1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

deputies

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Demo Game: Citizens' started by dutchfire, Jul 31, 2006.

  1. dutchfire

    dutchfire Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    14,106
    Location:
    -
    Since deputies don't have much of a use, and since at the moment, no-one has a deputy because of the low participation, shouldn't we change this to

    IB. All members of the Cabinet and Governors may have a Deputy, appointed by the principals of those respective offices.
     
  2. robboo

    robboo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    4,123
    Location:
    Cajun Country
    I dont think we need to change it..I havent heard any one yet complain that an office HAD to have a deputy.
     
  3. Oldbus

    Oldbus Chief of Confusion

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    544
    Location:
    England
    I agree - I don't think there's a need to change that
     
  4. ice2k4

    ice2k4 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,937
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York
    Unless donsig sees this thread. :p
     
  5. dutchfire

    dutchfire Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    14,106
    Location:
    -
    I agree with you, no-one uses it. I thought we might change it because it isn't much work, but leaving it this way is ok to me.
     
  6. Fetch

    Fetch When in doubt, reboot.

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    615
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    I think it should be changed to reflect the actual role of deputies: not necessary to have (shall have a deputy), but ok to have (may have a deputy).
     
  7. robboo

    robboo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    4,123
    Location:
    Cajun Country
    You know what....lets test out the new judges and make the change. Gives them something to do. As it reads right now...it seems you MUST have a deputy. It should be optional.
     
  8. dutchfire

    dutchfire Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    14,106
    Location:
    -
    ok, it has been 48 hours, there hasn't been anything posted but agreements, so here we go:
    Edit: there's no judiciary thread yet. I'll pm the chief judiciary.


    Mock Poll
    This is a Citizen's Initiative poll for the amendment of the Code of Laws. The purpose of this amendment is to remove the need for deputies, and change it into an option.

    This is a public poll, and will run for 4 days. For this amendment to pass, a 6/10 majority of voters must vote 'Yes'.

    Link to discussion thread

    Do you wish to adopt this amendment?

    Current law:
    B) Deputies

    I. Deputies
    IA. Members of the Triumvirate and Judiciary shall not have a Deputy.
    IB. All members of the Cabinet and Governors shall have a Deputy, appointed by the principals of those respective offices.


    Proposed amendment, completely replacing above section:
    I. Deputies
    IA. Members of the Triumvirate and Judiciary shall not have a Deputy.
    IB. All members of the Cabinet and Governors may have a Deputy, appointed by the principals of those respective offices.

    Poll Question: Do you wish to amend Section 3B of the Code of Laws as follows?

    Yes
    No
    Abstain

    Poll settings:
    Duration - 4 days
    Public Poll - Checked
     
  9. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    I doubt any harm would have come from leaving it as is, but have no objection to amending it.
     
  10. GeorgeOP

    GeorgeOP RF Bleachers

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,428
    Location:
    RF Bleachers
    I would vote "no" since this is a useless change.
     
  11. dutchfire

    dutchfire Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    14,106
    Location:
    -
    it's not very usefull, true, but I wouldn't consider it useless.
    It's more useless to vote no IMO.
     
  12. dutchfire

    dutchfire Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    14,106
    Location:
    -
    I would like to ask anyone who wants to vote against this amendment when/if it's polled: "If the current law was proposed, and the proposed law was the law at that moment, what would you vote?"
     
  13. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Since you feel it's useless, you will, of course, personally ensure that all positions required to have deputies have them, right?

    We've had some situations where the rules have been used to stall, delay or cause dissention in the game. Although this hasn't been used, it's a small tweak that doesn't hurt anyone and removes a potential legal snag.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  14. robboo

    robboo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    4,123
    Location:
    Cajun Country
    With 17 people voting..I dont see how we could fill the postions since some people wont even run for a "main" office. All it will take is one "strict rule " following citizen to screw this up royally.
     
  15. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West

Share This Page