TOADWATER IS DEAD! LONG LIVE TOADWATER!
Toadwater Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 02, 2021, 08:01:39 am
Home Login Register
News: Crowbarella waxed a Coup d'état Scutching Sword, increasing its power by 73 points

Toadwater  |  Archives  |  Old Tavern Posts  |  Government Discussion  |  Topic: The Toadwater Constitution 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Print
Poll
Question: Adaption
Adopt   -36 (83.7%)
Reject   -7 (16.3%)
Total Voters: 42

Author Topic: The Toadwater Constitution  (Read 14559 times)
Dragoon
Centivelian
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 167
Offline Offline

Posts: 16249


WWW
« on: January 01, 2008, 09:08:08 pm »

The Constitution

§1 - We, the players of Toadwater, find these rules to be fair and wise. As these rules were agreed upon by the majority of the community, no one person or one group shall be able to edit or censor or rewrite without the specific changes being agreed upon in the format detailed below.

§2 - Any attempted edit or censoring or rewrite of these rules shall reside in one vote for every one paragraph to be changed. No vote can be held to change more than one part of the Constitution at once. No votes residing at the same time can rewrite the same paragraph.

§3 - Every player with the ability to post in the government forum has the right to start a vote to change any part of this constitution at any time. However, only government officials, moderator and administrators are allowed to hold more than one vote at once, so as to prevent random newbies from spamming the board with change attempts.

§4 - A vote to change any part of the Constitution will be known as a Constitutional Change Request (herein referred to as a CCR), and shall adhere to the following format or be deemed invalid:
§4.1 - The subject shall be "Constitution Change Request: §x.x", where x.x is the number of the paragraph in question.
§4.2 - The question shall be "Old or New?"
§4.3 - The body shall be the text of the old paragraph, followed by a blank line, followed by the proposed new text of the paragraph.
§4.4 - Option 1 shall be "Keep the old paragraph".
§4.5 - Option 2 shall be "Adopt the new paragraph".
§4.6 - Option 3 shall be "Having no opinion certainly won't stop ME from voting". Votes for this option will be discarded and not counted towards anything at all.
§4.7 - The Poll Options shall be: 1 Maximum votes per user; Run the poll for 7 days; Allow user to change vote; and Only show the results after someone has voted.
§4.8 - Once the poll is created, lock the thread by clicking the lock / unlock button at the bottom of the post to avoid discussion.
§4.9 - There may be no more than 3 (three) CCRs running at any one time.
§4.10 - If a CCR fails, there may not be another vote to alter that effected paragraph for a period of 1 (one) month.
§4.11 - At least 20 votes must be cast for Option 1 and Option 2 for the vote to be valid -- votes cast for Option 3 will be discarded and not counted at all.
§4.12 - At least 2/3 of the votes must be cast for Option 1 for the change to be made to the Constitution.
§4.13 - It is the poll creator's responsibility to ensure that an admin has confirmed that no player has voted more than once by having said admin post his confirmation as a reply to the poll.
§4.14 - It is the poll creator's responsibility to ensure the Constitution is updated appropriately -- the wiki admins who can update it are http://www.toadwater.com/Guide/index.php/Special:Listadmins

§5 - Any vote result is subject to checks for mules by the admins.

§6 - Any vote is subject to being checked for correct form by any current admin or Government member. If a flaw is pointed out, the vote may be recreated in the correct form without the usual delays between votes.

§7 - Any vote modified, edited, locked or similar after the initial post will automatically become invalid.

§8 - These rules shall reside in the Wiki in a locked article, that only moderators can edit, and all mention of the Constitution shall point to this Wiki article, as it alone shall have the final word in conflicting versions.

The Government

§9 - The Government shall consist of a total of 3 (three) leaders, from here on referred to as Viceroys.
§9.1 - Every Viceroy will have the same powers and responsibilities.
§9.2 - Viceroys will be initially be voted on in a special vote that is detailed below, after which this paragraph will be deleted.
§9.3 - Viceroys will have an unlimited ruling term unless either voted out of office or impeached.
§9.4 - To vote a Viceroy out of office, a poll can be started by any member of the Toadwater community above level 100 (one hundred). A reason must be given. 3/4th (three fourth) or more of the valid counted votes must be in favor of removal.
§9.5 - To impeach a Viceroy, a poll can be started by any member of the Toadwater community above level 100 (one hundred). A reason and a detailed account of the rule violations must be given. Only violations of the Constitution are valid reasons for impeachment. 1/2 (one half) or more of the valid counted votes must be in favor of removal.
§9.6 - A maximum of two removal OR impeachment processes per 2 (two) months are allowed.
§9.7 - No removal poll can be started within the first month of any Viceroys term. This does not apply to impeachment polls.

