To not further delay gameplay, I will making my first Executive Order, by calling an immediate and otherwise defined "special", 0 turn turnchat.

Dutchfire will be playing the save as soon as he receives it. There will be no set time.

Official Instructions of the Cheftain. Move the the scout 1NE. Immediatley Save and Quit. DO NOT PLAY THE SAVE WHATSOEVER IF ANY CITIZEN POSTS AN OPPOSITION IN THIS THREAD, BEFORE YOU START.

If anyone opposes this, please state so.

Got it

I oppose!

While I wholeheartedly agree with the planned move, the procedure for implementing it is totally at odds with the DG's focus of allowing gameplay to be directed by the Citizens.

This matter should be handled by poll or during a regular DP session.

149190
149191
149189

Gold!

I hope the naming was correct this time.

Not to stir up controversy, but this move was very poorly planned and implemented.

The suggestion of a variance from our standard play @ 10:15 a.m by Ice, with a request for objections, followed by an indication TWO minutes later that the suggestion would be implemented carries with it the appearance of collusion.

While I believe that dutchfire was simply following Ice's instructions, the move he made within minutes of the original post gave no realistic opportunity to object.

It would have been more honest if Ice had simply said that the move was going to be made and that anyone who didn't like it could jump off a cliff. The invitation in Ice's original post that objections be made was hollow as things actually played out, since my objection 4 short minutes later obviously meant nothing.

We have a procedure in place for playing the saves, including making moves of units. Let's follow that procedure. Variances from it should not be acceptable. Certainly the variance in this instance was no big deal. But it sets a VERY BAD PRECEDENT for the future.

cool, executive decisions are cool, and gaidynne you could always take it to the courts or even.... Coup

The first post was made 2 hours earlier. LINK (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5166433&postcount=29)

Why was this done so quickly.
Well, let's have a look at what would happen if everything was done very carefully.

Today Ice announces extra play-session
1/2 days of discussion
Scout moves 1 tile in play session.
1/2 days of discussion
scout moves another tile
1/2 days of discussion
settler moves/settles
turn 1 finishes after 3/6 days.
2 days of discussion
-first real turnchat of about 10 turns.

That's a lot of time with absolutely nothing happening to keep everybody entertained and happy.

The first post was made 2 hours earlier. LINK (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5166433&postcount=29)

Why was this done so quickly.
Well, let's have a look at what would happen if everything was done very carefully.

Today Ice announces extra play-session
1/2 days of discussion
Scout moves 1 tile in play session.
1/2 days of discussion
scout moves another tile
1/2 days of discussion
settler moves/settles
turn 1 finishes after 3/6 days.
2 days of discussion
-first real turnchat of about 10 turns.

That's a lot of time with absolutely nothing happening to keep everybody entertained and happy.
Sorry to say but that can be objected at every turn discussion, so is this the way turns are going to be played then? What about the entire democratic stuff then?

Well, normally we like to play about 10 turns at a time. That way there's enough to discuss during the next days. After that discussion we can play again, and then we'll need new discussion.

At the moment, we need to decide on a vital issue, settling our first city, but to do that, we need to scout first, and then discuss. But the move of the scout didn't really have to be discussed that much (in the opinion of Ice).

At the moment, we need to decide on a vital issue, settling our first city, but to do that, we need to scout first, and then discuss. But the move of the scout didn't really have to be discussed that much (in the opinion of Ice).
Can I stress vital issue and point out that Ice is not the only one playing the game? I know what his position is but I once again say his decision seems to bare hardly any democratic value.

Not to stir up controversy, but this move was very poorly planned and implemented.

The suggestion of a variance from our standard play @ 10:15 a.m by Ice, with a request for objections, followed by an indication TWO minutes later that the suggestion would be implemented carries with it the appearance of collusion.

While I believe that dutchfire was simply following Ice's instructions, the move he made within minutes of the original post gave no realistic opportunity to object.

It would have been more honest if Ice had simply said that the move was going to be made and that anyone who didn't like it could jump off a cliff. The invitation in Ice's original post that objections be made was hollow as things actually played out, since my objection 4 short minutes later obviously meant nothing.

We have a procedure in place for playing the saves, including making moves of units. Let's follow that procedure. Variances from it should not be acceptable. Certainly the variance in this instance was no big deal. But it sets a VERY BAD PRECEDENT for the future.
Firstly, I did no wrong doing in the fact that I could of told everyone to jump off a cliff, unless of course someone overrode my authority via initiative. The discussion has been open for 2 days. Noone polled anything.

