About our team structure we will organize in a way that serves our purpous. If/when that involves TNT I'm sure we can work something out that is to the liking of everyone involved.Perhaps we should open an intra- set of positions and regulations, divide the sheeps into smaller, easier to organise herds.

Right now I see several departments and easy ways of putting people at heads. We could put some people in """charge""" (notice the many quotes and quotes) of given departments, and those people would be the ones posting reports in the Stupid Decisions thread (in fact, that's right about it). Besides any other idea that would strike anyone's fancy, I suggest that the Diplomatic corps be reserved exclusivity over talks off our reserved forum - and as harriet suggested, that they be several in number, so as to keep a nice face. Titles and nominations are pending suggestions.

Department of Stupid Decisions: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=129443) Idiot-in-Chief: Whomp

Diplomatic Relations: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=127497) Diplomats: Daghda, Bede, Kickbooti

City planning and dotmapping: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=125996) Hut Idiot: Beorn

Department of Geeks & Numbers: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=125992) Counting Idiot: Tubby Rower

Department of Naval Operations (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=128366) / Military Headquarters: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=124956) General Idiot: SirBugsy

Research Lab: (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=124833) Know-it-all Idiot: Pentium

[edit]: I've started to edit the list according to your suggestions.

Feel free to suggest some idiots to take either chair, or to offer your services for one. Hopefully this is done quickly enough, we don't need to sticky this and the chairsmen can post reports of our team's intentions in the Stupid Decisions thread.

Although we've never had any formal elections, I think it's a given that Whomp is our Idiot-in-Chief.

There was an earlier informal agreement that Whomp and Bede should do diplo, but perhaps since Whomp is already Chief, and since Dagh, Kickbooti and Bede are our most well-spoken, polished and tactful of our remaining members, all of them (including Whomp if he chooses) could form our diplo corps. Having a larger group would avoid the availability problems we've noticed with MIA.

I think there's no question that Tubs is our geekiest idiot and we couldn't manage without him in that spot.

As for the other positions, I think we've been doing quite nicely with our anarchic chiming in on topics, and that arrangement should have no effect upon the other teams. If the other offices are actually assigned to individuals, it might constrain others who are not in charge from making their thoughts known for fear of stepping on someone's toes. Just my thought on how organizations tend to work.

OTOH, if we should decide to make positions "official", I think BB and I should be jointly in charge of Cheerleading, since we are the least experienced or knowledgable Civ players. We would likely be equally qualified to do backflips and cartwheels in leading the cheers. :p

If the other offices are actually assigned to individuals, it might constrain others who are not in charge from making their thoughts known for fear of stepping on someone's toes.I see your point, and the purpose of this was to create a (very mild, mind you) sense of responsability and/or leadership in the 'elected' individuals for them to ensure ensure
1- the aforementionned threads keep being pooled with new ideas
2- the chosen ideas get summarized and given to the wide-public in the decisions thread

In a word, I think of these people as "named motivators" that will keep a thread rolling and keep others up-to-date with synthesized conclusions from the thread. That wouldn't undermine the current hectic, anarchic organisation of the troops currently at work, it would just designate someone to draw conclusions from the mass.

I think it isn't much to do for each of them, while the increased cohesion and coherence it can bring will make things easier for everyone, especially in matters that relate several dpts: for instance, research paths are greatly intertwined with both military HQ and diplomatic relations, etc.

I think B-e-L has a good idea. While we can still be very anarchic and chime in where ever we like. Having an idiot-in-charge of certain areas to bring an overall feeling of decision and some responsibility might help as thinks get a bit busy.

