Another City Settlement Poll:

Should we settle the city pointed out by Grant 2004?

Settler is already produced in Equus Aurum, all we need is to utilize same settler and complete the Southern Aimaq Province. All these resources will boost our economy, something we need right now.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/48994/waiting_settler.JPG

Options are:

1. Build the City
2. Not Build the City
3. Abstain

I believe that we should do it eventually, but our economy does not need a new city to hurt it anymore than it is already, so abstain.

I believe that we should do it eventually, but our economy does not need a new city to hurt it anymore than it is already, so abstain.
:agree:

I don't like the poll choices: "Abstain" is not the same as "Disband the Settler"...

I don't like the poll options either, where is the poll option "No, we want to build at the present site with specified settler at a later time" for example?

Hyronymus

Not build the city, is the same as "at a later time".

But the option is not "not build the city"

It's "Build the city at another location"

Not the same.

I'm abstaining.

I also object to the "disband the settler" addendum to the abstain option. We might not have language saying it, but the poll violates the unwritten standard that poll options should be non-biased.

I have to self-censor my comment on building a settler when we already had one. Let's just say it's not a very optimum move.

Can we just keep inserting stuff into the build queue until we need to build another city, and use the existing one to settle "below"?

I just realized, there has been a fairly significant logic error between this poll and the previous one (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=226415).

The previous vote was a binding yes, for settling the proposed location. Voting abstain in this poll results in a no decision, so the previous decision would stand.

I don't think building the city is such a drastic error that we can't just live with it, but others who don't share my optimism can try to take action to poll it once more with effective poll options.

No comment.

No comment.

No comment, by itself, is a comment. :p

I just realized, there has been a fairly significant logic error between this poll and the previous one (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=226415).

The previous vote was a binding yes, for settling the proposed location. Voting abstain in this poll results in a no decision, so the previous decision would stand.

I don't think building the city is such a drastic error that we can't just live with it, but others who don't share my optimism can try to take action to poll it once more with effective poll options.

Disregard -- people continued making comments to a poll which had already been superceded by another poll (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=227249).

The current condition is "no, don't settle there".

The problem is still this being a poll which doesn't ask a yes/no or here/there type question. People are using abstain to protest the bad format of the poll itself, because the simple option they want to vote for is not there.

Well, and the negative ones should probably ask themselves if inaction in changing the civcs is as smart as criticizing something being done.

The problem is still this being a poll which doesn't ask a yes/no or here/there type question. People are using abstain to protest the bad format of the poll itself, because the simple option they want to vote for is not there.

A poll is a poll is a poll, is it not? I think it was suggested awhile back that polls include an option that can be used to protest a poll internally. It was (and remains) a darn good idea that should be included in demo game polls. I suggest you all make a sticky non-discussion thread to use as a poll primer. In that thread you could put brief instructions (for lack of a better term) about making a good poll. Maybe some bullets with do's and don'ts and a couple examples or templates. This could be done without making any of it part of the rules or laws and of course the thread could evolve over time as we (finally) learn to make better polls. Eventually the judiciary (or whomever) might use the thread as the basis for deciding if a poll is valid or not and the citizens could use it as a guide if poll legislation became necessary. A first step would be a discussion thread to build what would be in the sticky thread. That's a discussion I'd even be interested in contributing to. (If someone pointed me in its direction.)

Your poll sub-forum is a chance to draw lurkers into the game and boost participation. Provolution's polls have not been the best but at least they are about meaningful decisions. He (and others) should be encouraged to continue polling but to improve the polls they post.