Secondly, although dutchfire got the save a little earlier than I expected, the original post with my intentions, also stating that I would give instructions unless someone objected was made a few hours beforehand.

Thirdly, the decision was based upon the discussion made by the citizens. Although the citizens did not directly and collectively make the instruction, my instructions were not based on my plans, but my interpretation of the citizen's opinions, and further more, the decision that I found most logical, after reading the arguments.

Also, many people requested an immediate turnchat, even earlier than today.

I do admit that I was reluctant to call this immediate play of the save, but by the power the citizen's had invested in me, I found it favorable in the sense that it would keep the game moving. A huge factor of the last demogame that lead to loss of participation, and ultimately the first demogame that was not finished, was the game moving too slowly do to massive polling and waiting. Therefore, within a weeks time, we would of had three turnchats, and still not played one turn. (Creation, Scout Movement, Settler settling.) Although as Chieftain I am in charge of most of the in-game powers, I also am in charge of keeping the participation level high.

I do not like to think of this as something that will set precedent and I hope this won't have to be done again.

Thank you for the Link, dutchfire.

However, I don't think it demonstrates that the emergency turnchat was appropriate or well-handled. The linked material by Ice suggests something he may do if people don't respond to his posts.

But, this thread is where he actually stated his intention and invited responses. He got a response, within FOUR minutes, objecting to his course of action. I would submit that any reasonable person would agree that an objection within 4 minutes is timely and should be considered.

Unfortunately, it wasn't and couldn't be considered, because you had promptly carried out his Executive Order.

Again, I don't believe that you and Ice colluded in your actions to deny the Citizens their right to comment on the process and participate in it. Nonetheless, your actions did exactly that. While unit move was not a big deal, it does establish a precedent for future, similar behavior which might be more damaging.

@Nobody: I agree that this matter could be addressed via a Judicial Review and/or a coup. I am hesitant to initiate either procedure as I believe this episode was simply an earnest effort by Ice and dutchfire to move the game along. However, I am concerned about the precedent this sets and therefore wanted to act as the proverbial "squeaky wheel". I would hope that others weigh in with their thoughts, and that we could all move past this in short order, but still set the tone for the remainder of the game with respect to emergency gameplay sessions.

Respectfully,

Gaidynne

Realize that the special session was brought up on Friday and discussed a little bit on that day. There was even a suggestion that Ice play the special session on Saturday, which did not happen. There was also a request by me on Friday in the DP thread based off of suggestions/statements made by others.

In one of those statements someone stated that the Chieftain could move the scout as he sees fit according to the rules of the Demogame.

I believe the error, or misunderstanding, is that Ice asked for objections and at the same time told dutchfire to just play the save. Now, I'm just guessing here, but I believe with Ice's current family emergency he was just trying to speed up something he'd been forced to neglect over the weekend. If I'm wrong, I apologize for my mistake.

Note that this isn't how the game is usually played out. Unfortunately it happened on the first turn with a bunch of new players who are unsure about how the game is played and hoping this isn't the way its supposed to.

Just my two :gold:, I apologize if my assumptions are incorrect.

I also am in charge of keeping the participation level high

Well, this thread did get participation :p

That was interesting. :eek:

A few hours delay would have been more traditional, but I'll admit it got something done.

Whether this loses me votes or not I could care less. The fact still stands that everything done was legal. Your very much right, that I could of said, hey go jump off a cliff if you don't like it. Small decisions like this in the first place, do not represent the democratic attitude in which this game is played. You will soon come to realize that only big decisions are usually polled, as everything else is delegated to officials. I was trying to be nice by giving citizens a chance to object, but dutchfire saw the thread earlier than I expected. I was about to send him a pm to wait a while before playing if he could, but I checked and he already posted that he started. If you ask the more experienced players, some will agree that the game should not be slowed down, while others will stick to the strict legal sense (you know who you are ;) ) and oppose my actions.

Edit: Now it was unfortunate that this last week has been extremely hectic for me, and I was not able to devote the normal time I do to the demogame. I would of called the turnchat earlier with more notice if I was able to. Also, for the last 3 days the discussion has been opened, and no poll. By that I assume that the citizens are leaving the decision in my hands, as it has been defined by our law and constitution.

I don't care what the more experienced will think or if you lost some votes. I still find it rather strange to use your power for something you most like could've (or should I say would've?!) done in a little more hours time than you did now. Is time really so scarce then?

We elected Ice to lead. He did.

Is time really so scarce then?

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt due to this statement (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5166339&postcount=27) he made in another thread.