§10 - Any single Viceroys has the power and responsibility to commit the following actions.
§10.1 - Start edicts people have purchased. To purchase an edict, the player has to donate the edict price plus 50 (fifty) million gold, then provide a Viceroy with a link to his profile. The edict can be started at any time as long as no other conflicting edict is running or was scheduled earlier.
§10.2 - Teleport new players to SWI or to the new worlds. If possible, the price should be covered by the player in question, but in cases of actual new players being too poor, Government funds may be used at the Viceroys discretion.
§10.3 - Locate inactives. At the Viceroys discretion, inactives may be located to help clean out base expansions. This is not to be used to locate active players with ill intent.
§10.4 - Locate, poison and teleport raiders. Completely up to the discretion of the Viceroy.

§11 - Any 2 (two) out of the 3 (three) Viceroys have the power and responsibility to commit the following actions.
§11.1 - Player harassment. Teleportation, location and poison features can be used to harrass any player the Government wishes to punish, delay or temporarily incapacitate for any reason.
§11.2 - Raise or lower the taxes to a level of their choosing.
§11.3 - Spend Government money on edicts.

§12 - In cases of previously unruled cheating, the combined Government has the power and responsibility to agree on a punishment, which is then used for further cases and added to the Constitution.

The Players

§13 - If any player announces their intent to raid another player for whatever reasons by making a post in the tavern titled "PLANNED RAID: Targetname" 7 (seven) days ahead of his raid, the Government is not allowed to intervene as long as the player does not harm a different player. Only one raid may be planned by any one person in that way at any time, to avoid people simply spamming dozens of names. This expires after two months.

§14.1 - MultiClienting (determined by an admin):
§14.1.1 - For players above rank 50: Removal of 1/2 (one half) of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their posession that relate to the multicliented skill.
§14.1.2 - For players below rank 50: Removal of all of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the multicliented skill.
§14.1.3 - For second offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the multicliented skill plus a three month ban from the skill.
§14.1.4 - For third offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the multicliented skill plus a six month ban from the game.
§14.2 - AFK Macroing (defined by not answering a popup for more than 15 (fifteen) metric minutes):
§14.2.1 - One freebie is given every month.
§14.2.2 - It is at the discretion of the Viceroys on whether or not the person is given a macroing offense.
§14.2.3 - For players above rank 50: Removal of 1/2 (one half) of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill.
§14.2.4 - For players below rank 50: Removal of all of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill.
§14.2.5 - For third offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill plus a three month ban from the skill.
§14.2.6 - For fourth offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill plus a six month ban from the game.

§31.4 - No government official shall ever at any point have the name of a Star Wars or Star Trek character.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2008, 09:41:56 pm by Matthias » Logged
lilojo
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 58
Offline Offline

Posts: 324



« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2008, 09:20:44 pm »


§31.4 - No government official shall ever at any point have the name of a Star Wars or Star Trek character.

That seems a bit harsh.  Well, yeah, ban the Start Trek, but I like Star Wars.

Logged
Twisti
Guest
« Reply #2 on: January 01, 2008, 09:21:16 pm »

Whoever wrote that Constitution must be a mastermind.
Logged
Deadly Sane
Public Relations
----------
*****

Karma: 7
Offline Offline

Posts: 484


DAAAAH!!


« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2008, 09:22:41 pm »

Twisti, we know it's you who wrote it  Wink
Logged

(\__/)
(O.o )
( > < ) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny and this attached message into your signature to help him on his quest for world domination.

<@Travis> I know it's hard to belive, but I've taken a ton of english classes.
Lemonade
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: -58
Offline Offline

Posts: 1206


« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2008, 09:30:37 pm »

Except that they made 2x a paragraph §3.

§3 - If any player announces their intent to raid another player for whatever reasons by making a post in the tavern titled "PLANNED RAID: Targetname" 7 (seven) days ahead of his raid, the Government is not allowed to intervene as long as the player does not harm a different player. Only one raid may be planned by any one person in that way at any time, to avoid people simply spamming dozens of names. This expires after two months.


