Discussion in 'Civ3 - Demo Game V: Citizens' started by Black_Hole, Jan 26, 2005.
On a side note CT, you use the word conspiracy too much
Maybe someone is conspiring to use the word conspiracy conspiciously, conscious of the constant complacency of conspiracy theorists conspiring to collude in nasty ways ?
The time we spend discussing this could be set to be used finishing the constitution. If we don't have a limit, the possibilities of time are endless (can be good, can be bad).
I don't feel like participating in discussions if they go nowhere...which is what this is turning out to be.
Look at DG4 were we were forced (by a mod) to start before we were ready. Give me a quill, I'll sign this petition.
Umm, are you commenting in the OFFICIAL DISCUSSIONs? Don't remember seeing too many comments...
Well , I see the poll gameworld preference attempt to drive the process forward is being shot down by the originator of this thread. So, if someone should put energy into preparing a better set up, and may need a delay for that, one should at least honor the effort put into it in order to assure a firm and constructive progress to do this nicely, in place of spending energy policing and overruling each other. This is plain anarchy, and some people shoot down initiatives in order to maintain firm control, even on very basic gameworld preference polls impacting the constitution. I can really visualize 3 months bickering and jealous decapitation of rival debaters having other visions of the game.
There is no structure of founding fathers, just forum posters with individual initatives either doing some effort to drive the process, make people look dumber than they are or simply assure that a well though out initiative drowns in quagmires of assumed rotten agendas. In a sense, I understand those who want to limit this process, at the same time, those who wants to secure the quality of it. However, whenever I see attempts on taking down individual reputations, many of us makes a mental note.
So, if there is a select few posters that are sort of acceptable by political correctness standards to overrule other initiatives in this, please let us know, if some of you want firm control over the process, and set new deadlines, please let us know. Such a petition needs a plan B, and I cannot see any.
If there was an alternate date, at least one could compare options.
Parse error -- tilt -- reset brain...
Provolution -- are you for or against having a predetermined start date?
I would like to play in DG6. I do not want to hang around while seemingly aimless discussions go on about such things as "let's have a two-tier government where the upper group dictates what the lower group does."
It's been my experience as both a manager and a bureaucrat* that, without a deadline to start work on a project, the time spent in preliminary discussion approaches infinity as a limit. There always seems to be a few people who want to discuss things to death. There's also always one or two people who prolong discussions because they are against the majority consensus and think that if they stretch the discussion long enough they'll wear everyone else down to accepting the minority viewpoint.
If, on February 20th, it's obvious that there are still major issues to be decided, then we can put off the start of the game, but only for a short time and only to settle outstanding issues. Otherwise, let's start on March 1st.
*I do get a chuckle over the many ways that people here spell "bureaucracy."
You guys have a month.
Hell...the way you guys argue and politic, actually governments probably have been formed faster.
Compromise is a great tactic...learn to use it.
How did I miss this one?
I do have to say that one month's warning is better than the 4 days we had last time. Yet as donsig has indicated, I gave 2 month's notice for a start date(yes, I was that mod ) in DG4 and we still didn't make the deadline. The show went on at my command, and our entire first term was riddled with controversy.
We've been talking about the rules for a month now, and as far as I can tell we still haven't decided whether we are going to go traditional or fresh regarding the ruleset. Whenever that's decided, we then have to flesh out the winning format and ratify it. In other words, we could easily put this off until April or the next month, if not given some sort of deadline.
Yet as usual, it is Chieftess' heavy-handed use of authority that negates the positive effect that would have come with a gentle prodding of the process. "Hey, guys....we seem to be running in place again......is there any way we can set our sights for March 1st?" If only. But we are used to this by now, so we do not have any choice but to work diligently to complete the ruleset by the required date.
So, will I sign? Yes, but let's make sure that our righteous contempt does not inspire us to drag our feet just to prove a point. If we have learned anything, it is that this game will start on March 1st so that social hour can begin anew. This regime cares not for your petty rules, and would rather sponsor some sort of Interactive Succession Game than a mock government.
I think a forum name change is in order.
Well, those dragging their feet asking for an extension could be sent to a verbal firesquad like in the Soviet times. I am through with procrastination culture. I can see the difference of positive and negative thinkers, and YNCS has a great valid point. This petition is no worth
without a comperable target date. In real life, real diplomats can handle much more complex issues and drive the process forwards. I recommend "Getting to Yes" by Fisher and Ury to get an idea on how some real people do real work. Remember, if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
*The original "conspiracy guy" walks in....*
Did someone mention my name? Is CT giving my title to someone else now? I get no respect in this game.
I'll sign too. Pretty much everyone knows who I agree with in this thread.
I will sign, conditional the target date is April 1. April Fools Day. And if we did not make it in time, we can have some cheap laughs at the expense of the 3 most anal posters stopping the process. But 1. April, then I sign.
Besides, why not put up a Founding Fathers poll, stating 1. Mars, 1. April, 1. May and 1. June, maybe even 1- July (4. July for the Americans) and 1. August, maybe even 1. September ?
The US Constitution took about what, a month to write and a year or 2 to ratify?
Do you really need to insult and degrade someone in every of your posts? It is getting tiring. Get some manners.
I was just presenting a democratic way to agree on a set deadline ? So people could at least anticipate some good to come out of it. The language is rough, but is targeted on the process, not specific nicks or posters. Maybe an exception for you Blackheart, my perpetual fiend.
So are u signing or not provo?
let me see how to say this...your Charles Dickens type posts have gotten me somewhat confused.
BTW I hope to send this to Rik Meleet and eyrei in about a week.
Cyc and DZ are added...
Well... goodluck with this... when I tried it awhile back I got banned. Of course, you guys can get away with almost anything, whereas I get banned at the slightest hint of protest.
Seemingly respecting a moderators authority isn't a forum rule anymore.
Edit: Making this post made me realize I've been on CFC for 3 years now. I'm getting old.
well if i get banned so be it, its not like I am defying a moderation action...
CT (a mod) set this deadline, so it could be viewed as discussin a moderator's action.
That rule is pretty much set aside for discussion of bannings, which is verboten. However, any mod worth their salt should be able to accept public criticism, especially in the "democracy" game forum.
So far, so good. But still no budge on the start date.
Separate names with a comma.