FionnMcCumhall
Emperor
One question, is this what the demogame is about? rules and egos? OR is it about a group of people getting together to play a game? Im still havening trouble deciding that, maybe someone can give me the inside scoop.
What is the demogame about?
- Thread starter FionnMcCumhall
- Start date
disorganizer
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 4,233
maybe all of that, and even other things.
different people have different ideas about the game.
some like rulemaking and political debattes, some the true civ3 game, some the rpging, some the communication.... so there is no "what is the game about" which can be said in a single sentence imho.
different people have different ideas about the game.
some like rulemaking and political debattes, some the true civ3 game, some the rpging, some the communication.... so there is no "what is the game about" which can be said in a single sentence imho.
Cheetah
Deity
I understand how you feel Fionn.
I believe that this is a game where we are supposed to have fun, and just as in any other game, it is allowed to do mistakes.
If one gets angry at people just because they miss a goal in football, one wouldnt have much of a team for long.
Errors can happen and errors can be fixed. And after all, its just a game.
I believe that this is a game where we are supposed to have fun, and just as in any other game, it is allowed to do mistakes.
If one gets angry at people just because they miss a goal in football, one wouldnt have much of a team for long.
Errors can happen and errors can be fixed. And after all, its just a game.
Donovan Zoi
The Return
I like the whole package and try to enjoy each aspect of the game as much as time allows.
The Democracy Game has many aspects of a true democracy. Spirited debate, balances of power, and the right to enforce the will of the people are cornerstones of any thriving democracy. Though unpleasant to some, these tenets are really what I believe this game was founded on.
All in all, I think that the DemoGame has been a successful experiment, even taking into consideration our current plight. Let's face it, the people are going to be divided on some issues. You can't please everyone. But in the long run, the best proposal usually wins. The divisive battles are memorable, and always educational. Most PI's, while a distraction, usually light the way for us to better our laws and ourselves.
Then there are the times when the nation is united for a single purpose, whether retaliating against a cowardly attack or pulling out all the stops in a Wonder race. These challenges find Fanatikans working together, past wrongs forgotten, toward a common goal. And these are the fun times that make all the hard work worthwhile.
I love it here in Fanatika, and I wouldn't change a single thing.
The Democracy Game has many aspects of a true democracy. Spirited debate, balances of power, and the right to enforce the will of the people are cornerstones of any thriving democracy. Though unpleasant to some, these tenets are really what I believe this game was founded on.
All in all, I think that the DemoGame has been a successful experiment, even taking into consideration our current plight. Let's face it, the people are going to be divided on some issues. You can't please everyone. But in the long run, the best proposal usually wins. The divisive battles are memorable, and always educational. Most PI's, while a distraction, usually light the way for us to better our laws and ourselves.
Then there are the times when the nation is united for a single purpose, whether retaliating against a cowardly attack or pulling out all the stops in a Wonder race. These challenges find Fanatikans working together, past wrongs forgotten, toward a common goal. And these are the fun times that make all the hard work worthwhile.
I love it here in Fanatika, and I wouldn't change a single thing.
FionnMcCumhall
Emperor
by the way this is a retorical question, i already know what the game is about i should by now at least .
I mean lately all i see are personal attacks and PI's and god knows what else when things dont go someones way because of a mistake. I always thought we were supposed to be playing a game not catering to the egos of leaders
. I mean lately all i see are personal attacks and PI's and god knows what else when things dont go someones way because of a mistake. I always thought we were supposed to be playing a game not catering to the egos of leaders
disorganizer
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 4,233
ah btw:
all be careful, cause some people may be roleplaying things sometimes... so taking things personal is useless!
all be careful, cause some people may be roleplaying things sometimes... so taking things personal is useless!
Fionn, I believe you are on the re-bound from your PI. This is why you shun our PI procedure. How would you feel if your instructions(As domestic leader) were ignored? You would be frustrated. You would want justice! We all want justice! That is what these PI's are here for! To ensure justice and FUN! This game would not be fun if it was not for these PI's. Elected officials would have the ability to get away with anything, and I know that I get my fix of a dictatorship everyday at school, and I dont need it here! This is a democracy, and in a democracy, we have judicial procedures that are essential to the well being of the nation.
Ps. I wrote an essay on teacher Tyranny if anyone wants to read it!
