Editing the Chain of Command

[Strider]

Originally posted by Peri
We don't need a large CoC - it serves no useful purpose. If the branch charged with executing the will of the people is unable to play the game, we should simply cancel the session.

That is a quote from RF and he is absolutely right on all counts. However no one forsaw the sort of mess we are in now
We could lengthen the CoC to include more people but surely it would be better to ensure that there is always more than one member of the elected Executive present or indeed actually making it clear in the TCIT that the save is to be cancelled if no one shows up from the elected government.

By doing that we can avoid any misunderstandings. Also cancelled chats should be rescheduled within the term so we don't lose momentum

Any thoughts?

IMHO, once again you are asking the impossible. We can never guarantee that someone is going to be there. Take this for instance:

The President sets a time, but then something important pops up in real life, and he'll be unable to play the game. In our const. (not going to look it up) it says a scheduled turnchat can not be changed after a certain amount of time, and as such it can only be cancelled once it "starts," but is none of the executive department can make it either, because of one thing or another, we've just wasted precious time.

Also, being DP is possibly the easiest thing you can do. The only real challange to it is findind the time, other than that... you follow the instructions in the correct thread, ask the advice of the citizenry in the turnchat for some of the small matters. Simple enough.

Raven, as a mental side-note, you may have a voice, but wether your voice matters is a differant story entirely.

 

[Furiey]

Well I didn’t expect this, as one of the 3 deputies present at the last turnchat, it never occurred to me that deputies weren’t included in the CoC, after all what are deputies for but to stand in when the Minister isn’t there? I realise that they aren’t specifically listed in the CoC but:

CoS
K.4.  Should an office holder post that they will be absent 
      for a certain time period, the Deputy is empowered 
      with all duties and responsibilities of the position 
      for that period.

Sarevok posted in the TCIT that he would not be at the chat until late and for CT to fill in:

NOTE: Although I can come, I will be at least 1 hour late to this turnchat. I hope CT can fufil the role of Defense minister in that time.

CT did so, Defence was next highest in the CoC, so she played the save. I was very surprised when I saw Zorven’s CC about it.

If we want to only allow elected officials to play the save, then why is the VP in this list? let alone in second place, ahead of the other elected officials?

 

[ravensfire]

Originally posted by Strider
Raven, as a mental side-note, you may have a voice, but wether your voice matters is a differant story entirely.

Wow - that's almost insulting. And rather ignorant.

Every person's voice matters in this, and every issue. It is insulting to say that because someone believes the opposite of you that their opinion is irrelevant. Far from it.

This is a discussion about a proposed rule change. I, and others, wish to keep the status quo. You, and others, do not.

Both voices matter, and are important, just as a mental side-note.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by ravensfire


Wow - that's almost insulting. And rather ignorant.

Every person's voice matters in this, and every issue. It is insulting to say that because someone believes the opposite of you that their opinion is irrelevant. Far from it.

This is a discussion about a proposed rule change. I, and others, wish to keep the status quo. You, and others, do not.

Both voices matter, and are important, just as a mental side-note.

-- Ravensfire

Technically, no if your in the minority, your voice does not mean one thing or another, because it's going to pass anyway, with or without your consent. That last line was not directed at you, but at the demogame itself.

 

[ravensfire]

Originally posted by Strider


Technically, no if your in the minority, your voice does not mean one thing or another, because it's going to pass anyway, with or without your consent. That last line was not directed at you, but at the demogame itself.

Agreed - and most unfortunate. Trust me, even if I am opposed to a measure, I will suggest changes to improve it, or reduce loopholes, or point out scenarios. Just because I don't like a proposal doesn't mean that I'm foolish enough to not make it as good of a proposal as I can.

Well, excepting a few occasions, but there were extenuating circumstances.

Strider, never think that someone's voice is irrelevant, especially early on. One person, making a good point, can change the opinions of enough people to become the majority. In truth, the majority/minority isn't known until the polls close. There is a significant, silent group of players that are affected by the words and actions of all of us.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Donovan Zoi]

First of all, I would like to congratulate Furiey for actually taking the time to sift though our laws, rather than waxing nostalgic or inviting every citizen to take a crack at the save with no legal basis whatsoever.