Due to an emergency in family matters, I haven't really been at my computer this weekend.
<snip>


Emergencies never happen in a timely and considerate matter.

Please create an instruction thread for this session, using the normal format. In other words - the save you used, a post with instructions, and post with the session log and the closing save.

Also, update the summary thread.

A special session is still a normal session, and includes the same elements. It's just much faster.

To those who don't like how it was done, if it's that much of an issue for you, create an initiative that covers how special sessions are done. Quite intentionally, that wasn't done yet.

-- Ravensfire

Also, update the summary thread.

The summary thread was already updated prior to your post, or are you saying update it after the above updates you have requested?

Summary post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5158761&postcount=2)

Please create an instruction thread for this session

Isn't this thread the instruction thread?
All instructions are in the first post, the closing save is in another post, the log is just that I moved 1 unit and made 2 screenshots.

Summary thread is Methos' job.

I don't care what the more experienced will think or if you lost some votes. I still find it rather strange to use your power for something you most like could've (or should I say would've?!) done in a little more hours time than you did now. Is time really so scarce then?I'm not saying that the more experienced players should have precedence over the new players, but if you were around the last demogame, you would have a better understanding of my decisions. Also, I don't care about votes.

Please create an instruction thread for this session, using the normal format. In other words - the save you used, a post with instructions, and post with the session log and the closing save.
Doing it as we speak.

Some thoughts:

1. I applaud the bold move. I don't personally feel is was absolutely necessary, but it did seem to speed up something that was looking like an all too early stumbling block.

2. When we are micro-managing locations, how about having the grid ON and move the camera back a bit so we can see all there is to see in one picture?

3. OT - why are there forest tiles that seem to be just sprouting? Same way with initial pictures, but they are fully sprouted when I load the save.

3. OT - why are there forest tiles that seem to be just sprouting? Same way with initial pictures, but they are fully sprouted when I load the save.

It looks like a graphics mod, or perhaps the detail level was set lower than what you use.

I don't believe there should be an uproar over ice2k4's decision. I think he made it cause it needed to be done. I support our leader and I trust his judgement. Besides, if we have to poll everything, including unit movement, it will make for a slow dull game.

Sorry to say but that can be objected at every turn discussion, so is this the way turns are going to be played then? What about the entire democratic stuff then?

There've been "movements" before to have 1 turn turnchats, but even that would take far too long. There's 400+ turns in a game (back in Civ3, 540). That would mean games would be going on for 2 years, by which many people would simply leave because there's nothing going on.

A few hours delay would have been more traditional, but I'll admit it got something done.

Oh yeah, it got something done all right. It started turning people off from the DEMOCRACY game already. C'mon give the rest of us a chance to participate will you? I still haven't seen a real screenshot and all of a sudden someone decides to move our guys around!

Now is it true the Chieftan can move our scouts around at whim or is it that he can do that only when we fail to make a group decision? If the latter, then you really have to give us time to make a decision and not just fly off half-cocked and do something. I'm quite a bit annoyed that I've been one of the few active posters here prior to the actual start of the game and I don't even get to see the start position before things start happening.

SLOW DOWN!!!!

Different stages of the game require different paces. There is nothing wrong with calling for a special session to move a scout but give us a decent chance to object. More than two hours please and no opened ended stuff like this one. It would have been better to call the session for a specific time so we'd all know how long we had to object. And please don't do this stuff on the weekends. Most importantly, make sure we've had some decent discussion where we all can participate.

Once more,

Slow down!!!!!

EDIT: Just looked at the screenshots posted earlier in this thread. Why in heaven's name did we move the scout NE when there are a couple hills to the WEST! How does that move by our scout help us decide where to place our first city? :confused:

Public Notice: Anyone interested in staging a coup has my support.

There have been several recent references in posts above to polls slowing everything down and being unnecessary at this stage in the game. I think these references miss the point of my posts.

I don't advocate that we poll every decision. Rather, I believe that we should play the saves as we have planned & scheduled for the last couple of weeks. Ice's decision to make an "emergency" unit move was objectionable to me because it took the matter out of the normal routine. We had a normal play session scheduled. We could have waited till then to make our next move. We could have discussed what to do during that session. The scheduling of an "emergency" session simply denied the vast majority of us an opportunity to participate. This is bad precedent. It will haunt us later when other Chieftains exercise similar authority and cite Ice's conduct as precedent which has been recognized/approved since the outset of this game.

