Constitution Discussion : STARTING FRESH

[DaveShack]

Citizens (to be),

I stand before you to start discussions on a new government. My suggestion is to start a fresh demogame based on the fresh new Civ4. To that end, I would urge you all to:

• have an open mind about how to organize ourselves
• share your ideas, no matter how unusual they might seem
• leave old disagreements behind, and enter this game on a basis of friendship and respect

 

[GenMarshall]

Why did I have a feeling that I read your mind Dave .

This is a new game, both in Civ version and Demogame. We should start off on a good foot. I do wish to see a friendly atmosphere to be created in this game .

 

[Nobody]

I agree, also i think that somesort of constitutional convention take place. For example we elect 5 people to be founding fathers. They work together to write it, contintuely consulting with the people. In the end they will give it to us to ratify.

 

[donsig]

OK, where do we start? It's been awhile since I helped write a constitution...

...but starting fresh seems a bit, well, like reinventing the wheel. Why should we forget all the errors we made in the Civ III demogames? Do we really want history to repeat itself?

One way we can start fresh is to write a constitution that focuses on how demogame decisions are to be made - and then use that framework to decide how we're going to organize ourselves. There's no reason why we cannot write a demogame constitution now that will serve all future Civ IV demogames. I'm not suggesting we lock ourselves into one way of playing the demogame. I'm all for trying different things from demogame to demogame (or within a single demogame for that matter). I'm suggesting there is a basic framework common to all demogames and it is those common things that should form the constitution.

Off the top of my head some of these basics are: no unauthorized playing of the save, citizen 'rights' and responsibilities, a reaffirmation of forums rules, a very rough and flexible outline of government, how the constitution can be changed, and the role of lesser laws. I also think the relationship of mods to the demogame should be addressed.

 

[DaveShack]

Donsig is kinda on my wavelength. A lot of discussion during pregame for the last 4 or so Civ3 DG's has been spent on what the offices do, and it ends up being useless for the next DG. We need the Constitution to be the most basic rules. It needs to define only the most important aspects of the game. Ideally we should be able to use it for the entire life of Civ4 and when Civ5 comes out it should serve that environment just as well. Heck, maybe we'll do such a good job that it never needs to be amended. The one thing we must get right is allowing lower forms of law to define what the Constitution leaves unspecified. The less there is to contradict, the better, as long as when we start the actual game the lower structure is in place too.

I'm not suggesting we should forget our mistakes per se, just that in the spirit of this being a new game we should use our experiences in a positive way versus a negative way. What I don't want to see is arguments based on "we did blah blah blah in DGn and it was a disaster, so we can't do it in this game". I don't want to see endless debates about whether a certain arrangement of offices helped us or hurt us, or whether certain things we did were or were not compromises. I don't want to see the events of previous DGs used as weapons.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

One thing we've got to keep in mind is that Civ4 is an entirely new game, so now may be the best (if not only) time to use the "evolution method" of lawmaking.

In other words, why don't we actually start as inarticluate caveman settlers and build our laws as we gain more knowledge of the game mechanics? Since many of us will be looking at a "brave new world" for the first time in years, this may our only chance to pursue such a concept.

Of course there would need to be basic guidelines to address mishandling of the save etc, but starting things this way would allow us to begin the game faster.

 

[Stilgar08]

My approach would be to check out old constitutions and keep what's good, change what's bad and leave out what's unnecessary from my actual point of view and then make a proposal... Good idea or bad idea? How are the old constitutions? Sth. you should forget about or sth. you can work upon?
Furthermore I think less is more in this case... So basics in the constitution and fine-tuning in lower laws really make sense!

 

[Mikeytikey]

I've never really been involved in a Demogame I registered foir the last one but then had trouble getting online. Is there any where I can read the old constitutions? That way I can hopefully join in an informed discussion about the new one.

 

[Cheetah]

I only have two paragraphs for the constitution so far:

§1
The Democracy Game is a game we play to have fun, and all rules and actions should be made with the intent of making the most fun for all participants.

§2
Governing rules shall consist of this Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be valid that contradicts the Constitution.
These rules may not contradict the rules and regulations of the Civfanatics Forums. Moderators may veto any such rules.

Those I think will be the most important ones.

I think DZ's idea is great!

 

[donsig]

I've never really been involved in a Demogame I registered foir the last one but then had trouble getting online. Is there any where I can read the old constitutions? That way I can hopefully join in an informed discussion about the new one.

The current one is in the Civ III demogame forum and the rest are in the archives. Here's a link to the best one we had in my opinion:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=51315

Cheetah, that's an excellent start. I suggest we flesh out paragraph 2 regarding exactly what it would take to pass an amendment. Instead of *No rule shall be...* I'd use the same terminology from the sentence before: *No lower law shall be*.

I also think we should do the easy paragraphs early on. This is taken almost word for word from an earlier Constitution:

Commission of any game action that is not instantly reversible by any person other than the designated player(s) while carrying out his/her duties is strictly forbidden.

We had an exception for checking peace treaties in Civ III. This exception may or may not be needed in Civ IV...

 

[RegentMan]

One thing we've got to keep in mind is that Civ4 is an entirely new game, so now may be the best (if not only) time to use the "evolution method" of lawmaking.