Ps. I wrote an essay on teacher Tyranny if anyone wants to read it!
PIs rarely accomplish anything and are most definately not fun. We have never had a leader commit more than a minor infraction, but each time we do have one do something minor, we spend way too much time and energy making sure that they get a stern warning. Seems like a waste to me. If someone doesn't like the way a leader does things, they should vote for someone else. If our leaders don't have leeway, they really can't do their jobs very well. This has been a fundamental disagreement since the beginning of the game, but I still hold to this opinion.
donsig
Low level intermediary
I've always thought it was about a bunch of people getting together and playing a civ 3 game. I always liked the idea of having the Civ 3 game cut up into sections where everyone gets a chance to micromanage some aspect of it. I've also liked the interaction in the strategy debates and I've learned alot about how to play Civ 3. (I'm closing in on my first victory at emperor level using the strategy we started with in this demogame, along with a couple things I picked up from DG1. 
)
Some people take the PIs as if they are an attack on the person rather than a mechanism to ensure our rules are followed. To me the rules are there to divide up the Civ 3 game responsibilites so that more and more citizens can meaningfully contribute to the demogame. A perusal of the PI's throughout both DG1 and DG2 will show that the consistent theme concerns the division of who does what in the Civ 3 game. (I know the DP plays the game but in theory most of what the DP does should be from instructions.) The PIs fly when it is percieved that the DP is doing too much on his or her own. (Note that most PIs are directed against the DP.) It is a shame that most of those who actively participate in the demogame (especially those who act as DP) do not realize this.
)Some people take the PIs as if they are an attack on the person rather than a mechanism to ensure our rules are followed. To me the rules are there to divide up the Civ 3 game responsibilites so that more and more citizens can meaningfully contribute to the demogame. A perusal of the PI's throughout both DG1 and DG2 will show that the consistent theme concerns the division of who does what in the Civ 3 game. (I know the DP plays the game but in theory most of what the DP does should be from instructions.) The PIs fly when it is percieved that the DP is doing too much on his or her own. (Note that most PIs are directed against the DP.) It is a shame that most of those who actively participate in the demogame (especially those who act as DP) do not realize this.
Zarn
Le Républicain Catholique
It's also about the Jedi taking over... I mean... ummm. Alright we are planning on taking over CFC, and there's nothing that anyone can do about it, except for the whole ban thing. Opps.
*Waves his hand*
The Jedi are good. The Jedi are everyone's friends. The Jedi are not here to control CFC. We are here to help, people*
Man, that was close.
@Fionn- Yes, it has been a bit out of control. When I noted Apolyton about PIs, a former pres. there said that we should just drop these things. He said that Apolyton messes up alot, and no one gets in trouble for it. They really don't have PIs.They fix there mistakes and get on with it.
*Waves his hand*
The Jedi are good. The Jedi are everyone's friends. The Jedi are not here to control CFC. We are here to help, people*
Man, that was close.
@Fionn- Yes, it has been a bit out of control. When I noted Apolyton about PIs, a former pres. there said that we should just drop these things. He said that Apolyton messes up alot, and no one gets in trouble for it. They really don't have PIs.They fix there mistakes and get on with it.
Furry Spatula
...
Fionn, I agree this question needs to be answered. As most people remember as children, playing a game with too many rules makes the game stop being fun and makes it a chore. We need to re-evaluate this entire game and all the laws we have and how to enforce them.
PI's are important to some extent to make sure there is a deterance however i find this last/present PI fest to be a bit silly. It doesn't realy seem to serve any purpose but show us what the state of the game is.
I have some suggestions to help fix this game up somewhat. It will involve revamping the rules quite a bit. But we need to change the rules in terms of adding/changing/removing a few things:
1) PI's take too long to go through, they must be shortend. If someone pleads guilty, allow it to go directly to sentencing. Also, we should allow the use of precedance. We have info such as the problems the action caused to the game play, the number of offences the player has commited, and what the offence was. This should allow the game to progress faster. The game tends to get boring when it changes from a game of Civ 3 to a game of psuedo-politics. I realy thought this was a Civ 3 game.
2) Rethink the point of a PI. What is the goal of it? To be punitave and punish people for doing anything against the rules, even if it is easily fixable and it appears that there wont be any large risk of it happening again? Or just to make sure that the game follows some basic guides to make sure that it keeps some sort of form. Presently it is my opinion that we are sticking to the rules way too much.