Finally, to the several posters suggesting that we should stop carping about this issue because we haven't been around as long as some of the veteran DG'ers and therefore just don't understand that this is how things are done, I reply as follows:

Our veteran DG'ers may have let us all down. Couldn't it have been anticipated that we might want to move a unit or two around before we actually played our first real session? If so, why wasn't this issue addressed by our more experienced members in the many weeks leading up to the start of the game? For these same more experienced members to now express righteous indignation at questions directed to the poor timing of the emergency turnchat is perplexing to me. If you all knew this type of emergency session would be necessary, why wasn't it built into our system ahead of time? Why wasn't the Chieftain's authority to do this sort of thing more expressly outlined?

Again, I suggest that our Citizens' rights to participate in gameplay should be respected. This means playing the game during regularly scheduled turnchats. Emergency turnchats, especially those that are announced and played within four minutes, are simply a denial of everyone's right to play.

Gaidynne,

I think more than a few "vets" did contemplate that - we've certainly used them before. I know I expected them to be used at various times. I quite deliberately didn't put in any initiative I proposed sections about running special sessions. In the "Playing the Save" initiative, the only reference to special session is basically to treat them as any other session. There should be an instruction thread, a game log and the final save.

A couple things bother me about this session. First and foremost - the speed of it. I completely understand emergencies. They happen, and they will delay games at various points. The thread was created at 12:15, and an instruction saying don't play it if anyone objects. The designated DP picked it up at 12:17, two minutes later. An objection was posted at 12:19, 4 minutes after the OP.

An objection was posted within 5 minutes, and that wasn't in time?!?!. It would have been greatly preferable to see the Chieftain state that there was going to be a special session to move one or more units, and request advice on that specific scouting. On Monday, make the move.

The other part that did bother me is purely from the traditional/vet part of me. It was the cause of my post about an instruction thread/save/etc. Instruction threads, even for special sessions, should be labeled and formatted the same as other instruction threads. It makes them easier to find and work with. As they are a game session, they need to be logged in the summary thread as well.

I think this could have been handled better than it was. It is, however, done. As such, we the citizens need to decide we need to force future behavior through an initiative, or if simple public pressure will be enough. That is the objective of our ruleset - keep it simple, and only pass the laws we decide are needed.

-- Ravensfire

Ravensfire,

I agree with most of your post's content and very much appreciate the tone.

The part of your post I thought most important was where you pointed out that the matter is now done and we now have to figure out what to do about it. My suggestion is not a Judicial Review or a Coup. Rather, I think that the discussion we are having is important simply because it makes clear whether our Citizens feel that emergency turnchats, announced and played within 5 minutes, are appropriate. I believe they are not in keeping with the goals of a Democracy Game and should not be utilized. I hope that others express their opinions. At a minimum, this discussion thread will be helpful during Term 2 Elections, when we can look back and see each candidate's position on the issue.

With that being said, I extend this challenge. If you believe the Chieftain can and should require emergency gameplay sessions, please state your position here unequivocally.

Gaidynne

With that being said, I extend this challenge. If you believe the Chieftain can and should require emergency gameplay sessions, please state your position here unequivocally.

24 hour delay from notice of session and execution. Notice should include reasoning and scope of session.

1 day isn't a significant delay, plus it allows for some period of citizen comment on actions to be taken.

-- Ravensfire

We had a normal play session scheduled. We could have waited till then to make our next move. We could have discussed what to do during that session. ... Again, I suggest that our Citizens' rights to participate in gameplay should be respected. This means playing the game during regularly scheduled turnchats. Emergency turnchats, especially those that are announced and played within four minutes, are simply a denial of everyone's right to play.

Our right to pareticipate includes making decisons in the FORUMS and not durings game play sessions.

We haven't even pressed enter the first time and already it's a chat based game. Gimme a break guys.

For what it's worth, I am totally against emergency game play sessions. I am not against turn sessions where all we do is move a scout one tile as long as we have at least 24 hour notice of said session and have some sort of citizen veto power over it.

I draw your attention to this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=209984) on capitol placement. The first mention of the possibility of a special session was made March 2nd, 10:18 AM, in the form of a question. I counted twelve people in the 1st page of that thread (on the settings I use) in favor of moving the scout in a special session, and zero against.

Two days later, the move was finally made.

Was it a good idea to have no delay between posting instructions and playing? No, there should have been a delay. It is certainly arguable that some people wouldn't know because it was not obvious from the thread the discussion was in that a special session was being planned. But don't go acting like there was no citizen input at all. Some of the people condemning the action here were very supportive of it in the other thread.

And no, we're not going to take the weekends off because certain people aren't here. :p

Can we also try and make thread subjects on the forum reflect what is going on inside them?! I.e., the discussion whether to move the scout could've been held in a topic with a 100x better subject as "Our capital site".

