All important decisions to date - A VPs report

MrWhereItsAt · May 5, 2002, 07:33

OK ppl. I haven't been too active here the last few days, partly 'cause I have just finished going through almost EVERY thread on this site from day one, and here are my collated results. These are grouped into various little categories, and all facts have been polled on or decided by the relevant Ministers. Let this thread be a springboard for discussions on any that ppl are now unhappy with. Also I would ask ppl to discuss the questions that have been brought up from my researches and to ask anything that is bugging them. If you don't want to do so openly - PM your friendly VP!

Confidence guaranteed, and service with a smile.

Responsibilities of Cabinet

Prez:

Plays the game
If supplied with conflicting advice/polls and there is no time/way to straighten this out, the Prez makes the final decisions.
If the matter is urgent enough (eg imminent invasion/loos of capital city), the Prez is expected to seek help from Ministers/the Public and NOT go it alone.
Should post a turn-by-turn account of their play (nothing too detailed, just major troop movements, conquests etc, Wonder/technology news...)
Gets to name cities

VP:

Posts nomination thread
Posts election polls
Becomes Minister if that Minister is absent for 24hr
Becomes Prez in event of abdication - holds position until next elections

SMC:

Military polls, exploration

Sci:

Setting science rate (in conjunction with Trade Advisor)
Tech targets (main and secondary for just in case situations where we can't go for the one we want) - should be for a tree of several techs so we don't have to stop every time we get one.

Trade:

All uses of caravans (Wonders, trade with ourselves/others, rushing other things)
Setting tax rate (in conjunction with Science Advisor)

City Planner:

What to do with workers and when to build them
Build queues. When polling on possible build queues, the Minister decides the most important ones for himself (in consultation with public/Council if necessary) and poll only on these important ones
Unhappiness Issues

Imperial Exploration:

Where to build cities
Cultivation (improving terrain)

Deputy Ministers:

Do not get the save game.
May be required to take over if the actual Minister disappears (will be decided when/if it happens)

Historian:

Writes a narrative of all that happens during a term (see -Jrabbit's excellent ones for a good indicator of what you are to do) with excessive smilies (important! :doitnow: ) and must be prepared to be contacted for news to put on the Apolyton Civ2 news site (has happened twice)

Foreign:

All foreign affairs, use of diplomats/spies and government change

General Cabinet

Each person may hold 1 post at a time.
Cabinet gets the save.
Absolutely NO play to be done by any but the Prez
NOBODY is allowed to check the map by cheating or playing into the future for an advantage
NO reloading for favourable outcomes of huts, battles etc.

Everybody

Anyone can be a member of Apolytonia.
All are allowed (and encouraged

) to vote on polls
Any concerns should be posted or PMed to Ministers - this IS a Democratic game!

Elections

Elections end of every month.
Each citizen may be in the Cabinet for four terms in a row only - need a responsibility-free month before they can run again. The only exception is if there is no other candidate for a position in an election - this should be considered last resort material
Self Nominations OK
Once elected (polls close and Cabinet names are posted in High Council thread by the Prez) Ministers must PM their emails to the Prez

Our initial setup

Normal start
Multiplayer Gold Edition
Deity
Raging Hordes
Destroyed Civ restart
Normal Map
Leader name: Fearless Leader

United Apolyton - Dark Blue colour

Science rate at 60%

'Till I am needed again, I will be lurking.

(Tired) VP MrWhereItsAt.

Oh, and here's the Apolyton flag, courtesy of ColdWizard. Mmm. European.

civman2000 · May 5, 2002, 08:53

Quote:

City Planner:

City sites
What to do with workers and when to build them
Build queues. When polling on possible build queues, the Minister decides the most important ones for himself (in consultation with public/Council if necessary) and poll only on these important ones

Imperial Exploration:

Cultivation (improving terrain)

Imperial expansion should be in charge of city sites, city planner in charge of production and settlers (if the city planner controls them and the IE advisor does the cultivation, wont there be some major conflicts?)

MrWhereItsAt · May 5, 2002, 08:55

Exactly my point. Until now City Planner has been exactly that - planning where the cities go. Time for a change, anyone?

civman2000 · May 5, 2002, 08:59

are you sure? I think that steele as IE advisor made some city site polls...

MrWhereItsAt · May 5, 2002, 09:02

You may be right, but I've had FAR more than enough researching for tonight.

civman2000 · May 5, 2002, 09:07

civman2000 · May 5, 2002, 09:09

it took a lot of sorting through old threads to compile that list, but I'm not tired, it's morning where i live!

MrWhereItsAt · May 5, 2002, 09:20

Same here, only it's 1:20am on Monday morn'.

I'm just waiting for the Cartoon Network Anime to finish and then I'll be gone so all the debate can begin.

cavebear · May 5, 2002, 13:26

The *working* understanding while I was City-Planner was that Minister of Expansion sited places for new cities (and otherwise considered the expansion of the Civ, while the City-Planner was dedicated to the maintenance and efficiency of existing cities (Worker placement, city improvement, unhappiness issues, etc). Once a city was built, it became the City-Planners domain.

cavebear · May 5, 2002, 13:38

I don't think the VP should have the power to impeach the President. Since in contested elections the VP is the loser of that election, there could be some conflicts of interests. It should not be the VP.

