Enough already!

[Kuciwalker]

If we're going to twiddle our thumbs, let's do it on fun things, such as roleplaying. And no, constitutional discussions do NOT count as roleplaying.

[disorganizer]

What about having a constitutional ammendment about constitutional ammendments?

I meant:
A constitutional ammendment about NOT having constitutional ammendments.

[Will 5001]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
You have my full support skywalker ! This game is on the best way from a Democracy to a Bureaucracy game.

• No further constitutional amendments, they suck the fun out of the game like a leech.
  
• No sophisticated laws discussion in the style of a hedge advocate.
  
• No complicated polls, they don't attract people but rather repell them.
  
• No useless bills of right and stuff like this .
  

Let's play the game and have fun, not work.

I agree with absolutely everything there , and with skywalker.

[Captain]

Originally posted by skywalker
If we're going to twiddle our thumbs, let's do it on fun things, such as roleplaying. And no, constitutional discussions do NOT count as roleplaying.

this is ridiculous. obviously some people enjoy Constitutional debate. they find it fun. And they're not just a few. there are a large number of people who post in those threads.

consider: everything we do here is fiction. it's all roleplaying. whether you're discussing a fictional COL or pretending to make war plans, it's all roleplaying. just because you find one part unappetizing doesn't mean it should be banned. different strokes for different folks, it's called diversity.

for instance, I don't go to turnchats. I don't enjoy them. I need time to think before posting and time to compose a coherent message. A turnthread would suit me better, but perhaps not the majority of others. I don't go around arguing for the abolition of turnchats simply because I don't want to participate in them. I let those who enjoy it, enjoy it. live, and let live - or do you expect everyone to have the same likes and dislikes as you? There's no scarcity here. there's no limited number of things to discuss. don't like it? discuss something else. no one forces you to participate in every aspect of the game.

now that you've destroyed whatever level of mutual respect formerly existed, let me tell you plainly that I think many of the threads you create are pure b.s. and a waste of time - but, and this is an very important but - I don't go around telling you to shut your mouth. If I'm not interested, I simply don't post. If I want to discuss something else, I open another thread or find one I'm interested in. Why don't you try that? It'd be a lot more constructive.

Sure I'm being argumentative here and perhaps I should take my own advice and ignore this thread, but I want to respond to this and make sure all you anti-constitutionalists realize that not everyone agrees with you, or at least, not your solutions.

[Spiffor]

Captain :

As often, ou have a point. Everybody can discuss on the subjects that interest them, and shut up in the subjects which are of no interest to them, you're right.
But I think this thread (and the wide welcome it got) comes from the fact that almost only constitutional matters were discussed last week.
You could say "if people disliked this, they could discuss on something else", and you'd be right. I think this thread is the trigger of the rebirth of other topics (i.e, topics which directly concern the Civ3 game). It's a way for the "anti rulemongers" (for the lck of better name) to show their numbers, and to relieve themselves : there are enough people with whom to talk about Civ3.
Should this thread be successful, the anti rulemongers will create / revive various threads, and we'll see a variety of constitutional and gameplay threads on 1st page.
This variety will not frighten casual gamers (they'll simply avoid procedural threads), and will be wishable, because everyone will find what he likes.

As a minor point, I'd like to pinpoint a minor flaw in your reasoning : we sure could abstain from posting in procedural threads. But these threads are about the rules of the game, and apply to all players, not only the people who write them. That's why many responsible players try to discuss the matters even if it displeases them (such as Skywalker and SirRalph... I'm quite bored when I post in procedural threads either)

[Captain]

Spiffor, good point. perhaps I'm just trying to counter what seems to be a mass overreaction that goes all the way to ignoring the rules we set up. So the COL debate goes overblown, and some 3A2Cxyz people rally in the other direction, fair enough. I still think there are more constructive ways to solve such a "problem".

---
btw, isn't the lack of clarity in rules what sparked the whole set of Const threads? because of the presidential election?
the vast majority of people said they were uncomfortable with Trip and Ninot sharing power despite it being expedient (convenient). they wanted one (1) president only. they cited the COL for support and the Court was formed partly because of this impetus. I mentioned earlier it's cyclical. when we first started this game, it was about the same level of debate on procedures. when we got that sorted out to a satisfactory level, we moved on. so it will be with this time too.

[Spiffor]

I think the thread raised one constructive solution : holding turnchats more often, so that those who want can discuss more about the game itself.

With this thread, I came to a very simple conclusion. If we anti-rulemongers want the game to be fun, we shouldn't blame the rulemongers for it. Rather, we should foster the fun by discussing on issues that interest us. The fun (in our point of view) of this game is up to us.

[Robber Baron]

Originally posted by Spiffor
If we anti-rulemongers want the game to be fun, we shouldn't blame the rulemongers for it. Rather, we should foster the fun by discussing on issues that interest us. The fun (in our point of view) of this game is up to us.

