Final report from the Fanatikku Commissionj

[Provolution]

In order for us to agree on some fair democratic groundrules for setting up polls and city localization alternatives in an orderly fashion, so that people are not slapping trouts around the heads of each and everybody.

On developing a case for a city alternative

1. Explore all tiles in any city alternative
2. analyze tile efficiency for 6-12 tiles (notice all Departments and Governor)
3 compare worker/settler development time/build queues (notice Domestic Minister)
4. Factor in strategic role of city (notice President)
5 Consider a plan for city defense improvements (notice Military Advisor)
6. See what additional infrastructure/improvements is needed(notice governor Zarn)
7. Define external defensible border (notice Foreign Affairs Dept.)
8. Define culture expansion in phases, and a culture plan for the city (Culture Dept.)
9. Define science development in phases (Science Dept)
10 Consider the acquisition of all strategic and luxury resources by the city alternative, how long it will take to develop them into tradeable goods in turns (Trade Dept)

The procedure for deciding on the city build would be the following

City proposal should be posted in it own City development thread in the Domestic Ministry, with a link to the Citizen Group pages, so everyone can see the proposal.
The proposal should also be PMed to each Minister and the respective Governor.

Tile Effiency : 50 % of City Alternative Evaluation

The President, Vice President, the six ministers, the governor and the Official Cartographer will each rank their evaluation of the tile efficiency from 1-5.
Tile efficency is one of the most critical points in placing a city, in fact vital.
Tile efficiency will then net a potential 50 points maximum, and each evaluator is free
to develop their own criteria in giving these points.

Departmental Evaluation

Each Specialty Ministry, President will then have an equally important evaluation of the following:

Strategic Role of the City: President may give 5 %
Development Plan for City:: Domestic may give 5 %
Defense Plan of City : Military may give 5 %
External Boundary Plan of City: Foreign Ministry may give 5 %
Strategic Resource and Luxury Development Plan Trade Ministry may give 5 %
Research/education development plan of city Science Ministry may give 5 %
Cultural expansion development plan of city Cultural Ministry may give 5 %
Gubernatorial Province Development Plan 5 %

Judiciary Board Evaluation of legality of city alternative: 10 %

5 point checklist, all must be approved to give the final Judiciary Evalutation and approval of alternative.

1. All tiles are explored
2. City is within reasonable distance of the nation center
3. All necessary documents are submitted in time
4. All forums have been notified
5. All rules have been followed

The Judiciary is then allowed to consider the risk of corruption in the city, with their own analytical criteria, considering distance from Capital, Forbidden Capital, eventual courthouses and police stations, as well the pace of city growth and border culture.
The Judiciary may then give 0-10 % based on these criteria to the alternative.

Finally, the Domestic Minister will have a joint governmental and Judiciary review of the
City alternative, where the Domestic Minister will poll the top two alternatives to the Congress (Public Poll), where each Congressman/Citizen give their vote.
The Domestic Minister will be free to present his preferred alternative to the two to the congress, and will present both alternatives in full. The Domestic Minister and Governor will also be in charge of the naming process of the city, appointing a Mayor and the other duties related to administering cities as Domestic Minister.


End note

with this model, everyone is accountable for every step in the process, and still be in role with their present functions and mandates. This model will preempt apathy, as the
5-10 point model is very transparent, with a final peak at max 100%. This evaluation model will preempt silly populist proposals that are not well put together, and hold the entire decision chain of Japanatica accountable prior to the Turnchat, holding the powers in the forum. Public polling of the final two results has several advantages.

10 advantages of the system based on prior experiences of Fanatikku

1. There will be no more compass direction decisions, with split votes
2. Only the two best alternatives will be considered for one settler
3. Noone can hide away from responsibility, and everyone is held accountable, those seeking to hide in the process and then later pursue individual decisions must have their things well put together, and has to defend their decisions as well.
4. We are assured a strategic holistic, yet economically viable option
5. All departments affected by the new city is allowed input
6. The Judiciary is included in the appropriate manner, letting them also consider corruption, a relevant area that may be neglected in the jungle of details.
7. For future reference, all historic and cartographic data will be more easier to access for external and new readers, as we have seen continous use and abuse of
prior DG history in political debates and election campaigns.
8. Every single citizen is held accountable, from the inception to the plan, voting to the plan and postbuild inquries on the legal, democratic and strategic validity.
9. Automated procedure, we will not be discussing new ground rules from city to city.
10 Easy to implement, clear cut processual chain that can ve handled in less than two days with a minimum of input, yet create enough background data so people is interested to read about the outcome and read. This system will counter apathy and promote political participation based on objective criteria, and reduce mudslinging.
Each evaluation point giving should be followed by 1-2 paragraphs, structured by the Domestic Affairs and then recompiled by the Dept. of Domestic Affairs. The City proposal can come from anyone, but if it is proposed by the Domestic Minister, the handling of the Ministerial side must be handled by Deputy for hability reasons.

