June 23, 2002, 23:53
|
#1
|
Emperor
Local Time: 05:07
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 7,138
|
Now that we have parties...
Isn't making personal elections for anything other than the president kinda... wierd?
I suggest that the president will be the only body directly elected.
Now I thought of 2 possible theories for the rest:
Theory 1
As for other duties, we shall have a vote between parties support. There will be the current parties, plus an "Independant" option.
What does it mean?
The president then should make up the government to be a reflection of the percentages of the votes.
So if DIA got 50%, Majority got 30% and Independant got 20% :
We have currently 9 minister offices.
4 will go to DIA.
3 will go to Majority
2 will go to people not related to parties.
What good does it do?
Each party gets strength relative to the support of it's people.
Theory 2
The President elects people whom he wishes to fill in each role.
Theory 3
There are personality polls.
But the president has a veto which is worth 10 votes.
Meaning, if cadidate A is leading over candidate B by less than 10 votes, the President can still elect candidate B.
What good does it do?
The president has administrative power and is not held back by opposition.
Why are you suggesting all of this, Siro, are you bored?
No.
But I have two things in mind.
1) Parties, currently, are meaningless.
2) Personal elections lead to a wide array of people with different views being elected. This infact forces a unity government, where all the people are from different parties and must get along.
This could potencially harm the game progress, as some persons are stronger and more vocal and will possibly force their views on others, making them redudant.
Or, this could instead halt the game, if the ministers are split about something, and no agreement is reached.
These are just suggestions.
I urge you to develop better ideas and post them.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 00:03
|
#2
|
Deity
Local Time: 21:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: of naught
Posts: 21,300
|
I like Theory 1 Siro. Very much I must say.
I have considered the risk of one party sweeping the elections 2 or more times consecutively. We might then lose a significant number of people who drop away due to their views being shut out.
A lot of thought should go into it if we do change something though.
BTW. I do not belong to any party, and I have no intention of ever running for a ministerial post. That could change, but at the moment I am having more fun focusing on whatever I feel like without having to pay too much attention to politics.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 00:05
|
#3
|
King
Local Time: 22:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,088
|
Re: Now that we have parties...
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Theory 1
As for other duties, we shall have a vote between parties support. There will be the current parties, plus an "Independant" option.
What does it mean?
The president then should make up the government to be a reflection of the percentages of the votes.
So if DIA got 50%, Majority got 30% and Independant got 20% :
We have currently 9 minister offices.
4 will go to DIA.
3 will go to Majority
2 will go to people not related to parties.
What good does it do?
Each party gets strength relative to the support of it's people.
Theory 2
The President elects people whom he wishes to fill in each role.
But I have two things in mind.
1) Parties, currently, are meaningless.
2) Personal elections lead to a wide array of people with different views being elected. This infact forces a unity government, where all the people are from different parties and must get along.
This could potencially harm the game progress, as some persons are stronger and more vocal and will possibly force their views on others, making them redudant.
Or, this could instead halt the game, if the ministers are split about something, and no agreement is reached.
|
I have to disagree that parties are meaningless. Parties provide a way for the people to organize their thoughts. Theory 1 sounds alright but if we where to do theory 1 maybe we should have the president appoint people who then must be approved by the citizens.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 00:07
|
#4
|
Warlord
Local Time: 19:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Posts: 194
|
For our purposes, direct elections are best but nice brainstorming. But no party is official and they are a pain when they have too much influence, like our current American government.
__________________
Est-ce que tu as vu une baleine avec un queue taché?
If you don't feel the slightist bit joyful seeing the Iraqis dancing in the street, then you are lost to the radical left. If you don't feel the slightest bit bad that we had to use force to do this, then you are lost to the radical right.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 00:10
|
#5
|
Emperor
Local Time: 22:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Centre Bell
Posts: 4,632
|
I dislike theory 1 cuz, the Prez might be of one party, but if the majority of votes go to another party (like our current status), then all the prez needs to do is put the members of the opposing party into offices deemed less neccesary for whatever his goals are.. and put his own men in areas he needs them.
I like our current system. If i had my way, i would kill off all of the parties. Parties make the game more vicious than need be, I think. It may make it more interesting (and to that effect, more fun), but if everyone ran as independents, the game might run more smoothly, because there would be no smear campaigns, and less agendas (hidden or not) to screw up our progress.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 00:14
|
#6
|
Deity
Local Time: 21:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: of naught
Posts: 21,300
|
Ninot has a point, but I don't see how we can prevent clubs from forming.
Would it even be a good thing to outlaw political clubs? If the people want to do it... this is a democracy.
I think the thing to do is to adjust our institutions to suit a healthy body politic as well as the needs and aspirations of our people, not the other way around.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 00:14
|
#7
|
Prince
Local Time: 19:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 570
|
I like the idea but it gets hairy when it comes to deciding which party gets which post. Mabye we should bring back the idea of the senate. Plus, I think people vote for individuals when it comes to ministry posts and not parties.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 01:50
|
#8
|
Firaxis Games Programmer/Designer
Local Time: 23:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 9,567
|
As others have said, they're good ideas, but in reality they wouldn't work. It would take a great amount of effort and time just to change things from the way they are now. That in addition to the fact that there are many flaws in any new proposal that need to be ironed out, and that would take even more time. By the time that a plan was worked out and put into practice, the traditional way of doing things will have become so driven into people they won't want to change, or they won't be able to handle it.
Okay, so little of what I said makes any sense, but you get the point.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 02:34
|
#9
|
Emperor
Local Time: 22:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: flying too low to the ground
Posts: 4,625
|
dont like the ideas. sorry
__________________
"I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 03:21
|
#10
|
Deity
Local Time: 21:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: of naught
Posts: 21,300
|
Hmmm. A good thread for discussing how things 'could' work. Defeatism such as 'it could never work' may be premature.