In other words, why don't we actually start as inarticluate caveman settlers and build our laws as we gain more knowledge of the game mechanics? Since many of us will be looking at a "brave new world" for the first time in years, this may our only chance to pursue such a concept.

Of course there would need to be basic guidelines to address mishandling of the save etc, but starting things this way would allow us to begin the game faster.

This would be an interesting way to play, but I doubt it'll work with our group (no offense to anyone).

 

[ravensfire]

Gotta like this so far!

First and foremost, this is a completely new game, and we've probably got a lot of things to "unlearn" from Civ3. Any ruleset that we put out must be easily changed from top to bottom.

As others have pointed out, we know that we've got to have some information about playing the save in there. That's pretty darn easy. Go with everything that's worked from the previous DG's. The rest - beats me.

I really like the DP pool from DG 7, and I think that's something that should be used. It allows more people to play and connect with the game than before.

Other than that - I promise not to bring in any preconceptions. At least, not knowingly.

-- Ravensire

 

[Alphawolf]

In other words, why don't we actually start as inarticluate caveman settlers and build our laws as we gain more knowledge of the game mechanics? Since many of us will be looking at a "brave new world" for the first time in years, this may our only chance to pursue such a concept.

I like this idea, it would make the game alot more like a real civilization rising up from prehistory.
Wolf

 

[Ginger_Ale]

Agreeing with Ravensfire AND DZ here...

With Ravensfire, there are some things we know right away we can put in (basic, generic rules about keeping order and fairness). With DZ, adding rules that need to be covered as we experience them is a great way to deal with them. In any case, we definately need to start a ruleset's contents from scratch (much like the code in Civ4!).

 

[RoboPig]

How about this

1.No group or assembly of citizens shall be banned, unless acting against forum rules, to ensure freedom of speech.

2.No citizens group shall be banned or outlawed due to the behavior of a single member.

 

[Strider]

OK, where do we start? It's been awhile since I helped write a constitution...

...but starting fresh seems a bit, well, like reinventing the wheel. Why should we forget all the errors we made in the Civ III demogames? Do we really want history to repeat itself?

One way we can start fresh is to write a constitution that focuses on how demogame decisions are to be made - and then use that framework to decide how we're going to organize ourselves. There's no reason why we cannot write a demogame constitution now that will serve all future Civ IV demogames. I'm not suggesting we lock ourselves into one way of playing the demogame. I'm all for trying different things from demogame to demogame (or within a single demogame for that matter). I'm suggesting there is a basic framework common to all demogames and it is those common things that should form the constitution.

Off the top of my head some of these basics are: no unauthorized playing of the save, citizen 'rights' and responsibilities, a reaffirmation of forums rules, a very rough and flexible outline of government, how the constitution can be changed, and the role of lesser laws. I also think the relationship of mods to the demogame should be addressed.

Agreed, and instead of focusing on the Constitution immediantly, let's get our organization working first. Before we even start on the Constitution, let's get the help threads up, let's get everything organized efficiently, etc. We lose dozens of people, because we never describe what the hell the demogame is.

We should wait, atleast a month before we even start working on the Constitution. It gives everybody plenty of time to get the game, and get use to it.

 

[Black_Hole]

we need to wait awhile, like Strider said, to start.... Nobody except the beta testers know how to play...

 

[RoboPig]

we can still decide on some parts of the constitution that do not require civ 4 knowledge in the mean time.

 

[Octavian X]

I think we need to slow down. Civ4 WILL be different, and I expect we'll need a brand new way to organize the executive branch. I'd say that we give the whole thing a good, long rest. Let's wait for the current Civ3 DG to run it's course, so we can actually allow people to acquire the game, get it running, and actually grasp an understanding of how it works before immeadiately diving into something new.

If we're really that eager, the first Civ4 DG should be a test run - running perhaps a bare-bones government (just one elected leader, a President, to run it, and a removal of the restriction that prevents 'unauthorized play' to encourge some experimentation) on a low level of play, so we can give everyone a chance to get in and talk about the game while we also organize a new government.

There are many variables we need to test out, anyway - for example, Civ4 is a fully 3-D game, which will almost surely mean that anyone will have difficulting alt-tabbing in and out of the program. Does this mean an end to the current format of the turnchat? etc.

 

[DaveShack]

Should we wait a bit to start playing the actual game? Absolutely! Not too long, or we won't be doing our part in addicting the people who sign up to CFC because Civ4 is their first game in the series.

Waiting to discuss it is a surer means of turning newcomers away than anything else I can think of.

Wanna keep people from leaving because they don't understand what's going on? Take a good look at this thread and do what I do. Every newcomer should be welcomed, every question answered. Don't wait until a structure is put around those answers. Don't wait for the greeting committee to be formed. We experienced DGers have an opportunity to grow our community.

Does this mean we shouldn't have a FAQ? Of course not, I'll be disappointed if one isn't started by tonight! (edit: it would have been helpful to read it myself before posting this ) If you know something which should be there, then put it there -- the editing and organization can wait, but we need to make the most of these exciting times!

Poets, Writers, Scribes -- pens at the ready, and CHARGE!

Edit: Oh, by the way... that FAQ thread in the main forum isn't an empty header thread, Chieftess posted the first version of the FAQ itself. Still, if you want to add content then let's get content added.