3) Perhapse add a way of initiating a mid-term re-election for a position. But this must be regulated in a way in that there wont be too many steps to get through it, and that we wont have a few of these after each turn chat. If we realy are PO'd at how someone is doing their job but it isn't PI worthy then we may need a way to kick them out. However this can't be abused. It should be used to create personal vendetta's and keep some lines that have been drawn to grow and slpit the game up. Perhapse a rule of one a term at max and only under some circumstances (which will be determined later). Or maybe this idea is just bad and it will cause more headaches and more feelings of the game turning personal.
These are just a few idea's, however they are major changes. As it stands now, the game seems to be going down the crapper. PI's are strict following of the rules are distracting us from the matters of the actual game. However, one thought i have on this is the fact that the demogame might have been going on for too long. By that i mean it's kinda like a sports team. After a while the team kinda splits up, you have certain people you are close to and will always support, and others that you can't realy stand. It appears that these lines are forming as personal PI's and just a large number of PI's are happening. PI's are popping up left and right, and they seem to be happening just to be punitive. Again, i must reiterate, If the problem is fixed then lets just move on with it. If we don't we'll get bogged down in non Civ3 stuff. And this is a Civ3 game not a psuedo-political game. I remember hearing the reason we don't allow political parties in the game is because it polarizes the citizens too much. But it seems that we have managed that without parties. Perhapse putting an (insert number here) term maximum would fix the problem. Say if you have been in an elected position for 4 terms in one demogame season, you can't run again for that season of the demogame. The four terms can be consecutive or split up. It seems the problem is coming from a few people who get in power and hold the seats for a long time and have different views on how the game should go. And thus you get conflicts that cause PI's left right and center. ALso, imposing a limit as to the terms would allow other newer people to get in the game and encourage growth. If we have a few people in power the entire time or for the majority of the time then you tend to get these divides.
Please note that this isn't a personal attack on anyone. THis is simply human nature. It happens all the time, and it isn't realy anything you can controll on your own. It happened with me on the sport team I'm in. And it isn't pleasant. It makes the activity loose all the excitment. So again. Don't take it personaly, this would happen given the same circumstances with any people on the forum 9 times outta 10.
PI's are important to some extent to make sure there is a deterance however i find this last/present PI fest to be a bit silly. It doesn't realy seem to serve any purpose but show us what the state of the game is.
I have some suggestions to help fix this game up somewhat. It will involve revamping the rules quite a bit. But we need to change the rules in terms of adding/changing/removing a few things:
1) PI's take too long to go through, they must be shortend. If someone pleads guilty, allow it to go directly to sentencing. Also, we should allow the use of precedance. We have info such as the problems the action caused to the game play, the number of offences the player has commited, and what the offence was. This should allow the game to progress faster. The game tends to get boring when it changes from a game of Civ 3 to a game of psuedo-politics. I realy thought this was a Civ 3 game.
2) Rethink the point of a PI. What is the goal of it? To be punitave and punish people for doing anything against the rules, even if it is easily fixable and it appears that there wont be any large risk of it happening again? Or just to make sure that the game follows some basic guides to make sure that it keeps some sort of form. Presently it is my opinion that we are sticking to the rules way too much.
3) Perhapse add a way of initiating a mid-term re-election for a position. But this must be regulated in a way in that there wont be too many steps to get through it, and that we wont have a few of these after each turn chat. If we realy are PO'd at how someone is doing their job but it isn't PI worthy then we may need a way to kick them out. However this can't be abused. It should be used to create personal vendetta's and keep some lines that have been drawn to grow and slpit the game up. Perhapse a rule of one a term at max and only under some circumstances (which will be determined later). Or maybe this idea is just bad and it will cause more headaches and more feelings of the game turning personal.