§3 - Every player with the ability to post in the government forum has the right to start a vote to change any part of this constitution at any time. However, only government officials, moderator and administrators are allowed to hold more than one vote at once, so as to prevent random newbies from spamming the board with change attempts.
Logged
Twisti
Guest
« Reply #5 on: January 01, 2008, 10:21:51 pm »

Lies.
Logged
Zim Foamy Fan
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 275
Offline Offline

Posts: 4368



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2008, 12:30:21 am »

The Constitution

§1 - We, the players of Toadwater, find these rules to be fair and wise. As these rules were agreed upon by the majority of the community, no one person or one group shall be able to edit or censor or rewrite without the specific changes being agreed upon in the format detailed below.
We the people, in order to form a more perfect union, etc. Okay, groovy.

§2 - Any attempted edit or censoring or rewrite of these rules shall reside in one vote for every one paragraph to be changed. No vote can be held to change more than one part of the Constitution at once. No votes residing at the same time can rewrite the same paragraph.
Okay, so a way to keep the constitution from being corrupted, while giving a way to change it. I'd suggest adding something into this like a 2/3 vote must be obtained or something, because a popular majority is actually a bit too easy to change

§3 - Every player with the ability to post in the government forum has the right to start a vote to change any part of this constitution at any time. However, only government officials, moderator and administrators are allowed to hold more than one vote at once, so as to prevent random newbies from spamming the board with change attempts.
Okay, taking away the rights of the citizens. Can we get this to be changed to once a day, instead of one at a time, considering that when one thing is wrong, normally many things are?

§4 - A vote to change any part of the Constitution will be known as a Constitutional Change Request (herein referred to as a CCR), and shall adhere to the following format or be deemed invalid:
§4.1 - The subject shall be "Constitution Change Request: §x.x", where x.x is the number of the paragraph in question.
§4.2 - The question shall be "Old or New?"
§4.3 - The body shall be the text of the old paragraph, followed by a blank line, followed by the proposed new text of the paragraph.
§4.4 - Option 1 shall be "Keep the old paragraph".
§4.5 - Option 2 shall be "Adopt the new paragraph".
§4.6 - Option 3 shall be "Having no opinion certainly won't stop ME from voting". Votes for this option will be discarded and not counted towards anything at all.
§4.7 - The Poll Options shall be: 1 Maximum votes per user; Run the poll for 7 days; Allow user to change vote; and Only show the results after someone has voted.
§4.8 - Once the poll is created, lock the thread by clicking the lock / unlock button at the bottom of the post to avoid discussion.
§4.9 - There may be no more than 3 (three) CCRs running at any one time.
§4.10 - If a CCR fails, there may not be another vote to alter that effected paragraph for a period of 1 (one) month.
§4.11 - At least 20 votes must be cast for Option 1 and Option 2 for the vote to be valid -- votes cast for Option 3 will be discarded and not counted at all.
§4.12 - At least 2/3 of the votes must be cast for Option 1 for the change to be made to the Constitution.
§4.13 - It is the poll creator's responsibility to ensure that an admin has confirmed that no player has voted more than once by having said admin post his confirmation as a reply to the poll.
§4.14 - It is the poll creator's responsibility to ensure the Constitution is updated appropriately -- the wiki admins who can update it are http://www.toadwater.com/Guide/index.php/Special:Listadmins
Okay, so there is a 2/3 thing in it... Might I suggest you refer to that in paragraph 2? Enjoyable format, although fairly constricted.

§5 - Any vote result is subject to checks for mules by the admins.
Good, no multiple votes, makes sense. Everyone counts as one person.

§6 - Any vote is subject to being checked for correct form by any current admin or Government member. If a flaw is pointed out, the vote may be recreated in the correct form without the usual delays between votes.
Heh, that's a bit too creepy. I understand that a proper format is good, as to ensure no confusion, but DANG!

§7 - Any vote modified, edited, locked or similar after the initial post will automatically become invalid.
lol

§8 - These rules shall reside in the Wiki in a locked article, that only moderators can edit, and all mention of the Constitution shall point to this Wiki article, as it alone shall have the final word in conflicting versions.
Okay.

