areas of different Consuls. [b]Sets the overall budget
                and balances financial needs.[/b]  He/she will also decide on 
                any strategic tasks not designated to another consul 
                in this constitution. The President is the primary 
                designated player. He/she has the following 
                responsibilities, and may appoint a citizen to oversee 
                a responsibility: Naming of Cities and Units, 
                Elections, and Polling Standards. These appointed 
                officials remain in office until removed by a 
                President. The President also leads discussion on how 
                to use military and scientific great leaders.

            4.  Consul for External Policy - Oversees planning 
                of policy regarding other nations. This includes 
                military [b]objectives[/b], [b]declarations of war, peace
                treaties, alliances, rights of passage, and mutual protection
                pacts.  Authorizes building of embassies, diplomatic missions,
                and espionage missions.  Authorizes trade embargoes[/b]

            5.  Consul for Cultural Policy - Monitors culture. Pushes 
                for culture improvements [b]and authorizes cash rushing of
                improvements.[/b]  Plans wonder strategy.  [b]Authorizes use of
                luxury slider vs specialists.[/b]

            6.  Consul for Resources and Technology Policy - [b]Decides on 
                tech queues, science slider, and all trades which do not involve
                items specifically listed under other consuls.  Authorizes use
                of tech and resources by other departments.[/b]

Article E.
            1.  Commander of Armed Forces - Micromanages the military 
                operations against foreign countries and unit 
                (excluding worker, settler, and non-military transport) 
                movements.  [b]Plans military operations within the boundaries
                set by the Consul for External Affairs regarding military
                objectives.  Authorizes unit upgrades within the budget
                limits set by the President.[/b]

            [s]2.  Director of Commerce - Decides on foreign affairs and 
                trading. Sets exact tech queue. Also decides on espionage 
                missions.[/s]

Commentary

• Moves overall budget to the President, who is already responsible for resolving disagreements between departments.
• Clarifies the External Consul role
• Clarifies the Commander role to include military planning [edit]and unit upgrades[/edit]
• Shifts Director of Commerce responsibilities to other departments. Treaties etc. to External, Trades to R&T.
• Adds cash rush authorization to Culture

 

[Provolution]

In general, good proposal, but I like the wording in full sentences. I really do not like the language. (Leads....) It is lazy, hapless, non-communicative and not worthy a Constitution. Please write in full sentences (Subject, Verb etc).
I. e. President is in charge of setting...

1. President, please change to Prime Minister or something British add "Secretary of Treasury" to make this title more accessible to new players

Regarding the Financial budget for the term and balancing departments, this should be done 1-2 times a term in a national budget discussion and poll, like in a real nation, a long term national budget DOES exactly that. Of course people with non-existant math skills should stay away from this post, but a large faction of the population, at least the Civ playing population in the US could handle this.

2. External Consul NOW Secretary of State (why not use the one we agreed on, the latter you posted now is not that good, in terms of language and so on)

please change the language to full sentences AND add "Trade Embargoes" in the line with the other treaties so there is no doubt they are grouped, which is a trade policy tool impacting international relations more than anything else.
State ALWAYS overrides USTR and Department of Commerce, or similar foreign affairs Depts ALWAYS override trade Depts.

2. Culture and Security Consul make this into "Secretary of the Interior"

I suggest to add location of Capital and Forbidden Palace here, as well as promoting the builds of courthouses In addition to culture wars, also observe the political stability in cities (very close to culture wars and flip risk), also watch corruption and waste, which is intrinsically linked to political stability and cultural influence.
I agree with the other changes, but letting Culture also handle corruption/waste and political security here makes this position more complete and integral, solving a new area mostly forgotten (corruption/waste) in previous constitution.
Also in charge of monitoring planting and cutting of forest maps, related to corruption and peripheral builds. I am amazed this has been ignored, even when I proposed it several times (certainly political reasons). Corruption is key to remember here.

3. Consul for Resources and Technology Policy, please "Secretary of Industry"
You asked for more catchy names right. Please add full sentences here as well.
Secretary of I decides on all trades not involving national security trades, that is trades involving other bilateral treaties covered by Secretary of State.
This will enable non-diplomatic trades to be handled here, but not mess up major diplomatic events. Add spaceship building here as well.

4. Commander, please change to "Secretary of Martial Affairs", so titles are lined up.
also exclude military escorts of settlers, we really do not need two hands on that wheel, that is plainly unnecessary and causes bad situations. (settlers restricted to one escort, if there is more escorts, then it is a military settler, for example when the settler only serves a mililtary purpose).

In general this looks good. Please do specify that President/Prime Minister ALSO is the Secretary of Treasury, so people know where responsibilities belong.

Question, maybe the DP should be the VP, possibly VP should be Prime Minister?

 

[mad-bax]

Well, this is an improvement, definitely. If I were to be hyper-critical then I would consider being more specific in separating diplomatic missions and espionage missions. Gifting is not specifically mentioned. The R&T consul decides on tech queues, whilst the director of commerce decides on exact tech queues. I would prefer the Consul to set overall research objectives - just to give the impression of clear water between the two jobs. Similarly the external consul decides on Espionage missions as does the Director of commerce. There needs to be some differentiation here.

On my personal wish list would be some tying in of the governors to government policy. I would like to see the COA able to issue targets for military builds, the Commerce director targets for commerce related builds and the Culture consul targets relating to culture/happiness and research builds. I would like to see the COA take responsibility for cities in resistance, handing the city over to civilian control once resistance is quelled. I would like the COA to be able to dictate resource disconnect policy. I would like to see the Culture Consul responsible for setting provincial boundaries. I would like the R&T consul to choose which tech is taken on a successful steal.

I don't want any of these changes made now. I just don't want this process to stop here. Let's keep discussing it and make the constitution an interesting and living document that adapts to changing circumstances in the game as it develops.

 

[Provolution]

ALSO

in line with mad bac here to make this more forum friendly

Secretary of Martial Affairs


Force composition, upgrade plans/criteria, disband plans/criteria, military organization (present military groupings in a larger picture), military intelligence (assessing enemy militaries) as well as military fortifications and coordination with State.

 

[Provolution]

Mad Bax, I think he killed off the Commercial Director for good reasons.

 

[GenMarshall]

I like the expanded definition that Dave has added into. No more headaches in regards to planning the war (in regards to troop movement).

 

[mad-bax]

Mad Bax, I think he killed off the Commercial Director for good reasons.

So he did! Good. I support the changes as they stand.

 

[Provolution]

With my small amendments I hope, they are added in a heartbeat.
Corruption and Waste is key for a commercial CIV

 

[Provolution]

Frankly, I suggest we delete Article E, and adjust articles accordingly, moving Military to D.

 

[Nobody]

Instead of offically changing the names like people say, lets just have it so the leaders can change them abit like Ministry for state sponserd violence