Constitution: more discussion?

[DaveShack]

Well, at least two people don't like moving toward ratification of the articles whcih aren't getting much dissent without holding explicit discussions on each one. Bummer, ya try to get some movement towards starting the actual game and here comes a complaint -- but the point is at least partially valid.

To avoid controversy, I will open this discussion on whether we need more discussion. The current ratification polls were written such that the propopsed articles can be amended with a majority vote so there isn't much to worry about with regard to getting part way done and then not being able to change what came first, but if public opinion is strongly in favor of more discussion and new polls, and that opinion is backed by a poll, then I'll go along with whatever the people decide.

 

[burning_phoneix]

I myself don't see anything wrong with the constitution but quite a few people complained that we need discussions. It'll be best if people discussed what they want changed so we don't have arguments in the future. But I do have a question.

are we going to set up another ratification poll or se the current one?

 

[Sarevok]

There isnt too much wrong with it...

 

[ravensfire]

I don't want more discussion on the articles, I want SOME discussion on the articles. Throw up a thread - "Does this look good?" If most people do agree with it, you'll know in 2-3 days, post the ratification poll.

DS, you've got some contentious debates ahead in some areas. Taking a few extra days to confirm the basic stuff with the citizen isn't going to delay things at all, and might reduce future problems.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Epimethius]

I'd be up for more discussion, as it allows me to try and advance my ideas, as well as giving me more time for my game without seriously detracting from this one.

 

[donsig]

Yes, some discussion would be prudent at this juncture.

 

[Sarevok]

Yes, some discussion would be prudent at this juncture.

Then get it started!

 

[ravensfire]

Then get it started!

Sarevok, why don't you start the threads off, and give DS some help. Trust me, it's nigh-impossible for just one person to do it all.

After all the grief, whining and potshots I had to deal with in DG4 though, you couldn't pay me to do it again. Trashing one friendship was quite enough, thank you. Time for someone else with dreams and ideals to see them crushed beneath the feet of apathy, ignorance and selective memory.

-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

Sarevok, why don't you start the threads off, and give DS some help. Trust me, it's nigh-impossible for just one person to do it all.

Yes, please do help!

The one thing I'll recommend changing from the way we did it for DG4 is to not be quite as responsive to the 1st comment that something needs to be changed. Let it get a little support first, but don't take it too far to the other extreme of polling every detail either, or we'll be swamped in polls.

Time for someone else with dreams and ideals to see them crushed beneath the feet of apathy, ignorance and selective memory.

Not to mention a few brushes with behaviour which is bullheaded, contrary, inflexible, intractable, obstinate, and unyielding.

Couldn't resist visiting the online thesaurus...

A very few issues (deputies, when and how to stop play, JR/CC procedures, and chat powers or not) are going to tie us up for weeks, until the final votes I'm afraid.

 

[Immortal]

There isnt too much wrong with it...

Sure, from the standpoint of someone who has already learned, agonized over and read the constitution numerous times, it looks like its fine as is. However, I still think the constitution harms participation in its overly long, drawn out, seperated style.

I dont see why the consititution couldnt be the only document, with a few added pieces.

 

[ravensfire]

Yes, please do help!

The one thing I'll recommend changing from the way we did it for DG4 is to not be quite as responsive to the 1st comment that something needs to be changed. Let it get a little support first, but don't take it too far to the other extreme of polling every detail either, or we'll be swamped in polls.



Not to mention a few brushes with behaviour which is bullheaded, contrary, inflexible, intractable, obstinate, and unyielding.

Couldn't resist visiting the online thesaurus...

A very few issues (deputies, when and how to stop play, JR/CC procedures, and chat powers or not) are going to tie us up for weeks, until the final votes I'm afraid.

More than just a few issues, I believe. Core structure of the goverment will be there, existance of lower bodies of law, probably a few others as well. I wish you well on this, but I'm going to adopt the philosphy of many people from the last time, and toss comments from afar.

-- Ravensfire