DG4 Discussion - Const: Article K

[zorven]

Sarevok: To me it seems like you have the wrong idea about what a private session means. When it is said that the president is allowed to play the game play session privately, it does not mean that he can play whenever he wants - he still follows a schedule just as we do when turn chats are used. For example, the DP may state that he will be playing on the 24th after 8 pm.

Sorry if I misunderstand you.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Based on the results of this poll, it seems that the nation is divided on the subject of turnchats. However, there is a clear majority that believes that turnchats should receive Constitutional backing.

I would like us to work for a compromise in our wording which mandates scheduled turnchats, but allows the possibility to conduct preturn actions or game-halting trade options either offline or in a "quick chat."

Let's hear your constructive ideas, with minimal grousing from this issue's minority. This issue has been decided by public vote so we must move on.

 

[ravensfire]

I will point out that to those crafting this clause to be careful about the wording. If you want to allow small sessions to accomplish certain tasks, be sure to explicitly allow them here.

Failure to do so will leave you open to future JR's on several fronts.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Donovan Zoi]

No takers? OK, well I'll give it a shot.........

Article K: All irreversible game actions must progress during a public turnchat, while reversible game actions(ie build queues) that adhere to legal instruction can be prepared offline.

Not sure if this is a keeper, but it will get us started.

Under this Constitutional Article, the President/DP can set up build queues offline as long as they are already posted by the appropriate leader in the turnchat instruction thread. On the other hand, I believe that using a "quick chat" to conduct the first trade in a possible series of trades should be handled publicly as it is an irreversible action. Since the people have voted that they want turnchats to continue, I believe they should have the right to witness any points of no return that may transpire.

Ratification of this article would also force us to put in place a clear definition of "legal instruction," which we may have already determined to be orders from the turnchat instruction thread only.

Please let me know what you think.

 

[Cyc]

As usual, it looks excellent. It seems to cover all the bases.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Ratification poll has been posted. Please vote here:

Ratification Poll for Constitutional Article K