And Strider, don't think that just because yourself, Sarevok and Chieftess are forcing this issue down the peoples' throats to deflect blame from the actions of the last turnchat, you are in the majority. Once discussion has gone on for some time, we can have a poll to decide whose opinion matters and whose does not.

As a mental side-note , I would tend to side with those who actually take the time to read our laws and understand them, do their best to abide by them, and err on the side of doubt when they are not sure. If this measure wins based on the prevailing arguments to this point, the game is doomed.

 

[Strider]

The game is doomed if we don't do anything, if this game continue's the way it is, it will soon become like the model parliament.

I've read are laws time and time again, one or two are even one's I proposed years ago, just because I don't make a direct reference to the esteemed works ever time I make a post, does not mean I don't know them. Personally, I don't like our laws, and I only took the time to read them, for I can fix them.

Watch it............. - DZ

Great DZ... esteemed works? haha

 

[Civanator]

According to what Furiey pulled up:

CoS
K.4. Should an office holder post that they will be absent
for a certain time period, the Deputy is empowered
with ALL duties and responsibilities of the position for that period.

Since it is all duties and responsibilites, I see it as the Deputy will also be recognized as a canidate for the CoC when the Leader is absent. Maybe this is the solution for this problem?

I also see the need for the CoC to be clarrified if we accept the deputies as being in the CoC if the leader of that department is absent.

 

[Sarevok]

That does make sense, and if anything needs to be fixed, it is that. That is indeed something that is unclear and may have caused this issue.

DZ, I am forcing this down people's throats indeed, to defend my deputy and to press that there are a few things that need change, but just a few.

 

[Civanator]

I propose editing section k.4. saying that the deputy's powers will include the Chain of Command. This is one way of looking at it.

Or by listing the Deputies after the Leaders, because of this example:

Say the Minister of Defense was absent. His deputy fills in with all powers and responsibilities, including the CoC. At this moment it puts the Deputy MoD at a higher rank in the CoC than the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Trade and Technology. This can be seen as unfair to them.

The other way is to list the deputies the way we have done it before, after all the leaders, like this:

a. President
b. Vice President
c. Minister of Internal Affairs
d. Minister of Defense
e. Minister of Foreign Affairs
f. Minister of Trade and Technology
g. Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs
h. Deputy Minister of Defense
i. Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs
j. Deputy Minster of Trade and Technology

Optionally, we can add the Governors. Their rank in the CoC can be determined by when their province was established, i. e. 1st province, 2nd province. Then We can put in the Chat Reps, but whether to put them before the Governors or not is another discussion.

So I say we poll these two ideas, and then work out the fine detail after one or the other pass.


OT- What does CC mean?

 

[Strider]

CC means Citizen Compliant, pretty much a PI, same concept and everything.

Nice research BTW Civanator.

 

[Sarevok]

It goes well. I propose we either do what Civanator has said, or we edit that section of the constitution to make it more clear.

 

[Strider]

We could even possibly include the following:

"A deputy is legally capable of speaking and acting for a there department as might a leader would, only under the said leaders absense. This does not include within the forum system, unless the said leader creates a statement, binding by our laws, that legally fully leaves the power to the deputy, untill such time the leader may return.:

Or, in the whole, if the Leader is not there, the deputy may act as the leader. This should be placed under certain limits though.

 

[Sarevok]

That could work out, but I would prefer to hear comment before it is polled.

 

[Civanator]

I understand what you're saying Strider, but I think that is what is said by K.4., but it doesn't specify the CoC, which led us here, and it may seem vague when saying all responsibilities.

BTW- Thank you Strider . It's a good thing you brought this up.

 

[Strider]

On the account of limits though, speaking on behalf of the department is a must(I believe it is already aloud by K.4), but acting is kind of a shifty matter.

The deputy should be limited to acting on (of course) the defined will of the citizenry on the matter at question, or based off the leaders choice's and plans.

In the whole though, I think this would encourage partcipation of deputies in the game, and make them where they actually do something.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Or we can just live with the fact that deputies do not get to play the save, and word the CoC article so that there is no question. This still won't save us from those folks that do not know what the law is.

Incidentally, what happened last turnchat was a fluke, and will most likely not be repeated any time soon. And forwarding a campaign to change the law will not retroactively help Chieftess, as her case will be heard based on our existing laws.

