Study Poll: Ambassadors

Timeline · July 2, 2002, 00:39

Ambassadors:

These government agents assist the Foreign Affairs Minister by reporting on specific details of individual nations. The Foreign Affairs office is required to have one Ambassador per Foreign Nation, with each Ambassador assigned to one specific foreign country.

Ambassadors make reports on the details of other countries, to be included in the Foreign Affairs Minister report.

Sound good? If so:

How should these be given their position?

Appointed by the Preident, but approval from the Foreign Affairs minister is required

Appointed by the Foreign Affairs Minister, but approval from the President is required

They should be elected into office, just like ministers

Torkkeli · July 2, 2002, 02:18

Hello,

I think Ambassadors are not needed as the FAM can take care of all the actions regarding Embassies and the distribution of information to the people and the President.

Embassies should be created asap when we have sufficient funds.

Just my 2 cnts.

Nym · July 2, 2002, 03:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Torkkeli
Hello,

I think Ambassadors are not needed as the FAM can take care of all the actions regarding Embassies and the distribution of information to the people and the President.

Embassies should be created asap when we have sufficient funds.

Just my 2 cnts.

I think so too. I do not see the usefulness of dedicated ambassadors.

Schee · July 2, 2002, 04:48

Quote:

Embassies should be created asap when we have sufficient funds.

Yes, but where will be created the first ? France ? america ? Grece ?

How to decide that ?

Torkkeli · July 2, 2002, 05:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Schee

Yes, but where will be created the first ? France ? america ? Grece ?

How to decide that ?

Well as this time comes when we have discovered writing ( we haven't yet I hope

) we'll have plenty of time to think this.
(I hope by then we'll be in war with the Americans, so perhaps they are not the first ones)

Maybe this could be a good place to yet another poll

Timeline · July 2, 2002, 07:19

I think people are misunderstanding the purpose....

True, the FAM job will get much harder down the road, but right now it's already one of the most intensive Ministerial assignments in existence.

Consider Ninot's latest report:

FRANCE
1:The French still think we are a backwards people
2:The French military is still bigger than ours
3: The French look down upon our small culture status (and they might have reason to)
4:The French fear our Warrior
5: The French have Warriors

AMERICA
1: The Yanks think we are a backwards people
2:The American Army outnumbers ours
3: The Amercians have better culture than ours (or so they think.. or so we think?)
4: The Americans fear our Warrior
5: The Amercians have Warriors

Iroquois
1:The Iroquois think they are our Scientific equals
2: The Iroquois military outnumbers ours.
3:The Iroquois are spitting on our culture
4: The Iroquois fear our Warriors
5: The Iroquois have Warriors
6: Our people are unimpressed by Iroquois culture too.

Dedicated Ambassadors could make up reports similar to these for their assigned country, so Ninot would not have to spend hour(s) doing these kind of detailed reports.

In my opinion, it is not a question of weather we need ambassadors or not, but rather how they should be implemented. Just ask Ninot and he will tell you how hard it is to put together these detailed reports, and it will only get harder.

Sheik · July 2, 2002, 09:15

Appointed by the Foreign Affairs Minister. I dont think the president should have a say at all.

Papa Chubby · July 2, 2002, 10:29

Foreign minister should do this, and in case things get to much to handle. He should assign somebody, not ambassadors, but prefferably a steward to take care of some duties. This should be something that the foreign minister would use at his discretion.

Looking at the embassies, I have to admit that they can´t be our Nr.1 priority at the moment. We should though get them up and running as soon as money and time allow, after taking out either the Americans or the French.

Kuciwalker · July 2, 2002, 10:50

Ambassadors could be the Foreign Ministry equivalent of Military Commanders and Provincial Governors. They would assist the Foreign Minister by doing all of the little work, which would make him more effective.

Robber Baron · July 2, 2002, 11:12

Ambassadors would also make a good training ground for future foreign ministers.

Kuciwalker · July 2, 2002, 11:25

That too, same as Provincial Governors for City Planner or PW Minister and Military Commanders for War Minister.

Jon Shafer · July 2, 2002, 11:44

Why have them appointed/elected/approved at all? Or even have them as an official body? If the Foriegn Minister wants cronies to do his work, then he can get some. No need to add more bureaucracy.

Kuciwalker · July 2, 2002, 12:04

They get the title because it's fun roleplaying, NOT bureaucracy. They have no part in the decision-making process; they simply provide information.

Torkkeli · July 2, 2002, 12:37

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
Ambassadors could be the Foreign Ministry equivalent of Military Commanders and Provincial Governors. They would assist the Foreign Minister by doing all of the little work, which would make him more effective.

Yes, something like this, but they need not to be elected or anything, FAM can always ask someone to do the work for him/her as our President pointed...

