Trench Wars Government

[DankNuggets]

there's a lot of stuff that needs to be clarified, but that in itself isn't a reason not to try it.

A few points I think should be addressed:

1- Bills should only be proposed by the 1st level of gov't - the TW Community Body (TWCB).

1a- Bills can be written by anyone, but they need to be sponsored by a member of the TWCB. Ideally, they should be sponsored by the group that best represents them (ie, a bill on pubs should be sponsored by a "P" chair)

1b- Bills should be debated for a set amount of time in each level of gov't. Could be anywhere from a week to a month, depending on the amount of dissenting opinions.

1c- Before the bill gets the final OK from staff/PL, it should be evaluated to see how long it will take to implement. When/if it's passed, staff/PL should announce the expected date at which it will take effect - and try to stick to it.

1d- TWCB members should use responsible judgement in sponsoring bills. Repeat bills shouldn't be sponsored to slow down the process. Each section of the TWCB should have equal oppurtunity to sponsor a bill, so that no one section can "hog" the process. They could take turns, and yield to others if they don't have pressing issues.

2. Within the TWCB, there should be a designated "comittee head" responsible for keeping contact within each section. This would be the "1" chair (P1, W1, etc) and they would need to direct the debates and record the voting. There should probably be one person elected within these comittee heads to rely the votes and information, acting as a liason to the next level of gov't (SMods).


I think this way we can keep down the amount of spam in the form of repeated bills or attempts to derail gov't. Also, if each level gets 1-2 weeks to vote, then it should only take a month to get something passed. It doesn't have to be the same for everything too: it could be 2 weeks in the TWCB to go from rough draft to polished bill, 1 week to be picked apart by staff and evaluated for required effort to enact, and then however many days it takes PL to say yes or no to it (and really I'd be surprised if he went against the majority of staff/players given this system).

[Troll King]

I don't understand the argument that this will slow things down. I didn't know things were going fast as it is right now.

The important matter is whether this gets support from the top and whether any ideas actually get implemented. That's what was wrong with the public committee. It had no weight.

[Foreign]

You need fewer moving parts to make this machine last. Otherwise it will wear down quickly and fall apart.

This is a good idea, but it should involve fewer people on the voting end and a throttle on the frequency by which people are allowed to submit ideas. I'd almost want to limit everyone to 1 idea per election period to keep people from spamming with retarded ideas, though I'd be lenient enough to let them resubmit their 1 idea with changes. I'd make them wait a minimum number of days before re-examining the idea, though.

The aim of this idea should be to reduce the amount of complaints, not to encourage people to look for ways to complain. If everyone knows they only have 1 chance to be heard per X months, each will save it for something worthwhile.

That said, there are plenty of questions that we haven't thought to ask yet that are going to ruin this idea, which makes me sad.

[Liquid Blue]

I don't understand the argument that this will slow things down. I didn't know things were going fast as it is right now.

The important matter is whether this gets support from the top and whether any ideas actually get implemented. That's what was wrong with the public committee. It had no weight.

The important factor is that things aren't going fast right now, so why introduce more people into the decision making process? If staff wants to see ideas get implemented, they should start with one committee for pub and take it from there- but they're trying to form 4 or 5 different committees at once when there is really no need to, especially since (to my knowledge) this hasn't been done on such a scale before.

[CaptainPoopface]

Well, this does seem a bit more complex than necessary, and we must remember that a lot of people on the forum and in the game act like they're 13 years old.

But let's face it - pub has certainly been in need of some changes for awhile. I basically only play pub, and here are some things that could stand to be adjusted:

• Which pub(s) allow levs, and which pub is the default
• Less terrible settings for weasel
• Changing arena population cap to suit present needs
• TK bot? How about 45 seconds in spec per dead teammate as jav, and !shipreset after 5 dead teammates per life as lev? Or something else. Human supervision falls well short here. A more powerful deterrent is needed.
• New map(s), possibly on a rotating / trial basis
• The in-game voting system. Should it come back? If so, with what changes?

These problems aren't very new, and what we know is that not a hell of a lot has been done about them in TW's present bureaucratic configuration. I think what we need is a body to sift through all the possible things we could do, then whittle those down to the few to try right now. Then try those things for a week, say. Then get player feedback via in-game poll bot. Yes, the people who play the game should be the ones who ultimately decide whether to keep those changes.

I don't know if Pure_Luck's proposal is the answer, and Dank's rundown sounds far too slow and complex. But when what you're doing right now isn't working, it's time to try something else, right? I think the groups for each arena should be fairly independent. They should be as small as possible while being representative of the major styles or divisions of opinion. And most importantly, they must have the power to actually CHANGE things.

[Jeenyuss]

captainpoopface for prez.

[paradise!]

As a longtime member of the javelin community, i would like to officially cast my ballot. I have also created a new witty campaign slogan tellme wacha fink:

YES PARA CAN

[Liquid Blue]

another problem with this is people are going to care more about winning a seat than actually taking the time needed to enact change

[Exalt]

there is only one thing that really needs to be said about this idea:

Why is it needed?

Apparently staff are so full of all basers and ungrateful brats that do not play any ship at all well that they don't know how to make good decisions. No wonder so many VETERAN players are turned down each month for staff and you hire players like charis.

Stop hiring retards, and stop allowing the current staff to feel so secure in their positions that they do nothing in the process for so long. Stop letting it be a consensus vote inside staff to get INTO staff, because any player that has played 10+ years will have made enemies with at least one current staffer. All that leaves are the no named newbies and the ass kissers. Both are bad choices if you want change.

but you already knew this P_L. That's why you are going the politically correct road and proposing this idea. Honestly, you should have just been the forceful dictator for once and told the other staff to shut the fuck up or lose your job, and to start listening to players that actually play the game instead. Staff should have been a service for the people by the people, not a bunch of stuck-up nose in the air brats who think they are special and are better than the real players of this game. As soon as it became that stigma it ruined it for good. Why else is there such a HUGE turnover rate in staff? People join to get things done, and cannot because current staff won't let them, so they leave. The current staff stay put, and nothing good ever happens.

well... at least you are trying to shake some things up a bit anyway.... not that it will help at all... staff are too worried about banning racist comments then actually improving the game with fresh ideas, hence the need for this new "government" thing you are proposing... hopefully it works cuz I'm real tired of how staff is currently, only a few are doing anything really, the rest are just brats who like to talk on staff chat, you should axe them and let them quit the damn game already, its not like they play it anyway

[Stayon]

just make the fuhrer aquatic who loves pretos so much, and make her run the "government"

[Da1andonly]

another problem with this is people are going to care more about winning a seat than actually taking the time needed to enact change

What he said.

I'll gladly help if I am needed.

[sonlox]

after reading this, please dont do it.

[Capital Knockers]

awesome, instead of just blaming a smaller staff, now we can bitch about our own government! Cool beans!

[Trunks_rage]

Yeah this is a terrible idea. What would make more sense to me is have 5 staff members that are given the position based on elections. Every 6 months they have to run for reelection. Easy enough?

That way they have:

1. Real Power

2. Accountability

[dads revenge]

2 staff 1 of each division of twd and 2 or 4 of public/event players

those who can and will represent responsibly.