Final report from the Fanatikku Commissionj

[Black_Hole]

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.

All I did was say it would be alot of work and many people wont have time to develop those in dept evaluations of cities

 

[Comnenus]

... but in a written environment like this, they cannot expect me to write my proposals in the format of Snoopy Dogg ...

Is that the cartoon character or the rapper?

 

[Provolution]

For the kids sake, let us say both the pronstar rappr and the cartoon dog

 

[DaveShack]

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.

Your proposal is worth consideration. It is definitely a good idea to handle city location decisions by evaluating the pro's and con's of competing proposals. We do that routinely, but it seems you're looking for a more thorough and formal evaluation. In my eyes this is neither better nor worse than what we usually do, merely different.

Let's discuss this idea a bit further with the goal of aiming the discussion at the true problem it is trying to solve. I think that I'm hearing you say that the city placement process for the capitol was flawed because too many people gave their support to a location without giving their reasons why they would make that choice. Furthermore the evidence which was given in favor of a particular move seemed to be ignored, and too much focus was given to the quantity of people and specifically which ones supported each option.

If I have not understood your position correctly, please enlighten us further.

Now, moving forward, what we need is for analytical material and other evidence to receive the proper consideration. Your proposed solution of imposing a process which requires analysis is certainly one way to handle this problem. I will make a counter proposal that when a discussion comes to a close, prior to polling it the originator of the discussion should summarize all positions so that voters can find the necessary information to make an informed choice. This proposal has the advantage that it is not specific to the city placement decision, but can be used everywhere, and if there is no such material offered then we don't have a regimented process to follow.

Constructive discussion please...

 

[Immortal]

I applaud Provolutions extremely hard work in the city-founding fiasco and I wish to encourage him to continue his well thought out and extremely effective city plans and investigations.

Thank you most Honorable Provolution.

 

[blackheart]

I like Provolution's idea, but who would be responsible for this? Would a new governmental post need to be created or would this fall under a current ministry? Many people here just don't have the free time on their hands to do this.

 

[Provolution]

I am glad that people are moving from the spinal tap reaction to the constructive and reflected. I did not intend to make this entire proposal pass wihtout alterations, but needed to provide a clear and tangible vision to work from. Still, letting all departments giving grades to various proposals before polling, and pool these together, will counter the rallying and populist bullying we see in public polls. Making citizens that seek power to work for the same power by preparing solid cases to be voted for, would kill off some negative thinking and make people realize that people work hard in order to provide them the best public service prior to an informed decision.

So, let us be creative, develop a streamlined analysis and decision process that saves us tme and gives us energy to discuss the more fun details of the game.

The work for each minister is to give 1-5 points for the tiles, and 1-5 points for the Departmental interest in the city and write a brief paragraph on the points given.
the MA may comment the barracks, the Judiciary may ask for a courthouse to reduce corruption and culture dept may like a Colosseum to keep the mob happy.
Judging the energy I see people spend in vain, especially when we get no less than 20 cities, we will lose track of why we expand as a nation. All the Dom minister got to to, is to subtotal and total these numbers, from 0-100, from some 15-20 various inputs, and post them with a recommendation of where to move the settler out of two alternatives. Can it be simpler than this?

The majority of the work will be on the one sponsoring the proposal, and maybe that person may be allowed to decide the name of that city, or at least earn the right.
So the workload will be only 20-30 min for making a draft proposal for a city, less than many arguments I see in the threads now, and 3-5 minuts for each minister, 10-15 minutes for the Domestic Minister, who may outsource some of the work to his deputy or governor, or a volunteer citizen. PLus, every process is documented in a standardized and uniform manner, like an adult government you know, not like William Goldings "Lord of the Flies" or Orwells "Animal Farm". This standardized form will help our Official Cartographer a lot, as well as for the archives, when you veterans will transfer knowledge to newbees about DG5 in DG6, not bullying them with knowledge they don't have, or must read hundreds of pages just to compile the basics.

If some people do not see this opportunity, I am flabbergasted

 

[Epimethius]

Snoop Dogg? Spinal Tap? What the hell are we talking about here?

I think the current method is fine. The fact is it went wrong this time because of a close vote and a poor loser who wouldn't accept it. Sounds a lot like another vote a while ago.

 

[Provolution]

Well Epi we agree to disagree, but some people see that there is a valid point.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

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.

You want to give a shout out to da masses, and have yo stuff bangin' outs every hooptie? Then, yo G, lemme front you dis:

http://www.asksnoop.com/

Lamentably, this word translator is not compatible with the CFC forums, but you can get a good laugh by entering the main page. Know what I'm sayin'?

DZ out.......

 

[Fier Canadien]

Provolution, your idea would be good in a real-life situation, where we would have 40 hours a week to work on this, and where it would be that important to settle at the most optimal spot.

However, that is not the case. Reviewing the possible tiles and getting the evaluation of each ministry may well take more than the time we have between turn chats.

The current system is a bit chaotic, maybe slightly strange and surely less than efficient, but it works well enough for the demogame environment.

It's funny to say that it was so easier to agree on a city placement with this system in DG2 than it is now. Ha, time has changed much things.