Good effort B-e-F. This could be sort of Anarchy Nouveaux. As long as it's about responsability for gathering and posting relevant information I'm all for it. If it also means officials should actually DO the stuff then I'm not.
What we need, and that is your point too if I get it right, is someone in the office doing secretary stuff. I totally agree but would be very reluctant to apply for the job :p .
What we don't need, IMHO, is people assigned to special tasks. That will/have come naturally (Tubby geeking, Whompie negotiating and...er, I think that is what we have done so far. I did conquer that Barbie camp but would not consider myself military expert :lol: ). The flexibility we have is a strenght and should not be organized away.
The decision thread is a very good idea and now I'm starting to waste space here so my suggestion in brief (whadda laugh):
-We decide what dept's should be "official" and what kind of stuff belongs there, e.g. does the latest dotmap show in "city planning", "cartograph room" or "Turnplay".
-We assign volunteers to be secretary of respective department.
-Their job is to (a) be responsible for summarizing and posting relevant information about their, or others, doings in that particular area and (b) posting decicions made in the decisions thread.

Having said that I must add that the way it works at the moment is fine with me. I'm convinced that our anarchy is the smoothest mother of an organization in this MTDG. But as Bugs point out, when things get more complicated this make-up will have impact.
I will of course send Provo a gift for telling us to do this. Would the Military dep't be so kind to deliever that package for me ;) .

The only department where I think we need named executing representatives would be the diplomatic front. Keeping at it the way it has gone is a recipe that may cook a disaster sometime.

For all other dept's, since it concerns only idiots among themselves, we can get along wayyyyyyyyy fine, as mentionned.

I Captain Idiot, do hereby pledge to not post anything in a public forum without the prior consent of 2 other team members.

For the record, i had a bad day, I'd been drinking, and it was fun.

Due to the "secretary" nature of the above positions, I suggest we get a banner of secretaries, sponsored by the babes threads (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=123280), with a few babes and the nominated people's avatar for their heads.

Disclaimer: This is in hopes to bring a bit of affluence, interest and attention to the present thread and the currently open positions. In no way have I ever thought of this so as to get a babes banner :nono: - and neither have AK, Dagh or Pentium in the MSN discussion that led to this, or in the conclusion we drew that it deserved a visit to the babes thread.

I like the idea of sub-groups. I think it's important for all our team members to have roles since things will get more complex as we grow.

Let me repeat my statement from the Anarchy/Democracy poll:

Me be research. Pleece :)!

Let me repeat my statement from the Anarchy/Democracy poll


I voted democracy and as far I am concerned we would have had people in charge. I'm not saying things are going really badly... not at all in fact. I'm just an organized kind of guy and things around here get... well... messy sometimes :crazyeye: We definitely don't want to get rid of the idiocy around here and I take it we're not changing our minds about the anarchist way of going about things. But in the spirit of Beorn's proposal, I would really like to have some people to 'guide' certain departments.

The way I see it, these people would simply function as a discussion leader of some sort in the respective threads, directing the discussion towards whatever should be achieved. If a decision needs to be made for our next turn, then the chairman leads us that way. If we are discussing long-term strategy or issues that majorly affect the game, the chairman posts a poll. It may not sounds much like an anarchy, but I think we can pull it off without actually violating the spirit of our team. We seem to have a nice bunch of people... no moderator will get powercrazy (there was no power to begin with, actually), no member will feel inhibited to bring up anything he or she likes.

Missed you Crackie. Good to see you again :D. Sounds like you and B could be sort of monitors here organizing this organization. I'm all for doing things easy to handle and if this would do it let's try. I might be good to have it up and running before it's actually needed.

i agree and disagree with crakie. someone to lead the discussion towards the goals is a good idea. i also agree that nobody here is powermad with the need to dominate everyone else. also agree: If we are discussing long-term strategy or issues that majorly affect the game, the chairman posts a poll. but where I disagree is that minor issues should be voted upon all the time. a declaration of war should be discussed, an agreement to not pop a hut should not be. :blush: Is it me, or are my communications becoming more like soul's? ;)

I don't think we disagree, Admiral :) Only MAJOR issues warrant a poll.

If we are generous towards each other and don't flay someone for making a semi smart minor decision then polls on such matters are best avoided. The GH is a good example methinks. There I think your own proposal to not decide that (in the future) w/o at least 2 other saying Aye is a good one. And btw, it is The Law :lol: .
No you're not like SW. Still somewhat intelligible. Your new title is hillarious btw

I think what needs to come out of this discussion is what the team wants to vote on and what to just let happen.....

