Babylonian Trade of the First Contact - Informal Poll

[Sir Donald III]

Now that I've seen the way things are... I voted 2. Call it an "insurance run." In more ways than one.

 

[DaveShack]

Abstain, public poll.

-- Ravensfire

Do you have any specific reason to object to public polls, or is this just a ritualistic way to register your discontent?

Public polls let us:

• Verify that the voters on the poll are indeed citizens
• verify vote change requests, though there is a technical glitch which will probably mean we can't use vote changes anyway

What are the downsides? I can think of a few potential ones

• An individual can't say one thing and vote the other
• People could abuse it to pick on others who voted the opposite way

I don't want someone to be able to say they are in support of an idea and then vote against it, or vice versa. As for "getting jumped on for voting the wrong way", chances are high that for most issues we know who supports them and who doesn't anyway.

Really though, please explain the problem. If your reasons are valid you might just pick up one or more supporters for going back to non-public polls.

 

[ravensfire]

Do you have any specific reason to object to public polls, or is this just a ritualistic way to register your discontent?

Public polls let us:

• Verify that the voters on the poll are indeed citizens
• verify vote change requests, though there is a technical glitch which will probably mean we can't use vote changes anyway

What are the downsides? I can think of a few potential ones

• An individual can't say one thing and vote the other
• People could abuse it to pick on others who voted the opposite way

I don't want someone to be able to say they are in support of an idea and then vote against it, or vice versa. As for "getting jumped on for voting the wrong way", chances are high that for most issues we know who supports them and who doesn't anyway.

Really though, please explain the problem. If your reasons are valid you might just pick up one or more supporters for going back to non-public polls.

Copied from the Article E Ratification poll

Likewise with my disapproval of public polls. I've already seen comments made about how people voted, comments with negative implications. That's flat out wrong, anyone that does it should be ashamed of themselves. To right to vote as a citizen MUST include the right to vote without critisicm of your choice. Anything else represent potential restraint of free speech through voting your preference, not the option that will result in the least amount of criticism.

End copied text

That, in short, is my main objection to public polls. It already has happened, it will happen again.

Vote changes - quite frankly, too bad. If you don't understand the issue, research before you vote. Polls have time limits, use the time available to research the choice you wish to make.

Verification of citizenship - we have a low threshold of citizenship - post in the registry thread. Given that, we should never be concerned about if a voter is a citizen or not.

Saying one thing, voting another - It happens. It's politics. Quite honestly, I have done that in elections because I didn't have the heart to tell someone that I didn't think they could do the job. I'm a bit harsher now, but there are times, with certain circumstances, that they are easier with this.

-- Ravensfire

 

[blackheart]

Let us finish research then reassess the trade. Perhaps by then they will have something better to offer. We're going to be done with Bronze Working soon, so why should we pay 1gpt for it when our income is at ZERO?

And Ravensfire, people can just ignore what other people say about how they vote. Yes we should be concerned if people are actually citizens, there was election fraud this election.

 

[ravensfire]

Let us finish research then reassess the trade. Perhaps by then they will have something better to offer. We're going to be done with Bronze Working soon, so why should we pay 1gpt for it when our income is at ZERO?

And Ravensfire, people can just ignore what other people say about how they vote. Yes we should be concerned if people are actually citizens, there was election fraud this election.

And if those "fraudulent votes" were cast by people that DID register as citizens? Is that fraud?

No.

Duplicate logins - yes, that's fraud.

Was there ever a systematic analysis done of the votes?

-- Ravensfire

 

[KtarraMoon]

I say we should go for the BW for 1gpt deal. We could be safe for the next 20 turns while we build our forces and get ready for the potential attack. We cannot declare war on them because that would be stupid this early in the game; we might get wiped out because we have no defense against Babylon. We would also be able to get a 3 turn head start on whatever the public decided our next target of research. If we wait and research BW, they might get more powerfull, and kill us anyway so I say GO FOR the BW for 1gpt deal

 

[Civman2004]

The 3 turn headstart would more than be wiped out by the required decrease in science rate to pay for the 1gpt

The defense against babylon option is still valid though.

 

[Rik Meleet]

The 3 turn headstart would more than be wiped out by the required decrease in science rate to pay for the 1gpt

The defense against babylon option is still valid though.

If you look only on a shallow level; that is true. But if you look deeper:
Bronzeworking needs another 11 beakers to complete. This is comparable to 11 gold. Netto loss: 9 gold.
But it will virtually guarantee peace, have onobstructed worker-tasks (without fear) and will allow the safe building of a 2nd city (which also has commerce). Also, the Babylonian presence reduces the risk of pillaging by Barbarians.

The net result will be not so negative as you depict, in fact I think it can be positive.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

And now, here's a new excerpt I'd like to call.....

Snippets from the Chat!

[10:02:33] <!Chieftess> First I'd fire the current trade advisor who gave the
Babylonians an excuse to increase THEIR research.

Perhaps our Vice President would also like to do away with the 18 citizens who supported this proposal.

Everyone within earshot knows what a great civ player you are, CT, but this is a game to be played as a nation that faces many sorts of trials and tribulations during its development. Therefore, I think it is unfair to slag on about a publicly supported trade agreement that protects us from a rival civ.

Guess what, this is not a move that would be made in my games either, but it makes sense in the context of this game. In the DemoGame, it has always been the journey and not the destination that has made it great and has kept me here for nearly two years. We are not interested in the high score here, nor are we interested in victory before Cavalry(at least we shouldn't be).

CT, as a leader of this game, try to play it out as it is meant to be played. As a nation of individuals making decisions as a nation would. Your boasting, and your berating of public decisions is uncalled for; I am surprised that the people continue to tolerate it.

EDIT: You didn't even take part in the poll!

 

[blackheart]

And if those "fraudulent votes" were cast by people that DID register as citizens? Is that fraud?

No.

Duplicate logins - yes, that's fraud.

Was there ever a systematic analysis done of the votes?

-- Ravensfire

I believe there was, that's how people found out it was vote fraud in the first place. What if someone registered JUST to vote and not participate? Is that even valid?

 

[blackheart]

And now, here's a new excerpt I'd like to call.....

Snippets from the Chat!



Perhaps our Vice President would also like to do away with the 18 citizens who supported this proposal.

Everyone within earshot knows what a great civ player you are, CT, but this is a game to be played as a nation that faces many sorts of trials and tribulations during its development. Therefore, I think it is unfair to slag on about a publicly supported trade agreement that protects us from a rival civ.

Guess what, this is not a move that would be made in my games either, but it makes sense in the context of this game. In the DemoGame, it has always been the journey and not the destination that has made it great and has kept me here for nearly two years. We are not interested in the high score here, nor are we interested in victory before Cavalry(at least we shouldn't be).

CT, as a leader of this game, try to play it out as it is meant to be played. As a nation of individuals making decisions as a nation would. Your boasting, and your berating of public decisions is uncalled for; I am surprised that the people continue to tolerate it.

EDIT: You didn't even take part in the poll!

CT... you DO know that the FA follows the WOTP on what to do in trades, right?

 

[ravensfire]

I believe there was, that's how people found out it was vote fraud in the first place. What if someone registered JUST to vote and not participate? Is that even valid?

I think it was one vote called into question, that decided the race. Cannot remember, to be honest.

To answer your second question, yes. To be a citizen, you must register. Nothing more, nothing less. Some citizens are active, some passive. For most of DG2, I was a purely passive citizen. Heck, I don't even know if I registered or not!

-- Ravensfire