Fanatikku is a functional city, but the question of validity of the decision process is disturbing. In a good system, such a question would never be raised.
This solution buries these questions for good.

I seriously hope this will be implemented.

 

[Noldodan]

While the proposed process is undoubtedly thorough, I don't think it's a good idea. Too much work for every single city. I, for one, would not relish putting together the initial proposal for a city. So, while it's a great idea, I'd rather have bad city locations than go through all that beuracracy.

 

[DaveShack]

How do you approach these decisions in your own games? How much time do you take on placement? Do you make a spreadsheet with tile values and crunch numbers, or do you just take a look and decide?

Some things to think about, in a Democracy Game:

• Some players are here because they don't really know what is best, and want to learn.
• There are many experienced players with conflicting play styles.
• We're not looking for a perfect game of Civ, just an enjoyable one.
• If it's work, then it's not play, at least for some people.

As for me...

I tend to think of every single tile as usable, and try for a settlement pattern which uses every tile. Occasionally I'll get an area which can't be used, but most of the time it is a 4x4 square, a 3x1, or a 3x2 area. If it gets to the size of 3x3 I plop another city in there.

How close spacing should be is a factor of what city size I want to grow to (6, 12, 21). For a diplomatic win target we're talking modern age, so we need a wide spacing to give every city time to grow.

 

[FortyJ]

Looks like the beginnings of a platform for the upcoming Domestic Advisor elections to me....

 

[Provolution]

Too much work?

that is nonsense, it take 2 minutes to look at a city, and give a bid 1-5, and write one-two paragraphs on it. To sum it up to 100 points is done in a heartbeat.
and polling it is done very quickly with two options. The way we decided the last city had
a lot of silly debates, hard work for nothing, a poorly structured set of alternatives and so on. I will measure the energy that went into that last process and existing processes, and you will see they actually take more time and energy.

A flawed and undemocratic process force you to put out fires and create a sense of people being run over for no reason, loudest voice shuts down the rest and so on.
Look at the energy people put into alternatives for setting up cities already.
This is a great way to include new players by giving them some structure.
Who said this would not be enjoyable, if I followed your rhetoric, I would scrap insitutions, constitutions, threads , laws, 'PIs, CCs and so on.

I would rather have constructive inputs in order to improve the last flawed process, instead of attempting to bury idea in its beginning.

I will wait for more comments before I make further moves.

 

[Comnenus]

In order for us to agree on some fair democratic groundrules for setting up polls and city localization alternatives in an orderly fashion, so that people are not slapping trouts around the heads of each and everybody.

etc, etc, etc...

Maybe we're not all as smart as you are. Maybe we don't all have the time that you do. I know that you have some great ideas, but is there any way you could boil them down for those us us with ADD?

 

[Provolution]

Comnenus

Well, the only thing a citizen would need to consider, would be the proposal on placing the city, and to vote for the best out of two alternatives. With all the energy you spent in the legal department, this is piece of cake, this is probably hwy you either meant this as an ironic jest, or some prelude to an election campaign ?

Well, having read this draft, each person involved will only quickly assess tile value 1-5
, departmental interest 1-5 and write a paragraph of 3-5 lines.
With all this written congestion in here, having read all of your legal drafts and voted on them, I think you may easily consider this.

The citizen will then vote in the end poll only the best out of two options, in place of being forced to be detectives reading through each thread.

Come up with a short version if you think it is better.

 

[Comnenus]

Comnenus

Well, the only thing a citizen would need to consider, would be the proposal on placing the city, and to vote for the best out of two alternatives.

Now see, there's something I can live with.

With all the energy you spent in the legal department, this is piece of cake, this is probably hwy you either meant this as an ironic jest, or some prelude to an election campaign ?

No, please, no elected offices. "I am not seeking and will not seek the office of..." Too much work, you know? I just like parliamentary give and take.

