Game Starts on July 23rd???

[Donovan Zoi]

Our moderator recently dropped by the DemoGame to give this announcement:

Nominations start on July 23rd.

Do you feel this is too early or just about right?

This is an informational poll, and will run for four days.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

This is an outrage. After ignoring almost all discussion, one of our mods drops a unilateral decision to start the game in 4 days. Most ratification polls take more than 4 days to become official!

This decision was hasty and misinformed and clearly favors one side of the populace, the side that has no interest in laws and would rather sit in a chatroom playing what would amount to a succession game. After all that is precisely what it would be with NO LAWS!!!

I would challenge our esteemed mod to alter the Announcement to showcase the "Anarchy" Game, cause that is pretty much what this move is fostering.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Oh, and did I even mention that we are still in the DG4 Forum???

So , unless we plan on playing DG4 II: the Revenge right here, I would advise that new digs be opened for DG5 IMMEDIATELY. So get ready for a whirlwind of confusion as our moderators will now need to scramble to post a brand new Forum while closing this one. Not to mention all the confused participants new and old that will be thrust headlong into the abyss by this abrupt change.

Enough about that, however. The train is about to roll. Can our mods rise up to Chieftess' challenge in time???

 

[Ankka]

Why couldn't the new forum be opened when the former demogame ends and new discussion starts, wouldn't it be easier?

 

[Sarevok]

Too early.

 

[Immortal]

Somehow I doubt our esteemed moderator is going to change minds any time soon. I can only suggest we get ratification polls going within the next 24 hours.

However DZ, I agree with you, this is getting off to a bad start already.

 

[Ankka]

I think several months of debating on rules is much worse than an early start.

And I still don't get it. Why can't the same rules be used as in DG 1 or 2?

 

[Cyc]

Way too early. Can I get banned for calling a Mod a Bozo? I guess I better find out before I do it.

Anyway, we should have learned our lesson from DG4. Rules first, then Nominations...

Ankka, the way the Demogame Forums have EVOLVED, we have found it much better to fill the old forums with the posts about starting a new game rather than have them all clog up the new fora. The important and unfinished debates/threads are brought over to the next games forums.

DZ, I heard Thunderfall wasn't going to open DG5 forums before we got the rules squared away. But that was just rumor.

 

[Immortal]

Ankka, how about a couple of months of debate over rules, followed by a fast track when things are being simonized?

BTW I agree with you about the DG1/2 ruleset.

 

[DaveShack]

I feel compelled to post an analysis, without voting.

It is true that starting without a complete ruleset is asking for trouble. If it goes badly, we will have a repeat of DG4, with a term 1 which is buried in controversy, and so many legal challenges that we won't be able to find the game threads buried in all the clutter. It could go well if certain people, whom I shall not name but whose identities are well known, refrain from spending the first month filing JR's and CC's at every drop of a hat.

It is equally true that waiting any longer risks a dramatic drop in participation which could kill the game before it even starts. What we need is a really fun game, with lots of participation from many veterans and many new people. Instead of looking for permission to run a RPG within the government threads, the people who get into that need to just do it. Citizens who are not happy when an issue doesn't get discussed need to get the discussion going themselves.

By the way, I seem to remember a certain mod who decided that DG4 was going to start on 1/2/04 (with noms on 12/22/03 ?) whether we were ready or not...

 

[Ankka]

Ankka, how about a couple of months of debate over rules, followed by a fast track when things are being simonized?

simonized?

 

[BCLG100]

i think its too right, we should have started ages ago, maybe this will give us a kick to finally finish the rules, besides we wont actually be starting till august seeing how nominations and elections take a few days by this time if we havnt finished the rules we have something seriously wrong with us.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

By the way, I seem to remember a certain mod who decided that DG4 was going to start on 1/2/04 (with noms on 12/22/03 ?) whether we were ready or not...

I was waiting for that comparison from someone, DS, but there are some huge differences.

1. The 1/2/04 deadline was announced by myself in late October, which gave us two months to shoot for an attainable goal. And my decision to start the game regardless was based on the fact that most of the rules were already in place. Unfortunately, the election rules were not. Going back, it would have been best to postpone the game for another month, but I would have heard about that as well. So it was a lose-lose call for me.

2. The DG4 Forum was opened on December 4th IIRC, a full month before the beginning of the game. We still don't have a new forum here and the game starts in three days?

3. Unlike the current staff, I did my best to help draft our laws so that we could make the deadline I had established. We fell just short of our goal.


So say what you will about my missteps. I have always taken full responsibility for my mistakes, as I did when they happened. I doubt that you will get the same candid admissions regarding this reactionary measure.

 

[Cheetah]

I would like to start as well, but how about we wait a little more?

I suggest that nominations start 28.07. That would give us a week to complete the rules and three days to have nominations and elections and then start the game 1st August.

 

[BCLG100]

but isnt that when were planning on starting anyway? just we have more time for nominations and elections, and to get things initially set up. we can finsh the rules in that time.

pointless smilie =

 

[DaveShack]

I would like to start as well, but how about we wait a little more?

I suggest that nominations start 28.08. That would give us a week to complete the rules and three days to have nominations and elections and then start the game 1st August.

I assume you mean 28.07?

 

[DaveShack]

I was waiting for that comparison from someone, DS, but there are some huge differences.
. . .
So say what you will about my missteps. I have always taken full responsibility for my mistakes, as I did when they happened.

You did indeed take responsibility, which is an example more people should follow.

Your comparisons between the two situations are also right on.

 

[Epimethius]

I'm against a timely date, appointed long beforehand at random simply to please things, without taking into account when we're ready. Especially if we actually start two days earlier than that like in Iraq.

It seems like at this rate we'll be ready by the first. So lets aim for that.

 

[Fier Canadien]

Ouch, you're getting into trouble:

Respect the authority of moderators

Public discussions of moderator actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private. If it's not resolved or if you don't receive a reply from the moderator after 24 hours, you can then PM or email Thunderfall.

And, anyway, you'll notice that every member of the ACLU is supporting the early elections.

 

[Cheetah]

I assume you mean 28.07?

Correct. Edited my post.