Well spoken, Spiff! If you're looking for more role playing (of a non-constitutional sort), pick some roles and play 'em, folks. One great boon recently bestowed on us was the embassy sent by Phoenatica (sp?). Visiting their site, I was very impressed with the depth of the environment they had built up. It was like replacing Firaxis graphics with Snoopy graphics. ( ) The whole world seemed alive.
Now, we have a different set of personalities here. (A bit more bloodthirstiness. It's a good thing. ) So we'll have a different kind of world. But I hope, as the game progresses and deepens, one that is every bit as rich and textured a place.

[Captain]

Spiff, good points

RB, I couldn't agree more! I saw some of their stuff, very cool! disorganizers city is quite interesting. they actually didn't want a factory because it ruined their recreational/tourism/environmental ambitions for their city!!! sure it had no real use in the game to call something a resort, but that roleplaying is pretty cool. love the fake Sunset Beach resort photos. hopefully we'll get to a viable enough position in our game that any one of our cities would ever consider turning down a factory!

[civman2000]

btw, isn't the lack of clarity in rules what sparked the whole set of Const threads? because of the presidential election?

Of course. It's a well-known political phenomenon: The people ask for the leaders (not just government leaders but influential people as well) to do something and then they blame them when they don't like it.

If we had never had a constitution in the first place, I believe there would havee been less confusion. However, it is too late to remove the constitution without chaos ensuing now, so we need to try to make amendments to avoid chaos and endure temporary chaos.

[GePap]

Let me add a shamless plug for my notion of a legislature with power to affect the game (not the constitution), so that all those people who want more turnchats and more about game discussion (like the majority of posters in this thread) can have their say in the game , while Law and Order folks get to keep having fun with issues of juridsiction, balance of power, and so forth. I don't think that no constitution would have been better, but a simpler one, that perhaps mimicked current, sucessful, real life ones (all of whih, ahem, have 3 branches of gov) intead of us having taken the plunge into brand new constitution writting.

[Spiffor]

GePap : everybody can post his concerns already, and everybody can start a poll about what-to-do-next.
Case Pink wasn't suggested by a minister, but was the common work of 2 involved citizens without electoral mandate at that time (NYE and SirRalph) and UberKrux.
If you want to post your ideas, you don't have to be elected for this. And that's precisely why the Demogame is great : it gives its word to everyone who wants to, unlike RL democracies.

The previous poll about "the senate" was pretty conclusive : even if the question showed favour to the senate, there was a huge majority of nos : simply because people feel we're all the senate / legislature.

[GePap]

Let me be clear on two points:

First, 'we' are not, NOT, a legislature, since we have no actual power to affect what goes on in the game, no matter how much we can fiddle in the constitution (and the more we fiddle, the more we devalue it).
Our current system is a sfolows: elect X number every two months. They play the game for us. The report, we discuss, but they still play.

All governments have a balance of power, we don't, simple as that.

Neither hae I ever said that only elected official woud be able to discuss or make decisions in the game (which is true today), but that we need to restructure our gov:
Shrink an ovebloated cabinet and create a group that regulates debate, and has the power to form debates on the thread into laws', mandates that ministers must follow. What would be an example? 52% of the ublic feels the want a minimum balance on the treasury of 100 gold for some reason), the legislature passes it,a nd until it is repealled, those laying the tun would have to make sure 100 was always in th pot. Today we can't do this, even if we wanted, since use of money is up to the cabinet.

Fine, not everyone may like this idea, but to continue to call this mob in the threads a 'legislature' is false. We aren't. We have a simple gov. structure: an executive, with a constitutional court (which has no powers in the game). If this is what you want, fine. BUt don't keep telling me we are a legislature.

[Kuciwalker]

Please don't turn this thread into another constitutional debate. PLEASE

[BigRed515]

Originally posted by skywalker
Please don't turn this thread into another constitutional debate. PLEASE

Oh, what an ironic threadjack!

[Aro]

Originally posted by skywalker
Please don't turn this thread into another constitutional debate. PLEASE

You can't beat a lawyer, you know.

[GePap]

Originally posted by skywalker
Please don't turn this thread into another constitutional debate. PLEASE

Sorry Skywalker, but this thread has a fundamentally short life, which really ended on page one. Once people stop complaining about the fact that there are constitutional debates going on, whats the use of complaining about them? Look at this as some sort of poset-modern thread, in which the act denounced become integral to it, while at the same time keeping the thread alive. Now in one single thread, we get a constitutional debate, and then those like you that are sick of it can continue to post, on the same thread, how much you hate it. In this way, the rest of the forum doesn't get cluttred with either constitutional debate, nor thread whinning about it. This thread becomes an inclusive, all in one

[Kuciwalker]

Ok, then I'm going to ask why the :P smiley doesn't work anymore.

[BigFurryMonster]

Finally, an important question :P

[Kuciwalker]

Oh, and Aro, I probably can - my dad's a REALLY GOOD lawyer, and I always enjoy talking my teachers in circles until they just tell me to shut up.

[Spiffor]

the :P smiley doesn't work anymore because of the new : Party : ( ) smiley which needs a capitalized P. If you want to , you'll need a small p ( ": p" ). Erm, was it clear ?

Edit : btw GePap, check you PMs