1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: Government Structure, Branches & Duties

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game V: Citizens' started by Chieftess, Jan 26, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. YNCS

    YNCS Ex-bubblehead

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,098
    Location:
    -4 GMT
    I don't believe that enough citizens will take initiative. We've already decided that we're playing C3C. There are people who want to participate who don't have C3C, so they'll have to be given a very detailed description of what's happening in each turn for them to make informed decisions.

    If, for instance, nobody is in charge of the sliders, then who will inform the non-Conquest-owning citizens of the status of sliders? If I am elected "Slider Tsar" and I don't inform people of the state of the sliders, then people can complain to and/or about me. If nobody is Slider Honcho, then all people can do is whine to the general population if they don't know the slider status. One or two whines and the person will just give up in disgust.

    Blackheart, what you're proposing sounds great in theory. Unfortunately, there'll be some major problems in trying to run it.
     
  2. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    Well read YNCS, and the problem is that some of the soul-eaters in the game thrive in such an atmosphere that is conducive to whining and mudslinging, and only heavy handed moderation could reduce that. The last proposal is all about to remove all the power of leaders, all the motivations and simply snuff out the basis of a productive system.
     
  3. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    That's also the problem with the current system isn't it? I thought we were trying to make it so people without C3C can still hold government positions. Who's going to give info about the game then? This isn't a system of work like real life, where everyone is forced to go, we're here on our own accord.

    Provo, shut up about whining and mudslinging would you? I think we've seen enough of it in your posts to know it exists by now.

    Moderator Action: And that goes for you too, Blackheart. I'm fed up with you, Provo and Blackheart flaming eachother. I hope you 2 won't need a cooling-down period. - Warned!! - Rik
     
  4. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    Blackheart, I am talking in generics here, and we try to find a way to remedy it.
    I will not attack you, but you seem bent on attacking me. Please stop will you.
     
  5. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    Generics with a slightly leaning curve towards people, which you seem to do A LOT. We get it, you've been attacked and such, give it a rest and stop bringing up the past in most of your posts. Is it really necessary to keep talking about a "veteran conspiracy" and those darn "bashers" and "mudslingers" at every twist and turn?
     
  6. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    I suggest we quit commenting each other, and never ever refer to each others nicks again. I am through with this, but I sure will argue for patching up some legal holes and systemic gaps that make such methods, yes methods me and many others have used to put down the other sides arguments. Right now, it seems like you are the only player left with a thorn in my side, whereas I can actually reason and discuss things with the others I had my disagreements with. I will leave the past, and not mention nicks, but I will refer to deep problems with the present structure that causes problems for the present, as well as newcomers. I think things worked just fine prior to Term V, and we could rewind the clock and start all over. as YNCS says, leave past conflicts behind, but learn from the mistakes, and I sure has learnt from mine.

    Polling standards
    Naming convention
    government structure
    term organization

    and so on.

    Many would agree with me on that direct democracy would fail here, but I am sure I am the one you will give "special" treatment in your response.
     
  7. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Summary:

    With significant work being done on the alternate government style, the traditional government style will need to be worked on simultaneously if we want to meet the deadline.

    I'm working on the non-government parts of the ruleset, and the alternate government stuff. It would be really, REALLY helpful if someone would step up and push all discussions on the traditional government style.

    Using the DG5 ruleset, this would be the following articles:
    Article D - Executive Branch
    Article E - Legislative Branch

    This should go up to creating the text that would be used in each article. This will greatly help in enabling us to meet the deadline with a full ruleset should we decide to go with the traditional style of government.

    Thanks,
    -- Ravensfire
     
  8. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    The problems with the DG5 problems aren't problems that are going to be solved. They're present in real world governments as much as virtual ones. They're a corner of how humans interact socially. You can't completely eliminate "popular block voting" or grudges.

    That's one of the inherent problems of the DG5 system, people in power have may grudges against people who are not, and therefore requests or proposals may be ignored.

    As for direct democracy, sure it is highly idealistic, but all things made real start with an idea. Freedom and representative government was highly idealistic until they were fought for and won. I don't think direct democracy would fail here, the people who participate are intelligent and civilized enough to work out problems (most anyways).
     
  9. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    Here what I propose for our const., based on the tradational DG5 one:

    This is what I propose as the basic format of the tradational constitution. I re-formatted it into a Article/Section format, whereas it was orginally a mix of three differant formats rolled into one. I also added a Short description by each Article/Section for easy browsing. It is also copy/paste friendly :).

