Announcement

**#endgame** · March 10, 2005, 05:49

Release it with my entry for the propoganda thread (appropriately edited of course

)

Change is good, except for when it's bad :P. In this case I think

.

-- CTO #endgame

**-SafaN-** · March 10, 2005, 10:15

I'm still lurking, and in a week I should have internet @ home, then I can be more of a help

greetz

**AndiD** · March 10, 2005, 16:12

Great!

I'll just play the moderator role now - no comments on the matter itself, just "brokering" between you guys and our external consultant. I'll also contact a few previously active players via PM and see what they say.

Draft 1 from arginine - open for comments

This is going to be a tough read... Better language will help greatly. I am not done with this yet/ and missed some ideas. good luck reading :P

This document is intended to be rules on how Morgan Industries will be governed. In particular, I have written it with people whom can be active one week, but be unavailible the next week.

At the simplest, Morgan Corporate Law will revolve around the laws created by the board of directors.

Voting power is determined by the level of activity / participation. A member who has shown little activity and has made minimal posts ~3, 0 votes. After about 5 legitimate posts in the last 2 months, 1 vote. Post every ~2 weeks with a relevent post and seems up to date, 2 votes. An active member 3 votes. Non****ty performance in a high responsibility position or 2 low responsibility positions (not counting landowner or land manager) adds 1 point. That gives a maximum of 4 votes. Votes on a big bill or a big bill of a similar topic adds with authorship in the last 4 weeks, >25% 1 vote, >50% 2 votes. The sum of good responses, rebuttles during debate is added in as well.

Example: Fred holds the position of Commander and Chief and wrote a bill for increased naval buildup in the eastern seas. He would get 3 votes +1 for his position and +2 for writing the bill for 6 votes on the bill. Stryder who pops in every few weeks votes against the bill with his 2 votes. The respected greedy and positionless peacenick Ralph get 3 votes. Bob who just joined gets 0 votes. Al who joined a month ago and posts somewhat actively gets 2 votes. Albert whom is similar to Al, except joined 3 months ago and made many good points and costs for the naval buildup gets 5 votes.

// HIGH RESPONSIBILITY POSITIONS

Chief Counsel - renders judgement on the interpretation of the bills and treaties.
Vice Counsel - a backup to the chief counsel

MILITARY - controls ALL military units in or near a war zone and in strategic locations and all OFFENSIVE military units. The Commander and Chief is the head guy, but should work with the vice commander and chief. The military controls military cities. Who the military heads are classified.

Commander and Chief - effectively the most powerful Morganite. CAN NOT HOLD ANY OTHER POSITIONS EXCEPT for land manager and backup land manager
Vice Commander and Chief - a backup. should talk to the commander and chief often, so will be up to date, and fulfill defense if the Commander and Chief is out.

DIPLOMACY / COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE
Head Diplomat - While the board of directors decides most of foreign policy, if we NEED to talk to aff particular faction. The Head diplomat has the power to limit who can say what to which faction in the factions or forums. The Chief counsel and faction specialist can override censure orders for a particular faction. Note that Legal Teams acting offensively fall under the military

experienced turnplayers (no limit). Can play demanding turns

// LOW RESPONSIBILITY POSITIONS

Chairman of the Board - right now, only power is to break ties between the chief council and the vice council. Namely, tries to drive discussions of the board members.
Vice Chairman of the Board - a backup for the chairman of the board.

Tertiary Commander and Chief - should keep an eye on the military so can assume duty if need be.

Faction Specialist (under the Head Diplomat) - can serve as diplomat to the specific faction and should watch that particular faction. EG, someone would watch Sparta's territorial ambitions. The Angel would their spy activity.
This position's existence is classified, but it won't be difficult for outsiders to guess who it is. This person can request units/spys to gather intelligence (actions can be stopped vetoed by 2 of 3 chief counsel, head of diplomacy and commander and chief). Intelligence actions are classified, except to for the 3 positions listed above.

Gaian Diplomat / specialist
Spartan Diplomat / specialist
Angel Diplomat / specialist

routine turnplayer - just follow the turnplay order. Hopefully give the experienced turnplayers time to rest.

