Domestic Quick Poll (600AD) - Octavinium Settler Instructions

Governor Stuck as a Mac has now informed me that a settler will be produced in Octavinium within the next six or seven turns. Therefore, we need instructions.

Where should we send this settler?

Domestic Department recommends Site 'D1' (N,N,NW of Kells)



This poll will remain open until at least the beginning of the turn chat tomorrow. Quorum is 11 votes. In the event that the turn chat is cancelled or delayed, or that the settler is not completed during the chat, this poll shall convert into a standard, official poll with a minimum duration of 48 hours and a quorum of 16 votes.

I voted for D1 because it can have a great productivity and a nice size. However, it will have to culture fight Izibia, so it will need some culture right from the beginning.

I also go for D1 because it doesn't overlapp that much.

As long as we've put the FP is the WORST spot, we should build a new city to take advantage of it's effects.

Also, X should be settlered soon if the citizens of Denver don't see the Fanatikan light soon.

Yes, but X is very far away from Octavinium...

I voted for "N". I think D1 will just take away from the needy cities in the area. The coast line around Penguin was just offered up for Settlement and I voted for "O" on the other poll. I repeat, I really think we should stop building Settlers.

I voted for D1 for its excellent Production area .

Happy to see that someone agree that it can be a monster production city later in the game.

Please note that according to CoS.F.4.C.3, this poll should not have been considered valid. Do not use Quick Polls to determine city placement, as quick polls may *not* be used to determine actions that have permanent effects.

Originally posted by Veera Anlai
Please note that according to CoS.F.4.C.3, this poll should not have been considered valid. Do not use Quick Polls to determine city placement, as quick polls may *not* be used to determine actions that have permanent effects.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I cannot think of too many actions that can be taken in a game of civ3 that do not have a permanent effect. A quick poll is better than no poll at all, regardless, and many times it is impossible to get a poll posted 48 hours before a chat, particularly if you allow any time for discussion.

Further, I find it mildly ridiculous that spot votes are given more power than a quick poll. If we are going to limit the power of quick polls, I believe the same must be done for spot votes. However, I think strict adherence to these guidelines (and that is all they are) as layed out by the CoS, will be a detriment to the game, as it will severely handicap the ability of our leadership to take action on ideas that may be necessary to our winning this game.

I still don't get why votes shouldn't count just because it's not the right kind of poll... I mean, they all look the same to me.

Eyrei, if you have a problem with the laws, I *encourage* you to propose changes to them. It is not my place to make or change the laws as Chief Justice; that's up to the citizens.

And the law does not say permanent actions; it says the action must be instantaneous or reversible. Feasibly, founding a city is not reversible, nor is the decision an instantaneous, one-time action; it's effects typically last until the end of the game.

CT: Don't ask me. I didn't write the laws, I just follow them ^_^;

Originally posted by Veera Anlai
Eyrei, if you have a problem with the laws, I *encourage* you to propose changes to them. It is not my place to make or change the laws as Chief Justice; that's up to the citizens.

And the law does not say permanent actions; it says the action must be instantaneous or reversible. Feasibly, founding a city is not reversible, nor is the decision an instantaneous, one-time action; it's effects typically last until the end of the game.

CT: Don't ask me. I didn't write the laws, I just follow them ^_^;

Click to expand...

While it is not your place to make the laws (other than being a citizen yourself ), it is your job to interpret them. Since the issue of quick polling for city placement is not specifically stated in the CoS, it is only your interpretation that keeps these polls from being valid.

Also, it could be argued that it is feasible to reverse a city placement decision, since cities can be disbanded by forcing settler construction before population rises to 3. The term 'instantaneous' needs to be completely removed from this clause, as all actions taken in a game of civ3 that affect another civ, our budget, our technological advancement, etc can be said to be instantaneous. The recent alliance we signed with the Chinese took affect instantly, and is reversible (though not in any realistic sense) through a declaration of war on the Chinese.

Basically, what I am asking for the time being is a change in the judiciary's interpretation of these clauses.

Originally posted by Veera Anlai
Please note that according to CoS.F.4.C.3, this poll should not have been considered valid. Do not use Quick Polls to determine city placement, as quick polls may *not* be used to determine actions that have permanent effects.

Click to expand...

First of all, this statement is incorrect. I have read the laws on Quick Polls, and I cannot find this statement within them.

Second, Eyrei is absolutely correct. There is no decision, other than perhaps the naming of a city, that can be "undone" in Civ3, by the strict definition of the term. Once something is done, it is done. The only true way to "undo" something in Civ3 is to go back to a previous save and start again, which, as we all know it, is strictly forbidden.

In my opinion, and I don't think I'm alone in this, I believe that the entire section of laws on Quick Polls is inconsistent, contradictory, and in need of an overhaul.

For example, an issue like a city name change is explicity called out as an example of what a Quick Poll should be used for. I don't agree. How is this issue time-sensitive? Are we to assume that the naming (or re-naming) of a city is a topic so critical, that it must be decided before the next turn chat? This is absurd.

Equally absurd is the idea that trade deals, city placement, and uses for great leaders are not better suited for Quick Polls. With turn chats every 3 or 4 days, by the time our leaders have an opportunity to analyze the data, report it to the citizenry, post discussion polls, and then poll the populace for instructions (or even approval of recommended actions), the next turn chat is already upon us.

Perhaps we should consider restricting the number of turn chats to 1 a week so that the leaders have enough time to do their jobs properly without violating any of our polling laws.

One more thing, Veera...

I'm challenging your ruling on this poll.

Originally posted by FortyJ


Perhaps we should consider restricting the number of turn chats to 1 a week so that the leaders have enough time to do their jobs properly without violating any of our polling laws.

