12-02-2003 02:52									#61
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

So what if consulB don't like to work with consulA and plan to get him out of the consulate? Cause he has another scheme, etc.
Can he place a no-con vote too? - No one really answered that...




NB:
Sorry I'm 'problemizing' things for you here.
I just want to look at the possible problems that might arise in this simplified system, so we can catch them ahead of time.
I don't want to slow down any game issue, or complicate the job for anyone. That I can reassure you.

	12-02-2003 02:55									#62
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Yes - everyone should be able to call a CoC vote.

	12-02-2003 03:06									#63
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Ok BFM, I see.

quote: Originally posted by BigFurryMonster h. A Consul, Minister or official appointed by the Consulate may propose a Change of Command vote on himself.

[edit]

I do not completely agree then, as I would have written it this way, for reasons already mentioned:


h. A Consul or Minister may only propose a Change of Command vote on himself, and not on another one.




One Consul could get a CoC (no-con) from another Consul.
Opens up for a lot of bad scheming.

	12-02-2003 03:08									#64
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

We could end up with a Julius/Augustus Caesar situation.

Scheming to remove someone from office due to political reasons is unacceptable, and should be thwarted by some means.

	12-02-2003 03:35									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Right on Trip... Thats why I ranted so much about this lately.

	12-02-2003 03:51									#66
	Get a bigger avatar today!

As much as I'd like to think everyone would be completely honorable and this would never happen, I must be the cynic and the devil's advocate, and assume that if everyone here leaves and we get a slimey new consulate crew in, there has to be something to stop 'em from letting their weird machinations from succeeding.

	12-02-2003 04:02									#67
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Not a lot of complicated rules please.

The point stated by Aidun was a good one, but legalizing too much just to try to (unsuccessfully) to prevent every posible problem will take us nowhere.

Of course that's IMHO

	12-02-2003 04:50									#68
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

The consulship of Apolyton is a very important issue. I'm turned off by rules also (one of the reason I'm not active in the C3DG anymore... the huge constitution), but there has to be a clear-cut way to nominate/elect/remove consuls from office. It's like saying "There is to be an election for the President of Apolytonia." This tells you nothing... you need procedure and rules of how the election is to be conducted.

	12-02-2003 05:03									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

That's also something I've been ranting about mister Deutchland. The current Constitution is a nice start, but does not provide one guideline to how things are gonna happen. We need some amendments, I guess. And not complicated ones. I do agree to that oliverfa.

	12-02-2003 05:29									#70
	Suffering from ads?

Guy's , no one is going to chitchat. The NoCon Motion will only be rarely used as we have seen in the SPDG that we have very good ministers etc.

And well IF Sam thinks he can do better than Joe or likes to play silly infantile games, the majority can vote on the person that is in office to prove their trust in him.
There is no threat that this vote shall be used for silly purposes.

BTW BFM, you have written a perfect proposal. We can post it as an amendment now that Constitution is accepted.

Aidun

	12-02-2003 05:46									#71
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Trip I'm turned off by rules also (one of the reason I'm not active in the C3DG anymore... the huge constitution), but there has to be a clear-cut way to nominate/elect/remove consuls from office... you need procedure and rules of how the election is to be conducted.

Give me a break. So the Con in the the SPDG is "too big", you're turned off by rules, and having lots of rules keeps you from participating in the game, but you have to have more rules and procedure because everything must be explictly spelled out. And once we spell out every little detail (like we did in the NewCon) people will groan and say that it's too big.

I'd much rather people start being honest about their reasons for bailing on the SPDG game and stop making comments like this. The size of the Con is a result of us wanting a clearly defined explanation and system for everything ... it's not some big hurdle you have to "get" to be involved.

I challange anyone who thinks it's "too big" to say which part of it could be cut out. Those who wish to have everything spelled out in this game are easily looking to create a document of that size.

Keep it at a bare minimum. Majority rules in all disputes. Let's keep this thing moving.

--Togas

	12-02-2003 05:51									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I also think BFMs proposal is good... But if we could just have changed the h-clause with one single little word, it would be even better. Ok, see ya guys!

	12-02-2003 05:51									#73
	Remove this text

Just that single word? Please?!

