DG3 Discussion - Demogame Rules

Originally posted by Shaitan
That looks workable to me. One thing though - we really can't plan on 80 turns per turn. It is a goal but one that is simply not reached. A more realistic amount may be 5 or 6 per chat. We had quite a few chats with no turns this game and that skewed our average.

The mock-up schedule contains 60 turns per term. With 2 chats per week at 5 or 6 per chat a term would be 5 to 6 weeks. I think allowing off-line preturns and other off-line things (like specific trades, etc.) would raise the average number of turns per chat.

I suggest rewording articles D and H as follows (new wording in bold):

D. All offices will be filled via election with terms ending at each calendar month.

D. All offices will be filled via election to serve fixed terms.

H. Game turns will only be progressed during a public turn chat.

H. Any game actions taken by the DP must be documented in a game play log. The game play log must be made publicly available in a timely manner.

Please note that this would not be an automatic repeal of turn chats or calender based terms. It would allow us to proceed directly to a discussion about how we want to structure terms and turn chats. Said discussion would hopefully be followed by swift passage of legislation to implement the systems devised through discussion.
 
I am still very much against making turn chats optional. They provide an important safeguard for Fanatikan citizens, one that allows them to have some more in-depth control on how the game is played.
 
I like it too. it would add a new facet to the Demogame. One that would require thought, not just waiting for the monthly curse.
 
I'm sorry, but I don't agree with turn-based elections. This method would reward inefficiency by allowing low t/tc(turns/turnchat) culprits to stay in office longer. Conversely, it may put a productive team of leaders up for re-election sooner.

Keeping the election cycle at the end of a calendar month will ensure that citizen participation in the election process stays consistent. Remember all the trouble we had filling seats near the end of DG2. Having elections at different times each month, if at all, will only make this problem worse.

I like many of the modifications that have been addressed here, but there are some things we shouldn't change just for the sake of change. Keep the election cycle static.
 
Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
I'm sorry, but I don't agree with turn-based elections. This method would reward inefficiency by allowing low t/tc(turns/turnchat) culprits to stay in office longer. Conversely, it may put a productive team of leaders up for re-election sooner.

Keeping the election cycle at the end of a calendar month will ensure that citizen participation in the election process stays consistent. Remember all the trouble we had filling seats near the end of DG2. Having elections at different times each month, if at all, will only make this problem worse.

I like many of the modifications that have been addressed here, but there are some things we shouldn't change just for the sake of change. Keep the election cycle static.
I agree on this matter. I also think we should keep the election cycle calendar-based. I also agree with Octavian that we should not make turn chats optional. They allow the citizens to have more input while the game is played, and they allow new citizens to have a better idea of what the demogame is all about.

BTW, Octavian, I found a crumpled box stamped "Sell by Sept. 12" under the Public Defender's bench this morning. It contained a round object with 14 different species of mold growing on it! How did that get there?
 
I understand the concerns raised about switching the base of our terms and making turn chats optional. But I would like to remind everyone that by rewording the constitution to allow different ways to define our terms and turn chats we are not necessarily doing away with either turn chats or calender based terms. We would merely be leaving our options open. Shaitan maintains that the demogame players have made their minds up about mod participation. I'd say the same could be said of turn chats. Despite the strong support for turn chats I suggested a rewording of the article because (at least at the time I left DG2) that article was a hinderance to off-line pre-turns, especially those where a trade or other deal was made. There are times when the turn chat is stopped for citizen input because an intersting trade opportunity has arisen. Many times such deals lead to other lucrative deals, the details of which cannot be known until the first trade is completed. Being able to complete a citizen approved trade and return immediately to the forums for further discussion without the formality of a full blown turn chat could speed the game along while raising citizen participation levels in trade decisions. By constitutionally mandating that game actions be made during public chats we end up making the first trade decision in the forums while subsequent deals are made by those at the chat.

As I said in an earlier post, we could adopt a constitution that leaves our options open and immediately address such big issues as how to structure terms and turn chats. I'd like to suggest one further general idea. If we continue with the Three Books idea we may want one book that contains demogame rules and another that contains rules for running our country. The former would have things like how long a term is while the latter would spell out things like where we would build our forbidden palace or military academy. The latter could also be used to guide our elected leaders in many ways. We could place limits (either max or min) on the size of our military, set parameters for the sci/lux/tax rates, designate that specific provinces should make so many workers or concentrate on growth or culture improvements or whatever.
 
Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
I'm sorry, but I don't agree with turn-based elections. This method would reward inefficiency by allowing low t/tc(turns/turnchat) culprits to stay in office longer. Conversely, it may put a productive team of leaders up for re-election sooner
Basing terms on turns rather than fixed RL time periods would not reward your so-called "inefficient" leaders any more than the current system favours Presidents who ratchet the pace of the game up by scheduling several TCs a week, hellbent on completing ten turns at each one.

Does this actually happen? Not really.
So why should we assume that leaders will try to exploit the weaknesses in a different system...

