Should we decrease the number of ministers?

Pedrunn · February 14, 2003, 20:39

Thats a dicussion for another amendment.

Since the beginning of the DG. We had trouble filling all the ministers positions

In the first term was the Minister of Domestic Affairs the problem in which we had to extend the nomination period. The last elections was this same position again which lead to a absent minister: Wise Ass. This term the problem was the minister of Diplomacy. Not to mention that in almost all elections a candidate ran alone for the position which gave boring disputes.

So shouldnt we make only four position rather than five like the Civ3DG and CTPDG. Killing the MoDTS position and give the control of the Trade and Science to the minister of Infrastructure and the power over diplomacy to the President?

The changes would take place in the next month election.

What you guys think?

MrBaggins · February 14, 2003, 20:47

I'm certainly OK with that.

The President doesn't have enough decision making as far as I'm concerned.

HuangShang · February 14, 2003, 21:18

neither of u voeted?

H Tower · February 15, 2003, 00:05

no, things are going to get a lot more complicated in the game and you can only divide up so much of the decision making process

Zaphod Beeblebrox · February 15, 2003, 04:22

well, though of course, one can discuss about reconfiguring the government, thats should be done careful, and with a wider scope than just moving the decisions a little around. but i fear it won't solve our mainproblem: we are too few people. i recently looked, who our 50 citizens are. one third of them i never heard of, and another third i heard or read of, (for instance peter triggs, who contributed the unitupdater iirc) but not inside this forum. when you have a look at the posts from the last week, there is about a dozen people at the moment who contributes here at all

Frozzy · February 15, 2003, 05:06

The CtPDG has 3 ministers and a president... it seems to be feasible.

mapfi · February 15, 2003, 08:43

Sometimes I have this hunch that Pedrunn proposes things just to stir up discussion...

Anyway, if you must decrease the number of ministers, then do it in a other way. Give the infrastructure to the MoDST. Giving it the Pres would be bad because he controls the sliders and we should have checks and balances, taking the MoDST appart is even a worse idea. Diplomacy is a tricky work, it deserves a own ministry and a minister that knows his way around. I think Pedrunn himself prooved very efficently why the Pres shouldn't handle diplomacy.

btw - if you compare to the C3DG, keep in mind they only elect 4 positions but appoint more after the election. Also workload will certainly increase as this game progresses. Furthermore, I don't think that the elections turn out that bad. It's not necessary that every position is disputed. In the current election we only have the MoI who's undisputed and that's because he's not that important and the MoDST, that's because...(political statement that I don't want to make) We're doing a lot better than the C3DG which has uncontested elections with less gov positions.

Locutus · February 15, 2003, 10:29

Pedrunn, you beat me to it!

I was gonna propose to kill the Infrastructure Minister (he hasn't done *anything* so far) and add the responsibility to the MoDTS. Possibly move Science to MoDA if this burdens the job too much, like in the CtP1DG.

If the workload of any minister increases beyond what he can handle, he could appoint delegates to alleviate the job.

Gilgamensch · February 15, 2003, 10:50

Don't forget, sooner or later we will have 'some' infrastructure' to do. And that can be quite a job, posting/polling about where to farm/road/whatever.

Also the MoDSaT, will become more difficult in the future, once we have caravans up and running.

I still think we should leave it like it is.

It would be better, if more people would participate

MrBaggins · February 15, 2003, 11:04

You know what... you've convince me to change my position. We should keep the current number of positions, as is. I still feel as though the president has too little mandate, somehow. Although I'm not sure what additional function could be given to him.

Perhaps nuclear release authorization?
What about unconventional attack authorization?

MrBaggins

mapfi · February 15, 2003, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by MrBaggins
Perhaps nuclear release authorization?
What about unconventional attack authorization?

First one's far far away, second one is already with the MoDST instead of the MoD because of their grave diplomatical influences. But maybe somehow you're right, the pres could hold a little more power, the problem is only which? I think the balance we have now is rather good.

HuangShang · February 15, 2003, 19:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
Pedrunn, you beat me to it!

I was gonna propose to kill the Infrastructure Minister (he hasn't done *anything* so far) and add the responsibility to the MoDTS. Possibly move Science to MoDA if this burdens the job too much, like in the CtP1DG.

If the workload of any minister increases beyond what he can handle, he could appoint delegates to alleviate the job.

notice how this is his way of taking MoI