Last edited by ThePlagueRat on 12-02-2003 at 06:00

	12-02-2003 06:15									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Togas Give me a break. So the Con in the the SPDG is "too big", you're turned off by rules, and having lots of rules keeps you from participating in the game, but you have to have more rules and procedure because everything must be explictly spelled out. And once we spell out every little detail (like we did in the NewCon) people will groan and say that it's too big. I'd much rather people start being honest about their reasons for bailing on the SPDG game and stop making comments like this. The size of the Con is a result of us wanting a clearly defined explanation and system for everything ... it's not some big hurdle you have to "get" to be involved. I challange anyone who thinks it's "too big" to say which part of it could be cut out. Those who wish to have everything spelled out in this game are easily looking to create a document of that size. Keep it at a bare minimum. Majority rules in all disputes. Let's keep this thing moving. --Togas

Did you see the example I gave above? Did you read it?

There's little/nothing about the procedure and not much beyond that either. Fleshing out what should be done properly does not bind anyone, nor is it just 'useless fluff'.

How many problems were there before the NewCon? How many after? How much of the NewCon was actual procedure, necassary to play the game and enact government, like elections, impeachments, etc., and how much of it is actually just 'rules'?

I know you're proud of your own, and other people's work on the NewCon, but let's leave my own, and other people's reasons for leaving the C3DG for another thread, and keep this on-topic...

	12-02-2003 06:30									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I recall both of you contributing with nice stuff to the SPDG constitutions at different occations, and I tried to contribute myself and it was not always so easy to agree on issues.
Ok, what we did there and then, is not the topic here...


This whole mess makes me sad.
Perhaps Apolytoners in the future will understand that my proposal was a good one too??? The reason I have been ranting about it lately, is that we need no Consuls no-conning other Consuls, triggering internal struggle and bad stuff.
It could ruin the good team spirit. And make us all angry and sad.

A healthy team spirit is everything, and we can even use it to win this game!

	12-02-2003 14:43									#76
	Increase Your PM Length

First of all, let me say I also am against bureaucracy. That is why the proposal for a Constitution (as posted by Thud and me) roughly describes only 3 things:

• Give 3 Consuls the power to play the game
  
• Give 4 Ministers the position of Official Advisors
  
• Provide a means of getting the right people at the right jobs

	12-02-2003 15:23									#77
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by BigFurryMonster By the way - I agree on the change proposed: an Official should not be able to call a CoC vote on another Official.

Not sure if it is that much of a problem, actually... The officials (especially the Consuls) are IMHO supposed to project the collective will of the team into the game itself and organize things. I can hardly imagine that the personal views on how to project the team's will could differ significantly among the three players. I imagine it would be likely that any Consul not following the will of the team would be replaced by the team in the first place...

A clause preventing Consuls from calling a non-con vote on another Consul can be so easily defeated by having someone else calling the no-con vote on behalf of the Consul (all of the Consuls will have at least one true friend here, that I am sure of ), that I would not even bother adding it.

	12-02-2003 17:05									#78
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

OK.

Are there any seriuous objections on the text that we have now got? Is there any major loophole in it? Will it provide enough flexibility and speed to play the game? Will it not restrict us having fun playing?

If not, I think we can propose the text as an amendment, or re-poll the whole thing.

	12-02-2003 17:10									#79
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

hi ,

okay we got a COL now , who and how is it going to be policed , .....

, NYE would be great as chief justice chairman

have a nice day

	12-02-2003 20:03									#80
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by vondrack A clause preventing Consuls from calling a non-con vote on another Consul can be so easily defeated by having someone else calling the no-con vote on behalf of the Consul (all of the Consuls will have at least one true friend here, that I am sure of ), that I would not even bother adding it.

Right, I thought about that one too. (we can call it a Caesar-CoC)
We just gotta cope with it in some way. So if it would ever happen (and I hope not), I can only recommend everyone to vote 'NO' on such a CoC proposal. At least when there is evidence of another Consul involved in the scheme...

	17-02-2003 11:43									#81
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I have a general question stemming from all the talk about the replacing of a Consul:

Will there be new appointment(s) to the Ministries by the new Consul(s)?

	17-02-2003 13:36									#82
	Increase Your PM Length

no... once a consul/minister is apointed/voted for, the only way to remove them is with a CoC.

	19-02-2003 02:02									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

hmm, donegal... did we settle the appointing officials issue?
Or do we need more elections now?

	19-02-2003 02:44									#84
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Donegeal: we're changing this into "only Consuls can be removed by CoC".

	19-02-2003 03:03									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

And how is the appointing of other offices carried out?
The lame thing is having a minister alone appointing ambassadors and so on... It can't be fair to the applicants.
Very bad law.

Last edited by ThePlagueRat on 19-02-2003 at 03:23