Editing the Chain of Command

[Donovan Zoi]

To be honest, CT, I think your doomsday scenario is precisely the reason why we invented Abstain. Which reminds me, what would happen if Abstain won the Presidential election??

Let's try to stay on track here. The only "mistake" that may need correcting would be scheduling a chat without knowing who would be in place to run it. I am sure if we widened the CoC to accomodate twice as many people, the President would be more careful with leaving the save wide open. But that alone is not a reason to pursue this measure.

And yes, I am usually one to "open the door" to new citizens, especially those who have proven themselves with meaningful debate. I usually don't endorse someone simply because they are new; they need to demonstrate leadership potential as well.

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Donovan Zoi
To be honest, CT, I think your doomsday scenario is precisely the reason why we invented Abstain. Which reminds me, what would happen if Abstain won the Presidential election??

Abstain is there for people that don't want to vote the other options for several reasons:

1) Does not know enough information to make a decision
2) Does not like any of the options.
3) Likes both candidates, and not sure which one to vote for

So I guess if abstain wins, the second highest vote "getter" will be president.

 

[Sarevok]

Its good to see that your policy concerning new blood is reasoned, and not blind like some other people who only seek new blood DZ.

 

[Peri]

Ahem. I'll ignore that dig Sarevok.

The main problem is how do we avoid losing momentum if the TC is cancelled and how do we ensure clarity so people aren't confused about what should happen when the DP is absent.

If a scheduled TC is cancelled then it should be rescheduled with the same TCIT for the next available opportunity. That way the game's momentum is not lost. Also it should be made crystal clear in the TCIT that if for whatever reason no one from the existing CoC attends the chat it should be postponed. In this way there will be no misunderstandings and confusion.

These methods may not be as radical as extending the CoC but they do solve the problem and alleviate concerns about the game losing pace.

 

[Chieftess]

Originally posted by Peri
Ahem. I'll ignore that dig Sarevok.

The main problem is how do we avoid losing momentum if the TC is cancelled and how do we ensure clarity so people aren't confused about what should happen when the DP is absent.

If a scheduled TC is cancelled then it should be rescheduled with the same TCIT for the next available opportunity. That way the game's momentum is not lost. Also it should be made crystal clear in the TCIT that if for whatever reason no one from the existing CoC attends the chat it should be postponed. In this way there will be no misunderstandings and confusion.

These methods may not be as radical as extending the CoC but they do solve the problem and alleviate concerns about the game losing pace.

And, if it's the same instructions (and we have to wait 4 more days), then that one instruction would have stopped the chat for yet another 4 days... (or, maybe until sometime next term). That's what I'm worried about. Situations where the chat would be stopped for long periods of time, and the demogame wouldn't continue.

 

[Sarevok]

i would make it so the next TC was 2 days later mabye as it would be the same instructioins.

 

[Peri]

I agree about poor instructions holding up the game unneccesarily and that is something we will have to work on. However My proposal just addresses what to do with a lack of DP. Sarevok is right. It doesnt have to be a 4 day wait. We could even have a back up time for TC posted in the TCIT. It is unlikely it would ever be needed but it would prevent further delay if everyone knew in advance when a cancelled chat would take place.

 

[Sarevok]

in the event, perhaps the President should say "in the event that no one is able to play, the TC will be on (date)"

 

[Peri]

Yeah thats exactly what I mean.

 

[Sarevok]

I think it is a good solution

 

[ravensfire]

The public discussion thread for T2-JR12 has been created. This questions for this review is "May deputies play the save?".

Link to discussion thread

Thank you,
-- Ravensfire, Chief Justice of Fanatica

 

[Civanator]

DZ, but what if the deputies are experienced citizens who have been a DP before? By blocking the deputies from the CoC we could be halting the chat and slowing the game down.

But I also see what you mean by having an inexperienced citizen playing, and then messing us up. It's like a double edged sword, and it's probably a chance we have to take to prevent the game from slowing down.

Also, and alternative to this is seperating the departments again, and add Culture and Science back, which adds two more spots on the CoC that can provide a DP.

 

[Krabius]

So inexperienced players (in DG) must'nt be in the goverment (even as DP). Any ideas on how we will become experienced then?

 

[Strider]

Originally posted by Krabius
So inexperienced players (in DG) must'nt be in the goverment (even as DP). Any ideas on how we will become experienced then?

Wow, nice .

Not only does the "proposal" I mentioned above, makes the deputy active within there department, but it also creates more people who can play the save.

 

[Sarevok]

Having experience decide wether a deputy could play the save or not is something i will not stand for. It sounds too much like a "Class system" to me.

 

[Peri]

How curious. I offer a reasonable solution to the problem yet some would rather just use this thread to complain and not even comment on it.

 

[Bootstoots]

Peri, I think your proposed solution is very reasonable and makes plenty of sense. Perhaps it can be codified, if there is enough support.

Regarding the issue at hand, I'm nominally in favor of having a restricted CoC, though I wouldn't raise a fit if deputies were given that power.

 

[Sarevok]

Peri, I said above it is a very good issue

 

[Peri]

Thank you both for your support.

 

[Sarevok]

your welcome for it