What are effective ways to ensure the gameside gets represented?

Welcome to the forums of the Undead Dominion of Lazarus. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features

What are effective ways to ensure the gameside gets represented?; SHOULD it be in the constitution?
Tweet Topic Started: Apr 23 2015, 05:20 AM (226 Views)
Kazmr	Apr 23 2015, 05:20 AM Post #1
Lazarene Posts: 987 Group: Members Member #85 Joined: Apr 22, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral	One of the major points of my Proposals was ensuring that the game side of the region is represented. Pertinent proposals and mechanics include the following (one new one has been added) An elected legislature that includes a substantial number of its members elected directly from the gameside region using the poll mechanic. Only nations with World Assembly (perhaps endorsing the delegate), who have had World Assembly in the region for two weeks or longer prior to the opening of the vote, and who have not voted for congresspeople on the forum, are eligible to vote in the forum poll. Some individual, perhaps a cabinet member, an individual directly under one, or an independent appointment, should be responsible for connecting the game side of the region and the forum. This should include bringing issues to te attention of the executive, helping prepare polls and regular dispatches to be used on the region, maintaining activity on the regional message board, encouraging forum users to utilize the regional message board, and more. Rather than instituting a 'shoutbox' on the forum, members of the forum should be encouraged to use the regional message board for casual chatter instead. The gameside of the community must be made aware of all laws passed by the legislature, either through dispatch pinned to the WFE or telegram. At least one endorsee should come from among longtime residents of Lazarus whose primary activity in the region is not on the forum. Some of these do not need to be included in the constitution, but I think some, particularly those revolving around the legislature, endorsees, and perhaps communication (include a 'right to be informed' or something like that) should be considered. What are your thoughts on these proposals? Are there others that could be considered? Should matters like this be encoded within the constitution?



Benevolent Thomas	Apr 23 2015, 05:35 AM Post #2
Blessed of the Vale Posts: 1,532 Group: Members Member #63 Joined: Apr 14, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Nation in Lazarus Benevolent Thomas	I'm a fan of all of these proposals besides the first one. The latter two should definitely be in the constitution.



Funkadelia	Apr 23 2015, 05:38 AM Post #3
Posts: 2,155 Group: King of the Undead Member #86 Joined: Apr 22, 2015 Alignment Chaotic Neutral Military Stance Raider Political Views Socialist Nation in Lazarus Funkadelia	The last two are good ideas. I was thinking probably two or three from gameside. I hate shoutboxes, so I wasn't going to add one anyway. The second one is pretty good. I think that better communication with gameside would be a good thing. Keep in mind though that a lot of Lazarus natives are pretty meh about governments in general. I really think the first one is pretty odd.



Gulliver	Apr 23 2015, 05:42 AM Post #4
Lazarene Posts: 241 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: Apr 8, 2015	Some of these would be better suited for statutory law than constitutional law I think, but for the most part I think they're excellent ideas. The one I'm not keen on is the first. I think a better option, if we think such a direct link is necessary, would be for the Delegate to set up some in-game elections for one or more representatives of the gameside people in their policies, as was experimented with in TNP.



Harmoneia	Apr 23 2015, 05:46 AM Post #5
Mhysa Posts: 657 Group: Accused Member #42 Joined: Apr 11, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Harmoneia	^ I was just going to suggest an in-game/off-site liaison :o



Cormac	Apr 23 2015, 05:58 AM Post #6
Lazarene Posts: 398 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Apr 8, 2015 Alignment Chaotic Neutral Military Stance Raider Political Views Independent Nation in Lazarus Cormactopia II Skype cormac.ns Discord Cormac#9408	I don't think we should have a game-side component to the legislature, but some non-binding votes to measure the opinion of the in-game region on issues -- particularly issues that might primarily affect game-side -- would probably be a workable compromise. I think, moving forward, and keeping in mind how supportive game-side residents were during the recent coup, it is important to try to include them more in the region's governance. But I think to avoid manipulation that is possible due to game mechanics, their inclusion should mostly be non-binding. That might also encourage more game-side residents to get at least occasionally involved on the forum. I would support implementation of all of the other ideas, besides the first one. I think the rest are all solid. I agree with Gulliver that most of these are better defined by statutory law than in the constitution, or just simply implemented by the executive government without law. Edited by Cormac, Apr 23 2015, 06:00 AM.



Benevolent Thomas	Apr 23 2015, 06:04 AM Post #7
Blessed of the Vale Posts: 1,532 Group: Members Member #63 Joined: Apr 14, 2015 Alignment Lawful Good Military Stance Neutral Nation in Lazarus Benevolent Thomas	Cormac Apr 23 2015, 05:58 AM I don't think we should have a game-side component to the legislature, but some non-binding votes to measure the opinion of the in-game region on issues -- particularly issues that might primarily affect game-side -- would probably be a workable compromise. I think, moving forward, and keeping in mind how supportive game-side residents were during the recent coup, it is important to try to include them more in the region's governance. But I think to avoid manipulation that is possible due to game mechanics, their inclusion should mostly be non-binding. That might also encourage more game-side residents to get at least occasionally involved on the forum. I would support implementation of all of the other ideas, besides the first one. I think the rest are all solid. I agree with Gulliver that most of these are better defined by statutory law than in the constitution, or just simply implemented by the executive government without law. This.



Arlo	Apr 24 2015, 10:44 AM Post #8
Lazarene Posts: 60 Group: Members Member #92 Joined: Apr 22, 2015	I think Cormac's point on the first point is right. The second point I think contains various things that members of government should be doing anyway. I agree completely with 3 and 4. 5... Security isn't my strong thing so Idk. Obviously endorsees should be active in game though.



Powthran	Apr 24 2015, 08:21 PM Post #9
Lazarene Posts: 523 Group: Members Member #103 Joined: Apr 22, 2015 Alignment Lawful Neutral Military Stance Uninterested Political Views Conservative Nation in Lazarus Powthran	Having been never involved in a nationstates government, I think the most important part is communication. I got involved because of telegrams telling me about the coup and flurry of activity. I think a lot this could be covered in the 2nd suggestion. But I think that person should be elected by poll from the game site. Basically as a representative or ambassador for those players. Perhaps they would work in tandem with a cabinet member to ensure a good relationship. Many people seem loath to giving any real power to non-forum members, but at least thus gives them some power and representation.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Constitutional Convention 2015 · Next Topic »