I'm going to make an unusual suggestion. I suggest we do away with our system of allowing governers free will of naming provinces.

Why? This always results in a hodgepodge of different names which does get very annoying.

I suggest defining and polling a list of provincial names, to be used each time a province is defined. This system has worked well in the Civ2 Democracy Game, where (last game) provinces were named after geographic areas of Mars.

To that end, I suggest the following names, to maintain a theme originally proposed by eyrei, based upon the names of the Seven Hills on which Rome was originally built:

Palatine, Aventine, Capitoline, Quirinal, Viminal, Esquiline and Caelian

Thoughts?

Good, though the province which will hold the Egyptian cities HAS to be named Asphinxia

Maybe in the citizen registry, we could have a personal providence name option, like we already have a city one. Then people could vote on it, debate, etc.

Stuck: Our future provinces will likely all be former Egyptian, Aztecian, American, Greek etc. You can't have the 7 hills of Rome as the names and divert from it immediately. We'll end up with the Provinces: Palatine, Aventine, Capitoline, Asphinxia, Aztecia, Americia, Grecia, or whatever we think of for the Aztec nation, the Greek nation etc.

If we take Octavian's advice we should not deviate from it.

BTW: Pal p atine ??

@Rik- yes, second P.

But here in lies the problem. Many people were not arround for the first game. I got there at the end. There was a mighty province, Asphinxia. Ruled by Almightyjosh, who has just recently rejoined us. This province was a culture powerhouse and had great shield output.

We once again can take over Egypt. We NEED to name it Asphinxia.

PS- extra P. yea

No, we don't. Frankly, your getting a bit too nostalgic. ;)

I want to support your proposal to name our first 7 provinces after the seven hills Octavian so would you mind correcting the spelling to Quirinal and Palatine please since I'm afflicted by acute geekiness where Rome is concerned.:)

Stuck: We must learn from history, but we should not necessarily copy it. It's a new game with a new history. Don't get Stuck ;) in the past.

Peri: the P was a small joke. I'm sure Zarn will smile at it.

@rik- okay
and isnt Palpantine the senator from star wars?

I also approve of using the names of the Seven Hills as our Provincial names. The greatness of Demogame 1 will never be matched by any other Demogame, let it be. Besides, by the unorthadox move of delaying the COC to name a freshly placed city Lake Asphinxia (which goes against all the standards of the Demogame itself), we have already averted DG3 from its true course of equality.

please delete

@cyc- there is no COC anymore
[12:04] <@Chieftess> hmm, there's NO rules stating naming rights!
[12:04] <+bootstoots> i forgot to post them
[12:04] <@Chieftess> since we voted to redo everything. :)
[12:04] <@Chieftess> We're just running on momentum
[12:05] <@Chieftess> So...
[12:05] <+CivGeneral> So...?
[12:05] <@Chieftess> I issue a Vice Presidential and Domestic decree, that the the next
city shall be named, "Lake Asphinxia", and succeeding cities will continue down the
CoC.

Use of the seven hills seems good to me, and far preferable to reuse of ideas from the first demogame such as "Asphinxia".

So basically, CT knocked someone down the ole totem pole by abandoning a common law practice of equality in city naming. How quaint. Her normal Gestapo tactics. No suprise there.

Cyc, do you like trolling me? Please stop before you wind up banned a third time.

Back to the subject, if we're all in agreement so far, I'll post a poll on the subject tomorrow. :)

Originally posted by Cyc
I also approve of using the names of the Seven Hills as our Provincial names. The greatness of Demogame 1 will never be matched by any other Demogame, let it be. Besides, by the unorthadox move of delaying the COC to name a freshly placed city Lake Asphinxia (which goes against all the standards of the Demogame itself), we have already averted DG3 from its true course of equality.

It was meant to be reserved for AJ, with the naming rights continuing as is. It can be changed.

While it would be nice to have a province named Asphinxia, I feel in this circumstance we must bow to the general will. Regardless of what it is called, I will be running for Governor of the 'Old Egypt' province one it ceases to be a warzone :) I think the combination of Egyptian cities, lots of plains and Lake Asphinxia (be it the city or the lake) will satisfy my nostalgia. It's good to see that people still remember Asphinxia so fondly, testiment to its greatness!! (thnx for the support SAaM, CT)

In terms of Lake Asphinxia city, we don't have any law about naming cities currently, but we do have convention. However, one of the things that has been good about this game is that the nameing of cities has been less personaly orientated (so the names all sound better). I don't think Lake Asphinxia deviates from this, it is quite a suitable name.

So, given that we must determine province names somehow, I would agree with Rik. We have three possible means:

Governor: This is the traditional method where the first governor of a province chooses a name as he/she sees fit.

Plebicite: A name is chosen for each new province by a poll each time.

List: There is a list of province names that we work through (eg the hills of Rome)


I suggest a mix of all three!! (stick with me, this idea may work) I have a feeling that if we put it to a vote, great support would be shown for the idea of naming our provinces after the hills of Rome. In fact, I think we could get approved the idea that our first 7 provinces MUST have those names! However, as there is no real reason to enforce an order to these, the first governor of any new province should be free to choose which name *taken from the list) will be the name of his province!!

See, everybody's happy!!!

Actually, that's not a bad idea.