Next play session

[DaveShack]

The next play session after the one currently scheduled will be May 30th, or when the Judiciary rescinds the requirement that 3 days pass before an appointment, whichever comes first.

 

[robboo]

Dave...I think we might need to hold up the curent one. As without a censor we can not post binding polls in order to declare Peace according to our CJ. First he wants the citizens input now he seems to want to limit the input to only those thigns which the censor wants to post.

I also will think we should write an amendment to remove the judicairy from our government or at least cut their powers. I KNOW we would have overwelming support.

 

[dutchfire]

just play a few turns until you run into problems

if you can't play please reschedule the turnchat as it seems there aren't many players in the chain of command able to play the save easily

 

[ice2k4]

Well, this has been a pretty useless term.

 

[BCLG100]

bit like the last one really

 

[GenMarshall]

Well, this has been a pretty useless term.

Agree

...

 

[DaveShack]

Actually, I'm reconsidering, because I thought of a new tactic.

We'll press ahead with the common sense approach.

This approach is two-pronged. The first part is that we should proceed as though things are how they should be.

For example suppose there is no Censor to validate polls and write the results of the poll into an instruction? Who cares, the DP can easily see the result of the poll, and the President has the following to fall back on.

5. The President has all powers not expressly given to another official and not retained by the Citizens Assembly.
​

Who has the right to handle an office while it is vacant? Does the law say anything? If not, the President can handle it.

The 2nd prong of this new approach is to act and ask forgiveness if someone complains, instead of asking permission and failing to act until it is given. Said differently, this means "we don't need no stinkin' JR's" coupled with "what are you going to do, CC me?"

Most of you may now return to your regularily scheduled DG merriment, already in progress. We'll see the ones who can't handle that in the next election, where somebody will be fired.

 

[Chieftess]

bit like the last one really

Unfortunately, the demogame has been becoming more and more like this since about Civ3 DG2. A slippery slope, and much like Civ3 DG4's judiciary. Back in the old days , one person was the DP, and made a schedule a week in advance (1 month in some demogames), and was required to play regardless. This is why we're sometimes the laughing stock of the global demogame community - we care more about the laws than the game. Then, when a multiplayer game comes along, we bomb out quickly.

 

[BCLG100]

Unfortunately, the demogame has been becoming more and more like this since about Civ3 DG2. A slippery slope, and much like Civ3 DG4's judiciary. Back in the old days , one person was the DP, and made a schedule a week in advance (1 month in some demogames), and was required to play regardless. This is why we're sometimes the laughing stock of the global demogame community - we care more about the laws than the game. Then, when a multiplayer game comes along, we bomb out quickly.

Yup well we should stop paying so much attention to the rules then.

 

[Oldbus]

I agree with going for the common sense approach.

I'm not familiar with exactly what the President can/can't do (I'm sure you know that a lot better than I ), but other than the case of the Judiciary checking out amendments to the Constitution and stuff, I only think they should be there to resolve disputes, not to prvent things happening in case there is a dispute.

 

[Chieftess]

Yup well we should stop paying so much attention to the rules then.

And just to clarify (before Cyc pops in), what I'm talking about is the micromanagement of every single word - probably every single letter.

 

[GenMarshall]

We'll press ahead with the common sense approach.

That is the approach I mainly take.

For example suppose there is no Censor to validate polls and write the results of the poll into an instruction? Who cares, the DP can easily see the result of the poll, and the President has the following to fall back on.

Then what if election season happens? Traditionaly elections were posted up by the Demogame Mods or thoes who voluntere to do so.

As Judge Advocate, I confirm that, the DP's Powers in the event that there is a non-existant instruction (and I feel that vacant offices also fall into this spectrum too)

"1. If no instructions from a given office are posted for a game session the Designated Player assumes the powers of that office for the game session." (§4 VI ¶1B )

I feel that this also includes vacant offices.

The 2nd prong of this new approach is to act and ask forgiveness if someone complains, instead of asking permission and failing to act until it is given.

I agree, This would lead to less CCs this way if we learn to work together and get along. Eventhough this is a faceless internet enviornment, we still should act like if we are face to face. Since you made mention of Forgiveness, I shall leave you and everyone here some quotes in regards to it .

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned." - Buddha

"Forgive, and you will be forgiven." (Luke 6:37)

"Peter came to Jesus and asked, 'Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?' Jesus answered, 'I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times (or seventy times seven).'" (Matthew 18:21-22)

"He who forgives ends the quarrel." - Anonymous

"Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you." (Ephesians 4:32)

 

[DaveShack]

I agree that the DP has the right to act when there are no instructions. The problem is the non-instruction work like posting election threads, organizing the governors council, etc.

 

[dutchfire]

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned." - Buddha

Common Sense instead of Code of Laws will greatly help this game

(btw we haven't even researched code of laws in game so we shouldn't care too much about it)

 

[Rihiter]

Common sense approach <- YES!
Yup well we should stop paying so much attention to the rules then. <- YES!!!

 

[Rihiter]

(btw we haven't even researched code of laws in game so we shouldn't care too much about it)

BUhahahhahahaa........ Your right!!!! Ahahahah ;]]]]

 

[Vind2]

I guess our CoL makes us more of a demogame and less a succesion game.

 

[DaveShack]

Actually, I'm reconsidering, because I thought of a new tactic.

We'll press ahead with the common sense approach.

I was insufficiently clear about this post. What this also meant is that I no longer feel that we have to wait until May 30 to play.

 

[Cyc]

And just to clarify (before Cyc pops in), what I'm talking about is the micromanagement of every single word - probably every single letter.

Speaking of which, CT, you might want to read a quote from the pied piper (or is it peter pan) of the new revolution, below....

I would like to repost my semantics argument on the so-called 72 hour rule for appointments. Yes, I know the CJ is well aware of this argument, but the other two justices may not be.

As for objectivity on the matter, I'm using English grammar and semantics, and logic, to interpret what I wrote according to the rules of the language.

Let's take an example and work it through. The same logic applies to every place this 72 hours appears in the relevant law.

IIIB. If there is no deputy, the President must request interested citizens that do not currently hold office to contact them. If no such citizen contacts the President within 72 hours of the office being declared Vacant, the President may appoint any citizen to the office.

The sentence in blue filters the people who can apply for a vacant position to include only those people who do not have an office. This is the independent condition, defining what happens if no other modifiers are applied.

The portion in red defines a 1st dependent condition, that no person who does not hold a position contacts the President. The magenta portion further restricts the red portion, by placing a time delimiter. Together, the red and magenta parts modify the blue part, setting the conditions under which the restriction of "do not currently hold office" is lifted.

The black part is the condition which results if the red + magenta conditions become effective, overriding the blue restriction.

Now, I have just broken down the law as written, using the semantic rules of English, in this case the canonical method of dividing paragraphs, sentences, and phrases into independent and dependent parts. Once the law is parsed correctly, it is clear that the 72 hours is a time modifier on who can apply, and not on when the appointment can be made. In fact, the law itself does not specify either a minimum or a maximum time for an appointment to be made.

If you try to break down the example using this method to isolate the 72 hours and thereby to show that it applies to the last part in black, you will find that extraneous bits remain which are not part of any other construct.


I'm not saying that DS is micromanaging every single word (or every single letter), but you might....