Kuciwalker · July 2, 2002, 13:11

I didn't say they needed to be elected. It's better if they aren't, as it gives the people who aren't good at winning elections a chance to gain experience anyway.

Panag · July 2, 2002, 15:05

hi ,

later on maybe , ...

most people complain there are to many posts in the government , so first we should show to those people that there is a need for extra aides , ....

have a nice day

Inverse Icarus · July 2, 2002, 16:15

i noticed there no "no, no ambassadors at all" choice. great way to get votes for what you want i suppose. i'll try that some day.

Timeline · July 2, 2002, 16:34

It's just a study poll, not official. I am just trying to get the people's feelings on the matter before I do some work on the constitution.

Calm down

SABRA · July 2, 2002, 17:33

It would have been more intresting with more options in the poll .
Abstain should have been in .

Schee · July 2, 2002, 17:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Timeline
It's just a study poll, not official.

As this poll isnt official, abstain is useless, if you want to abstain then do not vote at all

Timeline · July 2, 2002, 17:51

Abstain is just for those who lack the self-control to not vote

.

Some people just gotta click I guess .....

Inverse Icarus · July 2, 2002, 17:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Schee

As this poll isnt official, abstain is useless, if you want to abstain then do not vote at all

no, because when people who arent realyl active / dont really have a firm belief see options, they pick the one closest to their view that isnt there.

leaving the abstain out will yield less abstains.

SABRA · July 2, 2002, 17:55

There could have been more options .

FrustratedPoet · July 2, 2002, 18:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Timeline
I think people are misunderstanding the purpose....

True, the FAM job will get much harder down the road, but right now it's already one of the most intensive Ministerial assignments in existence.

Consider Ninot's latest report:

FRANCE
1:The French still think we are a backwards people
2:The French military is still bigger than ours
3: The French look down upon our small culture status (and they might have reason to)
4:The French fear our Warrior
5: The French have Warriors

AMERICA
1: The Yanks think we are a backwards people
2:The American Army outnumbers ours
3: The Amercians have better culture than ours (or so they think.. or so we think?)
4: The Americans fear our Warrior
5: The Amercians have Warriors

Iroquois
1:The Iroquois think they are our Scientific equals
2: The Iroquois military outnumbers ours.
3:The Iroquois are spitting on our culture
4: The Iroquois fear our Warriors
5: The Iroquois have Warriors
6: Our people are unimpressed by Iroquois culture too.

Dedicated Ambassadors could make up reports similar to these for their assigned country, so Ninot would not have to spend hour(s) doing these kind of detailed reports.
Just ask Ninot and he will tell you how hard it is to put together these detailed reports, and it will only get harder.

I don't mean to offend Ninot, but how hard can it be to make these reports? Surely it is just a question of loading up the save, going to the relevant screen and waiting for the advisor to scroll through his selection of comments and then writing them down?

A boring job, certainly, but quick and easy.

Timeline · July 2, 2002, 18:26

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet

A boring job, certainly, but quick and easy.

Not when you have 4 nations you gotta do it for. And check for every possible trade for all 4 nations. And still keep up with polls and other reports. And there are more nations on the way...

Not so quick and easy now, is it?

FrustratedPoet · July 2, 2002, 18:47

you don't need all of that information, though, however hard or easy it is to get.

how many of us scrutinize all of that Data for every Civ, every few turns, whenever we play solo?
anybody?

this seems like creating work for no reason.

The trade possibilities are very important, but the minute details of each Civ's attitude to us is irrelevant.

Kloreep · July 2, 2002, 18:55

I think the attitude and military strength reports are helpful, although I suppose the cultural aspect isn't to important.

Spiffor · July 2, 2002, 19:05

The great edge of te Democracy Game is precisely that no aspect of the game gets forgotten, and all micromanagement (military, cities, foreign, trade etc.) is handled.
Knowing everything about everyone will be useless most of the time, but it will be useful onr time or other. When this will be useful, we'll be happy to have all this info gathered.

TheGreatKaspi · July 2, 2002, 21:56

I think that this is probably more trouble than it is worth.

MrWhereItsAt · July 2, 2002, 23:04

I agree with Spiffor: we have dozens of players here, and some of them certainly scrutinize every aspect of the game, even on their own. Collectively there are hundreds of man-hours spent on this game per week, and we only play less than a dozen turns per chat! We scrutinize everything (collectively), and the info is necessary, especially since the one in charge of distributing it may miss something vital if they make decisions on which info to look for.

And I ALSO agree with Trip - no need to make this any kind of polled decision or amendment or anything. No more bloody complications! If the Foreign Minister wants an intern or three- sorry, I mean Ambassadors

, then he will ask someone to help.