I draw your attention to this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=209984) on capitol placement. The first mention of the possibility of a special session was made March 2nd, 10:18 AM, in the form of a question. I counted twelve people in the 1st page of that thread (on the settings I use) in favor of moving the scout in a special session, and zero against.

Two days later, the move was finally made.

The discussion wasn't just mentioned in "The Capitol" thread, as I also brought it up in the DP thread with this post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5160637&postcount=24). Everyone had two days to discuss it, in which some players did, so I'm confused to the statements suggesting it wasn't expected nor had any discussion as two days is plenty.

Note: The discussion I refer to is on the move, not on the ask for objections and get one within four.

With that being said, I extend this challenge. If you believe the Chieftain can and should require emergency gameplay sessions, please state your position here unequivocally.

I'll try from the newbie's perspective:

Chieftain "can" require emergency sessions? Sure. I would like to see the game tempo maintained and if subsequent steps are delayed by uncertainty in the first step, then taking that first step seems like a good idea.
Chieftain "should" require emergency sessions? Not sure what "should" means here. Is the Chieftain obligated to call emergency sessions? I think not, but he can always be voted out if the players don't like what he's doing.
Full disclosure. I suggest that once the subject of an emergency session arises, ALL discussion would be moved to an EMERGENCY SESSION thread so everyone knows the previous schedule may change.
Planning ahead. Being new here, I'm a bit surprised more experienced folks (on all sides) didn't see this coming. I'm a fairly casual player and generally settle where I start, but it's clear that many here give serious thought to being more selective. With that in mind, the potential for an emergency session could have been acknowledged in advance with some rough times on when things might happen. This would help reduce the surprise factor.

Our right to pareticipate includes making decisons in the FORUMS and not durings game play sessions.

We haven't even pressed enter the first time and already it's a chat based game. Gimme a break guys.


Wrong! All of the decisions we have made this game, have been made in the forum. Just because we all call a play session a turnchat does not mean the chat itself has anything to do with the decision making process.

Eek, stop confusing the world ;) . In all honesty I am still somewhat amazed by the swift action Ice took but I also have to admit there was a discussion going on that I failed to spot. That is why I, seriously, urge the powers that be to use more descriptive topic subjects and if time is running short please consider postponing the turn instead of hurrying it.

And 730195, thanks for taking the effort to look at this from a newbee's perspective. But shall we now move on, 1 SE i.e.?!

But shall we now move on, 1 SE i.e.?!

I assume you mean the scout. If so, you have my vote.

Was it a good idea to have no delay between posting instructions and playing? No, there should have been a delay. That's exactly the point I'm making here. You also probably noticed that after the Chieftain declared that a special session someone DID object. Too bad though - even though he commented 4 minutes after the post saying "post if you object!", he wasn't in time.

Some of the people condemning the action here were very supportive of it in the other thread.
Yup, and I'll be objecting from now on since I now know the timeframe the current government will be working on.

1 day. Just 1 day. Would that REALLY have caused problems?

-- Ravensfire

OT - why are there forest tiles that seem to be just sprouting? Same way with initial pictures, but they are fully sprouted when I load the save.
or perhaps the detail level was set lower than what you use.


Low detail, low everything actually, to keep it running.

Now I'm of the read the other pages off this thread.

We haven't even pressed enter the first time and already it's a chat based game

Got a problem, just blame the chats :rolleyes:

Just to say:

1) The only elected Officer in charge (because Elder still lacks a city to rule)
gave instructions to perform one quarter of turn.
Is that an abuse of power? Too fast a speed? If that is beyond Chieftain
power, then what for is he here?

2) The leader just played his role: he leaded. And I think he should have done
more, that is, give more instructions to make game go on.
(Or a quarter of turn is too much for all these threads,posts and polls?).

3) The move in itself, I think it was poor, because didn't help us to see how
good (or not) current location is; of course, scout can now move SE, but
just one tile of radius is revealed.

4) Someone spoke about a coup. If this happens now I'll vote against.
(And no, I do not know the person, or player, in charge).

Best regards,

i want to throw my 2 cents in.

I have no problem with the executive order. I have a problem with not letting any one have time to voice their concerns. For example...why did we go north..checking out the "coast' and the silver should have been considered. The timing of 2 minutes to play then 2 minutes to object frankly stinks. I dont care if you had a family emergency...you could have said so and asked for a few days. Losing a day or 3 at this stage wont hurt.. Going a whole month like in the first game with only playing 2 sessions would hurt. taking the power from the people...will hurt and we will be back to just the officials playing(and then not enough of them either)

I am tempted to coup...but I cant fault you for someone elses prompt actions. Lets just slow down and not make major decisions due over the Saturday/Sunday time frame. I guess I will have to start thinking like a lawyer and try to draft something to slow down the "0 turn" TCs

Since this has obviously cause quite a stir, I'm not going to respond to every post individually.

