reduce governmental positions (PPO discussion 2)

[disorganizer]

The civ3 game of anarchy?

 

[chiefpaco]

I had a vision of a similar game but with a different way of operating which may mesh with your idea of reducing governmental positions. Not sure if I've ironed it out all yet but here goes:
Elected Positions:
Pres
VP

Thats it. The President opens these threads:
- Military Debate
- City Production
- Culture Debate
- Trade Debate
- Diplomatic Debate
- Science Debate

and maybe a couple more, if needed.

Citizens have the responsibility to discuss alternatives in each thread and the President monitors the threads for which ideas seem the best and may open polls to make things official, if desired.

The VP could either share or take certain responsibilities.
3 days between turns would work, giving perhaps 2 days for discussion and 1 for voting. Citizens could then hang out in the threads that interest them the most.

Benefits of the above plan:
- Reduce the # of govt officials necessary to cover each aspect of the game. Less dependency on separate proposals.
- Equal opportunities for each citizen to have a say. More inclusive for everyone, I think.
- Focus is on citizen input, not criticism on one advisor's proposals.
- A responsible President could perhaps more efficiently control the flow of the game.
- Reduce the # of threads and depts and forums we have.
- Centralized city production debate could better serve national needs.

Drawbacks I see (so far):
- Need a very responsible president and/or VP to monitor all this activity.
- Threads that get no responses are up to the President. Is this really a drawback? We already experience this flaw.

 

[disorganizer]

You should just change the following:
For threads with no response, the president makes up the proposals together with the VP and gives them for a poll to citizenry. We should also alow 2 days for polls, because when you dont get to the internet for 1 day, you still can take part.
We could also introduce "helpers" (national employees), which will be no governmental position, but work together with the president to gather all relevant information for the turn-chat. 1 day before the chat starts, they start to collect the info and post in the turn-instruction threads. For each department, this can be 1 (sounds like the leaders now, but without direct influence).
We should then also introduce "watchers" (oposition or constitutional watch), which monitor the activities of the president and vice president to spot misbehaviour or other things which must be changed.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by disorganizer
We should then also introduce "watchers" (oposition or constitutional watch), which monitor the activities of the president and vice president to spot misbehaviour or other things which must be changed.

I don't think this is necessary, as monitoring the activities of others is a popular pasttime around here. If you start making these official positions, we will have nothing but PIs. Just my two cents. I still think we need leaders...

 

[Padma]

I like that proposal, chiefpaco! And I appreciate your pointing out the negatives about it as well.

Disorganizer's point about "helpers" is good. Should they be "elected" or just appointed by the President as need arises?

And all citizens should be "watchers" anyway. (It seems they generally are. )

 

[disorganizer]

Well, the watchers purpose will also be to be on chat an intervene if they find something suspicious. ;-)
The helpers could be elected. Like the leaders now, but without the reponsibilities and rights of a governmental institution.
It is like having the departments being run as citizen groups, where the "leader" of the group is elected every month. The "leaders" of the department act as discussion-animators and information collectors.