Click to expand...

This was my sentiment awhile back. However, the arguments against it are very good...lack of interest because the game moves too slow, very slow weeks if the turn chat was stopped because one decision needed to be made, but nothing else really happened, etc.

Part of what I am trying to get across is that the rules are there in part to facilitate the functioning of this game, not to hinder it. Also, it is my belief that leaders should be given the benefit of the doubt, and that quick polls are better than spot votes.

Since this has become a discussion rather than a poll, I am moving it (while leaving a link) to the citizens forum.

Hmm. How quickly this poll turned into a disscution

I am hereby offering my newly purchased Musket to any or all of you that want to shoot themselves in the foot. At your request (tho I doubt I will get any), I will also pour a bucket of water over your powdered poofy wigs.

True, maybe the quick poll sections of the 3 books need an overhaul, like other sections of the poll guidelines. But you're making a big deal out of nothing.

Which Department is it that determines the location of settler placement? F/A? Military? No, it's the Domestic Department. Yes I'm going to simplify this as much as possible.... Who's in charge of the Domestic Dept? Right, the Domestic Leader. In the Constitution, is there a blurb about the responsibilities of the DL. Yes, there is, and it says that it is the DL's responsibility to organize matters within the Department's scope. That said...

To get around our main problem here (that i can see) of time constraints, all we really need to do is change the format of the quick poll to one of an informational poll. By doing this, just before the t/c, the D/L can declare the site or sites of the next Settler placement based on his/her knowledge and the will of the people that cared enough to vote. No one ever said the citizens of Fanatika get to place Settlers. It is said that the Leaders must follow the will of the people (and they only need to do that if the want to be re-elected/ not face impeachment). Therefore by using an informational poll to gather information about how the citizens feel about certain proposed locations (maybe with the help of a discussion thread), the DL can base their decisions appropriately.

If you feel that the poll strusture guidelines need work, go right ahead.I tried to do it at the begining of the guidline agenda, but I can't fight everybody at once. Not much work is needed now, but certain strategic changes ARE needed. Good luck.

Originally posted by Cyc
I am hereby offering my newly purchased Musket to any or all of you that want to shoot themselves in the foot. At your request (tho I doubt I will get any), I will also pour a bucket of water over your powdered poofy wigs.

True, maybe the quick poll sections of the 3 books need an overhaul, like other sections of the poll guidelines. But you're making a big deal out of nothing.

Which Department is it that determines the location of settler placement? F/A? Military? No, it's the Domestic Department. Yes I'm going to simplify this as much as possible.... Who's in charge of the Domestic Dept? Right, the Domestic Leader. In the Constitution, is there a blurb about the responsibilities of the DL. Yes, there is, and it says that it is the DL's responsibility to organize matters within the Department's scope. That said...

To get around our main problem here (that i can see) of time constraints, all we really need to do is change the format of the quick poll to one of an informational poll. By doing this, just before the t/c, the D/L can declare the site or sites of the next Settler placement based on his/her knowledge and the will of the people that cared enough to vote. No one ever said the citizens of Fanatika get to place Settlers. It is said that the Leaders must follow the will of the people (and they only need to do that if the want to be re-elected/ not face impeachment). Therefore by using an informational poll to gather information about how the citizens feel about certain proposed locations (maybe with the help of a discussion thread), the DL can base their decisions appropriately.

If you feel that the poll strusture guidelines need work, go right ahead.I tried to do it at the begining of the guidline agenda, but I can't fight everybody at once. Not much work is needed now, but certain strategic changes ARE needed. Good luck.

Click to expand...

The only problem I see with this solution is that spot votes would end up being called repeatedly, and their result would supercede that of the forum poll. It is my opinion that any forum poll that has been up for anywhere close to 24 hours contains votes that are more representative of the will of the entire populace than a spot vote.

While I am in complete agreement that leaders should be allowed to make decisions based on what they believe to be the will of the people, the trend seems to have been to take more and more power away from our elected officials. Maybe this trend is but a fluke, or driven by a mere semblance of this attitude rather than its actuality, but it seems a good number of people must believe this is the right way to do things for this to be the case.

I propose we develop a poll to find out what level of control should be placed in our elected leaders. I also would like to reduce the ability of spot votes to make decisions, but that is another matter.

To be legal, a proposed Quick Poll action must be instantaneous OR reversible/correctable (See CoS.1.F.4.C.3) AND it must be a temporary change OR be a specific, one time change (See CoS.1.F.4.C).
The building of city is instantaneous, but not reversible. Therefore, it passes CoS.1.F.4.C.3. However, it is not a temporary change, nor is it a specific, one time change. It is a permanent change. Therefore, it does not pass CoS.1.F.4.C, and would not have been a valid poll had I caught it before it took effect.


What follows is an insomniatic rant which may or may not make any sense at all. Be warned
The large problem with our laws is that accursed 'Organize decisions' term. That elastic word *technically* makes it possible for leaders to do whatever they want without any input from the citizens. In this case, Eyrei, you are correct. Forty doesn't even have to post polls at all about settlers. Indeed, according to the strictest letters of our law, the Science advisor doesn't have to make *any* polls about science. In fact, we don't even have to have a citizen poll on declarations of War! Our Foreign Affairs Minister has the power to make that decision with no input from our citizens. Seems like the monster of loopholes to me, as this rips the entire concept of Democracy to shreds.

However, the definition of 'Organizing' had nothing to do with my decision to stop this Quick Poll. Once Forty decides to make a poll, he *must* follow the proper guidelines, whether he has a mandate or not. The fact that he 'Organizes the Decisions' does not allow him to post an improper poll.
And if he wishes to use his power to merely Organize decisions and bypass the vote entirely, it's his own political funeral.