Term 1 - Gubernatorial Debates (Governors)

Questions from the Inquisitors:


What qualifications and experience do you have for the position you are running for?

Are you familliar with all of our laws? Do you abide by them?

What makes a good Governor?

Will you have pride in your province? What does this mean to you?

Will you support RPG in your province?

Will you give mayors the right to post build queues?

Which other rights will you give to mayors?

How do you think you can manage to involve citizens in provincial decissions?

If you are given the chance to name a city, what would you name it?

Would you appoint mayors?

Would you allow National Parks in your province?

Are turn chats a luxury or a nessessity for a Governor?

If offered a leader position and a governor position, which would you take?

Well, as governorships are the positions most grounded in the physical environment of our nation, it is most difficult to argue in a vaccume, nevertheless, debate there must be!

I think it may be constructive in these elections to look at the past actions of players in determining the wieght of responsibility that should be alloted to them. All the Governor candidates have been around for a while at least, so this is fair to all.

I have been a Governor before (in another life) and it's the best job in the world. There is nothing quite as satisfying as being able to focus on a province and see it through it's development to greatness. I hope to do this again.

I have always maintained that being a governor is more than just posting build ques. As a governor, you have a responsibility to build a sense of community and identity in your province and to further the lot of citizens there in as many ways as possible. Governors need to be involved in as much direct action as possible, debating laws, fighting for rights and organising events and services. This is not to say that the Governor must dictate such things, they ultimately have to come from a desire in the community to further the province. It is the job of any Governor to foster this will to progress.

I think also that supporting citizens groups in the province and implementing progressive policy such as National Parks and University systems is an improtant role of provincial governments.

Though I have said that there is more to being a Governor, posting build ques is still important. However, this is not a simple as it may seem. The governor has a responsibility to actively seek the opinions of the people when considering what to build. I have ALWAYS respected the will of the people, especially Mayors, in defining build ques. Sometimes the decitions made by the citizens of the province may be against my personal inclination, but I have and will continue to honour my commitment to my constituants.

We are on the brink of a new civilisation and this requires one thing, expansion. I have always aimed to expand the province I lead, but in this case it is particularly important. A focus on settlers and granaries is entirely appropriate in my view, but it is not ultimately up to myself alone.

There has been some worry about the fact that having a 1 member senate would mean dictatorial power over consitutional changes. Though some solutions are being debated, I don't believe there is any fixed outcome yet.

I wish to announce that if I am elected and no other solution is ratified, I will create a Senate Advisory Committe. This will be comprised of three members, myself and the two other highest polling candidates for governor. This committe would jointly decide on constituional amendments and then I would vote accordingly. I promise to abide by the decitions of this committe, even though it is informal, even if I am in the minority. This committe would be active until there is another governor, in which case we need to re-think the issue, or until the end of my tenure, whichever comes first. Thus you can be assured the power of constituional change will not be in the hands of one person alone.

Vote 1 AJ for Governor

I'm willing to take any queations, general or specific. Especially hard ones.

This list of questions was posted while I was giving my campaign speech, and thus now I will attempt to answer them.


What qualifications and experience do you have for the position you are running for?
I have been governor of Asphinxia for two terms. Under my direction, the province grew from a population of two to a population of over a dozen, all of whom were active in decition making and identity formation in our glorious province. With the help of many others, we were able to convene the grand banquet, form a university system with many departments, engage in search and rescue operations and produce a provincial newspaper.


Are you familliar with all of our laws? Do you abide by them?
Labouriously so. I have never been called to account for breaking our laws or given any cause for anyone to do so.


What makes a good Governor?
A love of being a governor. This sounds strange, but you can only be a good governor if you relish the role and wholeheartedly absorb the identity of your province.


Will you have pride in your province? What does this mean to you?
This was actually my question...
The answer is most certainly yes. I think citizens need to be more aware that they belong not only to a nation, but to a province as well ans that that carries with it certain meanings and traditions that should fill you with a fanatikal drive to accomplish whatever possible for your province (well, it does for me anyway). Pride is a many splendid thing.

Will you support RPG in your province?
My province will be the home, capital and bedrock of RPG. The RPG adds an extra depth to the tapestry of a province and allows another medium by which provincial issues can be tackled and another way to express that pride!

Will you give mayors the right to post build queues?
No, but my former mayors will tell you that I am very accomodating and most often go alone with their proposals. If I do not do so, it is becasue there is a good reason and I always explain myself.

Which other rights will you give to mayors?
I think that mayors are very important. They play a large role in attracting citizens and buisnesses to the province and allow for even more focused campaigns on certain issues.

How do you think you can manage to involve citizens in provincial decissions?
I have already answered this, but I would summerise by saying that it the primary role of a Governor to do so.

If you are given the chance to name a city, what would you name it?
Well, my first proposal for city naming was trounced, and in the end I was glad. City names are important to the feel and identity of a province. I would have to take this into account before naming any city. I refrained from exersising my chance to re-name a city in my province in my second term as the cities had developed individual characters under their Mayors and I did not want to ruin that.

Would you appoint mayors?
How mant times need this question be asked?

Would you allow National Parks in your province?
Only if we were at a level of development where it would not severely inhibit the growth of our cities. I think NPs are better later in our civilisations development when it is important to conserve nature. Noteable, ALL of the NPs commissioned last game where partly or wholely in my province.

Are turn chats a luxury or a nessessity for a Governor?
I see them as very improtant, but not an absolute nessessity. However, I do think a governor should always strive to have a representitive there if they can.

If offered a leader position and a governor position, which would you take?
I believe I would take the Governorship, as I loved it so much. As I have said before, what could be better than being Governor?


That was kinda fun, MORE QUESTIONS PLEASE!!

A couple questions for all candidates:

Is it more important to obey the letter or the spirit of the constitution? Basically, is this document open to interpretation or must it be strictly adhered to?

Will you submit to the will of the domestic department regarding settler construction, even if it conflicts with your desires for your cities? This is an important area, and one of potential conflict. We did not have this problem in the first game, because the domestic leader was the governor of the first province.

In a game at this level, city improvements must often be put aside in favor of military units for most of the ancient and middle ages. How do you propose to deal with this?

Is it more important to obey the letter or the spirit of the constitution? Basically, is this document open to interpretation or must it be strictly adhered to?
This is a question that all governments struggle with and it is by no means a metter of clear cut absolutes. I feel that we put alot of effot into our consituion, COL & COS and whenever possible we should follow it closely. The majority of it is not difficult to understand and follow given the will to do so.

That said, our laws cannot cover every contingency, nor should it attmpt to do so. I think it is important to keep perspective and make sure that we always have the good of the nation and the will of the people in the forefront of our minds.


Will you submit to the will of the domestic department regarding settler construction, even if it conflicts with your desires for your cities?
If I think that there is a city placement that is best for my province and it is not absolutely vital that the city goes somewhere else, then I will fight for the good of the province tooth and nail. While I recognise that there is a greater good and a wider scope than a single province, I would not 'submit to the will' of any department if I though it would undermine provincial interests.

Ultimately, city placement in a national issue, but I will ALWAYS push for what is best for my province, that it the role of a governor. Whether the dom. department agrees with my assessment of the balance of costs and benefits is another matter...


In a game at this level, city improvements must often be put aside in favor of military units for most of the ancient and middle ages. How do you propose to deal with this?

I have always been proud of the large commitment my province was able to make to the protection of our nation. This is an interesting situation, as I could not call for the units to be built elsewhere!! Obviously, if there is a need for millitary units, a province under my direction would be willing to suppy them.

However, in the same way as above, I do not see it as the mandate of a governor to always give in to the Millitary Department. If the view of my consituants differs greatly from that of the millitary department, I will again be pushing for the provincial good.


Please do not take this as a 'province first or death' approach. I realise that sometimes the good of the province may need to be compromised for the good of the nation. However, you will not find me arguing this. A governor's responsibility is first to his province and it's citizens.

I hearby with draw my bid for governor and throw ALL of my support to the one, the only,
Almightyjosh

What qualifications and experience do you have for the position you are running for?

I was governor of Istar during term 4 of the first demo game.

Are you familliar with all of our laws?

I'm as familiar as I can be given the number of changes that are made.

Do you abide by them?

I believe I do though there is not unanimous agreement on this point. We currently have three levels of *laws* and I uphold as best I can the highest level, our constitution. We are unfortunate in that we have laws and standards that do not always live up to the spirit of our constitution. I do not hesitate to challenge laws and standards that are not in line with the spirit of the constitution.

What makes a good Governor?

The same thing that makes a good leader: the ability to impartially present choices to the people so they can decide what they want to do. In the case of a governor this means laying out the production possibilities of a province's cities and encouraging discussion about them. An ability to foresee future needs, both provincial and national, so as to keep them before the public eye wouldn't hurt.

The governor of our first province also has special burdens to carry. Depending on how provincial borders are drawn, this first province may well be the main production center of the nation. As long as it is the only province, it will be the nation. Yet, this governor will have to make provincial sacrifices for the sake of the nation that subsequent governors may not have to make.

Perhaps most importantly our first governor/senator will have a virtual veto power over constitutional amendments. This is something that should not be taken lightly. Nor should it be ignored as it is a very important protection for the rights our constitution guarantees us. We need a governor/senator who will not be afraid to vote against a popular but nonetheless bad amendment.

Will you have pride in your province?

But of course. (Is this a trick question?)

What does this mean to you?

It means making that province the best!

Will you support RPG in your province?

Another trick question? Of course I would support it. How, I would do so is beyond me right now...

Will you give mayors the right to post build queues?

I would not give mayors the right to post build queues in the turn instruction thread. There would be no legal basis for a governor allowing that. I would certainly encourage mayors to elicit build queues from their cities' citizens. That would make the governor's job more interesting as he would then have to synthesize the queues submitted by the various mayors. A good amount of visiting each city thread would be needed to coordinate provincial and national projects on the city level.

Mayors can always formulate build queues and get popular support for them. If a mayor can demostrate the people's will then the governor's hands may well be tied.

Which other rights will you give to mayors?

Governors are in no position to dispense rights to mayors. That is up to the people to do.

How do you think you can manage to involve citizens in provincial decissions?

One way is to post suggested build queues in a discusison thread and/or poll. If we have active mayors doing this then the governor could concentrate on discussion threads and polls regarding provincial versus national or versus metro issues.

If you are given the chance to name a city, what would you name it?

Bremershaven

Would you appoint mayors?

No. I would go to the people in a given city and ask for their choice for mayor.

Would you allow National Parks in your province?

I would hesitate to have any area declared a National Park until well into the industrial age. I would not want to prohibit railroad building before we even know how to do it! I wouldn't mind Provincial or Metropolitan Parks. I do not like cutting down forests.

Are turn chats a luxury or a nessessity for a Governor?

Neither. Whether we had turnchats or not there would still be instruction threads where build queues would have to be posted.

If offered a leader position and a governor position, which would you take?

In term one I would take the governor/senator position over a leader position.

I'm afraid I cannot answer eyrei's questions at this time as they were not properly entered into the Inquisitors thread. I'm afraid eyrei will have to have himself PIed and then he will have to take mod action on himself for doing such a dastardly thing as making a sensible post in a sensible place. Shame on you eyrei.

:Luckily, I can actually plead ignorance here. Do we actually have a law against this?Sorry for editing your post, donsig, but making another post here might really bring the law down on me.


I am currently trying to make arrangements for a supplementary gubernatorial debate. If approved and accepted then I will gladly answer the questions posted by eyrei and anyone else.

BTW - I think Cyc had a question in the Inquisitor's that isn't included here. I would also like to congratulate Almightyjosh for eliminating one opponent by merely answering his own questions.

Originally posted by donsig
:Luckily, I can actually plead ignorance here. Do we actually have a law against this?Sorry for editing your post, donsig, but making another post here might really bring the law down on me.

Click to expand...

For a mere 5 gold
Apro, Poe & Nuffin can tell you if there is a law against this sort of thing.

If no-one else askes questions I'm gonna have to make up some more an answer them.
Like:
Why do you think Almightyjosh is the best candidate?
Y'now, really unbiased questions like that.

And thankyou to SAaM for the support.

Soap box debate is here!

Any citizen can question the gubernatorial candidates in the soap box debate. Join in today!

How do you feel about turn-chats and is your position that they should continue as is, or do you favor the concept of private/closed door turn sessions by the DP?

Question for younger candidtaes: Hypothetical Situation: You totally fail a math test. You realize that this effects your grade in a big way. Which would you do:
A- Study harder, even if it meant loosing forum time
or
B- Let your grades plumit and continue on with the demogame

How do you stand to the proposal of having very small provinces at the start to get to about 10 governors quick and then redesign the provincial borders for having a solid number of about 10 governors throughout most of the game?
(formerly known as the "provincial growth formula")

Explain in one sentence why the citizens should vote for you instead of your opponents

I've answered these questions in the Judicial debate thread.

Shaitan's Questions answered!!

How do you feel about turn-chats and is your position that they should continue as is, or do you favor the concept of private/closed door turn sessions by the DP?
NO!! NEVER WILL PRIVATE TURNCHATS HAVE MY SUPPORT!! Turn chats are a vital link between the citizens and the game. They allow first hand input by citizens and allow citizens to monitor the actions of the leaders. I think we need a new ULTRA-CONSTITUTION that sits above the current one and does nothing but enshrine open turn-chats. Well, that may be a little extreme but they are very important.


Question for younger candidtaes: Hypothetical Situation: You totally fail a math test. You realize that this effects your grade in a big way. Which would you do:
A- Study harder, even if it meant loosing forum time
or
B- Let your grades plumit and continue on with the demogame
I spend more time here then studying. I don't do maths, but I have been know to skip a day of class to come to a turn chat. Insanity of commitment?



How do you stand to the proposal of having very small provinces at the start to get to about 10 governors quick and then redesign the provincial borders for having a solid number of about 10 governors throughout most of the game?
I think 10-12 substantial provinces would be good, but given the high level we may only reach 7-9. I think that we should not have provinces that are too small to begin with. We should aim for 3-4 provinces quickly. I think that it would be a real shame to constantly have cities changing between provinces, but on the other hand it is insanity to try and make each new province 12 cities before starting a new one. We must use the provincial growth formula, but not aim for too many provinces too soon.


Explain in one sentence why the citizens should vote for you instead of your opponents
Because I'm the best. Nah, too simple.
Because I love being governor, it is my calling.

Originally posted by Almightyjosh How do you feel about turn-chats and is your position that they should continue as is, or do you favor the concept of private/closed door turn sessions by the DP?
NO!! NEVER WILL PRIVATE TURNCHATS HAVE MY SUPPORT!! Turn chats are a vital link between the citizens and the game. They allow first hand input by citizens and allow citizens to monitor the actions of the leaders. I think we need a new ULTRA-CONSTITUTION that sits above the current one and does nothing but enshrine open turn-chats. Well, that may be a little extreme but they are very important.
[/B]

Click to expand...

The last thing we need is another level of rules! It is too bad that my worthy opponent and I aren't running for President because then we could make a campaign issue out of turn chats. It is an issue that clearly seperates us as I am quite willing to dispense with the open turn chat especially if doing so would encourage more citizens to seek the Presidency.
As one who has conducted a few turn chats I can say that there is very little monitoring that citizens attending the turn chat can do that can't be done through the forums.

At the risk of sounding like an old man on a porch, I'd like to point out that the DP will play the Civ 3 game according to his or her own style whether the turns are played in a public turn chat or not. It is only when a new save is made available to citizens (whether they are in the forums or the chat) that the DP can really be monitored. That is the lesson that should have been learned from PI#6 of the first game. It is unfortunate that those who swear by the turn chats have not learned that lesson. I really think we would have a broader citizen base if we made turn chats optional.

I do think that the governor's job is pretty much the same whether we have public turn chats or not.

I was not really serious about having another level of rules, it was designed to illustrate how important I think turnchats are.
They ARE a direct way of monitoring how the DP is acting and they are also a way of getting instant citizen input when it is needed. To dispose of the mechanism by which average citizens have access to the game while it is being played and to see their decitions in action is not democratic or in the spirit of government transparency. The playing of the game must be an open process with as much citizen input as possible. Possibly we do cut down the pool of presidential candidates slighty, but many people do not run for leader positions because the time commitment is to great. Abolishion of one of our democratic instituions is not a solution, it is likely to make the game less accessable overall.

And yes, you do sound like an old man on the porch, embittened by one to many PI.

However, I do concur one one point, that the role of the Governor is not intimately tied to turnchats. However, were we running for president, do you think the 'yes, I will hold open turn chats' or the 'no, I will do what I like in private' line would be more appealing.

Almightyjosh

Originally posted by Almightyjosh
They ARE a direct way of monitoring how the DP is acting and they are also a way of getting instant citizen input when it is needed. To dispose of the mechanism by which average citizens have access to the game while it is being played and to see their decitions in action is not democratic or in the spirit of government transparency. The playing of the game must be an open process with as much citizen input as possible. Possibly we do cut down the pool of presidential candidates slighty, but many people do not run for leader positions because the time commitment is to great. Abolishion of one of our democratic instituions is not a solution, it is likely to make the game less accessable overall.

And yes, you do sound like an old man on the porch, embittened by one to many PI.

Almightyjosh

Click to expand...

And you, young man, sound like one who has never been the designated player. It is not going through the PIs that have made me a tad bitter. It is the fact that we do not seem to learn our lesson from the investigations. Not only have we not learned from them we've gone out of our way running in the wrong direction.

Citizens at the turn chat are not in a position to monitor what the DP is doing. They can't see what is happening in the game and depend on the DP to tell them what is going on. The DP has his or her own style of playing and will not relay unimportant things to those at the chat. Unimportant to the DP I should say. For example I rarely sell techs especially when I'm trying to build a wonder. When we learned medicine in the first game I didn't even think to see what it could be sold for. No one at the turn chat did either - until a couple turns later when I posted the turn five save. Then those at the chat downloaded the save and someone saw that we could get a bundle for selling medicine. It wasn't so much the fact that they were at the turn chat that allowed them to monitor my actions - it was actually seeing the save.

The lesson that we missed is that we were not doing enough pre planning! There should have been instructions in the turn chat thread to check and see what medicine could be sold for. If the turn chat instruction thread is properly constructed then the DP doesn't have to be monitored and turn chats are not needed.

We exclude not only presidential candidates but citizens as well by sticking with the turn chats. We lost many people in the firat game who simply lost interest becasue they felt that by not being able to attend the chats their voice was not heard. It would certainly be interesting to see a European President who set the turn chat times so as to be convenient for Europeans. I think many American proponents of the turn chats would change their minds.