Plus, does everyone realize what it takes to change the Constitution, and the Code of Laws for that matter? And does everyone really want to put the game's progress into the hands of a deputy? Chieftess is the one exception, as she has much experience as DP, but do we really want to open the door for other less experienced depuites to take our nation wherever they please?

And keep in mind, that should something go wrong during a chat, a deputy playing the save would be held just as accountable for his actions as would the President. Do we really want to put that kind of heat on what is usually an internship position? As you can see, widening the CoC could cause trouble for the samaritan deputy as well.

You guys really need to think about this before you go any further, and make sure that the law you present is within Fanatica's best interests, as well as the interests of those you are fighting for.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
Or we can just live with the fact that deputies do not get to play the save, and word the CoC article so that there is no question. This still won't save us from those folks that do not know what the law is.

Incidentally, what happened last turnchat was a fluke, and will most likely not be repeated any time soon. And forwarding a campaign to change the law will not retroactively help Chieftess, as her case will be heard based on our existing laws.

Plus, does everyone realize what it takes to change the Constitution, and the Code of Laws for that matter? And does everyone really want to put the game's progress into the hands of a deputy? Chieftess is the one exception, as she has much experience as DP, but do we really want to open the door for other less experienced depuites to take our nation wherever they please?

And keep in mind, that should something go wrong during a chat, a deputy playing the save would be held just as accountable for his actions as would the President. Do we really want to put that kind of heat on what is usually an internship position? As you can see, widening the CoC could cause trouble for the samaritan deputy as well.

You guys really need to think about this before you go any further, and make sure that the law you present is within Fanatica's best interests, as well as the interests of those you are fighting for.

The only one who is fighting for CT, would be myself, as I am her defense. The others are merely trying to fix a mistake this case brought into light. I'll take care of the interests of the one I am fighting for, the only other person who needs to be concerned is Chieftess.

Also, weren't you the one who was "wanted to open the door" and bring in fresh blood in the departments? Putting less experienced players in the most powerful poistions in the game? (I'm thinking more of Peri and RF on this one, but I am certain you said something about getting fresh blood into departments)

Yes, it is something that will most likely not happen for a very long time, but are we to do nothing, and let it happen again in the future? Let's fix it, then it won't happen again, and we don't have to worry about it, again.

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi

Plus, does everyone realize what it takes to change the Constitution, and the Code of Laws for that matter? And does everyone really want to put the game's progress into the hands of a deputy? Chieftess is the one exception, as she has much experience as DP, but do we really want to open the door for other less experienced depuites to take our nation wherever they please?

Then, on that note, why are we allowing anyone to run for president without first being in an advisory posistion like we used to? Granted, the presidential race is usually never uncontested, but let's say there's 2 canidates. One's an experienced player, but just came off of a humiliating PI (CC), and no one want to vote for them. The next canidate just found the demogame 2 days ago. They're elected, and 5 days later, they play their first turnchat. That's just the same as an "inexperienced deputy". Also, since we decided to downsize the advisors, there's less posistions, and a lot of us experienced "old folks" to go around.

The old rules were, I believe, origanally designed just to keep the game moving. Since, stopping the game would lead to a loss of citizens because nothing is going on. Even to lurkers, it would make it look like the demogame is dead.

 

[Sarevok]

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
Or we can just live with the fact that deputies do not get to play the save, and word the CoC article so that there is no question. This still won't save us from those folks that do not know what the law is.

Incidentally, what happened last turnchat was a fluke, and will most likely not be repeated any time soon. And forwarding a campaign to change the law will not retroactively help Chieftess, as her case will be heard based on our existing laws.

Plus, does everyone realize what it takes to change the Constitution, and the Code of Laws for that matter? And does everyone really want to put the game's progress into the hands of a deputy? Chieftess is the one exception, as she has much experience as DP, but do we really want to open the door for other less experienced depuites to take our nation wherever they please?

And keep in mind, that should something go wrong during a chat, a deputy playing the save would be held just as accountable for his actions as would the President. Do we really want to put that kind of heat on what is usually an internship position? As you can see, widening the CoC could cause trouble for the samaritan deputy as well.

You guys really need to think about this before you go any further, and make sure that the law you present is within Fanatica's best interests, as well as the interests of those you are fighting for.

which is why I said that we either change it or word it so that there is no room for error.