In the matter of calling the emergency chat, and citizens claiming there wasn't enough time to discuss:

Yes there was. There was actually 2 days worth of discussion and no poll. There was a whole thread on it. IT IS NOT THE OFFICIAL'S JOB TO NAME THE THREADS. If you don't read every thread, I completely understand, but maybe checking the first post of every thread could help. If you feel that the title "capitol start" or whatever it was did not give enough description, and you skipped over it because you were either too lazy to read the first post, or just didn't have enough time, I'm sorry, but the discussion was there. Also, screenshots were up as soon as the creation save file was posted. Again, you can't hold be responsible because you didn't find the screenshots, which were in the same post the save was in.

In the matter of me calling the emergency turnchat:

Firstly everything I did was legal. I had no intention to "play it without the citizen's consent" or anything like that, whether you feel that way or not. It was not meant to set a precedent, and the reason for calling it was simply to keep the game moving. The game gets pretty slow when you've gone four turnchats, and still haven't pressed enter (game creation, first scout move, second scout move, settle city.) A lot of support was shown with no objection to the emergency turnchat. It was proposed a day or two earlier than I actually executed it. I would of executed it even earlier, if it hadn't been for my grandmother having a stroke. The idea was proposed not only in the discussion thread, but as well as the dp thread.

In the matter of not being enough time to object:
I agree with you. There was not enough time to object, and I am truly sorry for this. When I was midway sending a pm to dutchfire, informing him to wait a little first, and then posting a duplicate of that in the instruction thread, he had already posted got it. At that point I realized whats done is done. Although he may of passed over my post time, not realizing I posted only two minutes ago, I take full blame for it, as I should of included that in my unedited first post (with instructions.)

If the citizens feel the 1/2 turn movement of a scout made in an emergency turnchat requires a coup, then go as far as you want with it. If you realized I withheld my decision to call a second emergency turnchat, and will not be calling one again, due to the controversy it causes. If everyone was against emergency turnchats, I assumed there would of been limitations stated in initiatives, acts or clauses

My two cents....

Given the importance of this opening turn, I feel a more definitive decision of where to move the Scout should have been made, with maybe a 24 hour poll. At the close of which the "Emergency" session would be scheduled.

City placement should be similarly polled, pick the best/most popular few options and poll them.

I don't think it's that people are "against emergency sessions" it's just,

A.) 1 day isn't a large delay in of it self.
B.) The time between the announcement of the session and where the Chieftain wanted the Scout to move, and the time the session was played out was much too small.
C.) While there was previous discussion there was no clear preference where to move the scout. At least a 24 hour poll should have been included showing the best options. The session could then be performed shortly (minutes) after the closure of that poll if need be, so long as the actions of the session complied with the poll.


EDIT: That said.... a few points.... the only reason why such a "minor" move i so important right now is our start can greatly effect the game. As such there are very few minor decisions, and citizens need to review and have a say in such decisions.

Secondly, we should move on and live and learn. Either create a new initiative to cover "emergency sessions" or just try to have greater self restraint in the future.
A coup is NOT necessary. I also feel major legal wrangling to assign blame, guilt, or punishment is NOT necessary.

My two cents....

Given the importance of this opening turn, I feel a more definitive decision of where to move the Scout should have been made, with maybe a 24 hour poll. At the close of which the "Emergency" session would be scheduled.

City placement should be similarly polled, pick the best/most popular few options and poll them.

I don't think it's that people are "against emergency sessions" it's just,

A.) 1 day isn't a large delay in of it self.
B.) The time between the announcement of the session and where the Chieftain wanted the Scout to move, and the time the session was played out was much too small.
C.) While there was previous discussion there was no clear preference where to move the scout. At least a 24 hour poll should have been included showing the best options. The session could then be performed shortly (minutes) after the closure of that poll if need be, so long as the actions of the session complied with the poll.


EDIT: That said.... a few points.... the only reason why such a "minor" move i so important right now is our start can greatly effect the game. As such there are very few minor decisions, and citizens need to review and have a say in such decisions.

