Should Ministers Pick City Names First?

Jon Shafer · June 20, 2002, 20:32

Due to many people suggesting this, I decided to make it a poll, since some people wanted Random/ministers 1st, but the votes split either way.

Question:
Should Ministers (in the order of Administration, in that thread) get to pick names for cities before everyone else (either random or joining order). Also, should we skip inactive members (I will PM whoever's turn it is next, if they don't reply within 10 days, then they lose their spot. The first ones who are picked to respond get to pick first)? If people vote to still include inactive members, then their names will be used exactly (for example, if I didn't reply within 10 days, then my city would be named "Trip").

Options:
Group 1 - Ministers should get first pick
- We should skip inactive members.
- We should simply use inactive members' names for the cities.

Group 2 - Ministers don't get first pick
- We should skip inactive members.
- We should simply use inactive members' names for the cities.

Expiration:
2 Days

jdd2007 · June 20, 2002, 20:38

first of all, i assume the president (you) is counted as a minister here

definitely yes. the ministers are the people most involved in this game. they deserve the first cities to be named after them.

Vlad Antlerkov · June 20, 2002, 20:40

I'm backing option 1-- ministers going first (in the order outlined in the Administration thread), then random, skipping over inactive members.

Basing activeness on responsiveness to PMs actually might work, since they could provide a reliable indicator as to whether one is still active or not. If based on posts, then we're ignoring people who just vote, but never state their opinions in posts.

Then again, am I assuming too much when I think that most of us have e-mail notification for PMs turned on?

Switch · June 20, 2002, 20:45

I too agree with Group 1, Option A.

However, what about people who get PMed while on vacation? Perhaps people who are going for longer than 10 days could either PM a minister, or post it in a specific thread where it would get noticed by thee who PMs the populace.

I mean, I'm going to Newfieland for 2 weeks, so I don't want to come back and find I've missed my chance to name a city

. I think that would be better than having someone who misses their chance saying it after the fact, 'cause then people who are generally inactive could use that as an excuse, when they didn't deserve their own city.

Inverse Icarus · June 20, 2002, 20:55

we're not going to name the cities after the people right? we're giving the people a chance to NAME it whatever tey want, right?

Jon Shafer · June 20, 2002, 20:58

If they respond, then they can name it whatever they like. If they don't, then we either skip them, or use their name for the city (depending on how the vote goes).

Inverse Icarus · June 20, 2002, 20:58

skip them. (IMHO)

voted choice 1.

Jon Shafer · June 20, 2002, 21:03

Quote:

Originally posted by SwitchMoO
I too agree with Group 1, Option A.

However, what about people who get PMed while on vacation? Perhaps people who are going for longer than 10 days could either PM a minister, or post it in a specific thread where it would get noticed by thee who PMs the populace.

I mean, I'm going to Newfieland for 2 weeks, so I don't want to come back and find I've missed my chance to name a city

. I think that would be better than having someone who misses their chance saying it after the fact, 'cause then people who are generally inactive could use that as an excuse, when they didn't deserve their own city.

Members who are known to be active will be given leniancy on this issue.

jdd2007 · June 20, 2002, 21:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip

Members who are known to be active will be given leniancy on this issue.

thats right. we should only pm people if there are any doubts about them being active...

Switch · June 20, 2002, 21:08

k, good. Though we'll need to be PMed anyways to tell us it's our turn, and for us to reply with our city name.

civman2000 · June 21, 2002, 07:23

Also, if you're a major active member you should say somewhere (maybe just as a ps to a post or something) when you're leaving. For example, I'll say now that I'm leaving to go to Utah the night of the 28th and returning July 10th.

Papa Chubby · June 21, 2002, 08:57

Personally I believe that it should not be a prerogative to be able to name a city if you are a minister. Why should the military advisor get to name the a city we have just recently constructed, I can´t see why. If it were a city recently captured after some heavy fighting or a stunning victory, then yes, but otherwise no.
If a minister´s should get the right to name cities it should only be the president and then only one city for his entire tenure.