These are just a few idea's, however they are major changes. As it stands now, the game seems to be going down the crapper. PI's are strict following of the rules are distracting us from the matters of the actual game. However, one thought i have on this is the fact that the demogame might have been going on for too long. By that i mean it's kinda like a sports team. After a while the team kinda splits up, you have certain people you are close to and will always support, and others that you can't realy stand. It appears that these lines are forming as personal PI's and just a large number of PI's are happening. PI's are popping up left and right, and they seem to be happening just to be punitive. Again, i must reiterate, If the problem is fixed then lets just move on with it. If we don't we'll get bogged down in non Civ3 stuff. And this is a Civ3 game not a psuedo-political game. I remember hearing the reason we don't allow political parties in the game is because it polarizes the citizens too much. But it seems that we have managed that without parties. Perhapse putting an (insert number here) term maximum would fix the problem. Say if you have been in an elected position for 4 terms in one demogame season, you can't run again for that season of the demogame. The four terms can be consecutive or split up. It seems the problem is coming from a few people who get in power and hold the seats for a long time and have different views on how the game should go. And thus you get conflicts that cause PI's left right and center. ALso, imposing a limit as to the terms would allow other newer people to get in the game and encourage growth. If we have a few people in power the entire time or for the majority of the time then you tend to get these divides.
Please note that this isn't a personal attack on anyone. THis is simply human nature. It happens all the time, and it isn't realy anything you can controll on your own. It happened with me on the sport team I'm in. And it isn't pleasant. It makes the activity loose all the excitment. So again. Don't take it personaly, this would happen given the same circumstances with any people on the forum 9 times outta 10.
FionnMcCumhall
Emperor
Goonie this has nothing to do with my PI to set you straigh, this has to do with PI's in general, ive always been oppsed to them, they may get people to the forums to vote but everything else stalls. Also ive had my instructions as domestic leader ignored before, but when i asked for a PI i was told it was in procedure, which it was and i was hopping mad. Im not telling you this next thing as a personal attack but do your research first before you assume things young one
disorganizer
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 4,233
just a flashback from dg1:
same discussions, same arguments... after a month it was over
so sitting it out maybe helps again ;-)
and btw:
most of the pi's even strengthened the position of the official who was subject of the pi. most of the time the pi'ed persons got re-elected for example ;-)
same discussions, same arguments... after a month it was over
so sitting it out maybe helps again ;-)
and btw:
most of the pi's even strengthened the position of the official who was subject of the pi. most of the time the pi'ed persons got re-elected for example ;-)
Gingerbread Man
Dark Magus
My suggestion for revamping the PI rules:
The only people allowed to speak in the PIs are the Judge advocate, the Chief Justice, The public defender, and the accused. If any citizens have input, e.g. evidence, opinions, they should post them in the JA/CJ/PD's thread, and the JA/CJ/PD will 'de-emotionalise' them, so there will be no flaming.
either that or scrap PI's. the CJ will permit a sort of PI, and the JA and PD will decide how many turn chats the accused will miss.
or: in a PI, each person, apart from the court members, is permitted only one post, not directed at anyone. If they need to clear up something, they edit their post. this would stop arguments from going back and forth.
The only people allowed to speak in the PIs are the Judge advocate, the Chief Justice, The public defender, and the accused. If any citizens have input, e.g. evidence, opinions, they should post them in the JA/CJ/PD's thread, and the JA/CJ/PD will 'de-emotionalise' them, so there will be no flaming.
either that or scrap PI's. the CJ will permit a sort of PI, and the JA and PD will decide how many turn chats the accused will miss.
or: in a PI, each person, apart from the court members, is permitted only one post, not directed at anyone. If they need to clear up something, they edit their post. this would stop arguments from going back and forth.
Octavian X
is not a pipe.
My opinion is that, while lengthy, the PI process currently is a very good one. The flaming and off topic discussions that occur are already dealt with in the Code of Laws: the Chief Justice is tasked with ensuring that discussion remains on topic. (REF CoL E.3.D)
A lot could be avoided, though, if the judiciary was given a bit more power to decided what charges become full-fledged investigations. I will call the last 6 PIs as an example. Many people complained because that many seperate charges could have been easily compiled into two, or even a single, investigation. Had the judiciary been given the power not to fully investigate those charges, we could have avoided much trouble.
A lot could be avoided, though, if the judiciary was given a bit more power to decided what charges become full-fledged investigations. I will call the last 6 PIs as an example. Many people complained because that many seperate charges could have been easily compiled into two, or even a single, investigation. Had the judiciary been given the power not to fully investigate those charges, we could have avoided much trouble.
disorganizer
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2002
- Messages
- 4,233
GM: then the PI's would be useless, as they could be done via PM.
Similar threads