The Government

§9 - The Government shall consist of a total of 3 (three) leaders, from here on referred to as Viceroys.
HEHE! You said viceroy Mr Green
§9.1 - Every Viceroy will have the same powers and responsibilities.
Are you saying that every viceroy has an equal amount of power, or are you comparing them to something that wasn't listed? Please do clarify
§9.2 - Viceroys will be initially be voted on in a special vote that is detailed below, after which this paragraph will be deleted.
Wait, this paragraph will be deleted? So it's like just the first, and then the rest of the time it's something regular? If so, then this paragraph should be deemed invalid, not deleted. Its information is important.
§9.3 - Viceroys will have an unlimited ruling term unless either voted out of office or impeached.
NO! NO NO NO NO NO! This is no good. Unlimited terms is no good. Can we get this changed to the maximum term of unlimited, but every 3 months new people can choose to run against them? Or something such that it's not life?
§9.4 - To vote a Viceroy out of office, a poll can be started by any member of the Toadwater community above level 100 (one hundred). A reason must be given. 3/4th (three fourth) or more of the valid counted votes must be in favor of removal.
Three-fourths has been proven time and time again to be too much by actual governments. Leaders need to be easy to get rid of, in case anything bad happens. At least lower this to 2/3.
§9.5 - To impeach a Viceroy, a poll can be started by any member of the Toadwater community above level 100 (one hundred). A reason and a detailed account of the rule violations must be given. Only violations of the Constitution are valid reasons for impeachment. 1/2 (one half) or more of the valid counted votes must be in favor of removal.
Okay, but what happens after the impeachment?
§9.6 - A maximum of two removal OR impeachment processes per 2 (two) months are allowed.
NO! If a leader is bad, we need the ability to remove them. A maximum on removals is a half-baked idea at best.
§9.7 - No removal poll can be started within the first month of any Viceroys term. This does not apply to impeachment polls.
A protection period? Frankly, they should be under probation for the first month. But if this protection were lowered to 2 weeks, I'd be okay with that.

§10 - Any single Viceroys has the power and responsibility to commit the following actions.
Nice typo. Shouldn't it be "Any single Viceroy?"
§10.1 - Start edicts people have purchased. To purchase an edict, the player has to donate the edict price plus 50 (fifty) million gold, then provide a Viceroy with a link to his profile. The edict can be started at any time as long as no other conflicting edict is running or was scheduled earlier.
Why no conflicting edicts? We should be able to have multiple edicts going at once. Also, I think it'd be better if we just made a page for buying edicts instead of going through people to do it. Maybe when it's been bought, a banner at the top of the forums is displayed.
§10.2 - Teleport new players to SWI or to the new worlds. If possible, the price should be covered by the player in question, but in cases of actual new players being too poor, Government funds may be used at the Viceroys discretion.
I enjoy this. Sounds fine to me.
§10.3 - Locate inactives. At the Viceroys discretion, inactives may be located to help clean out base expansions. This is not to be used to locate active players with ill intent.
Groovy.
§10.4 - Locate, poison and teleport raiders. Completely up to the discretion of the Viceroy.
Not groovy. What if a viceroy or viceroy's friend goes raiding, and thus the viceroy abuses his powers. But I guess that's fixed with the tricameral system.

§11 - Any 2 (two) out of the 3 (three) Viceroys have the power and responsibility to commit the following actions.
§11.1 - Player harassment. Teleportation, location and poison features can be used to harrass any player the Government wishes to punish, delay or temporarily incapacitate for any reason.
LOL! The government is allowed to HARASS players upon their discretion? At least add in to this that a reason must be given to the public.
§11.2 - Raise or lower the taxes to a level of their choosing.
Can we vote on it too?
§11.3 - Spend Government money on edicts.
I like this one Mr Elf
§12 - In cases of previously unruled cheating, the combined Government has the power and responsibility to agree on a punishment, which is then used for further cases and added to the Constitution.
In cases of previously unruled cheating? As in past offenses? Or as in making up rules for offenses in the future?



MESSAGE EXCEEDS MAXIMUM ALLOWED LENGTH, SO IT WILL BE SPLIT INTO 2 POSTS!
Logged

macroing is cool

[00:30:00] <+EmperorWu> don't finish
[00:30:02] <+EmperorWu> I'm in.