As for ironic jest? No. You do have some great ideas. I just hope that the full import of them is not lost in the length of the posts. This is just my feeling on it and others might not be of the same mind. However, a post is like a speech; it needs to be concise, hitting the points and grabbing the audience's attention. Long speeches tend to put them to sleep.

Come up with a short version if you think it is better.

Personally, I never take that much time or effort to decide such things. I just go with a reasonable looking place to settle.

P.S. I hope this was concise enough and I didn't break my own rule.

 

[blackheart]

I personally just build cities so I can claim every tile in my territory efficiently. It really doesn't matter if some tiles can't be used (mountains), they'll make for strategic strongholds later on. I also overlap my cities a little bit so I don't waste any tiles.

 

[Espírito]

I dont think this is completely necessary, but I think that the information should be provided in the first post of a thread unlike the first city thread, there there was a hidden link to the thread in which we had discussed but this was already on its second page where the 'numbers' were. So put all the info in the poll so people can see the differences.

 

[Comnenus]

I dont think this is completely necessary, but I think that the information should be provided in the first post of a thread unlike the first city thread, there there was a hidden link to the thread in which we had discussed but this was already on its second page where the 'numbers' were. So put all the info in the poll so people can see the differences.

Polls for the Constitutional Articles and amendments are supposed to have a link to the discussion thread, per the CJ. I agree that other polls that have relevant discussion threads should have links as well, as soon as discussion is opened.

 

[Black_Hole]

this looks to be alot of work, somehting that shoiuldnt be in a democracy game... I am very busy and will get even busier when school starts, so i can do all of this and many other people are the same way

edit: I didnt mean it should be in the dg, it jus shouldnt be required

 

[ravensfire]

this looks to be alot of work, somehting that shoiuldnt be in a democracy game... I am very busy and will get even busier when school starts, so i can do all of this and many other people are the same way

Actually, this illustrates what should be the strength of a demo game. Different people can put different time into parts of the game. Your time is limited in ways that others are not, but you can use the information they gather and present to make your decision. A citizen with the time can create this information, and present it for all to make decisions on.

<soapbox>
Everyone has a different viewpoint of "ideal" and "perfect". Sometimes this is based on Civ3 criteria, sometimes on DG5 criteria. I saw in another thread very negative comments about the preferences expressed by citizens - remedial was one of the terms that comes to mind. As a citizen - that's offensive! How dare anyone go insult another citizen in such a manner, simply because they expressed a preference that someone didn't like! If you want a reason to keep polls private - when citizens start attacking the choices others make is a one.

Citizens, your duty is to present information, discuss the matter and make decisions. Belittling others for their choices, time available or viewpoints is beyond useless - it's counter-productive. DG4 saw some of this, and drove some (including me) away. I'm starting to see that same, right vs wrong, viewpoint starting up again. That's bad. Present your information, present your case and use logic, debate and persuasion to make your case. If the vote goes your way - great! If it doesn't, great! Either way, don't gloat, don't drop "I Told You So!", both are counter-productive and divisive.

This is a game about interaction between citizens/members. It's not about the perfect game. We're playing at a level far below the top players in our community. I hope to see those players helping other citizens understand why decisions are made, not belittle them for making "sub-optimal" decisions.

Don't make this another arguementative, hostile DG. Please. For the children.
</soapbox>

-- Ravensfire

 

[Provolution]

Ravensfire

Well, I am seriously considering the DG5... If they want it this way, I cannot help it, but then it is not my game anymore, or the ones that like to actually develop a case.
There are two types of human beings, the ones the solve problems with constructive proposals, and those that tear them apart with insultive remarks and ignorance.
Well, if the DG is harder to win through with a prepared case than real life, I let them have it their way. I am not going to sulk, or try to change their nature, I leave them by and go on with more rewarding tasks. This proposal was made to quicken and structure the process for everyone, but if people prefer harrowing debates, insults, spinetap rejection, sudden u-turns on positions and so on, I cannot change that.

 

[Provolution]

Blackhole

We have nothing further to discuss...

 

[Comnenus]

Well, I am seriously considering the DG5... If they want it this way, I cannot help it, but then it is not my game anymore...

I certainly hope this doesn't mean what it sounds like.

This proposal was made to quicken and structure the process for everyone, but if people prefer harrowing debates, insults, spinetap rejection, sudden u-turns on positions and so on, I cannot change that.