Secondly, we should move on and live and learn. Either create a new initiative to cover "emergency sessions" or just try to have greater self restraint in the future.
A coup is NOT necessary. I also feel major legal wrangling to assign blame, guilt, or punishment is NOT necessary.After the few days of discussion, noone polled anything, so it didn't look like much was going to be polled.

If it is your preference that the citizens post relevant polls, I certainly will do so. I am used to the leaders being active in such matters, however.

Might I also ask about a research discussion? Such a discussion will be needed soon, and will provide a useful and welcome diversion.

-- Ravensfire

This game sure is starting off great...

IF we are back to "I wont poll....the citizens can do it". Then why do we have officials, lets just have DPs.

Obviously there was ALOT of different opinions on which way to move as almost everyone who is posting questions the move as well as how it was done. Perhaps a poll would have resulted in a different outcome.

IN addition the discussion thread had a lot of "well i might ask for" and "you could do a 0 turn TC"...nothing definitive. Most of us left the thread waiting for a poll or more discussion but instead when we return our decision was already made for us. Can you see how thats frustrating

Moving a scout wouldn't be that much of a bad thing unless it gets killed. This is just a small issue that doesn't really require polling and/or initiatives.

The scout move was pretty good too. It revealed gold, another happiness resources. Our starting position still leaves much to be desired, but at least it's better than just having silver.

And no, we're not going to take the weekends off because certain people aren't here. :p

But you won't use the HoF Mod because it limits others people's participation. So it all boils down to who doesn't get to participate, right? Just like the chats are always timed for the convenience of Americans and screw the rest of the world.

Was it a good idea to have no delay between posting instructions and playing? No, there should have been a delay. It is certainly arguable that some people wouldn't know because it was not obvious from the thread the discussion was in that a special session was being planned. But don't go acting like there was no citizen input at all. Some of the people condemning the action here were very supportive of it in the other thread.

Way back in DG1 (the Civ III DGI, not the last DG), we decided there would be no turn playing at all without at least 24 hours notice. It does not surprise me that some who supported the move are up in arms about the way it was conducted. It was not an emergency.

Wrong! All of the decisions we have made this game, have been made in the forum. Just because we all call a play session a turnchat does not mean the chat itself has anything to do with the decision making process.

My remark was made in response to the comment made that the movement of the scout could have been discussed during the regularly scheduled play session. That was a very ominous remark from a relatively new player. Try to pay attention DaveShack.

Got a problem, just blame the chats :rolleyes:

Read my reply to DaveShack above. There was certainly no indication on our leaderships part to let us all take part in the decision regarding moving the scout in the forums. I jhonestly do not understand the rush to play. We talked and talked for over a month about how to play this DG and already all that is out the window. I suggested continuous play where we'd play a couple turns every day no matter what. NO, that was too fast for everyone. We need to take time and make decisions properly. Then the first decision comes along and in two days a move is rammed down our throat. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Just like the chats are always timed for the convenience of Americans and screw the rest of the world.


May I point out that the first turnchat of this game was very convenient for Europeans, and not convenient for Americans. It just boils down to the turnplayer, if you want chats in "American Time", vote for people in those timezones, if you want "European" chats, vote for Europeans.

May I point out that the first turnchat of this game was very convenient for Europeans, and not convenient for Americans. It just boils down to the turnplayer, if you want chats in "American Time", vote for people in those timezones, if you want "European" chats, vote for Europeans.

I think we should schedule our next chat for the second Tuesday of next week. The one after that should be when Hell freezes over.

But you won't use the HoF Mod because it limits others people's participation. So it all boils down to who doesn't get to participate, right? Just like the chats are always timed for the convenience of Americans and screw the rest of the world.
And in how so was your participation limited. You were welcome to join in on the discussion. Noone said anything I did had to be polled, and you knew that. If you seriously felt your participation would be limited by me making the decision, you should of created a poll.

And participation being limited by the HoF mod was something that affected participation in a definite way. Mac users would not be allowed to view or play the save unless they bought a new computer, and a new copy of the game. On the other hand, time-frames in which people are online, are too diverse to control, especially with timezones. So stop trying to pry back on old decisions you didn't like, stick to the topic at hand.

:crazyeye: Barely one turn into the game and this... And I thought donsig's trade of Medicine was bad. :p

May I point out that the first turnchat of this game was very convenient for Europeans, and not convenient for Americans. It just boils down to the turnplayer, if you want chats in "American Time", vote for people in those timezones, if you want "European" chats, vote for Europeans.