[00:24:20] <Travis> I wasn't smart enough to back it up.
Zim Foamy Fan
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 275
Offline Offline

Posts: 4368



WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2008, 12:30:43 am »

The Players

§13 - If any player announces their intent to raid another player for whatever reasons by making a post in the tavern titled "PLANNED RAID: Targetname" 7 (seven) days ahead of his raid, the Government is not allowed to intervene as long as the player does not harm a different player. Only one raid may be planned by any one person in that way at any time, to avoid people simply spamming dozens of names. This expires after two months.
The planning of a raid, heh. I lol'd. But okay. You might want to add in that if the player does things that disobey the constitution that you'll be allowed to interveine anyway.

§14.1 - MultiClienting (determined by an admin):
§14.1.1 - For players above rank 50: Removal of 1/2 (one half) of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their posession that relate to the multicliented skill.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO SPECIFY WHAT ABOVE AND BELOW ARE HERE! You know that people will use that loophole.
§14.1.2 - For players below rank 50: Removal of all of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the multicliented skill.
§14.1.3 - For second offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the multicliented skill plus a three month ban from the skill.
YES.
§14.1.4 - For third offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the multicliented skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the multicliented skill plus a six month ban from the game.
A RESOUNDING YES.
§14.2 - AFK Macroing (defined by not answering a popup for more than 15 (fifteen) metric minutes):
THANK YOU! Finally, an actual, specified time for this, instead of about five minutes. Groovy
§14.2.1 - One freebie is given every month.
A freebie? Heh, okay, an understanding government is how criminals thrive, but okay. Once a month isn't often enough for serious offenses
§14.2.2 - It is at the discretion of the Viceroys on whether or not the person is given a macroing offense.
Can we add something here about how anyone can point out when a viceroy macros, and that say a small poll can be run for it? Leaders should be held more accountable than the followers.
§14.2.3 - For players above rank 50: Removal of 1/2 (one half) of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill.
ONCE AGAIN, SPECIFY WHAT ABOVE AND BELOW MEAN!
§14.2.4 - For players below rank 50: Removal of all of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill.
§14.2.5 - For third offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill plus a three month ban from the skill.
§14.2.6 - For fourth offenses: Removal of all of their total XP in the macroed skill, plus removal of ALL items in their possession that relate to the macroed skill plus a six month ban from the game.
A bit harsh, but k. Cheating is cheating.

§31.4 - No government official shall ever at any point have the name of a Star Wars or Star Trek character.
Then I officially will run to be an official Wink




Here's my comments on it, and suggestions on what to change. I won't vote until these have been resolved.
Logged

macroing is cool

[00:30:00] <+EmperorWu> don't finish
[00:30:02] <+EmperorWu> I'm in.

[00:24:20] <Travis> I wasn't smart enough to back it up.
Seraph
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 84
Offline Offline

Posts: 742


Ruler of the High Court


« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2008, 12:38:42 am »

I agree, and that wording makes it sound as though rank 50 is immune Smiley
Logged

Typed using the dvorak keyboard layout. Try it!
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/

Currently buying Balsam Fir Seeds at 5 gold each.
http://www.toadwater.com/TWeb/Buying.php?seller=Tide
DMC chii
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: -30
Offline Offline

Posts: 159


« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2008, 12:49:44 am »

The Constitution

§9.3 - Viceroys will have an unlimited ruling term unless either voted out of office or impeached.

§9.4 - To vote a Viceroy out of office, a poll can be started by any member of the Toadwater

§11.1 - Player harassment. Teleportation, location and poison features can be used to harrass any player the Government wishes to punish, delay or temporarily incapacitate for any reason.

§11.2 - Raise or lower the taxes to a level of their choosing.

§10.4 - Locate, poison and teleport raiders. Completely up to the discretion of the Viceroy.


I think 9.3 should be changed to three or two months. Set a maximum time for it. If no reelections occur (the TW people are content), then another of the set maximum month time of ruling occurs. So, say maximum ruling time is three months, a Viceroy rules for three months. If no one requests for reelections, another three months of ruling occurs. This way, other people are given a chance to rule.

11.1 is exploitable. For any reason can include personal reason.

Taxes should be voted on. I know the reason is to counter the gold inflation, but only a few people have this abnormally large amounts of gold. Poor people would remain poor, and rich people would remain rich either way.

Hm, I'm a bit uneasy about the "up to the discretion." It could be exploitable. There should be a line that any viceroy is responsible for helping a player who requests help against an unannounced raiding.