Here is my opinion:
Vote on
-Declaration of War (DoW)
-trades
-Major diplomacy
-Direction of War when it happens (this means attack west vs east not attack city 1 vs city 2)
-Major shift in production
-Wonder builds
-Research path

I've edited the first post; now it seems we have a secretary for each department.
Urban, Counting, Know-it-all Idiots and Idiot-in Chief are set, for whom the job is to

- Start, engage, participate, direct and draw conclusions from discussions in their respective threads
- Post polls about major decisions in their departments
- Post short summaries of what's happened in the summary thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=129443) whenever it isn't up to date with current decisions.

(I know I'm repeating myself, but hey, what the hell, I'm bored.)

For the Generals and Diplomats, I've put you there until I hear a negative answer from you - so far I take it the job hasn't displeased you since most posted and did not complain about their names there in Q-mark brackets.

Diplomats should be the only ones to keep the official inter-team relationships alive, and who do the negociations, in lieu of having a bunch of idiots knocking their heads everywhere ;):p

Other positions are meant to be light in responsability, and IMHO, a very small extension to being active in the team - at all.

Thanks for the support in making this, I wasn't sure it'd work at first :thumbsup:
I'm convinced it'll make things easier for everyone.

PS: if you have been put there and wouldn't want, or would no longer want, to be there, just say so and someone else will step up, eventually ;)
Also, if you wish to step up as a sub or something, don't hesitate.

PPS: I suggest every new secretary finds himself a secretary picture, like Dagh did in his wonders thread - although I know I'll presonnally try to make her more ... hut ;)

Other positions are meant to be light in responsability, and IMHO, a very small extension to being active in the team - at all.
I volunteered for Cheerleader, only partially tongue-in-cheek. I don't see any strengths I have aside from making gratuitous comments on this or that. I'd be willing to help if anyone can see where I might be genuinely useful. If not, maybe I should be changed to merely lurker status.

be the devil's advocate in diplo. it's against your nature so you'll challenge venerable and co.

Actually it's NOT against my nature at all, but I usually keep my mouth/fingers shut. I always try to see the other guy's point of view. It's a talent of not much help in a regular game against the AI, but extremely useful in RL.

@gma
Don't you go lurking on us. We'll set B on creating a recreation dep't where you can post jokes, serve coffee and cheer us up.

Thanks, Dagh! I'll see what I can do about whipping up some cyber-cookies to go with the coffee. ;)

Seriously, if I spot some empty niche that I think I can fill, I will jump right in. Otherwise I'll just play observer at large and comment where I think I can add something. :)

I don't know if I have enough time on my hands for it, but getting the core cities to produce a GS/4 (3?) turns each sounds like a challenge to me! I guess I'm volunteering for the micromanage+worker action dept :)

Sorry I've been kinda absent - RL and all.

I'd be happy to work on diplo, but truth be told I don't spend a lot of time on MSN and don't have AIM. If there is a scheduled thing, I can work at being there, if it is off the cuff stuff, I probably won't make it.

I will continue to make wry comments and off-beat suggestions, other than that I will go wherever I'm needed (except the Geek dept, my wife balances our check book...)

I've been also away for some time.

Well, I'm also free for any kind of job you would happen to have for me, but I doubt I'll be posting a lot in the forums, cause I havent before and it just isnt so obvious for me. I just prefer msn. I spend a lot of time there and can do anything that could contribute to the game.

Well, I could do something with economics or finances since that what I'm studying ATM. But I dont think that making a new departement just for that would be any useful, just more stckies :lol: -> more departements -> more ministers -> less job per minister/or ministers from nothing

@ Harriet

Waiting for those cookies :p

cheers

Tomasz

Here ya go!!! Hope ya know how I slaved over a hot stove for these. :D

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/180352/chocolate-chip-cookies.jpg

Thank you so much Harriet and isn't that Marylanders.....yummy.