DG4 Discussion - Const: Article E

[ravensfire]

Pending the poll DZ posted, here is the verbage I suggest we poll for ratification.

Governors in Executive Branch
E. The Legislative Branch will be formed of the entirety of the citizenry and is responsible for the drafting of new Laws.

Governors in Legislature (straight from DG2)
E. The Legislative Branch will be formed of two houses. The Senate will be formed of the Provincial Governors, each of whom are responsible for the care, management and use of the cities and lands of a province in addition to legislative responsibilities. The Congress will be formed of the entirety of the citizenry.

Either way, we do still have two significant decisions that I can see - slider and budget control. I would strongly prefer that these be expressed in the Constitution.

It has been proposed that the Governors (working together as either the Senate or as a Governor's Council) control the budget. Thoughts? Comments? Who controls the slider?

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

I believe slider and budget control belong in the CoL with standards written in the CoS. Things like this do not go in the Constitution. What if we get a situation that requires us to change who deals with these items. It would be too difficult to write an amendment to the Constitution. It would be more suitable for a change in the CoL. Heh. It may even be closer to a Standard than an Article.

 

[donsig]

I agree with ravensfire that something as general as who controls the sliders and the gold should be specified in the constitution.

 

[Cyc]

It's not general donsig. It's very specific. It's a job description. If you were applying for a position in a government and they said ok, you're going to be a Governor, that would be a general statement. If you wanted to know what you were going to do as a Governor, then the Government could get very specific with its job description. These type of things go in the CoL. But of course we want to tie up this discussion as much as possible until someone just stops trying and you win, so let's continue this pointless debate.

 

[donsig]

We specify what the governors do, don't we? We specify what the leaders do don't we? Slider control and budget control are sufficiently general and sufficiently import to warrant being in the constitution.

Why is it so hard for you to make a decision about things? Is it really so difficult to say I thing the domestic advisor should control the slider or I think the governors should control the slider and go on and rwrite that into the constitution?

 

[Cyc]

Why do you want to put everything in the Constitution, donsig? The CoL and CoS will be easier to change when we find out that because we had no time to do this properly ('cause some people are tieing up (or setting up roadblocks), we made mistakes.

Since the begining you have advocated the use of the DG3 Constitution, which tried to float the nation on a detailed Constitution alone (with no supporting books). Since the begining of this process you have tried to hold everything up with useless debates on what is what, depending on how well you combed your hair that morning. Now it's almost a third of the way through December and you're still nitpicking Articles of the Constitution and changing ones that have already been decided on. Congratulations, donsig. You have achieved your goal of screwing up the Rules writing process and you will get you wish of only having a detailed Constitution to work with.

I once stood with you, donsig while the others called you a tyrant. But no more. I have now been pushed to the other side. Look to me no more as an ally.

 

[ravensfire]

Originally posted by Cyc
It's not general donsig. It's very specific. It's a job description. If you were applying for a position in a government and they said ok, you're going to be a Governor, that would be a general statement. If you wanted to know what you were going to do as a Governor, then the Government could get very specific with its job description. These type of things go in the CoL. But of course we want to tie up this discussion as much as possible until someone just stops trying and you win, so let's continue this pointless debate.

Cyc,

I agree with donsig on this for one reason. The slider is a major factor in the game, as is the budget. We are stating in the Constitution the broad areas that each leaders oversee. As a major area, I feel it is appropriate to place them in the Constitution.

It is a personal preference for me, and I do understand where you are coming from. I just think that since these two areas have such an impact on the entire game, placing them in Con is appropriate.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

Sounds like a power grab to me Ravensfire.

 

[ravensfire]

No offense, but I'm not quite sure what you mean.

(seriously - no offense - it's been a long day at work with no end in sight, and I'm just not catching your meaning)
-- Ravensfire

EDIT: Edited for clarity

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Cyc
Why do you want to put everything in the Constitution, donsig? The CoL and CoS will be easier to change when we find out that because we had no time to do this properly ('cause some people are tieing up (or setting up roadblocks), we made mistakes.

Control of the sliders and the budget is not everything Cyc. What does it take to do this properly? You seem to have no faith in us being able to do it properly now or later so you're trying to slide everything in the CoL or CoS so we can fix the rules as we go. Give it up Cyc, it ain't gonna happen. Only a few of us (including you) care about the rules. They're not going to rewrite rules midgame. Let's do our best to make the decisions collectively and write rules according to those decisions. Why don't you quit crying about roadblocks and join the discussion.

Where would you place the authority to change the sliders and control the budget?

 

[ravensfire]

Originally posted by donsig

Only a few of us (including you) care about the rules. They're not going to rewrite rules midgame. Let's do our best to make the decisions collectively and write rules according to those decisions.

Regretably, that is very accurate, and an excellent challenge.

It does, however, make the viewpoints of each of us that much more important. We all see the same thing, but find different problems and solutions, sometimes completely contrary to what another person believes.