But if not the VP, then who (for it *should* be possible). Should it be a "Palace Coup" by the Ministers (who would either select one of their own or start a citizen poll) or should it be limited to Citizen vote of "no confidence" (and originated by who?).

I suggest it should be whenever 20% (to allow for the fact that there are some inactive citizens) of the registered citizens demand a "no confidence" vote, the poll to be administered by the VP.

In other words, the poll would be: "Should X continue as President" (yes/no). If "no", then the VP takes over.

I don't want it to be complicated, but I also don't want this to degenerate into a series of coup d' etats.

cavebear · May 5, 2002, 14:03

From my experience as a Citizen, a Minister, and as President:

"What happens during anarchy? Does the President have any more power than normal? Is continued anarchy regarded as a Presidntial/Cabinet failure?"

No additional power. We aren't quite role-playing the government-forms here. Continued anarchy may be beyond control (but not very likely). Impeachment should only be for general reasons and by a procedure. Not automatic in any situation.

"Foreign advisor needed for war decisions? "

The Foreign Minister should only poll and advise, like the other Ministers. We need to keep control in the hands of the Citizens.

"President has veto right on the Senate? - What does this mean?"

When conflicting demands or recommendations are presented to the President by the Ministers, the President has to decide which course to follow. The Monister's reports are made just prior to game time, so there is little opportunity for further polling. We do need to keep the game moving.

"If there is a threat of invasion on the capital we have a 24 hour poll to grant the Prez "special powers" (undefined)?"

Most likely, you won't know that ahead of time or it would have been discussed and planned for. In the course of a session, the President has to play the game. However, in unforeseen and serious situations, the President is expected to cut the session short and seek the advice of the Citizens and Ministers. During game play, I might well email or PM a Minister (or several) to ask for advice.

"Prez or Vice decides tied polls? Or do we repoll?"

The President should decide on tied polls.

"Should the Prez decide on their own when and what to rush-buy? This has been the case until now."

The President needs to be free to make decisions in game play not otherwise decided by the Citizens and Ministers previously. There is usually 5 days of discussion before the President plays a session. If a subject hasn't been discussed in that time, let him decide on it. I don't see any other way that doesn't stifle the game.

"City Planner consults with Military Advisor during war on build queues?"

I think each Minister has to make their own recommendations from their own specialty. All participate in the polls and discussions, so everyone's views should have been made known. The President has to decide when there is conflict.

"Idea of deputy Ministers has been brought up but not decided upon - what should they do?"

Deputy Ministers are honorary only, by will of the actual Minister. They have no actual rights, but maybe they are the heir-apparent if a Minister must resign the post. Let's not get too complicated here.

"MBloom III and shade posted turn-by-turn accounts of their Presidency - shall we continue this tradition or just get the Historian to do it?"

The President is obligated to keep an account of the session and post it. The Historian will turn it into a glorious story worth telling. The Citizens and Ministers should at least have a way to understand how the "new world" came to be after each Presidential session. It is the only information the Citizens have to understand what happened since the previous session. At least the Ministers get the game file. I insist that we keep the Citizens informed at some level.

Shaka Naldur · May 5, 2002, 14:06

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Questions
President has veto right on the Senate? - What does this mean?

no,
the veto right is that he can decide to change the result of a poll if he wants to,
i think is too much power for the president

Quote:

If there is a threat of invasion on the capital we have a 24 hour poll to grant the Prez "special powers" (undefined)?

I dont´ like the idea

Quote:

Prez or Vice decides tied polls? Or do we repoll?

I think we should repoll

Quote:

Should the Prez decide on their own when and what to rush-buy? This has been the case until now.

yes, it´s been the case, but I think we should poll about it, at least have the permission of the city planner and the trade minister

Quote:

City Planner consults with Military Advisor during war on build queues?

yes

Quote:

Idea of deputy Ministers has been brought up but not decided upon - what should they do?

we don´t have enought people to have deputy Ministers

Quote:

MBloomIII and shade posted turn-by-turn accounts of their Presidency - shall we continue this tradition or just get the Historian to do it?

I think is a good idea, but I didn´t do it when i was the president...

Quote:

Dark Cloud posted a list of active members on around April 1 - should we continue this? Are you still here, DC???

we have two lists, once in the initial thread, organised by adamsj and the darkcloud´s one,
i don´t think they are useless at all, but it would be nice to have a list with the active playesr

Responsibilities of Cabinet

Quote:

Impeaches the Prez if the ppl are unhappy (strictly, if the Prez doesn't follow the poll results)

why??

Quote:

Becomes Minister if that Minister is absent for 24hr

I like the idea, then we don´t need deputy ministers...

[/QUOTE]

CannonFodder · May 5, 2002, 16:12

Wow, too complicated. My understanding of Imperial Expansion was that the IE minister looked for city sites and the City Planner managed city build queues and development.

