Part Deux: Constitution?

[MrWhereItsAt]

As far as Government structure goes, I'd like to see basically the same as the first game - a City Planner position, a Public Works Officer, a Supreme Military Commander, a Foreign Affairs Minister, a President and a Vice President. Minister of Science can be subsumed within one of these positions as all they do is poll on he next tech. We may need to switch to regional governors after a time and if there is the interest, but at the start the job is easy enough for one to do.

Thoughts?

[Aidun]

I agree on the part of Cityplanner, PW officer, SMC and FAM, but I would like to see what the members think of this. Agree: RG's are noy yet needed and the science minister or minister of eceonomy can be deputy ministers.

Check the Government structure poll

[Kloreep]

City planner and PW should be combined at first, IMO; the first worker's moves are a vital and intertwined part of production at the start of a game, and having to coordinate that between two people instead of having one DM do it would be too difficult and... bureacratic! (Now that should set most people against it. )

The positions can either be split apart later in the game, or we can leave it to the DM to find a PW minister if he/she desires. Either way should work.

[Aidun]

Originally posted by Kloreep
(Now that should set most people against it. )

Indeed it does

You have a point

Aidun

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by Kloreep
City planner and PW should be combined at first, IMO; the first worker's moves are a vital and intertwined part of production at the start of a game, and having to coordinate that between two people instead of having one DM do it would be too difficult and... bureacratic! (Now that should set most people against it. )

Oh, you don't miss the arguments between CP and PW about which should get upgrades first and where?!?

[GodKing]

What arguements - we generally just ignored each other and then every 4 or 5 turns I ordered teh cities work force adjusted to account for the changes that took place...... oh how I miss those good ol' days.

[Thud]

Originally posted by Aidun
Mjmacy,

Welcome! You can join by signing up here for Single Player DemoGame nr. 2 and here for the Citystates Game.

Aidun

Also, I suggest that you consider joining a political party. In particular, I recommend the DIA, of which I am a mem--- doh!

New, basic Constitution.

[Octavian X]

A word from an outsider...

Previous experience with a new democracy game has shown us that 'If it works, don't fix it.' By the end of our demogame I, we had a detailed and complex system of laws that worked almost flawlessly. When we started demogame II, we kept the system, mainly to save us days of debate on a NEW constitution.

I'm sure you remember when your current ruleset was put in place to replace your old Code of Laws. Why needlessly cause more debate for a new system?

[Aro]

It's a good advice, OctavianX.

[Aidun]

Even in the NewCon, there were some things that malfunctioned. Aggie knows that very well: his bill to forbid abolition of slavery passed with a majority, but then suddenly the government VETOED. I was relieved, because I opposed this bill, but at the other hand, I knew there was something wrong: the bill was, according to the NewCon 100% LEGAL.
With what right did the government veto the bill then?
With the right to veto as stated in the New Con, also 100% legalaccording to the New Con.
If we should look critically, at the former DemoGame we were not a Democracy, but a Constitutional MONARCHY, ask Arnelos if you think I'm wrong.
This is but one of the little erriors in the NewCon.
We can cpoy much, but it's never wrong to take a new look at it.

Aidun

[MrWhereItsAt]

Certainly wise words, Octavian. Everyone is aware of my dissatisfaction with the NewCon and the restrictions it places upon those who actually want to keep the game going. Our NewCon does deal with almost all the issues we could face, but IMO in a little TOO much detail. Hopefully we will be able to pare it down somewhat, whilst keeping those necessary sections that have been honed to perfection.

[Beta]

I vote for a new detailed constitution. My rationale for such is in the pre-poll discussion thread.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Hm. Well it's certainly clear that a majority want some kind of guiding document for our game conduct. I guess I can detop this now, and we continue the discussion on exactly what to include in this document elsewhere...

[Panag]

hi ,

we should constantly improve what ever shortcomings we might find in the CON , .....

have a nice day