Okay, brain not working anymore, later.
Logged

DMC Store: Catering to your Every TW Need

In need of items but not willing to trade other TW items for it? Let us serve you! Check this post at the Shady Tree. Smiley

DMC chii sold 52640 Beggar's Seed Bag for 2021376000 gold pieces
Twisti
Guest
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2008, 12:55:37 am »

Okay, taking away the rights of the citizens. Can we get this to be changed to once a day, instead of one at a time, considering that when one thing is wrong, normally many things are?

Oh yeah, so you have to vote for a dozen things every day. Brilliant plan. Nobody is ever going to get tired of that and miss important changes. Well thought through. Thanks for sharing.

Okay, so there is a 2/3 thing in it... Might I suggest you refer to that in paragraph 2? Enjoyable format, although fairly constricted.

Why would 4.12 be specifically referred but not all the others ? All the vote details have been put into their own section for a reason.

§9.1 - Every Viceroy will have the same powers and responsibilities.
Are you saying that every viceroy has an equal amount of power, or are you comparing them to something that wasn't listed? Please do clarify

Yes, when I said that every Viceroy has equal powers, I meant that every Viceroy has equal powers.

Wait, this paragraph will be deleted? So it's like just the first, and then the rest of the time it's something regular? If so, then this paragraph should be deemed invalid, not deleted. Its information is important.

After the initial voting, this paragraph will never ever have any effect again, and thus can be safely removed.

NO! NO NO NO NO NO! This is no good. Unlimited terms is no good. Can we get this changed to the maximum term of unlimited, but every 3 months new people can choose to run against them? Or something such that it's not life?

One of the reasons the old Government stagnated was that nobody cared about the regular elections, because there was no real reasons for it. I see no reason to fire good working effective Viceroys, and my Government has proved that a constant, static Government works a lot better than one thats changed at practically random intervals. You want a new election ? Remove a Viceroy you think shouldn't be in the Government anymore. You think they should all stay in ? Then you don't need a new election either.

Three-fourths has been proven time and time again to be too much by actual governments. Leaders need to be easy to get rid of, in case anything bad happens. At least lower this to 2/3.

At least have the courtesy to read an entire document before complaining. In case something bad happens, you have paragraph 9.5.

Okay, but what happens after the impeachment?

A new election, obviously.

NO! If a leader is bad, we need the ability to remove them. A maximum on removals is a half-baked idea at best.

You know, you are totally right. If someone wants to piss off the Government, he should totally be allowed to make at least one impeachment poll per hour. And once they run out, he should be allowed to make more, right away. Again, well thought out.

A protection period? Frankly, they should be under probation for the first month. But if this protection were lowered to 2 weeks, I'd be okay with that.

You have so much to bitch, and clearly put so little thought in your responses that I don't see you ever voting for this anyways, so luckily whether or not you're ok with it doesn't make a difference. If someone is voted in, there is no logical, sane reasoning why he should be voted out a day after taking office (unless he does something wrong). However, if someone loses an election, and is a bad loser, he is very likely to start a poll to remove his opponent from office before he can prove himself. I fail to see why allowing for that would be a good idea.

Why no conflicting edicts? We should be able to have multiple edicts going at once. Also, I think it'd be better if we just made a page for buying edicts instead of going through people to do it. Maybe when it's been bought, a banner at the top of the forums is displayed.

Because conflicting edicts hurt every player, and only benefit a single person. Why on earth would you even CONSIDER allowing something that retarded ?

Not groovy. What if a viceroy or viceroy's friend goes raiding, and thus the viceroy abuses his powers. But I guess that's fixed with the tricameral system.

How would the Viceroy abuse his powers then ? He can't poison or locate the victim, since the paragraph clearly said that it's to poison RAIDERS, and the victim can just ask another Viceroy to help him. If all three Viceroys turn him down, there's probably a good reason.

LOL! The government is allowed to HARASS players upon their discretion? At least add in to this that a reason must be given to the public.

If two Viceroys agree, then yes, they are allowed to HARASS players. Obvious reasons would be to stop someone who's currently cheating until a Matt arrives, to punish a thief or to help Twisti win a bet.

Can we vote on it too?

No. Everyone would always vote 0%, which is not good for the Government. If you really want 0% that bad, vote for a Viceroy who promises to lower the taxes.

