What should a Deputy do?

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Ok. So, basically, it is agreed that the Governors decisions should be followed to the letter, unless changed by one of the methods stated in the constituion.

Therefore, I would think that the Deputy cannot change the decisions by themselves. It is clearly stated in the constitution which methods can change the Governors decisions, and a deputy being in 'charge' is not one of them. Granted, the deputy acts in place of the governor when the governor is not present, but he is not the governor, so he cannot change the decisions that were already made.

So, we have agreed where the 'line' is now. The deputy should act on the governors behalf and follow their decisions.

Now, it seems to me the main reason for this poll was to try and avoid a mistake from happening in the future. So, again, it seems like the real thing that needs to get worked out is the logistics behind the governors queues. As long as the Deputy knows what the governor has decided, he can act on behalf of that information.

So, it seems we just need to establish a protocol for the governors to post their decisions and perhaps increase the communication a governor has with their deputy, right?

 

[donsig]

Duke: Our four governors have each started a provincial thread in the government sub-forum. Build queues are currently posted in these provincial threads, with the exception of Istar. Eyrei has posted istar's build queue directly in the May 14 turn chat instructions thread. I suggest the other governors also post their build queues to that thread. Having them all in one thread will greatly speed turn chat start up.

The relevant links are listed below. I would point out that Eklektikos' builds were queued up during the last turn chat.

The Normany thread.

The Ameri thread.

The Asphinxia thread.

May 14 turn chat instructions.

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Yep. I'm aware of the threads.

So, having the build queues being easily found solves the problems that are being discussed here then, right?

 

[donsig]

Originally posted by Duke of Marlbrough
Ok. So, basically, it is agreed that the Governors decisions should be followed to the letter, unless changed by one of the methods stated in the constituion.

Therefore, I would think that the Deputy cannot change the decisions by themselves. It is clearly stated in the constitution which methods can change the Governors decisions, and a deputy being in 'charge' is not one of them. Granted, the deputy acts in place of the governor when the governor is not present, but he is not the governor, so he cannot change the decisions that were already made.

So, we have agreed where the 'line' is now. The deputy should act on the governors behalf and follow their decisions.

Now, it seems to me the main reason for this poll was to try and avoid a mistake from happening in the future.

I re-read the debate in the Istar thread and things are a bit more complex than your summary Duke. In general what you have said above is correct but there is the special case of the domestic leader being the governor of the first province. The question to be resolved is this:

Is the Deputy Domestic Leader acting governor of the first province in the absence of the Domestic Leader?

I assumed all along the answer to this question is 'yes' and acted accordingly.

I would point out that once a governor declares a build queue he or she has the right to change it as he or she sees fit (subject of course to constitutional over-rides). This is another reason why I think governor's should be present and voiced during turn chat. If something comes up during play a governor can simply authorize a change in build queue without the formality of a spot vote.

Forcing governors to have their messages relayed through other voiced members of the government means that what a governor says will not be in the turn chat logs.

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Originally posted by donsig
Is the Deputy Domestic Leader acting governor of the first province in the absence of the Domestic Leader?

I assumed all along the answer to this question is 'yes' and acted accordingly.

So I guess this is really what we may need a poll about then.

I agree that it is much better that the Governor be in the chat, but when that is not possible, it seems like it shoudl fall to the deputy to handle the province.

I'll be back in about an hour and a half with more...

 

[Shaitan]

I don't have time to post comments right now (screaming baby and then a pillow with my name on it) but I wanted to clear up some confusion right quick. The last several posts have referred to Governors and their Deputies. Governors don't have deputies. The Deputies we're discussing are Departmental Deputies.

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

If this poll was based off of the discussion that was going on about the Governors build queue not being followed and then a poll about should a deputy follow the leaders plans, then, in this special case, it seems that everyone seemed to agree that the Governor of the first province (who is also Domestic Leader) had a deputy.

Like donsig said, the real question seems to be; is the deputy Domestic Leader also the deputy governor of the first province?

It wouldn't seem that a Governor would need a deputy, since his build queues should be suffiencent direction through the few turns that are played out during a chat. You guys need to clarify that point I guess.