And I certainly hope this wasn't directed at me (can't tell). I tried to be constructive in my criticism, and hope that it wasn't taken the wrong way.

 

[Provolution]

Comnenus

You are ok, you are not the prime catalyst of the culture I describe.

Espirito

You are the only one in this thread that got the essentials, the information the ministers agree on, based on their needs, will be put together for only TWO alternatives in advance of the poll, not N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, NW and a lot of pushing back and forth with personal attacks, harangues and flawed argumentation.
This way, we do not waste time discussing futile options, for those who has little time,
I am glad I did not vote Blackhole for minister, due to his limited working capacity.

 

[ravensfire]

Ravensfire

Well, I am seriously considering the DG5... If they want it this way, I cannot help it, but then it is not my game anymore, or the ones that like to actually develop a case.
There are two types of human beings, the ones the solve problems with constructive proposals, and those that tear them apart with insultive remarks and ignorance.
Well, if the DG is harder to win through with a prepared case than real life, I let them have it their way. I am not going to sulk, or try to change their nature, I leave them by and go on with more rewarding tasks. This proposal was made to quicken and structure the process for everyone, but if people prefer harrowing debates, insults, spinetap rejection, sudden u-turns on positions and so on, I cannot change that.

Here's the trick - this is a process that you like, that presents information in a manner that you find useful. That's a good thing, not bad.

Not everyone, however, looks at things in the same way as you, or places the same value on factors as you. That's also good. Different viewpoints foster discussion, resulting in informed decisions.

Provolution, my soapbox stuff wasn't directed at any person, more at everyone in an attempt to remind people what *I* think is important in this game - the social interactions between citizens. We're using Civ3 as a means to organize and direct those interactions. I'm a software developer working on the main application for my company. Daily we have discussions, arguements and disagreements about issues, designs, even agenda formats! (Arial vs Times Roman - talk about a holy war!). However, we are all co-workers, and treat each other professionally.

You bring a highly analytical, numbers based viewpoint to certain decisions. Good! Great! Others bring a different viewpoint though, and that's just as valuable.

Shoot - wait until we get close to a war! The discussions can get quite involved there!

Enjoy the DG for what it is - a means of structured, social interaction. There are good parts, and bad parts. Use your information and reasoning to make your case on issues. When you come in with solid numbers and analysis, it's really hard to argue against. That won't stop people - so don't take it personally. Kick back, make your points, and enjoy the ride!

-- Ravensfire

 

[Black_Hole]

Blackhole

We have nothing further to discuss...

I am very sorry and hope that this doesnt mean you are leaving the demogame
I thought u meant all the leaders should all draw up proposals like the one you said and compare, and that is too much for me and each one would have a certain percent of the say
Again I am very sorry....

Also I am sorry that I do not have lots of freetime as you do, but I still like to participate in the demogame

 

[Provolution]

Ravensfire

Good to see some grown ups having fun with Civ as well as me

I work with defense contracts, which is military technologies contracted in from its inception from prototypes, pilots via full rollouts, and I am probably one of the youngest people in this industry. I happen to like Civilization as it was the PC game that captivated my interest right after the collapse of the Soviet Union and prior to the WWW. Certainly, we work in a very military-style organized fashion, with clear cut specialized roles and clear cut integrating roles. Of course the DG is a game, a play, but the fun leaves the room with the insultive style.

Again, I rarely see negative thinkers in my work, which is good, I love my job, I just have a too long waiting period on my hands. In fact, I do not think negative thinkers would survive in the business world, and in a game like this, where running a civilization is the business, they may just get by and feel ok. it is just a game, fair enough.
But what people should realize is that we cannot treat each other like the kid we don't like in the kindergarden *I don't want to play with you and so on", we should at least pretend we are all professionals, so we can have this structured social interaction you seek. Very fun that Times New Roman and Arial is the battleground, now that the military has left the old courier altogether for the Times New Roman.
I tend to use Arial for headings and Powerpoint presentations and Times New Roman for contracts and Reports, sometimes even Impact when I send the bill.

But what I cannot accept, is ignorance, unsolicited and insubstantiated attacks based
on conflicting emotions, with the intent of defamation, character assassination and in general spreading dirt in place of constructive alternatives. Age difference is one factor, fair enough, but in a written environment like this, they cannot expect me to write my proposals in the format of Snoopy Dogg or LL Cool-J just to keep the mob in the Colloseum happy. That is my two Yen.