TERRAFORMING & CITIES
Head of terraforming & city planning - has limited power. works with land owners and tries to build new bases, pop booms. Runs the strategic cities.
Secondary of terraforming & city planing - less powerful backup, but otherwise identical to the head of forming & city planning.

landowner(almost everyone) - Gets a piece of territory. Runs the cities and the cities' nonmilitary units. The actions be overruled by the board of directors. The Morgan faction was supposed to be entirely landowners on a more detailed scale.
backup land manager(almost everyone) - if a landowner is not in, can make the decisions on the cities.

control of goes: board of directors
cities, formers, \/
units and military/counterintel (if in immenent danger)
the budget \/
landowner
\/
city planner

Strategic cites: The cities holding Morgan's secret projects
military cities: cities used exclusively for military uses (ex: a fortress base, a support city, a city that produces primarily weapons.

120 hours (5 days) is normally the time needed time for people to vote on an bill. If for some reason, an event is forseen to require immediate action, a call to vote notice stating the anticipated event can be put up, starting the 120 hour clock up to 84 hours (3 1/2 days) in advance of posting the bill. That would permit a decision on a bill in 36 hours.

Successful passage of a bill makes it a law.

A regular bill passes if it gets >50% of the vote of the vote from >33% of the active members. (I haven't thought of a way to determine 'active members')

Ammendments to the constition require >66% vote of >66% of the then active members.

// SUGGESTED LAWS

TURN PLAYING
There are two types of turn plays.

There are critical turns. In a critical turn, detailed attention is needed for important reasons (such as defending a city with an SP) or periodic tweaking. Critical turns should be played by a exerpienced turnplayer.

There are routine turns in which the turnplayer merely has to follow the orders placed in the proper forum / thread where turnplay orders are given. They should be so that someone who wants to do lots of moves in a particular turn should be a turnplayer for that turn. This will allow the experienced turnplayers to get some time off and allow others the chance to turnplay.

A critical turn must be played at least once every 5 years. A critical turn can be called for by the board of directors.

The Chief counsel or vice chief counsel can have the power to interpret laws. If not enough clarity is reached, the chief council throws it to the Chairman of the Board to get a clarification and maybe more specific votes.

@endgame: Edit your propaganda posting yourself

if you wanna make changes - and tell me when it's ready to publish...
(I guess the basic attitude is just right - the loss of one base isn't really that a big deal - I guess the extra drone per base is what effectively hurts the most right now...)

**AndiD** · March 10, 2005, 17:28

More input just arrived from our external consultant:

olicy Positions - these are used to determine official Morgan Policy on various issues. These have diplomacy in mind, but could be used for other purposes. Namely, with policy positions, a person can vote on one of several competing positions. VOTES CAN BE CHANGED AT ANY TIME, we might even want to use a name other than "votes". Someone can vote AGAINST a position as well. Voting against a position is REALLY voting for a position that is the exact opposite of the one being voted against. A stance on an issue that has >60% of votes for 72 hours within the last 4 days will be considered the official corporate stance on an issue. That stance will remain in place until a different stance on that issue takes effect.

Example: at 8:30 on Jan 1, the board passes a policy position "Angel profitability maximization", part of which says we will accept a trade route. At 5:30 on Jan 2, it has recieved 43% of the votes, while the "Have no commerce agreements with anyone" policy position has 21% of votes against it. No changes in the votes. On 6:30 Jan 6, it becomes official corporate policy to accept a trade route with the angels. At 2:30 Jan 8, the "have no commerce agreements with anyone" policy position has 65% of the votes. On Jan 12, 2:30, the official corporate policy becomes to have no commerce with anyone.

Policy proposals can be voted on by the board of directors, or survive public scrutiny for 2 weeks and then automatically become a policy position. Amendments

Voting on proposals positions:
A policy proposal is subject to two simultaneous votes. The first vote is to pass a the policy proposal. The second vote is if a the policy proposal fails, should it be subjected to 2 more weeks of scrutiny again, or killed off. Alternatively, policy proposals can be posted and be subject to scrutiny and discussion for 2 weeks. If a policy proposal survives the 2 weeks, it becomes a policy position. During that time, the chief or vice counsels or chairman of the board can order a policy proposal be clarified and/or rewritten. Also during that time, the policy proposal can be put up to a vote.

Voting by the board of directors...

Any member of the board can ask the board of directors to vote on anything at any time. Members of the board of directors DON'T HAVE TO VOTE on it. If not enough members of the board don't vote on an issue, it is not passed.