    Edit: Also, yes I do know that the bit about the election office is missing, and I also plan on adding something about the Naming Commission in there also. The formor I could not find the exact coding, and the latter I wanted to wait to see how the discussion turned out.

    Edit2: Added Article P. Freedom of Information

    Edit3: Changed Article F. to a more citizenry accepted format.
     
  10. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    You should add something in there about when to start elections for the next turn, etc.
     
  11. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    That'll go with the election office portion, and I can't find that thread. Anyway (can a mod with search help alittle bit?)

    I'm also thinking of something called the "Common Sense Clause." This will basicly make anything legal that would normally be illegal, if you do a strict interpretation of the const.

    For an example, the time when Rik Meleet moved the slider down, although it was against the law (We still got the tech in the same # of turns, but got more gold).

    It'll hopefully kill some of the bickering and keep some load off of the Judiciary. However, I can't think of anyway to write it, without requiring alittle bit of common sense to interpret. So I'll likely just leave it out.
     
  12. Ashburnham

    Ashburnham King

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    827
    I definately don't like the idea of a "common sense clause". It sounds too much like a slippery slope allowing those participating in the Turnchat to run the game. "Common sense" is simply too open to interpretation.
     
  13. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Folks - not to be a pain here, but we've got a lot of discussions underway about the part of the ruleset common to both styles of Government, including elections,etc.

    Please use 'em to keep things focused. Use this thread to focus on those areas of the ruleset that will differ between the two styles.

    Please?

    -- Ravensfire
     
  14. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984
    I don't think that will be entirely possible, as there are several articles outside of the major differances that will need some small editing. I wouldn't support any constitution if it was just abunch of articles copy and pasted together. Hell, when I went through the DG5 const., there was still clauses saying the wrong nation name. And as I said above, there was a standard format to the constitution either. It will be much better to get both the modified tradational and alternative in a full constitutional proposal, and let the citizens decide.
     
  15. YNCS

    YNCS Ex-bubblehead

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,098
    Location:
    -4 GMT
    I notice, Strider, that you inserted your proposed changes into Article F. The typos are identical.
     
  16. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    Common sense isn't all too common :p
    A common sense law would be very hard to enforce, as each person would view things differently.
     
  17. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    Strider - the small edits are, for the most part, simple to take care of. Note them. Explain them.

    But this should be about the specifics of the traditional style of Government.

    And so, on to my comments.

    Article D.
    • Who controls/organizes worker actions?
    • Under domestic minister, what does "allocate workers" mean? Seriously - that was in DG 5, and I don't remember that being used.
    • Trade minister: What does "use of resources" mean? I'm guessing trade, so isn't that redundant?
    • No mention of spaceship parts? After the comments you've made about them being missed in the past?

      -- Ravensfire
     
  18. Strider

    Strider In Retrospect

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    8,984


    • I have no idea what worker allocation means either, and I believe I said something about that somewhere. Either way, I didn't know what it was, so I left it alone. Can't hurt.

      I believe "use of resources" means he has the choice on wether or not to hook our second iron up or something like that. About the same as above though, didn't know exactly what it was, so I just left it alone.

      Actually, that is my fault. I saw that Foreign Affairs had Espionage listed under them already, as that was one of the things I said along with the parts, I figured it was in there also, and didn't think much about that. Hey, afterall, it's why I posted it here, to find mistakes I might have made. It'll be fixed once I finish posting this.

      I still disagree, just the format can make a differance, and it will be much better to have the whole thing out there, just incase you miss one of those little things.
     
  19. ravensfire

    ravensfire Member of the Opposition

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    Messages:
    5,281
    Location:
    Gateway to the West
    "I don't knows" are bad reasons to keep things in a ruleset. I think you need to clarify, move or remove them. If you don't know what they mean, why do you assume someone else does?

    I would suggest not continually editing the same post though, and repost the changed sections. It's a great deal easier for everyone to read and follow.

    -- Ravensfire
     
  20. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    If the version Strider posted was copied from my starting point thread, then I can explain the "worker allocation" thing. Actually, I can explain it anyway even if it wasn't copied from my thread. :D

    The concept is to have domestic control how many workers each province has, but let the governors handle instructions on what tiles to improve and how. The DP then has lattitude to accomplish the governor's priorities in the most efficient way.

    BTW this is a perfect example of the way work would be divided in the alternative proposal.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page