This poll is strictly for informational purposes.

There has been a lot of support (which I didn't expect) to use warlords. However since warlords owners can play vanilla, yet vanilla owners (non-warlords) can not play warlords, it is possible for participation to be lower. The point of this poll is to determine whether participation will be significantly lower by using Warlords.

hmmm... If the Warlords Player plays the save as DP, won't the result be a saved game that only Warlords players can play anyway?

Like in Civ III, if you played a Vanilla file in conquests it would be saved as a Conquests file anyway...

To avoid that I suppose Warlords players would have to do something like have a seperate vanilla version of civ IV set up as well... Which might be an extra hassle to them, and inevitably someone would forget and we'd be left with a save that only warlords players would be able to play anyway...

If that made any sense...

Anyway, it makes no difference to me... I have only Vanilla, and I don't plan to be a DP (Sounds too stressful to me- It's hard enough playing civ without a whole lot of people in a chat giving you advice)

hmmm... If the Warlords Player plays the save as DP, won't the result be a saved game that only Warlords players can play anyway?

They are two totally different games. We can either play vanilla or warlords only. You cannot interchange between the two. Whatever version you start with is the only version you can play.

This poll is strictly for informational purposes.

I'm glad you stated only informational, as I disagree with how the poll was written. But since its informational, it isn't as important how its written.

Well, I won't be voting this informational / opinion / useless poll.

I would be more active if it were Warlords

Well, I won't be voting this informational / opinion / useless poll.

Then you will not aid in determining the overall opinion of the demos... Fair enough, but, if I may ask, do you have an opinion on this matter (You seemed vaguely pro-Warlords in the other thread, but this may have changed)?

Then you will not aid in determining the overall opinion of the demos... Fair enough, but, if I may ask, do you have an opinion on this matter (You seemed vaguely pro-Warlords in the other thread, but this may have changed)?

I will aid in determining the actual decision when we actually get around to actually deciding.

I am happy to post my opinion. I prefer warlords with the HoF mod.

I voted I would not participate in the DemoGame at all. I don't have warlords.

I voted I would not participate in the DemoGame at all. I don't have warlords.

Just to clarify, you don't actually need the game to play. The DP and officials should post all the necessary screenshots for us citizens to examine, therefore not requiring us to load the save.

As I recall when DG I started some of the citizens didn't even have [civ4] nor did they know the changes, but that didn't stop them from playing.

Warlords is better, and i think those who dont have it is just lurkers and they will
understand it after a while. I would love that whith UB and vassals and co

Yes, I know that but I would like to load the save.

Yeah... But if... I still think warlords is better...

Woops...voted for the wrong option.

This poll had terrible wording.

"I would not be as active as if we used Vanilla." means "If we use Vanilla, I won't as active.", not to mention "as active as if" is poor grammar. Why would it be: I prefer Warlords, I don't care, I prefer Vanilla??

I agree that it's better.

Woops...voted for the wrong option.

This poll had terrible wording.

"I would not be as active as if we used Vanilla." means "If we use Vanilla, I won't as active.", not to mention "as active as if" is poor grammar. Why would it be: I prefer Warlords, I don't care, I prefer Vanilla??
Sorry about that, really couldn't think of a good way to word it. Either way the poll results don't even mean much, there just to get a feel of how participation levels might change if we decide to use warlords.

ok, so shall Daveshack change it or are we just leaving it like this?

Sorry about that, really couldn't think of a good way to word it. Either way the poll results don't even mean much, there just to get a feel of how participation levels might change if we decide to use warlords.

There is no purpose in posting a poll when the poll results don't mean much. Participation levels will depend on much more than wether we use warlords or not.

Please post a propsed poll in the proper discussion thread before posting an actual poll. That way you can get input about wording and such. :)

ok, so shall Daveshack change it or are we just leaving it like this?

We can just leave this one. It will generate some information, and our budding new philosophy, should we choose to accept it, is to replace a bad poll by posting a new one.

We can just leave this one. It will generate some information, and our budding new philosophy, should we choose to accept it, is to replace a bad poll by posting a new one.

That's only part of the philosophy. Another part is that if no option actually gets a majority of the votes then no decision has been made. Another part is that if there is a majority choice it is binding until a subsequent poll is completed.

Another part is that if there is a majority choice it is binding until a subsequent poll is completed.Except this poll can't be binding. It's strictly informational.

Except this poll can't be binding. It's strictly informational.

Under our new philosophy there is no such thing as an informational poll. There are only binding polls.

Well, that philosophy hasn't been adopted by the citizens. :p

Also the question isn't in a form which would mandate an action, so even if we did adopt the aforementioned philosophy we'd still have a meaningless poll. :lol:

Edit: meaningless isn't the right word, because the results do have meaning. ineffective maybe?

Under our new philosophy there is no such thing as an informational poll. There are only binding polls.What kind of philosophy is that? So your saying that all polls that are posted must be binding, even if they ask a question like: Do you think it would be beneficial if we switched to civic x?

When did we decide on this new philosophy, anyway?
If we want to have an informational poll, I see no reason why we shouldn't!