And what if you are in Asia? Abstain? :lol:

@ordinaryguy Run and vote for yourself and hope you get enough support. Or vote for someone who does for example eveningchats that will be morning chats for you (I don't know how that would work around exactly, but it could be done.) Or just wake up in the middle of the night :p

@ordinaryguy Run and vote for yourself and hope you get enough support. Or vote for someone who does for example eveningchats that will be morning chats for you (I don't know how that would work around exactly, but it could be done.) Or just wake up in the middle of the night :p

Nah my com can't play Civ4 and be on the chat line at the same time :crazyeye: . From what I know, none of the DPs actually plays at sometime near GMT+8. The current DPs have been playing at like 12am (e.g. around 1500GMT) in my timezone but my mom would never allow me to stay up. So, I guess I can't participate when the game is being played then, only during discussions about what to do next.

Nah my com can't play Civ4 and be on the chat line at the same time :crazyeye: . From what I know, none of the DPs actually plays at sometime near GMT+8. The current DPs have been playing at like 12am (e.g. around 1500GMT) in my timezone but my mom would never allow me to stay up. So, I guess I can't participate when the game is being played then, only during discussions about what to do next.

Can't you play in windowed mode and use the chatroom?

Another option would be to run an off-line session. As long as you take good notes and produce a good game log, there's nothing prohibiting it. I'd rather see more DP's with a few offline sessions than just a handful and only online sessions.

-- Ravensfire

From what I know, none of the DPs actually plays at sometime near GMT+8. The current DPs have been playing at like 12am (e.g. around 1500GMT) in my timezone but my mom would never allow me to stay up. So, I guess I can't participate when the game is being played then, only during discussions about what to do next.

With players from various parts of the world and various schedule considerations, finding a time that suits everyone may be difficult. What might help is a thread of Preferred Chat Times. If people posted their ideal hours for chat/play (in GMT to keep everything neat), a DP who had some flexibility could pick a time that let others join in. As it stands now, I would have no idea what time to play to maximize participation or to try to include folks in far-off time zones.

Honestly - let the DP's pick their time.

Game sessions are a pain - right now they are short and with minimal instructions. I can remember sessions in past DG's that required spreadsheets to keep track of when to do what for whom. Sessions that lasted 5-6 hours. And that's not the worst by far. I believe CT had some that went over the 10 hour mark.

DP's know their schedule - let them set the game session. If people can make it, great. If they can't, oh well, join the vast majority of citizens that didn't. Point of reference - 3 people were in the chat room with me, with another lost. That's a mere 4 people.

-- Ravensfire

I agree with both opinions. :confused:

It would be good for a DP with flexibility to schedule at times that a lot of people can attend. But life goes on whether the chat room is full or empty.

A question for ordinaryguy, you posted your timezone is +8, but not what times of day are good for you. I figure this weekend's one is not, given it is at 0800 (-7) which corresponds to 2300 (+8), but I often play at 2300 (-7) which is 1400 the next day (?) your time.

Can't you play in windowed mode and use the chatroom?

I see that my post has generated a lot of discussion :lol:

No, I can't, because the computer I use to play Civ is not the same as the one I use to access this forum. The Civ computer has the ability to play and chat at the same time, BUT I will not do so. The playing computer has been attacked before while chating (without downloading anything), and I would not risk having that happening again.

But thanks for the suggestion anyway. :)

Another option would be to run an off-line session. As long as you take good notes and produce a good game log, there's nothing prohibiting it. I'd rather see more DP's with a few offline sessions than just a handful and only online sessions.

-- Ravensfire

Yes, I did think of doing that. But I usually have little time to play Civ, let alone take good notes or produce a game log.

I could nominate myself for DP, yes. But I don't think I would have the time to play a game and write in such detail. I would probably asked my turn to be skipped due to RL issues. But skipping my turn again and again...... You get the idea ;)

I agree with both opinions. :confused:

It would be good for a DP with flexibility to schedule at times that a lot of people can attend. But life goes on whether the chat room is full or empty.

A question for ordinaryguy, you posted your timezone is +8, but not what times of day are good for you. I figure this weekend's one is not, given it is at 0800 (-7) which corresponds to 2300 (+8), but I often play at 2300 (-7) which is 1400 the next day (?) your time.

Yes, I agree that the DP should play on regardless of the participation level in the chat room.

Of course, if the DP could schedule at the time of highest partcipation, that would be best. Maybe a thread could be started to discuss about this issue.

Regarding your question on what times are good for me, I could go online during the afternoon and evenings of weekdays (0800GMT to 1300GMT). During weekends, I just have to much homework to complete, unless my teachers were kind on that day. :lol: Thus, weekends are out for me.

I don't mind missing the game playing sessions. Here, I am just pointing out my situation.