It should be simply the people, randomly chosen that decide upon the names. The ministers can simply get a lottery ticket like the rest of us and hope for the best.

Wojit · June 21, 2002, 08:58

And what happens when new elections are held? The order is screwed up? Ex-Ministers without cities lose their rights? What? WHAT!?!?!?!?
*cough*

Kingof the Apes · June 21, 2002, 12:30

Choice one.

I'll be on vacation from July 6 to July 13.

And Wojit, maybe we could have former minesters with no city have higher priority over other citezens.

hetairoi22 · June 21, 2002, 13:07

Group 1-Choice 1

I'll be gone this weekend

Panag · June 21, 2002, 13:45

hi ,

how do we define "inactive" citizens , ....

have a nice day

Alex · June 21, 2002, 14:06

Yes, and we should skip inactive members.

I just want to say that, despite the problems I'm having now with my home computer, I'm still an active member and please do not forget me.

I'll probably won't be able to post or participate in the chat this weekend, because of the computer problems I mentioned above. But I guess that Sunday, June 23rd everything will be fine. Thanks for your understanding.

By the way, here's my email: alexandrenm@uol.com.br

P.S.: since we are playing Egypt, I'll be honored to be the first to name a city with some sense of historical accuracy.

Switch · June 21, 2002, 14:18

I'm not a liberty to say when I'm going (my dad's paranoid), however I will PM you when I get back if I find a missed chance to name a city.

Well, you know I'm active, so you know I ain't cheatin' the system.

Kuciwalker · June 21, 2002, 15:44

This has already been decided. It was decided that Random was the way to go in a previous poll. This poll is invalid. Note: I didn't vote for Random, I'm just enforcing the polling regulations.

Spiffor · June 21, 2002, 15:49

I voted option 3 : NO, but we should skip inactive players.
This poll is useless, as random has already been decided. I fear the yeasayers are ministers or wanabee ministers who want to get more power than they already have.
This is a repoll in its scariest form

, posted when the previous poll was still active. It is an antidemocratic way to go back on the people's decision.

Kuciwalker · June 21, 2002, 15:54

Exactly, Spiffor. What I said

DOWN WITH EVIL ANTIDEMOCRATIC REPOLLS NOW!

Harovan · June 21, 2002, 15:55

Spiffor is perfectly right

.

civman2000 · June 21, 2002, 18:53

I agree with skywalker and spiffor (skywalker didn't you join teh DIA a while ago?)

Jon Shafer · June 21, 2002, 18:55

Quote:

Originally posted by civman2000
I agree with skywalker and spiffor (skywalker didn't you join teh DIA a while ago?)

Actually he's a member of the Coalition, and our canidate for IE Minister.

GodKing · June 21, 2002, 19:00

Random. Keep inactive members because if they notice and want to change the name, it can always be changed later.

Panag · June 21, 2002, 19:04

Quote:

Originally posted by GodKing
Random. Keep inactive members because if they notice and want to change the name, it can always be changed later.

hi ,

maybe we should not use their names , because sooner or later someone is going to get upset , because his or her name is not on it , ....

have a nice day

Purple · June 21, 2002, 19:12

The original poll was invalid, because it didn't include all the choices, as many in that thread pointed out. This poll is the result of popular demand for the cabinet to go first.

I'm not and probably will never be a cabinet minister, but the people who contribute the most to the game should have the right to go first.

If there is a change of government (like a new VP

) and the outgoing minister has not given a name yet, too bad. Go back into the pool. Successor ministers should take the place of the outgoing minister in the naming order (or go to the top of the list if all the old cabinet have already named a city).

Jon Shafer · June 24, 2002, 02:04

Well, the poll is closed and option 1 wins. The Executives and Ministers will pick names for our cities in the order presented in the Administration Thread. Civman2000 has already picked, so I get the next pick.

*Thinks* I've got to come up with a good name.

notyoueither · June 24, 2002, 03:31

nothereeither

Panag · June 24, 2002, 11:12

hi ,

what happens when we disband a city , ......
what happens when we capture a city , ......

have a nice day