So, is it agreed that this poll is not really necessary then?

And, if everybody seems to agree on this issue, why was this thread getting so bad that I had to step in to calm it down?

 

[Cyc]

The reason it turned sour for me, Duke, was simply a matter of poll procedure by Department Leaders. If the poll had been put together in this poorly worded manner with no previous discussion by an ordinary citizen with no political gain, I probably wouldn't have said much except voicing my opinion. We should now address the issue of Poll Standards to resolve the problems that seem to key on Government sponored polls, or any polls for that matter.

I would propose any poll started by or sponsored by any Leader, Department, or other Government official first have a discussion thread posted introducing the subject and giving a rough outline of the options, locations, or point of views. In having a discussion thread for the subject, all citizens can examine the items, listen to different points of view and make up their mind in calm and informed manner. I say this because I see too many polls pushed on people who have to make a quick decision when they may not understand the issue or know all their options. You start a discussion with a discussion, not a poll. You start a poll with a poll.
I have started several discussions knowing that a poll is on the way. This is to get opinions of the populace so accurate and well defined options can be listed in the poll. This Procedure of requiring a poll to be preceded by a discussion thread should definitely be applied to Government/Leader/Department Polls. It would be an automatic watchdog mechinism to safeguard the citizenry.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Cyc
The reason it turned sour for me, Duke, was simply a matter of poll procedure by Department Leaders. If the poll had been put together in this poorly worded manner with no previous discussion by an ordinary citizen with no political gain, I probably wouldn't have said much except voicing my opinion. We should now address the issue of Poll Standards to resolve the problems that seem to key on Government sponored polls, or any polls for that matter.

I would propose any poll started by or sponsored by any Leader, Department, or other Government official first have a discussion thread posted introducing the subject and giving a rough outline of the options, locations, or point of views. In having a discussion thread for the subject, all citizens can examine the items, listen to different points of view and make up their mind in calm and informed manner. I say this because I see too many polls pushed on people who have to make a quick decision when they may not understand the issue or know all their options. You start a discussion with a discussion, not a poll. You start a poll with a poll.
I have started several discussions knowing that a poll is on the way. This is to get opinions of the populace so accurate and well defined options can be listed in the poll. This Procedure of requiring a poll to be preceded by a discussion thread should definitely be applied to Government/Leader/Department Polls. It would be an automatic watchdog mechinism to safeguard the citizenry.

I have to disagree here. Forcing a prior discussion to every poll will take far too long, and will delay any or all actions that normally involve a poll. Unless we separate turns by 4 days or so, this is just not feasible. I think everyone agrees that a poll must be up at least 36 hours before the turn chat, and if you add another 24 hours to that for prior discussion, we are almost at three days.

As far as the domestic leader's deputy becoming governor in the leader's absence, I also have to disagree. The deputy domestic leader is the deputy governor for the first province in the absence of the domestic leader. If build queues are posted, they should be followed except in an emergency. The reason I started this debate about my deputy's actions was because I do not consider a peacetime request by the military leader, an emergency. I understand that donsig may not have seen my build queues, as they were posted in the presidential thread. Keep in mind that these were posted before we had the turn instructions threads. I would like to reiterate my suggestion that anyone who ends up playing a turn should check the president's thread, not to find build queues, but to see if the president posted any instructions, and if there is other information in there that may be useful.

We need to define when and to what extent a deputy can override the leader's instructions in the event that the leader is absent from the turn chat. I would say that only in very dire circumstances can these instructions be overridden. A forum absence, where the leader has not posted instructions is a completely different story. In this situation, the deputy must make all decisions for that department. That is why we have deputies.

Finally, I would like to apologize to donsig that this became such a huge, very public debate. I have to admit, I was quite upset as that build queue in Eyr had been ignored for the last two turns. Someone had to have read it. I think Cyc did mention during the chat that I wanted an aqueduct. Anyway, that is in the past, and should remain there. Now, it is for us to define the powers and responsibilities of the deputy leaders. The paragraph before this states my opinion on the matter.

 

[donsig]

I don't mind the huge public debate eyrei.