CannonFodder · May 5, 2002, 18:22

I'd like to ask one other question. What about ministers voting on polls that they put up? Is that legal?

Shadowlord · May 5, 2002, 20:07

I would assume so.

Marquis de Sodaq · May 5, 2002, 23:50

I remember a discussion about tied polls. I think we repolled that 3 times, because each one ended in a tie.

Anyway, I think the final outcome was that the minister decides what to choose. This was because he is not just a polling puppet, but an advisor - one who makes a leadership decision.

MrWhereItsAt · May 6, 2002, 03:14

The impeachment idea is, in my mind, just so that, if evidence of the Prez not following the polls emerges the VP polls on whether to impeach or not. Or maybe, since anyone can do this, this means the VP takes over until the next election, which is really a regular rule if for some reason the Prez cannot complete his term.

All OK with that? I'll update all of this as soon as enough of the points have been nutted out.

-Jrabbit · May 6, 2002, 09:28

On Impeachment -- The VP would take over and -- for that very reason -- should NOT be the one who ousts the Prez. I think any High Council member (yes, including the VP) should be permitted to protest the President's actions and suggest articles of impeachment.

Actual Impeachment MUST be via a (3-day?) poll of the Citizens, and should require a strong majority (two-thirds?).

On Deciding Tied Polls -- I feel strongly that this is the province of each individual Minister!!!!!!! The poll is posted, the ppl vote and comment. If there is no conclusive poll winner, it seems clear (to me) that the Particular Expertise of the Proper Minister should be the deciding factor on the issue. A repoll would only decide which ppl happened to be online at the time, not the actual will of The ppl.

On Elections -- Your Historian feels strongly that there should be a rule against running for more than one position in a given election.

On MWIA -- Great job plumbing the threads to bring this together. You have great potential as a future Historian!

-Jrabbit · May 6, 2002, 09:29

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
I'll update all of this as soon as enough of the points have been nutted out.

"nutted out"?????????????

civman2000 · May 6, 2002, 11:23

Impeachment ideas:
1. For advisors, 1/2 of the council and 1/2 of the people is needed to impeach. Deputy takes over or if there is no deputy VP takes over.
2. For prez, 1/2 of council and 2/3 of people needed to impeach, VP takes over.

JCP · May 7, 2002, 13:05

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Prez:

Plays the game

VP:

Posts nomination thread
Posts election polls
Impeaches the Prez if the ppl are unhappy (strictly, if the Prez doesn't follow the poll results)
Becomes Minister if that Minister is absent for 24hr
Becomes Prez in event of abdication - holds position until next elections

Nobody is better served than by himself !

The first function of the VP and his original one is supplying Prez :
Becomes Prez in event of abdication or impeachment,...until next elections
As it was not harrassing, we complete with initiating and organizing elections at the end of the month
And no other task but taking part as a conscientious citizen

There is no need of a replacement of a Ministry for one day !

MrWhereItsAt · May 7, 2002, 13:22

Thank you all kindly for your VERY helpful clarifications and views on matters. I will update the top list of things whenever I wake up tomorr-, er, today with the working methods and understandings (as cavebear put it), and identify a few others for potential polling/submission to the Constitution committee (oops another thing to arrange

) when that is set up.

And JCP - the only reason there is so much listed under responsibilities for the VP is that at least twice in our history the issue of what the VP does came up. Both times new things were added to the list and few ppl realized that there were already a couple. Most of what I am responsible for are for events that have never (and hopefully WILL never) happen, eg Ministerial disappearance. Otherwise I agree that it looks like I have too much power (is it possible for one to have too much power?

), although I don't have much to do in the normal way of things.

When I update the top post you will all see that I (and all VPs) are nothing but a glorified backup, and the person who tells ppl to vote for a Cabinet.

The power!!!

JCP · May 7, 2002, 14:44

Quote:

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
On Impeachment -- The VP would take over and -- for that very reason -- should NOT be the one who ousts the Prez.

Actual Impeachment MUST be via a (3-day?) poll of the Citizens, and should require a strong majority (two-thirds?).

I fully agree.

civman2000 · May 7, 2002, 16:38

but impeachment should also always require the agreement of the majority of the council too.

James Adams · May 8, 2002, 04:51

I think that we need our committee of four, which I advise to be of 10 members now, will half for and half against a constitution to have or not a set of constitutions and rules as soon as possible!

MrWhereItsAt · May 9, 2002, 04:48

OK! The top post has been edited to include everyone's helpful reminders of the things I so stupidly missed in my quest for the truth. If there's anything ever to add to these - contact me or post here - I may get this topped.

MrWhereItsAt · May 13, 2002, 08:22

Just a shameless bump.

I could get this topped (and I may do so now the Committee is a go), but at the moment we have far too many topped threads!

James Adams · May 14, 2002, 06:37

Go for it!

MrWhereItsAt · May 21, 2002, 08:44

Bumped for new members.

MrWhereItsAt · May 24, 2002, 11:19

Updated with new (old) results.