OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: Terms of Office

[blackheart]

No minimum or maximum. This is determined by each person's playing style, so use your gray matter and vote for whichever person has the style that suits your tastes.

 

[Black_Hole]

Poll: Should there be turn requirement(minimum/maximum) for each term?

 

[YNCS]

I just clicked on Black_Hole's link and got: "No Thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the webmaster."

 

[Black_Hole]

I just clicked on Black_Hole's link and got: "No Thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the webmaster."

fixed......

 

[thescaryworker]

Poll: Should there be turn requirement(minimum/maximum) for each term?

as I posted in the above poll, each president could have a set number of points. For each kind of turn (peace;early|peace;late|war;early|war;late|ect.), they would have points deducted from their score until it reached 0.

 

[Strider]

as I posted in the above poll, each president could have a set number of points. For each kind of turn (peace;early|peace;late|war;early|war;late|ect.), they would have points deducted from their score until it reached 0.

I like this idea, actually, I like this idea alot. Of course, I'll throw in my own modifications, as I do with almost everything.

Based off of what you said, I think we should give each term a set number of turns. For Example, 50 turns per term. That way, we should have a pretty accurate estimate of how far were going to get in a single term. I'm sure the alternative government people will like this alot better, but this idea is really good.

 

[Ashburnham]

I'm all for having some sort of set minimum per term, but I'm definately against the idea of a maximum number of turns per term. What if we somehow reach 50 turns only two weeks into the term? Is the term then over? That doesn't seem fair--or democratic-- to the people who were elected to office for that term. Imposing a maximum of this nature would encourage presidents to play as slowly as they could in order to prolong their term in office.

I'm all for a set minimum. It would ensure that we keep the game progressing at a steady level. However, the idea of maximums would serve only to stifle the flow of the game and upset the balance of terms for elected officials.

 

[Black_Hole]

I am against having any minimum, maximum, or requirement. If you want a DP to follow your plan then elect one that will. It is also impossible to enforce that. What are you going to do at the end of the term when that isnt followed? Impeach the leader? Oh wait, we wont know when the law is broken until the end of the turn.

 

[Strider]

I'm all for having some sort of set minimum per term, but I'm definately against the idea of a maximum number of turns per term. What if we somehow reach 50 turns only two weeks into the term? Is the term then over? That doesn't seem fair--or democratic-- to the people who were elected to office for that term. Imposing a maximum of this nature would encourage presidents to play as slowly as they could in order to prolong their term in office.

I'm all for a set minimum. It would ensure that we keep the game progressing at a steady level. However, the idea of maximums would serve only to stifle the flow of the game and upset the balance of terms for elected officials.

Why would a DP reach the limit two weeks into the term? If they know how many there allowed to play for the total term, do you not think there spread them out? I like it for one major reason that I stated already, we know how far were going to get during a single term. Makes long term planning much easier and accurate.

 

[Strider]

I am against having any minimum, maximum, or requirement. If you want a DP to follow your plan then elect one that will. It is also impossible to enforce that. What are you going to do at the end of the term when that isnt followed? Impeach the leader? Oh wait, we wont know when the law is broken until the end of the turn.

Enforce it? Who ever said we had to enforce it? What would be the point? Nothing really, if they really want to break it then there meet the consequences during the next election process.

 

[Black_Hole]

Enforce it? Who ever said we had to enforce it? What would be the point? Nothing really, if they really want to break it then there meet the consequences during the next election process.

yes we are going to CC them, hurting their reputation, just because RL came in and stopped them from meeting the requirement... All this will do is scare people away from being a DP because, they arent sure if they can commit an exact amount of time to playing.

 

[Chieftess]

I'm against going by number of turns, or going by a point system. It adds too much micromanagement to the game. What's gonna happen when we forget what turn we're on? (true, C3C keeps track of the turns for us, but, it's easy to forget in a war or something). What if we made it 45 turns, and one term was so quick that we had nominations just 1 or 2 weeks after the last nomination cycle? (i.e., the first part of the game where the first 20 turns are usually spend building your first 2 units)

Points would complicate things even more. You'd have to have someone keeping track of what turn peace/war started, and what turn the era changed. Even if we could, suppose being at war was 3 points, and the DP was already down to 1 point. If war were declared the next turn, the DP would be at -2 points. That's asking for CCs/PIs.

Let's keep it simple and have it at one month.

 

[YNCS]

I agree with Chieftess.

If the DP appears to be dragging the game out, then we can deal with that problem. If the DP is just whipping through turns, that's a different problem which can also be dealt with. But the idea "you only played 19 turns out of the minimum of 20, I'm ignoring the fact that we had wars with five different civs and there was a long discussion and several polls about which of three wonders to build, I'm going to CC you" seems pointless to me.

 

[DaveShack]

Looking at the DG6 Startup Milestones we need to get polls started on issues which affect elections. For this thread, the issue is how long the terms will be. The minimum / maximum turns per term issue isn't strictly an election issue as far as affecting the actual election polls, but it does affect how people campaign for office.

I propose these polls

How shall terms of office be defined?

• One calendar month
• A fixed number of turns
• Other
• Abstain

Should we have a minimum or maximum number of turns per term?
Note: this is a single choice poll. If any of the yes options gets a majority, then that option wins. If no gets a majority, then it wins and there will be no limits. Otherwise there will be a runoff poll between no and the yes alternative(s) with the highest number of votes (more than one yes option if there is a tie).

• Yes, have a minimum
• Yes, have a maximum
• Yes, have both a minimum and maximum
• No
• Abstain

If there are no objections within the next few hours I'll go ahead and post these.

 

[Black_Hole]

Looking at the DG6 Startup Milestones we need to get polls started on issues which affect elections. For this thread, the issue is how long the terms will be. The minimum / maximum turns per term issue isn't strictly an election issue as far as affecting the actual election polls, but it does affect how people campaign for office.

I propose these polls

How shall terms of office be defined?

• One calendar month
• A fixed number of turns
• Other
• Abstain

Should we have a minimum or maximum number of turns per term?
Note: this is a single choice poll. If any of the yes options gets a majority, then that option wins. If no gets a majority, then it wins and there will be no limits. Otherwise there will be a runoff poll between no and the yes alternative(s) with the highest number of votes (more than one yes option if there is a tie).

• Yes, have a minimum
• Yes, have a maximum
• Yes, have both a minimum and maximum
• No
• Abstain

If there are no objections within the next few hours I'll go ahead and post these.

we already have a poll for a requirement, and no requirement is very strongly winning... this is why i posted the poll that way because i already knew most people didnt want a requirement. You can make another poll if you wish...

 

[DaveShack]

we already have a poll for a requirement, and no requirement is very strongly winning... this is why i posted the poll that way because i already knew most people didnt want a requirement. You can make another poll if you wish...

No need, didn't see it -- or remember voting in it. That's all too common once the 1st digit of one's (2 digit) age is more than 3.

 

[Black_Hole]

How shall terms be defined?

 

[Chieftess]

This discussion has a poll which is now closed. This will move onto the article phase!