1. ice2k4, is your intention of this poll to determine which version would draw more viewers?

2. Has the final decision been made?

IMHO, I suggest using vanilla as this would allow most people to participate.

Furius is right.

What kind of philosophy is that? So your saying that all polls that are posted must be binding, even if they ask a question like: Do you think it would be beneficial if we switched to civic x?

When did we decide on this new philosophy, anyway?
If we want to have an informational poll, I see no reason why we shouldn't!

The philosophy is an attempt to reconcile ongoing democracy game conflicts. On the one hand we have elected officials who whine that they have no power because they have to poll everything and can make no decisions themselves. On the other hand we have citizens who have seen officials time and time again get elected and then either do nothing or do things most players don't want. Some of us (who have been playing these democracy games for about four years now) have fought long and hard to ensure regular ordinary citizens (i.e., those not currently holding an office) have the right to post binding polls. We finally have a proposal for a philosophy that objectively lays out when a decision has been make by us as a group and when elected officials are free to make their own decisions.

The philosophy is simple:

Anyone can post a forum poll and all completed forum polls are binding (unless another subsequent completed poll specifically reverses it).
A forum poll results in a binding group decision if a majority of those voting in the forum poll vote for a single option.
Anyone can post binding game play instructions based on a completed forum poll that results in a group decision as outlined above.
Officials are free to make any decisions (within their sphere of authority) not made as a group decision.
The turn player is free to make any decison not made by a group decison or by an official in the absense of a group decision.


For this philosophy to work we need (among other things) to elevate forum polls to a sort of sacred status. As I said earlier there is no room for informational or opinion polls (especially since these have been abused by elected officials over the years). This does not mean we can not ask for opinions. It does mean we should do so through discusssion threads and not forum polls.

What if many citizens are against a decision of an official?
I agree that polls should be sacred.

What if many citizens are against a decision of an official?
I agree that polls should be sacred.
If you don't like a decision of an official, you can open a discussion about it and/or open a poll about it. The discussion is preferred to start, to get debate and allow all sides to present their case. If there's strong support, the official may allow change their views. If there is some disagreement, or time is short, a poll can be posted. This poll would require the official to follow the results of that poll.

-- Ravensfire

There are two main reasons for not automatically making all polls binding.

A poll can be unfair because of the way it is stated, the options that are presented, the timeframe, or any number of other errors. Such polls should not be binding.

A poll can be totally clean as to form but have no function, like this poll. This poll does not ask what we should do, nor does it state what will happen if we vote a particular way. If you ask a meaningless question in a DG poll, it does not make sense to somehow inject meaning into it and make it binding.

You know what folks - here's an example of a situation that, in past DG's, would probably have gone to the Judiciary, and resulting in much drama, arguements, resentment and the usual bickering matters like this bring into play.

There is quite obviously a difference of opinion here.

How about we be proactive JUST this once, and discussion and pass an initiative to resolve this matter. Please? Pretty please? I don't care one way or the other, but for those that do, GET IT FIXED!

-- Ravensfire

How about we be proactive JUST this once, and discussion and pass an initiative to resolve this matter. Please? Pretty please? I don't care one way or the other, but for those that do, GET IT FIXED!


Which matter, the Warlords one, or the binding polls one? :p

Or both... :lol:

As for question of what makes a good poll, please contribute to this discussion (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=205453).

I think we're trying to get it fixed Ravensfire. None of us know the answer though.
I'm suggesting that we try to restrain ourselves from making the types of polls DaveShack says have no function. We don't need opinion or informational polls - we can use discussion threads to get our opinions out there. These aren't the real problem anyway. So even if a majority in this poll voted a certain way (and we consider that vote binding), so what? No [civ4] gameplay is required. Polls like this one are really harmless except they perpetuate poor polling procedures. And when we start doing opinion polls about specific game actions (like peace versus war) we open the door for officials to post polls about game decisions we need to make but call them informational so they can make their own choice despite the vote.

The other concern DS raises is more problematic. The only solution we currently have for unfair polls is a subsequent poll. I think our expiriment with the Censor last game was a flop. I would not support giving any official power to declare polls invalid. I think the best solution is to work up templates for fair polls that we can copy and paste. I also urge proposed polls be posted ahead of time in the appropriate discussion thread so we can all do what we can to make the actual posted poll a fair deal. We really have to start frowning on those who post bad polls. Perhaps we can use intiatives to force certain things into polls but I suggest we approach this slowly and deliberately - with an eye towards creating polling rules we can pass on to future democracy games.

In the mean time we should accept all polls as binding so that we'll know when we've made a majority decision and when officials can make their own choices.

Why don't we place a poll procedure that must be followed in order for a poll to be considered binding. Basically state that for a poll to be considered binding it must follow x layout.

<discussion on polling moved to polling thread>

-- Ravensfire

Vanilla v1.61

ok... I'm going to post an actual poll...

I say we have polls for important decisions and for opinions-discussions to attend to the discussions forum.

That's true... An opinion poll makes more sense if it's posted in the discussion forum than in here...