In cases of previously unruled cheating? As in past offenses? Or as in making up rules for offenses in the future?

The latter. Whenever a new bug or exploit is found, the Government will decide how to punish it.
Logged
Twisti
Guest
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2008, 01:02:23 am »

YOU MIGHT WANT TO SPECIFY WHAT ABOVE AND BELOW ARE HERE! You know that people will use that loophole.

Those people will be properly laughed at by Dragoon.

A freebie? Heh, okay, an understanding government is how criminals thrive, but okay. Once a month isn't often enough for serious offenses

Not my idea and not after my tastes either.

Can we add something here about how anyone can point out when a viceroy macros, and that say a small poll can be run for it? Leaders should be held more accountable than the followers.

Really only the admins can intervene in that case.

A bit harsh, but k. Cheating is cheating.

Consider that with the freebie, thats FIVE offenses, I really don't think even a permanent ban would be too harsh. If after being caught four times, having all your XP, all your items removed and being banned for three months you AFK macro AGAIN you don't deserve to play this game. Or procreate.
Logged
Twisti
Guest
« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2008, 01:04:47 am »

Most of the things in the Constitution are there for a good reason, which usually becomes obvious when you look at it from a game perspective, instead of a player perspective. Letting people vote on taxes is NOT A GOOD IDEA. Also, having regular elections has not been proven to be useful. If we have a perfectly working Government, we shouldn't just break it up after a randomly decided time period just for the hell of it.
Logged
Zim Foamy Fan
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 275
Offline Offline

Posts: 4368



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2008, 01:12:10 am »

Oh yeah, so you have to vote for a dozen things every day. Brilliant plan. Nobody is ever going to get tired of that and miss important changes. Well thought through. Thanks for sharing.
I stated that once a day would be satisfactory. I completely agree that bringing up tons of things will only get nothing solved and prove to be annoying, but who knows how long a single topic will be around for? Days? Months? I think that once day would keep it relatively clutter-free.

Why would 4.12 be specifically referred but not all the others ? All the vote details have been put into their own section for a reason.
Point taken.

Yes, when I said that every Viceroy has equal powers, I meant that every Viceroy has equal powers.
I was merely noting that the sentence flowed more like a malformed one, and was making sure that I understoof you correctly.

After the initial voting, this paragraph will never ever have any effect again, and thus can be safely removed.
Yes, but it should be saved for posterity, although it would be invalid.

One of the reasons the old Government stagnated was that nobody cared about the regular elections, because there was no real reasons for it. I see no reason to fire good working effective Viceroys, and my Government has proved that a constant, static Government works a lot better than one thats changed at practically random intervals. You want a new election ? Remove a Viceroy you think shouldn't be in the Government anymore. You think they should all stay in ? Then you don't need a new election either.
Yep, the regular elections were no good. That's why I suggested a pattern that was life, except that people could still run against them to replace them.

At least have the courtesy to read an entire document before complaining. In case something bad happens, you have paragraph 9.5.
An impeachment is merely an indictment. It is not the actual removal of a leader. You would still need the 3/4 vote as stated earlier in the constitution to remove the leader, and thus my argument still stands.

A new election, obviously.
Once again, an impeachment is not the removal of a leader, but merely the indictment. We would still need the second stage, conviction. That'd be a trial, and we'd need rules for that.

You know, you are totally right. If someone wants to piss off the Government, he should totally be allowed to make at least one impeachment poll per hour. And once they run out, he should be allowed to make more, right away. Again, well thought out.
Yes, because if all three were corrupt, or a newly elected viceroy were corrupt, we SURELY WOULDN'T WANT TO REMOVE THEM! Nah, that's not a good idea, let's protect them by placing a maximum on impeachments. Your idea is so brilliant!

You have so much to bitch, and clearly put so little thought in your responses that I don't see you ever voting for this anyways, so luckily whether or not you're ok with it doesn't make a difference. If someone is voted in, there is no logical, sane reasoning why he should be voted out a day after taking office (unless he does something wrong). However, if someone loses an election, and is a bad loser, he is very likely to start a poll to remove his opponent from office before he can prove himself. I fail to see why allowing for that would be a good idea.
Yes, of course, I put no thought behind my arguments. You even stated in that paragraph that there's no reason to remove him unless he did something wrong. You have pointed out why I think that no protection period should exist. If the leader's horrible, why wait a month and suffer? Also, how do you think that a sore loser is going to get a majority vote on an impeachment unless there's a sound reason behind it?