 

[Provolution]

Fier, you got it wrong , it will save you time. Individually, all you got to do was to give 015 points for the tiles based on your gutfeeling, 0-5 points for the cultural plan, which is not a real plan, but the mention that here we may need a temple, and to give that suggestion 0-5 points based on your depts needs. Finally , you would write a paragraph on that city, then you would not see anyting before Dom min presents that in a poll?
Is that so hard?

 

[Fier Canadien]

Fier, you got it wrong , it will save you time. Individually, all you got to do was to give 015 points for the tiles based on your gutfeeling, 0-5 points for the cultural plan, which is not a real plan, but the mention that here we may need a temple, and to give that suggestion 0-5 points based on your depts needs. Finally , you would write a paragraph on that city, then you would not see anyting before Dom min presents that in a poll?
Is that so hard?

Clearly, you've never tried to get an inter-department program running in the demogame before, did you?

I have seen many of these, and 100% of them (in dg 1 to 3, I wasn't there in 4) went wrong. The reason: every time, someone forgot about it, did not want to participate, was absent... I was even at the source of one of them, a Governor-Governor-Domestic program to define the borders of my province, in DG3, but it went wrong too.

The less people implied, the simpliest to get it working.

 

[Provolution]

Well, when this one fails, we know where the failure occurs, and the system has a vuilt in security. If people do not present their case properly, it is not going to fly.
The reason it failed in DG1 to DG3, is that your system was built on cooperation, and if one part failed, the program fails. The reason why this system will work compared to the numerous other ones, is that the city will be built regardless. If 3 of 7 ministers fail to give their grades to the proposal, that will be mentioned in the presentation, and if the proposal is not approved by the Judiciary, the people can still vote for it.

The beauty of the system is the accountability and transparency, as well as speed.
When someone loses interest or does not give their input, it becomes very visible and very transparent, and when we move on to elections, people know who worked for them, and arguments in campaigns has to factor in who did what when.

If a person does not care for giving points or writing a paragraph that day, the deputy, or the assistant can do it, or no one, fair enough. So this system is more to place blame and credit where it belongs, if you work and deliver, it is visible, if you only conspire and make funky moves , maybe some mudslinging, that becomes visible.
Even if the proposal goes to the poll without a single vote for a minister, fair enough, but the proposal would lack credibility compared to a well prepared and well supported proposal. This would not silent the public debate, but refine it.

That they have failed in DG1-3 is not what I have in mind to repeat, the failures will be visible individually , not systemically.

 

[Comnenus]

Personally, I think that is why we elected Ministers, is to give us a synopsis of the info so that we can make informed decisions. I just like to see it in the short form.

Keep up the good work!

 

[Provolution]

Clearly, you've never tried to get an inter-department program running in the demogame before, did you?

I have seen many of these, and 100% of them (in dg 1 to 3, I wasn't there in 4) went wrong. The reason: every time, someone forgot about it, did not want to participate, was absent... I was even at the source of one of them, a Governor-Governor-Domestic program to define the borders of my province, in DG3, but it went wrong too.

The less people implied, the simpliest to get it working.

Clearly, you've never tried an inter-governmental technology program running in the real world before, did you?

I have seen many of these, and 100 % of them (In UK, Japan and California, I wasn't for the part in Russia) went right. The reason, every time, someone forgot about it, did not want to participate, was absent - was taken off the project and/or got a reprimande. I was even at the center in one of these cases, somebody did something wrong, but it turned out well as the responsbility was individual, not systemic, so it went right too.

The less lazy, denying or lying people implied, the simplest to get it working.

 

[Provolution]

People

Just some key japanese concepts to educate you on Japanese management.

Ringi 　

The ringi system is a very common way of arriving at decisions from "the bottom up" in Japanese companies. A lower-level employee writes up a proposal and this proposal makes its way up the organizational ladder, involving everyone who may be involved with the proposed idea.

Nemawashi 　根回し

Nemawashi refers to the common Japanese practice of arriving at a decision through informal, background discussions before an official meeting on the issue is held. Carried out in order to achieve consensus and avoid embarrassing public dissent, nemawashi is a common business and political practice.

Zaibatsu 　財閥

A zaibatsu is a giant family trust or financial clique which plays a dominating role in Japanese finance, commerce, and industry. The most notable are Mitsui, Mitsubishi, and Sumitomo.

 

[Epimethius]

The shizzolata' is not as powerful as I would have hoped. I did enjoy seeing police refered to as "the fuzz," though.

So...Ringi=democracy, Nemawashi=private politics and such, and Zaibutsu=corporation, basically.

 

[Provolution]

well Zaibutzu ir not only a small corporation, there are 6 of them in Japan

Dai Ichi Kangyo Bank
Fuyo Group (Fuji)
Sumitomo Group
Mitusbishi Group
Mitsui Group
Yasuda Group

These are called the Big six, and represent nearly 20 % of the Japanese GDP, roughly 10 %of the US GDP or the size of the Colombian Drug industry.

CORRECTION

ZAIBUTSUS was abolished by US anitrust reforms under Governor MacArthur, but were reestablished at the very time US occupation of Japan stopped 1952, leading to the 6 Keiretsus, based on the 4 Zaibatsus.

 

[Epimethius]

Conglomerate, then. Like GM or GE. A really huge company.