Initiative 1 - Designated Players

[ravensfire]

As it looks like donsig's proposal will pass ratification, it's time to start working on some of the game aspects of the DG.

Specifically - playing it!

MOST RECENT VERSION IS LOCATED HERE

A previous poll showed the DP pool having the most support of all other options, so I'm going to go with that approach. Likewise, polls showed that game sessions may be on-line or off-line, but that the off-line can only be with citizen approval. Special sessions may be on or off-line at the DP's discretion, but only for special circumstances (as yet undefined).

To cover most of those situations, and give some more detail to playing the save, I'm proposing the following Citizen's Initiative.

(NOTE - this version is outdated)

Citizen's Initiative 1 - The Designated Player Act

Section 1
During each regular election cycle, a separate thread will be created during the nomination process for Designated Player (DP) Candidates. Any citizen that wishes to be a DP must post in this thread. When the election polls are posted, a separate poll, in multi-choice format, listing each candidate will be posted. Citizens will vote their approval for a candidate by selecting their name.

A citizen may run for an elected office and apply to be a DP in the same term. The DP Pool does not count as an elected office.

Each candidate that receives a vote from more than ½ of the citizens that vote in the poll will be accepted as a DP for that term. The Election Office will put together a list of the Designated Players, ordered by the number of votes in support for that term. In the event of a tie, the order of posting in the nomination thread will be used. All DPs that actually ran a game session in the previous term will be put below those that did not, regardless of the number of votes. This list will determine the order that the DPs will be used for game sessions. If there are more game sessions than DPs, start again from the top of the list.

Should the DP pool be empty, the President is responsible for determining who will be the DP for each game session, using any citizen to serve as DP.

Members of the DP pool may exchange places as they desire, so long as all citizens involved agree.

-- Ravensfire

 

[donsig]

Any citizen that wishes to be a DP must post in this thread.

I suggest changing this to read:

Any citizen that wishes to be a DP must declare so in a post in this thread.

I'm not sure about naming the president and elcetion office - do we even have those yet?

Other than that I say BRAVO to this proposal! This is the way to go about making decisions in our DG.

 

[Nobody]

naming things act is cool!

 

[DaveShack]

I would like to see the President (or whatever we name the chief executive) be responsible for organizing the affairs of the DP Pool, including play order etc, instead of using vote totals. That gives real responsibility back to the President and will help move the game along. I would caution against rules which are too complicated, as that can lead to inflexibility and losing the fun aspects of the game.

 

[ravensfire]

No - the DP choice should initially be up to the citizens. I don't have a problem with the President being able to add people to the pool, or remove someone with cause, however.

-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

There's a difference between deciding who is in the pool (citizens via election) and organizing who should play and when. If we leave the when up to decisions by committee or at the whim of the player who is up, we risk a slow game that causes people to lose interest.

I'd rather see a system which designates when the turns will be played and then selects a DP who can play at that time -- and IMHO the President would be the preferred official to organize that.

 

[donsig]

If we leave the when up to decisions by committee or at the whim of the player who is up, we risk a slow game that causes people to lose interest.

Hey, DaveShack, did we even decide if we're gonna have a president yet?

I think the proposal outlined for order of play is good. It is objective and even you and I could look at the election and nomination thread and interpret them to get the same game play order.

As for when the save will be played, why don't we have a discussion about that and pass an initiative covering it. I would really like to point out that if we adopt the continuous play method (of playing two turns a day) we will not have a slow game. We could also better track the performance of our DPs. We can weed out those who miss their turn too many times by not voting for them next term.

The propsal works great for continuous play. Once the DP election is done anyone could post the play order. We could then pass an initiative thats says once a game session is played the next one can't be played until 24 hours has elapsed but must be played within 36 hours of the last session. That gives us 24 hours to revise any instructions and gives the next DP a 12 hour window to play which should allow for DPs in any time zone to play. Snice each game session is only two turns this should be doable.

Now, the only thing about continuous play is we'd need a different way of posting instructions. We need to devise a system of standing orders that can be in one place for the DPs.

 

[Furiey]

Someone needs to be responsible for organising the DP pool, making sure players know they're next, getting them to schedule sessions etc. If we don't have someone doing this we end up with the problems we had last time, with slow play as we waited to see if the next player would pick it up etc.

Do we want to know the schedule in advance or are we going to wait until one session has been played to schedule another? Some form of advance schedule would allow for better planning of poll durations etc.

 

[Nobody]

What if the DP pool selects a chairman from among themself like a jury. The Chairman can be incharge of posting the DP thread and making sure everyone plays when they are meant to ect.

 

[donsig]

Do we want to know the schedule in advance or are we going to wait until one session has been played to schedule another? Some form of advance schedule would allow for better planning of poll durations etc.

