Which constitution will we have?

[zyxy]

There are three proposals for a Constitution. One written by Nobody, one by Ravensfire, one by Strider. This poll is to decide which of these proposals shall be used as the basis for the Constitution (and Code of Laws, if applicable) of Demogame VII.

Links:

• Meta discussion
• Nobody's proposal
• Ravensfire's proposal
• Strider's proposal

(in each case, the constitution is near the start of the thread. Some of them come with a Code of Laws).

This is a public poll, open for 3 days (72 hrs). You can vote for one option only. You must be a registered citizen of Demogame VII to vote. The option (other than Abstain) with most votes wins.

Please note: this is not a ratification poll. It merely decides which of the three frameworks to follow.

EDIT: summaries for proposals by Strider and Ravensfire. Originals are in the Meta discussion thread (link is above).

I can do that easily enough for mine:

• Special attention paid to making Elected Officials more powerful. This will hopefully increase the interest and demand in the elected offices.
• Giving deputies odd-jobs, and more power in dealing with there office. This should allow the deputie poistions to also be wanted, on a lesser scale than the leaders.
• Detailed polling standards to help stop a citizen from undermining a leaders authority/plans. Also added in a clause that deals with polls of the same topic, but of differant timeframes.
• President selects the DP. Not as far reaching as the DP pool, and much more likely to work correctly.
• Lowers the amount of time it takes to run a turnchat. This should also open up the number of people who can play as DP.
• Another attempt to get more information to the citizens on the forums. Hopefully will work better than last DG's clause.
• Allows a PI (or CC) to be handled privately, instead of causing a huge public fuse.
• Modified to handle 5BC efficiently.
• Includes a Glossery of Terms, which will help newer players learn what is meant by differant DG-oriented terms (and may also help the Judiciary in Judicial Reviews, knows what the articles creator meant by a certain term).

• Framework style ruleset - Basics and core rules in Constitution, details in Code of Laws
• Layout and language are easy to read and understand
• Recall provision
• DP function seperate from President - allows more citizens to consider each role
• People get to approve each DP
• DP's used in an order, with new DP's getting first chance - no playing favorites
• Structured for 5BC game variant
• Focus is on the Governors, not national level leaders
• Elected offices provided freedom to accomplish tasks
• Elected official required to keep citizens updated about their office

I've borrowed heavily from the various rulesets in the past, and some excellent ideas that have been tossed around. The core framework from DG3, in particular, was inspirition to rewrite and remove several overally large sections from the Constitution.

There are a few key elements to what I'm proposing. First, I've tried to make the format and language clear and concise. Reading the Constitution shouldn't require a dictionary or a roadmap. I've tried to group things that make sense to group, and put things in an order that seems right.

Second, the Designated Player and President roles are seperate now. More than a few people have refused Presidential nominations soley because of the time requirements of playing the save. There are also people that want to play the save, but don't want the political junk of being President. This seperates the two roles, while still allowing all citizens to consider and approve anyone interested in either role.

Finally, the ruleset is structured for the 5BC variant. Our initial 5 cities will be the focus of the game, and each have their own Governor. Nearly everything we produce and build will come from these 5 cities. The focus and individual attention will enable us to manage them effectively. Combining all acquired cities into one position made just as much sense - grouping cities with some production capacity together gives a rewarding and challenging position. I think this will be the most challenging position in the game, rewarding those citizens with strong skills.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Black_Hole]

Ravenfires by far...
It has just the nessecary framework, defines 5BC, and uses a pool of DPs which is seperate from the President...
Excellent Job!

 

[Nobody]

it seems like this demogame is dead, but i will vote for Ravensfires anyway

 

[ravensfire]

zyxy,

If you would be so kind, please copy in the summaries Strider and I created into your initial post.

Thanks for putting this together!

-- Ravensfire

 

[Black_Hole]

it seems like this demogame is dead, but i will vote for Ravensfires anyway

once the game actually starts participation will come back...

 

[DaveShack]

I have to pick Ravensfire's version, even though I detest one of its provisions (supermajority for amendments) and am worried about the feasibility of another (5BC might be immutable even if more than half of the people hate it). Maybe we'll get incredibly lucky and neither issue will matter.

Nothing particularily wrong with either Strider's or Nobody's version, just have to go with the one which is slightly better.

 

[mhcarver]

I'm voting for ravensfires version and well, that's about all I have to say, time for the next game to start already

 

[zyxy]

zyxy,

If you would be so kind, please copy in the summaries Strider and I created into your initial post.

Thanks for putting this together!

-- Ravensfire

I would be.
Done.

 

[greekguy]

for anyone else who hasn't voted yet...

 

[GenMarshall]

Gah, did not get the chance to vote , I would have voted for Strider's anyway.