Amending the constitution: requires a >3/4 vote and a >66% participation of currently active members

Removal of an official requires a >2/3 vote and a >50% participation of currently active members

A regular issue before the board of directors requires a >1/2 vote and a >50% participation of current active members.

Introduction/removal/ammending via the board of directors a policy position requires a >1/2 vote and a >25% participation of currently active members.

**Whoha** · March 10, 2005, 19:01

Interesting proposals, but I say we try to make it those 5 turns first

I'll start looking at the naval situation more closely though from here on out.

**Mead** · March 10, 2005, 21:14

Arginine

Makes a number of interesting proposals.

I like a lot of it because it adds a lot to participation.

I am concerned a little bit about whether our current level of participation can support it.

We have a number of talented and experience Morgan members.

However only a few have play an active role for the pas few decades:

They are, and PLEASE let me know who I left out:

jtisisyoda, Mead (myself), Andid, Whoao, #endgame, -Saf-, and Arginine before he became inactive. Rubin helped out in consulting a couple of turns ago.

I am all for having more folks participate.

I am a little concerned about the maintence required for the eloborate voting system set up.

I like Arginnen have been a little disappointed in the past when concerns that I raised were not addressed and think we need to pay more attention to everyone before we make discisions, but I am not sure we need such an elaborate system. Perhaps, yes, a reorganization, but not such a complex one.

Mead

**#endgame** · March 11, 2005, 02:12

I was more curious if there was any security issues with the post I'd put out.

-- CTO #endgame

**Mead** · March 11, 2005, 11:16

Originally posted by #endgame
I was more curious if there was any security issues with the post I'd put out.

-- CTO #endgame

Oh. Okay, I looked at the proposed propaganda post.

The one thing that bothers me about it is:

Former VP Arginine has been hired as a consultant to assist in Morgan Industries' restructuring. While Arginine has not been made an employee of Morgan Industries, he has comitted to aid in the reorganization, consultants have been known to become a permanent part of the corporate hierarchy. That all will depend on how the final organization chart ends up. "I will minimize my exposure sensitive corporate information in order to have minimal ethical conflicts in future jobs. I ask the outside auditors commonly called 'moderators' to help ensure transparency."

He says he'll rejoin, but is keeping his options open to depart. Again, the outside moderators will take a lot of work. I have no problem with him rejoining. In fact, I PM'd him a few weeks back asking why he left and I posted his response in the turn discussion thread two or three turns ago.

I think we need to be more open to his views. I think, if I remember correctly, one of his big pushes was to make that trans foil. The one that has allowed us to get many techs from Zak and the artifact that is currently on it. He has had good suggestions that have worked out well.

I want him to come back but I am not so sure of the full package that he wants to return under.

Mead

**AndiD** · March 12, 2005, 14:56

So generally it is a bit too "elaborate"? I'll pass that on. Any ideas what we could simplify?

Add: Shall I post the two posts (or anyone else...) to give some kind of "public recognition"? If no, what should be changed?

**Mead** · March 12, 2005, 16:24

Originally posted by AndiD
So generally it is a bit too "elaborate"? I'll pass that on. Any ideas what we could simplify?

Add: Shall I post the two posts (or anyone else...) to give some kind of "public recognition"? If no, what should be changed?

I suggest that all active members (having posted at least once withing the prior two weeks sounds as good as any definition) have a vote. Any active member can call for a vote if they disagree with what the turnplayer/diplomat/teraformer/military/etc. is planning to do. The time for voting should match the urgency of the decision. Short time for stuff that must be decided while we have the turn. Longer time for long term strategic decisions.

Kinda simple, and it give everyone the ability to be heard.

Mead

PS
We usually make decisions by consenus, but I recognize that we need a mechanism if we can't reach consensus.

PPS
I have been in PM contact with Arg. I can, if there are no objections, pass this onto him. Please let me know.

**AndiD** · March 12, 2005, 16:55

Sounds good.

**#endgame** · March 12, 2005, 18:19

The article you quoted isn't even the one I wrote.

Apolyton Civilization Site

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=3649164#post3649164

**Mead** · March 12, 2005, 19:01

Originally posted by AndiD
Sounds good.

Seeing how Arg has rejoined the Corp there's no need.

It's good to see him back. there so much to do.

Mead

**arginine** · March 13, 2005, 13:45

I haven't been looking around, but there's almost always something to do.

Announcement

Corporation Reorganization?

Corporation Reorganization?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment