OFFICIAL DISCUSSION: City Naming Convention

This is the discussion to determine how city names will be decided when a new city is built. We've had several options before:

1 - Based on rank and order in the citizen registry.
2 - Based on order in the citizen registry.

It should be based on the order of who posted first in the citizen registery. Also (I know some people may have been effected by the same event that Ive been through), In the registery, the city's name to be used should be the first city name the citizen has posted (IE. City Names: Shorin Ryu, Okinawa. The first city on the list (Bolded) should be used). I do not wish to see other people's city names to be rearanged because it is not appropreate of the civilization's culture.

Make it based on rank and order in the Citizen Registry.

I would like to see it return to a rank based system. People who volunteer for all the work of being an elected representative of the people should get at least some small concession to that sacrifice. I'd even like to see a means for people who are active posters but not elected get bumped up the list.

People who register as their only public act can rot on the bottom of the list.

about the rotting part

I prefer a system based on rank. It's one of the few ways we can actually award those who voluntarily give up their time to help out around this game.

I totally agree, and there should be no timer clause involved to rectify a mistake done.
If so, methids, deadlines for complaints and potential sanctions should be written down.
Also, leave the registry list as a method. it did not work and was unfair to hardworking latecomers such as MOTH and SD3, as well as Ashburnham. This should also be written into the Constitution, and not be a so-called "Naming Tradition Law" with no wording, since We have seen enough of "Gentleman's Honor" in this game".


However, we also know that we only get about 10 new cities per term, likely ending at 40-50 cities in a Civ-game before it comes unmanageable. With around 15 office holders in term one, someone is gonna be shortchanged. So I suggest the people to vote between two city name lists of 15 elected leaders and five honorary citizens for the first 10 cities (A Ministers list a a Judiciary/Governors list with some estememed nominees). However, the citizens registry can be named for military units, this will allow everyone some place in the hall of fame.

A citizen registry list mishandled by incompetent/unaccountable/unfair/untouchable city name officials is not to be trusted, and is in the outset a poor solution, as it discriminates hard-working latecomers.

I won't go so far as to impersonate a mod, but bashing someone who isn't even active here any more is pretty uncouth.

We should add a line which states:
''Citizen must post at least once in DG VI forums''

That means those 'register and forget' people will not name cities.

I would rather have a minimum number amount of posts in the forums to earn the right to name a city, and yet, reserve some cities for productive government leaders and Judges.
We need a reward system for these putting much work into this.

Again with the bashing Provo. Do you ever stop?

Based on rank sounds good. You do the work, you reap the rewards.

Provolution said:

I would rather have a minimum number amount of posts in the forums to earn the right to name a city, and yet, reserve some cities for productive government leaders and Judges.
We need a reward system for these putting much work into this.

Click to expand...

And just how would you plan to define "productive"? What's the minimum? Just how "elitist" should we get?

Provo, you toss out lots of thoughts with no details behind them. Please - add some details to your proposals.

-- Ravensfire

What about 5 posts in the forums last term, to be considered for next terms city naming list, so at least somewhat active citizens get their voices heard? I am no more elitist than anyone else here, but I sure would like to reward contributors in this regard. I am certain latecomers would consider the last "convention" elitist and unfair, and I assume few will repeat that "traditional law".

Ravensfire, I think your allegations is a bit unkind, you read my posts with the most negative meaning conceivable most times. I would like to see similar treatment of similar posts posted by others.

So, the system could work as the following:

5 possible scenarios

1. Polling segments of the citizen regiustry list against each other:

Citizen registry prior to Term One could serve as a basis. Then we could poll lists of ten against each other in a city naming poll for the following term, assuming we will land at ten cities. This would be in case we get many registered citizens the first day.
First come first served is unfair given timezones differentials and so on.

2. Do it as last game, following the registry list slavically (hopefully to the letter...), and end up with late entrants getting no cities named, regardless of the work put in.
Again, timezones would be very kind to the Americans, less kind to the rest.

3. All ministers, justices , governors and directors nominated for two lists for the term, polling these lists against each other. The risk here is temporary bloc voting in this poll. The advantage is that all these are contributors.

4. Honorary polling of work done the last term for city naming. Have a board of some citizens nominating citizens contributing to the game in a list of priority, and let the voters discuss it and then poll it, and then name the cities in list of preference.

5. Poll every city founded, and all citizens could sign up for the poll (up to 5 options), and this self nomination can only take place once per term. Citizens with named cities cannot renominate themselves again.

If you do you are damned, you are damned if you don't. Whatever we do, someone will feel shortchanged. I hope there is a fair alternative in all this.

Poll, poll, poll. Do we seriously need to spend THAT much time and energy on this?

Some of us will.

I like the idea of "rank" versus the order of registering. However, "rank" needs to be defined. I'll repost a suggestion I remember someone else posting somewhere before.

The list of citizens who get to name a city should be as follows:

1st Term President
1st Term Ministers
1st Term Judiciary
1st Term Outstanding Posters ("outstanding" needs to be determined)
2nd Term President
2nd Term Ministers
etc.

The problem with this is that there may not be enough cities established each term to justify this order. But, it's a start.

Ashburnham, I would poll two lists against each other among leaders. For the first term, we could use the citizen registry lists and poll them agains each other in segments of ten
cities. Following that term, we could use the ministers serving the last term, following term 2, and poll the Cabinet (about ten names), versus that of Judiciary, Cabinet and a couple of others making up 10. Then people could select an entire list based on preference.

This is one area that I don't think we need a radical departure from the past. We have some DGs which used a list with priority for those who are elected, and some with no priority. It's a pretty straightforward choice, no need to have anything more complicated.

My preference is to give priority to those who volunteer to hold office and get elected.

Okay, doable if this is limited to one city per minister, regardless of how many times the person is reelected. However, we should still poll each half of the leader populations against each other in two lists, so the Judiciary people and governors would stand a fair chance too. All elected positions/2, with two namelists polled against each other in the beginning of each term, plain and simple. Again, we can still use the Citizen registry list for unit naming, so everyone get their own military unit named after them. However, earlybirds may risk that their pet unit falls in early wars, but that is part of the game.

I still feel that returning to system of using a list of elected officials to name our cities is a return to eliteism. Once the elected officials return to office, your going to have to resort to the list of common people anyway. But by then "the Aristocracy" that everyone accusses us of having will have gotten their cities named. The people who get elected to office already get enough perks, don't take this away from the registered citizens.

And i don't think some complicated formula will help in this at all.

Well, some consider it elitism that a few insiders manage to sign up for the first 10 core cities, which will dominate most of the game in terms of production, size and wonders.
Here even timezones can make a difference to sign up first.

No we need a system that is also kind to productive latecomers (SD3 for example) and to let the citizens choose between a number of names. Cyc, what you call "elitism" is the work that leaders put in to make the game playable. The polling secretaries that have to do as the people pleases all the time, and take fain and unfair criticism with a smile. At the minimum, we could poll lists against each other per term. Maybe we could poll segments of citizen lists prior to each term, and then revising the lists (omitting citynamers), and repolling these lists prior to each term. Then every citizen would get a fair chance, even "late" sign ups. Sorry Cyc, but this "aristocracy" can also be used on citizens signing up early knowing the fabric of the game, and taking on elected positions anyways. Look on the first ten sign-ups last game, that could be considered "Aristocracy".