If we use the continuous play method (of two turns every day or so) then it's no big deal if someone misses a session - we miss all of two turns. I've outlined a system a couple posts back that works beautifully with the proposed system of setting the play order for DPs and also nicely answers the objections raised by both you and DaveShack.

We really need to decide (via initiative) what sort of schedule we want to use for game play sessions then we can better decide (via initiative) how to structure the DP pool.

 

[ravensfire]

Agreeing with donsig, and noting that putting the President in charge of the pool as I outlined in a successive post would help address Furiey's concerns.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Bertie]

Should the DP pool be empty, the President is responsible for determining who will be the DP for each game session, using any citizen to serve as DP.
-- Ravensfire

What's a President? Until we actually have an initiative creating the position, does it make sense to start giving responsibilities and duties to a nonexistent office?

However, this is a quibble. I basically agree with everything in this initiative

 

[ravensfire]

Heh - this is pretty much what we used in DG VII (with that particular clause being a late amendment!). We've still got some things to nail down and define, such as the offices that we'll create now, how to run the actual elections, etc.

By putting this out now, we can start refining the wording, and change the titles to reflect what gets passed. My hope is that by doing this early, we'll be able to quickly poll it once the required parts are done.

Far too much of this process has gone slowly and chaotically. I'm doing my small part to help out.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Donovan Zoi]

To me, unelected=unaccountable. As long as it doesn't ruin anyone's fun, there needs to be a system in place to ensure that DP's are held accountable for rogue or faulty actions.

Also, 50% acceptance is a rubber stamp. Up it to 60% so that it reflects the faith of the populace in each individual. Otherwise there is no incentive to learn from one's mistakes, as we have seen in the past.

 

[Furius]

If I read that right then if there are two DP's elected for 10 sessions, say, then the two would alternate turns, yes?

What happens if no one receives more than the required threshold of votes? (I assume this is unlikely, but still, it could happen... maybe?)

And, in: "Members of the DP pool may exchange places as they desire, so long as all citizens involved agree." what is meant by 'all citizens involved'? Just the two people trading places? Or some official as well? Or more? Do they need to post the intention to swap beforehand?

 

[dutchfire]

What happens if no one receives more than the required threshold of votes? (I assume this is unlikely, but still, it could happen... maybe?)

Should the DP pool be empty, the President is responsible for determining who will be the DP for each game session, using any citizen to serve as DP.

 

[Furius]

ah... Well... yes... That would seem to cover it, wouldn't it?

 

[ravensfire]

If I read that right then if there are two DP's elected for 10 sessions, say, then the two would alternate turns, yes?

Yup.

And, in: "Members of the DP pool may exchange places as they desire, so long as all citizens involved agree." what is meant by 'all citizens involved'? Just the two people trading places? Or some official as well? Or more? Do they need to post the intention to swap beforehand?

Just the two people involved. They should post what's happening, so everyone knows about it.

-- Ravensfire

 

[ravensfire]

Version .1

Citizen's Initiative 1 - The Designated Player Act

Section 1
During each regular election cycle, a separate thread will be created during the nomination process for Designated Player (DP) Candidates. Any citizen that wishes to be a DP must declare so in a post in this thread. When the election polls are posted, a separate poll, in multi-choice format, listing each candidate will be posted. Citizens will vote their approval for a candidate by selecting their name.

A citizen may run for an elected office and apply to be a DP in the same term. The DP Pool does not count as an elected office.

Each candidate that receives a vote from more than 60% of the citizens that vote in the poll will be accepted as a DP for that term. The Election Office will put together a list of the Designated Players, ordered by the number of votes in support for that term. In the event of a tie, the order of posting in the nomination thread will be used. All DPs that actually ran a game session in the previous term will be put below those that did not, regardless of the number of votes. This list will determine the order that the DPs will be used for game sessions. If there are more game sessions than DPs, start again from the top of the list.

The DP Pool Manager is responsible for organizing the DP Pool, and tracking the schedule of DP's. Should the DP pool be empty, the DP Pool Manager is responsible for determining who will be the DP for each game session, using any citizen to serve as DP. The DP May also post a poll requesting that DP be removed from the pool. This is a private poll, lasting 4 days. If more than 60% of citizen vote in favor of removal, the citizen is removed from the DP pool immediately.

Members of the DP pool may exchange places as they desire, so long as all citizens involved agree.

Changelog
Version .0

• Posted

Version .1

• Clarified how to apply for DP Pool
• Changed approval percentage to 60%
• Removed "President", replaced with "DP Pool Manager"
• Clarified roll of Pool Manager
• Added clause on removing from DP Pool

-- Ravensfire

 

[Methos]

A suggestion, either add version .1 to the OP or link the OP to the version .1 post. This way everyone doesn't have to search through the whole thread for every change.