Sometimes we miss a significant issue early on, and try to catch it later. Sometimes we do things in the wrong order. But we have always acted within our perception of the best interests of this game and those that play it. Always. Note that perception word though - nasty one that is.

We have all taken this too personally at times. I was about to put seriously in there, but we should and are serious about this. We do get caught up in the discussions and the nature of the Internet, and forget that there is a person behind that name that cares just as much.

Let's stay with the constructive stuff, please?

donsig, to the question you raised, I would put something like this:
The Governor's, functioning as a group, shall determine prior to each turn chat, the slider settings and the allocation of the budget.

As a further question, how should we handle pop-rushing? An interesting idea would be to leave that up to each Governor/Mayor.

Thanks!
-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

I don't understand some of the back and forth. If the constitution is silent on an issue like who controls the budget, that does not prevent us from defining it at a lower level. It is entirely possible that an important aspect gets left out of all levels of the law. If that were to happen, and there was a disagreement on the point, a simple poll would be enough to legally determine the outcome for the specific incident. A law could prevent future incidents from happening by codifying the answer, but lack of a law can only cause a problem if two or more want to fight about it.

On the subject at point, I say leave wiggle room in the constitution for lower laws to define specific responsibilities. That way if it doesn't work out and they need to be changed we don't have to amend the constitution. See my post in the executive branch (article D?) thread. I'll probably add a link later, gotta do some work now...

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Good post, DaveShack, and I must agree.

donsig and Ravensfire, with all due respect, you guys are trying to put way too much into the Constitution for fear of a repeat of DG3. However, it is precisely these actions that are keeping us from closing the book on this process and writing the laws where your suggestions actually belong. So, now we find ourselves in the precarious position of once again entering Creation Day with only our Constitution in hand.

However, we should not let that prospect sway us into adding more than is needed into the Constitution. As early as right now, we can begin building our CoL in areas that fall under Constitutional articles that have been ratified. We will also begin to discuss our Code of Standards, which should fall into place much more quickly.

I am determined to make a sizeable dent in the last two books by January 1st, and will continue to lead(??) the process into Term 1. I will soon be selecting topics from both DG2 Lower Books, and if I can post them sooner than next Monday, I will.

 

[ravensfire]

(scuffs foot on ground) Okayyyyyyyyy...

As I said, we all get pretty passionate - good thing we've got DZ (and DaveShack) to remind us.

To keep this on the plate, as the Gov. poll will complete Saturday (?)

Governors in Executive Branch
E. The Legislative Branch will be formed of the entirety of the citizenry and is responsible for the drafting of new Laws.

Governors in Legislature (straight from DG2)
[i/]E. The Legislative Branch will be formed of two houses. The Senate will be formed of the Provincial Governors, each of whom are responsible for the care, management and use of the cities and lands of a province in addition to legislative responsibilities. The Congress will be formed of the entirety of the citizenry.[/i]

My only suggestion would be, on the second version, to add "and is responsible for the drafting of new Laws." to the end of the last sentance.

The Governor poll will close on Saturday, with any luck we'll have the verbage nailed down and get the ratification poll up immediately.

-- Ravensfire

-- Ravensfire

 

[Donovan Zoi]

(scuffs foot on ground) Okayyyyyyyyy...

As I said, we all get pretty passionate - good thing we've got DZ (and DaveShack) to remind us.

What, my post was constructive.....

Great pre-thinking there though, Ravensfire. I want to hit the ground running on Sunday.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

By a 10-9 vote, we have decided to keep Governors in the Legislative Branch.

While this a hotly-debated topic, I believe we must move on. So here is the proposal presnted by Ravensfire:

Article E: The Legislative Branch will be formed of two houses. The Senate will be formed of the Provincial Governors, each of whom are responsible for the care, management and use of the cities and lands of a province in addition to legislative responsibilities. The Congress will be formed of the entirety of the citizenry and is responsible for the drafting of new Laws.

The last clause in italics is up for debate, but please let me know what you think of this proposal. If all goes well, I would like to put this up for ratification in 48 hours.

 

[donsig]

As for myself I've pretty much given up on this process. I see what was a very good DG3 constitution being hacked up before my eyes am I am unable to stop the carnage. As I've stated elsewhere I'm just going to run for a post on the judiciary and do my best to

1) Make sure that the laws and standards you all write do not conflict with what you write in the constitution

and

2) that you actually live by the rules as you write them in the constitution.

In other words, you are making your bed and I intend to see that you lie in it.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

In other words, you are making your bed and I intend to see that you lie in it.

Fine with me. Controversy builds up participation. Although for your sake, I do hope that your election campaign fares better than some of the issues you have championed recently. For reference, I may even provide links(especially to the threats) so that the voters know what to expect.

If there are no constructive objections to the above proposal, I will post a ratification poll for Article E Wednesday afternoon EST.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Ratification poll has been posted. Please vote here:

Ratification Poll for Constitutional Article E