The gist of your earlier post eyrei seems to be:

1) the deputy domestic leader is the deputy governor of the first province

2) deputy leaders or deputy governors must follow the leader's or governor's build queues unless there is an emergency

I agree with 1 and disagree with 2. I think deputies should be allowed to exercise their judgement to take advantage of any opportunities that may arise. I also think that as new information or new requests from other parts of the government are made the deputy must use his or her judgement in dealing with the altered situations.

Also, the point was raised earlier in this thread about who decides when it is appropriate for the deputy to take initiative. Who would decide that it is an emergency? We cannot assume that everyone will know an emergency when they see one.

 

[eyrei]

It might be easiest to simply compile a list of emergencies. I will start:

Military Emergencies

1. A stack of 5 or more units, regardless of foreign relations, within striking range of a city. This constitutes an emergency for that city, and the military leader could override the governors build queue. Also, with the agreement of the domestic department representative, or a spot cabinet vote, the military department (or whoever is playing the game), could rush this unit.

2. Declaration of war by an immediate neighbor. This constitutes an emergency in all cities that border that nation. Also, if it is decided that our military is insufficient to deal with the threat, it would become a nationwide emergency.

3. Declaration of war by two or more nations, provided they are on the same continent. This constitutes and emergency for all border cities.

Cultural Emergency

1. A border moves in a way that is not favorable to us. This would allow the cultural leader to override the governors build queue in the closest city to start a cultural improvement.

2. A border moves, depriving us of a luxury or resource. This would allow the cultural department to change the build queue, and rush the improvement, provide the cabinet does not override.

3. A city has more than 2 tiles of workable area that are within another civs cultural borders. This city is therefore in danger of culture-flipping, and the culture leader could override the governors build queue.

Those, I believe, are examples of the emergencies mentioned in the constitution.

 

[Shaitan]

I agree that those are all emergencies, I just don't think it's possible to categorize all of the possible things that could be considered emergencies. This has to be kept very simple, which limits what we can use for checks and balances.

Proposal: Deputies cannot change a Leader's plans unless they have support. Example - an extra resource is hooked up that was intended for trade to China but it turns out Rome will offer more. The Deputy is running the show. The Deputy wants to overrule the Leader's plan of selling the resource to China as this new opportunity is better. The Deputy requests an override support from the Pres (or Designated Player) and at least one other person with Council Authority (Leader or Deputy, not a Chat Rep). This would mean that at least 2 elected officials agree with the Deputy's decision but would not require something as big as a Council Spot Vote. This is more along the lines of a "Proposed, Seconded, Carried". It gives the Deputy freedom for creative thinking and reacting to new circumstances while providing a check against flippant changes.

Thoughts?

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Shaitan
I agree that those are all emergencies, I just don't think it's possible to categorize all of the possible things that could be considered emergencies. This has to be kept very simple, which limits what we can use for checks and balances.

Proposal: Deputies cannot change a Leader's plans unless they have support. Example - an extra resource is hooked up that was intended for trade to China but it turns out Rome will offer more. The Deputy is running the show. The Deputy wants to overrule the Leader's plan of selling the resource to China as this new opportunity is better. The Deputy requests an override support from the Pres (or Designated Player) and at least one other person with Council Authority (Leader or Deputy, not a Chat Rep). This would mean that at least 2 elected officials agree with the Deputy's decision.

Thoughts?

The only problem with this, is that it gives too much power to those who can attend the turn chat. I think, with some work, it would be possible to identify almost everything that is considered an emergency. If something that is unlisted comes up, the turn can simply be stopped to discuss. We could also limit the discussion to build queues and rushing.

The example you listed is common sense. No leader would not want the new deal, unless the reason for the original one was to secure good relations with China. This information would probably be posted in the turn instructions thread.

 

[donsig]

originally posted by eyrei:

It might be easiest to simply compile a list of emergencies. I will start:

Eyrei we were discussing when a deputy could would be able to use his or her judgement in the absence of a leader. Your proposals are about leaders over-riding governors - a proccess that is already well defined by the constitution.