No ones holding a poll yet.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 04:07
|
#11
|
Civ4: Colonization Content Editor
Local Time: 04:07
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 11,117
|
Interesting idea, and I have thought a while about it. But I don't think it will be good for Apolytonia. It forces arguments between the parties what office shall go to what party. It forces the parties to nominate candidates for every office, with or without appropriate competence. And it discriminates the free candidates, because they will speak with only one voice in the arguments for the offices, while the parties speak with multiple.
I don't think it will be good to give too much power to political parties. That leads to no good, see real life. Competence shall trump party membership.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 07:41
|
#12
|
Emperor
Local Time: 21:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: of the Martian Empire
Posts: 4,969
|
Sir Ralph said almost exactly what I was going to say. Option 1 might be OK, but how do you decide who gets what office? It would overall be less fair and take the right to fvote for only who they want to away from the people.
__________________
Ham grass chocolate.
"This should be the question they ask you before you get to vote. If you answer 'no', then they brand you with a giant red 'I' on your forehead and you are forever barred from taking part in the electoral process again."--KrazyHorse
"I'm so very glad KH is Canadian."--Donegeal
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 07:52
|
#13
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 21,822
|
Parties actually wield a lot of power. The Coalition, for example, has 18 members, so any of their candidates has a very big boost in the elections.
__________________
[Obama] is either a troll or has no ****ing clue how government works - GePap
Later amendments to the Constitution don't supersede earlier amendments - GePap
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 08:02
|
#14
|
Warlord
Local Time: 03:07
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 158
|
Wouldn´t that simply be too realistic. Also the adding of parties that actually wield power would force those of us that want to play to choose between them. I can´t see how people who just don´t have that much time or don´t want to spend that amount of time on it would continue.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 09:38
|
#15
|
Deity
Local Time: 15:07
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: That's DR WhereItsAt...
Posts: 10,157
|
You have some Ace ideas, Siro.
I kinda like the 1st option (as a non-party member - don't believe any party lists with me in them - I'm there only by default and will exit soon enough).
The 3rd option: I HATE the idea of a Presidential veto on ANYTHING. The President does not decide these things. The Prez and Ministers may well outline the path we take, but the ppl have the absolute power and all decisions made by them should be final.
If we did have party votes, then the parties should mention their candidates for each position, also for the Independents. You may like a party's ideas but believe that certain members (eg the ones that aren't here all that often) are no good for Ministerial positions.
Otherwise (as it is now) parties are just fun more than anything - and that's what we're here for, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 16:55
|
#16
|
Emperor
Local Time: 22:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Centre Bell
Posts: 4,632
|
I kinda agree with MWIA.. but like i said....
my general stance is I don't like Parties, or Party Politics. I try and distance myself from the DIA vs. Coalition debates. The power they have might be inherent in that they are a group.. and as far as I am concerned, that is mighty powerful enough. I like the fact that I will run again for Foreign Minister under the name Ninot, and not under a general banner of DIA. And that is even tho I am a subscribed DIA member.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 16:58
|
#17
|
Emperor
Local Time: 22:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Centre Bell
Posts: 4,632
|
Oh! i gotta throw this out
the DIA was declared a party only after the elections. All of our members won on the account that they were independants with some good promises. Only once the DIA became a party did any of the elected DIA ministers get a tun of flack, and that was because of the party stance on certain issues (like war).
The DIA ministers were elected because they weren't in a party, not because they were. Maybe this contributes to the fact that perhaps parties are less favorable to a good independant.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 17:03
|
#18
|
Firaxis Games Programmer/Designer
Local Time: 23:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 9,567
|
Back then there weren't any parties anyways, so it wasn't really important then. 
Now when you have 10+ members per party, and only about 60 people total voting, party membership can be quite helpful. I feel that as the game goes on, the membership of parties will drastically increase, or parties will go extinct, one or the other. We have yet to see how things will turn out.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 17:08
|
#19
|
Emperor
Local Time: 21:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: As cuddly as a cactus, as charming as an eel.
Posts: 8,196
|
Yeah, I think partisan politics could become a destructive force in our political system.
Ninot has a point on the elections occuring before parties.
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 18:10
|
#20
|
Emperor
Local Time: 23:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,551
|
If the partisan politics become destructive, that is a part of the game. If they do, they will just kill themselves off for the next rise of our great society......
All in the spirit of things.
I personally hate and despise the partisan politics. My fear is that in doing such it won't be held to the game, but may make some players dislike each other personally. So far I don't think this has happened.
As such, I refuse to be a part of the smear. I will gladly point out the smear so that feeling are not hurt, and that people that may not realize they are doing such do come to realize. And thus hopefully correct their actions.
Peace all, except to all those who get in my way.....
__________________
Try peace first. If that does not work, then killing them is often a good solution. :evil:
As long as I could figure a way to hump myself, I would be OK with that
--Con
|
|
|
|
June 24, 2002, 18:18
|
#21
|
Deity
Local Time: 23:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 21,822
|
Party politics add a degree of reality (and, for some, fun) to the game.
__________________
[Obama] is either a troll or has no ****ing clue how government works - GePap
Later amendments to the Constitution don't supersede earlier amendments - GePap
|
|
|
|
June 25, 2002, 06:07
|
#22
|
Deity
Local Time: 21:07
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: of naught
Posts: 21,300
|
Siro,
Can you elaborate on any of your ideas and how they could apply to the Poly Demo game?
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 23:07.
|
|