I would also like to point out that short turnchats are sometimes necessary & desireable, and so are not a reliable guage of inefficiency.
 
maybe we could introduce a higher spirit in monitoring our government: our moderators... we could implement in our constitution that in any case if the moderators of the dg are conclusive that one of the articles of the dg is misused against the spirit of the game or the will of the people, they can intervene and force the government to change their doing by posting a temporary rule until a citizen decission is taken.

this must be a 100% conclusive decission among ALL of the DG-mods... but maybe we would need 3 mods to put the hurdle a bit higher...

example:

if somebody misuses the turnbased elections for slowing the game, the moderators, if all comply, could set a higher-spirit rule to play at least 10 turns per game until the situation is resolved by a citizenry-decission. they will immediately post a discussion thread about the respective topic and initiate the normal law-finding process. the temporary rule stays in effect until the problem is resolved by the normal means of lawfinding of the dg.
 
but that may take too long to ammend the constitution which could arise problems. the above only would be in emergency cases as described in the cons against turnbased elections.
 
I'd prefer to avoid having the mods be internal enforcers of demogame rules. That is treading dangerous territory and setting an unhealthy (IMHO) precedent. There are already several groups that could be given such authority: The Executive Council, The Senate and The Judiciary are already defined and (more importantly) elected bodies.

Creation of stop-gap arbitrary rules is not the way to go anyway. A poll referendum could be used to remove a president from office if the people want him/her out of there because of poor performance or not meeting the will of the people.
 
Includes things we've discussed here. Note that this does not force or favor offline turn chats or turn based terms. The wording does allow discussion of them and the implementation of offline preturn without a Constitutional Amendment.

Code:
The Constitution

We, the people of (Civ Name), in order to create an atmosphere of friendship and 
cooperation, establish this Constitution of our beloved country. We uphold the 
beliefs that each citizen must have a voice in the government and ruling of our 
country, that government itself is a construct of and servant to the people, that 
rules, regulations, and laws should be established to facilitate the active 
participation of the people and to make possible the dreams and desires of the 
citizens.

A. Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the Constitution, such 
   amendments that shall follow and lower forms of law that may be 
   implemented. No rule shall be valid that contradicts these Articles 
   excepting an amendment specifically tasked to do so.

B. All Civfanatics Forum users who register in the Citizen Registry are 
   citizens of (Civ Name). Citizens have the right to assemble, the right to 
   free movement, the right to free speech, the right to a fair trial, the right to 
   representation, the right to demand satisfaction and the right to vote.

   1. Political parties are not permitted.

C. The government will consist of the Executive Branch, Legislative Branch 
   and Judicial Branch.

   1. The Executive Branch is headed by the President, the overall 
      Leader of the land, and shall include a Council of Leaders, each of 
      whom heads a department that is responsible for one major facet of 
      the country. Each of these Leaders will be generally responsible for 
      the items found under the respective Advisor in the Civilization III 
      game and esoteric aspects that fall under their department name.

         a. The President shall be the designated player of the game. 
            The President is responsible for following the legal 
            instructions of all Leaders during play of the game.

   2. The Legislative Branch will be formed of two houses, the Senate 
      and the Congress.

      a. The Senate will be formed of the Provincial Governors, each 
         of whom are a Leader responsible for the care, management 
        and use of the cities and lands of a province.

      b. The Congress will be formed of the entirety of the citizenry. 
         Congress shall have the primary duty of creating laws.

   3. The Judicial Branch will be formed of three Leaders and is tasked 
      with verifying legality of legislation, interpreting rules, and 
      determining when violations occur. Each also has a specific 
      area of additional responsibility.

      a. The Chief Justice is the overall head of the Judiciary and can 
         fill in for either lower position. The Chief Justice is 
         responsible for maintaining the legal books of the country 
         and the mechanics of Judicial Procedure.

      b. The Judge Advocate functions in a role of prosecution and 
         attorney to the state when allegations of rulebreaking have 
         been made.

      c. The Public Defendant functions in the roll of defense for any 
         and all accused citizens.

D. All offices will be filled via elections to serve fixed terms.

E. No person shall hold multiple Leader positions simultaneously.

F. The average of the number of votes cast in each of the most recent 
   contested elections shall constitute an active census of citizens. The 
   highest vote total of these elections shall constitute a full census (the 
   Congress). A majority of the Congress shall be required to amend the 
   Constitution. A 2/3 majority of the Senate shall be required to ratify said 
   amendment.

G. Elected officials must plan and act according to the will of the people.

H. Any game actions taken by the DP must be documented in a game play 
   log (examples: Notes or chat log). The game play log must be made 
   publicly available in a timely manner.

   1. Commission of any game action that is not instantly reversible by 
      any person other than the President while carrying out his/her 
      duties is strictly forbidden.

      a. Exception: Determining options in the renegotiation of Peace
	 agreements requires an action of acceptance or war to exit the
	 bargain screen. This may be done but the game must be immediately
	 closed without saving.

I. The constitution, laws and standards of (Civ Name) can never be contrary 
   to the rules and regulations of the Civfanatics forums. Moderators may 
   veto/correct any such items.
 
:) Could you please slide C3c over to the right a little bit?
 
It's a beautiful thing. Two points, hopefully both minor:

The Judicial Branch will be formed of three Leaders and is tasked with verifying legality of legislation, interpreting rules, and determining when violations of the same.

The part after the last comma seems akward. Would something along these lines be better:

..., and oversee the inquiry process when allegations of rulebreaking have been made.

The other question involves the game play restriction. Shouldn't that include the exception for renegotiating peace?
 
Or...we could just add the word "occur" after the word "same".
 
Top Bottom