Because conflicting edicts hurt every player, and only benefit a single person. Why on earth would you even CONSIDER allowing something that retarded ?
Wait, what? Yes, having multiple edicts is SO horrible! Giving people the choice of what to work on is a horrible idea, so strike my argument there!

How would the Viceroy abuse his powers then ? He can't poison or locate the victim, since the paragraph clearly said that it's to poison RAIDERS, and the victim can just ask another Viceroy to help him. If all three Viceroys turn him down, there's probably a good reason.
Good point, which is probably why I stated right after that that it was no big deal, since it's a tricameral system we're setting up here, apparently.

If two Viceroys agree, then yes, they are allowed to HARASS players. Obvious reasons would be to stop someone who's currently cheating until a Matt arrives, to punish a thief or to help Twisti win a bet.
The "or to help twisti win a bet" part is why I pointed this out. Two buddies can get together to mess with any other character for their own means.

No. Everyone would always vote 0%, which is not good for the Government. If you really want 0% that bad, vote for a Viceroy who promises to lower the taxes.
Not necessarily, but I see where you're coming from.

The latter. Whenever a new bug or exploit is found, the Government will decide how to punish it.
K, thanks for clearing that up  Smiley
Logged

macroing is cool

[00:30:00] <+EmperorWu> don't finish
[00:30:02] <+EmperorWu> I'm in.

[00:24:20] <Travis> I wasn't smart enough to back it up.
Rizes Shadow
Best Accent Ever
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: -187
Offline Offline

Posts: 2294


Ex-Toadwater representative


« Reply #14 on: January 02, 2008, 01:13:18 am »

Hey, I know a great way of avoiding all bans and punishments!

It's called "Don't cheat you moron!"

Logged

<farmout> <Rize> make a guess retard.
<farmout> yea i am

<Crazyman> I never knew worth was calculated by rank
 <[twisti]> what else did you think it was calculated by?
<Crazyman> XP

<farmboy> no im not good at spekking
<farmboy> spelling

http://www.bash.org/?715722
Zim Foamy Fan
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 275
Offline Offline

Posts: 4368



WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2008, 01:16:21 am »

Those people will be properly laughed at by Dragoon.
LOL! Yeah, probably.

Really only the admins can intervene in that case.
Okay, but we'll need to add something into the constitution about that, like if a Viceroy were to cheat in any way, a support ticket should be opened, or something like that.

Consider that with the freebie, thats FIVE offenses, I really don't think even a permanent ban would be too harsh. If after being caught four times, having all your XP, all your items removed and being banned for three months you AFK macro AGAIN you don't deserve to play this game. Or procreate.
Good point. I wasn't thinking exactly how many times that was, so yeah, it's not harsh.
Logged

macroing is cool

[00:30:00] <+EmperorWu> don't finish
[00:30:02] <+EmperorWu> I'm in.

[00:24:20] <Travis> I wasn't smart enough to back it up.
Zim Foamy Fan
Centivelian
----------
*

Karma: 275
Offline Offline

Posts: 4368



WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2008, 01:25:45 am »

Most of the things in the Constitution are there for a good reason, which usually becomes obvious when you look at it from a game perspective, instead of a player perspective. Letting people vote on taxes is NOT A GOOD IDEA. Also, having regular elections has not been proven to be useful. If we have a perfectly working Government, we shouldn't just break it up after a randomly decided time period just for the hell of it.
I see what you mean on taxes. I forgot that the vast majority of people would merely vote on 0% time and time again.

Although regular elections have been proven useless, we still need elections. If anything, it'll keep the best people in office. I think something like life term, but anyone is able to challenge a viceroy for their spot every so-and-so would work best.

I thought that the government was doing well before it was dissolving, but meh.
Logged

macroing is cool

[00:30:00] <+EmperorWu> don't finish
[00:30:02] <+EmperorWu> I'm in.

[00:24:20] <Travis> I wasn't smart enough to back it up.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Print 
Toadwater  |  Archives  |  Old Tavern Posts  |  Government Discussion  |  Topic: The Toadwater Constitution
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

The Toadwater Forums and Game are Copyright © 2014 The TW Development Group
Powered by SMF 1.1.1 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines LLC