|
|
Post by Adriaticus on Feb 24, 2011 22:08:49 GMT
Hey guys! Sorry I haven't been on too much but now I got some more free time and I'll try to help out more. A friend of mine turned me on to another game called Cybernations. It's more detailed than ns but they have regions they call alliances. These alliances have offsite forums like ns. They use an economy type set up too.
While you guys are making the final arrangements for constitutional law, maybe it should be more generic to allow for a region, alliance, or domain of the continental union that operates not just in ns. It might attract alot more users to the forum. I think you need to make the constitution flexible enough to accommodate other type of gaming platforms. I thought I'd suggest it since we were also talking about recruiting and new members and users.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yávaros on Feb 24, 2011 23:01:39 GMT
You know I think Marzano was playing that game for a while. I remember him saying something to me about it when he joined us. I think this is one the players have to play everyday. I think Adrianica has a good idea here. I think we talked about making a forum with places for several different types of participants or players. I think it is right for saying it will be a possibility to bring more people on the forum. I like the idea, but do we need to change parts of the charter to make it flexible with this? I am not sure that it is necessary to change. The charter is for the region and it is up to the founder on how to manage the forum. I am not sure. What does everyone think? Should be stop the ratification process until we decide?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sabastos on Feb 25, 2011 22:14:03 GMT
Yah, we talked about this before in the early days on the Zeta board. We never came to a conclusion. I guess it would be a good option for it but I don't know if we need to clutter up the charter with things about it. Maybe we can mention something about it and reserve a constitutional order to some other kind of doc the founder can issue for other platforms. I really don't know. I think we should form a committee of three to discuss any final ideas so we can put together this charter and ratifiy it. It's been a year since we started it...we need to finish it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragos on Feb 25, 2011 23:13:00 GMT
This is interesting. I was with cybernations before I come to nationstates. I was only at cybernations for three months. It took too much time and was too complicated. You need to go on almost everyday or you pay interested on daily bills your nation must pay. I do not know if the alliances will want to join on a board for other game like nationstates. I agree more possibilities means more members. There is no rule for have to be on boards just for the game you play. I am not sure if charter needs to be changed for that. I think a committee is a good idea so everything can be discussed and given to members for final vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by Imperator Rex on Feb 26, 2011 18:06:58 GMT
Wow! Lots of ideas here! Two of you mentioned a committee. I think this is what we should have done in the first place. But, when we started this process, there were only four of us. None of us ever imagined it would become a process like this. I think that as we got more members coming on to contribute, we got new ideas and new perspectives on how to form this constitutional law piece. This is not a complaint at all. I believe that this diverse pool of ideas creates a more well-rounded basis for operation. We have changed the articles and the format of statements twice since "completing" the fnal draft. I would not say this is the result of an inability to reach an agreement. All of this is a result of seeing new things come up and looking for new possibilities taking into consideration most contingencies.
Here is what I propose...We draft an ROIC for a constitutional committee composed of three members. I suggest that one of those members be a Founding Partner. I will exclude myself from the selection. The members of this committee will be chosen by the General Membership after the ROIC is approved. I will set up a sub-forum for the committee to go through each article and discuss/approved any final changes. After that process is completed, the Charter will be resubmitted to the Founding Partners and then the general membership for ratification. Let me know what you think about this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragos on Feb 26, 2011 22:04:59 GMT
I like this proposal. It can cut down on time spend posting everything. We have approved already the articles that the approval rule required. It does not say about editing some things to fit new situations. The constitution is open still, so we are still following the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Basileus Romanus on Feb 28, 2011 22:38:19 GMT
Yah! I like this idea about the committee. It'll make things go quicker. Like drago says, we've already followed the rules with getting the articles approved. Now we just need to fine tune. I say we post this and get on with the process. I think we should make certain things more generic to fit different scenarios.
|
|
|
|
Post by Letor on Mar 2, 2011 1:29:51 GMT
Yes. I agree also. I think the committee witll make things easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by Imperator Rex on Mar 2, 2011 21:38:54 GMT
I will post a proposal in the polls so we can get this going.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adriaticus on Mar 2, 2011 22:44:58 GMT
Wow I really started something, huh? I like the idea and I know I haven't been on here much but I've seen stuff get jammed up because we tend to get ahead of ourselves and then not get other important things done.
By the way, I can serve on this commission if you want, but I may not be on for more than once a week. You guys might wanna post something for members that may not want to serve on this. Let's get going!
|
|
|
|
Post by Marzano on Mar 2, 2011 23:11:42 GMT
I do not know if I can do something with this. I only come on here every week or two. You can put my name in but you will need to be patient with me on getting back to things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Basileus Romanus on Mar 3, 2011 23:54:21 GMT
Sorry I wasn't able to get on sooner. Got lots of things going on right now. I was looking back at some of the notes we had when we set this charter deal up. I don't think this commission deal is compliant with what we originally had in place to approve constitutional law. Everything should be reviewed just the way we originally set it up. I don't think changing the process is the right thing to do. I know everybody wants to get this thing approved and we're almost there. I want to make sure it's done right and everybody's on board with the charter especially since it'll be our foundation and it's permanent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Imperator Rex on Mar 4, 2011 5:10:12 GMT
Yah! I like this idea about the committee. It'll make things go quicker. Like drago says, we've already followed the rules with getting the articles approved. Now we just need to fine tune. I say we post this and get on with the process. I think we should make certain things more generic to fit different scenarios. So...are we backpeddling here? If we still had more to discuss on this, then we should have waited before it went to the polls. I would have to disagree with it not being compliant. Things change and we have an opportunity to make the final transitions smoother. |
|
|
|
Post by Sabastos on Mar 4, 2011 23:49:20 GMT
I"d have to agree with Imperator on this. Bas, you're a day late and a dollar short. I can't understand why you did not bring this up before. You supported it and had time to unsupport it and keep the discussion going. I'm closing this topic since it's already in the polls.
|
|