The military leader can only over-ride a governor's build queue in time of invasion which is defined by as "(when there are troops in our territory from a country we are at war with)".

"The Cultural leader can override a governor's decisions for the construction of cultural improvement's."

"A governor's production decision can be overturned by a council vote ..."

The constitution is here. The quotes above are from sections E & F.

 

[Shaitan]

Okay, let's back up a step. We need to answer a different question first.

Is a Deputy only allowed to overrule the Leader's plan when it's an emergency or should they be able to exercise their own discretion for all in-game occurences? My example above wasn't an emergency but just about everybody would agree (with no other information provided such as appeasing China) that the Deputy's desire for a change of plan is justified and proper. Should changes like this be allowed?

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by donsig
originally posted by eyrei:


Eyrei we were discussing when a deputy could would be able to use his or her judgement in the absence of a leader. Your proposals are about leaders over-riding governors - a proccess that is already well defined by the constitution.

The military leader can only over-ride a governor's build queue in time of invasion which is defined by as "(when there are troops in our territory from a country we are at war with)".

"The Cultural leader can override a governor's decisions for the construction of cultural improvement's."

"A governor's production decision can be overturned by a council vote ..."

The constitution is here. The quotes above are from sections E & F.

True, but we are particularly talking about the domestic department, which includes build queues and when they can be changed.

The reason I am listing emergencies, is that we are trying to define that grey area to some extent, where a deputy can change the directives of the leader. We need to make this area less grey, and more black and white. Emergencies would definately allow the deputy to make changes.

Hmmm. I thought we changed the wording of that part about the cultural leader override. It gives broad power for this to be done at any time.... Sorry, that's another topic.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Shaitan
Okay, let's back up a step. We need to answer a different question first.

Is a Deputy only allowed to overrule the Leader's plan when it's an emergency or should they be able to exercise their own discretion for all in-game occurences? My example above wasn't an emergency but just about everybody would agree (with no other information provided such as appeasing China) that the Deputy's desire for a change of plan is justified and proper. Should changes like this be allowed?

The deputy should have a very good reason, and the change should only be in the application of a general principle. The general principle itself should not be changed. For instance trading to a different civ for a better price, is still making the trade, so the principle is the same.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that there is very little room for interpretation with build queues, and they should only be changed in emergencies. If a governor or the domestic leader says build an aqueduct, unless the deputy can figure out a way to build an aqueduct faster, the city should continue producing an aqueduct.

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by eyrei
Hmmm. I thought we changed the wording of that part about the cultural leader override. It gives broad power for this to be done at any time.... Sorry, that's another topic.

I'd say a fair limiter for this would be that the city does not control its full 20 tile radius (due to lack of border expansion or foreign border encroachment).

 

[Shaitan]

Originally posted by eyrei


The deputy should have a very good reason, and the change should only be in the application of a general principle. The general principle itself should not be changed. For instance trading to a different civ for a better price, is still making the trade, so the principle is the same.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that there is very little room for interpretation with build queues, and they should only be changed in emergencies. If a governor or the domestic leader says build an aqueduct, unless the deputy can figure out a way to build an aqueduct faster, the city should continue producing an aqueduct.

This could be fixed easily by making the Governor aspect of the Domestic Department separate from the other duties. In other words, the Domestic Deputy is not the Deputy Governor of the capital province. This puts the Domestic Leader's build cues into the same boat as the other governors - it would require a Council Vote initiated by the Pres (Designated Player) to override them.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Shaitan

This could be fixed easily by making the Governor aspect of the Domestic Department separate from the other duties. In other words, the Domestic Deputy is not the Deputy Governor of the capital province. This puts the Domestic Leader's build cues into the same boat as the other governors - it would require a Council Vote initiated by the Pres (Designated Player) to override them.

I was actually just considering this. What I would propose, is that, plus making it clear that should any governor not post build queues, it is the responsibility of the domestic leader, or the deputy domestic leader to designate these. The old build queues should obviously be checked to make sure that everything in them has been completed. Alternatively, it could be made solely the responsibility of the deputy domestic leader to designate the build queues for absent governors.