Recruiting Provincial Governors

I disagree.

You do not speak for the people, and in fact, your voice is opposed to the majority expressed position in the recent poll.

The people knew that Fionn would be limited to a single city province. He fact, he himself pointed that out in the poll thread only hours after the poll was posted.

The poll does indeed have a timeframe, and it is a legal one. The border provinces take effect as soon as the poll is passed.

A MAJORITY of citizens voted to limit the province to one city. That is the expressed will of the people.

I think Fionn is a fine governor, and should be managing more of our cities. I also think it is a waste to have him manage only one. Let him do so within the laws, and many suggestions were offered all ready that would have solved this problem.

We should not subvert the majorities opinion, and violate the laws of our nation, just because a few people want to do so.

Bill
Chief Justice
 
Unfortunately fionn, it appears to be. The other suggestions are, quite frankly, crap and strongly opposed so far.

It's your choice Fionn.
 
I wish to be considered for a governorship position. (Perferably the "Eastern Gate").
 
Although I would like to run for a governor position in the future, I have to disagree with this method of choosing our provincial leaders. I'd rather wait until we have a true election than having the positions given away without the consent of the people.

As much as I'd enjoy being Governer (governess?), I'll wait and run in the next election.
 
Originally posted by FionnMcCumhall
having to resign should not be my only recourse
Click to expand...

Well, I had to resign from the bench to even be considered for a governorship. :(
 
i dont think i should have to resign just to be considered for a job that is practically non existant. Im sure the citizens didnt even think ahead to this problem or maybe they thought id get reassigned well i wont be, so thanks to all the citizens who just voted for me as governor of bohemia only to truly vote me out
 
You do not speak for the people, and in fact, your voice is opposed to the majority expressed position in the recent poll.
Click to expand...

Did they all say they wanted the changes immediately? Quite frankly, no time was listed, or at least no visible time was listed and no such time is provided in the rules. The people voted for provincial break-ups, not to screw over one of the most talented governers and one of the most active the game could ask for.
 
I support Donsig in that we should have special elections.
 
The people are allowed to change the laws, and in fact encouraged to do so.

Bill
Chief Justice
 
I do not think a rule change is needed to hold a special election. Nominations could be made, polls posted and then the President could simply appoint the respective winners. ;)
 
Originally posted by gonzo_for_civ


Did they all say they wanted the changes immediately? Quite frankly, no time was listed, or at least no visible time was listed and no such time is provided in the rules. The people voted for provincial break-ups, not to screw over one of the most talented governers and one of the most active the game could ask for.
Click to expand...

All legal changes in our history have taken effect immediately. It doesn't say that it does not take effect immediately. The historical precedent is there.

I would invite you to learn a little about the history of the game in that regard, and others, it will help you to understand the reasons some of these rules are here.

Look, this is getting way out of hand. There is a solution and Fionn was well aware of, or should have been, the consequences of the Capitol provice suggestion, as we have been debating these damn things for six weeks now.

I am fed up with the laws being blamed for peoples mistakes. The laws were passed by the people, the majority of the people, if you don't like them, get them changed, it is actually quite easy.

The poll that passed the provincial plan was passed by a majority of the people. This turn of events should not be a surprise to anyone, as the point that a single city province might be a waste was FULLY and ENDLESSLY discussed, yet somehow it passed.

Perhaps...this is the way the majority wanted it? I don't know... I do know that it is my job (now that donsig has resigned) to enforce the rules of the game, and this one is a clear cut case.

I am at a complete loss to understand why there is such an outcry about a citizen who could solve his problem completely within the laws.

I am at a complete loss to understand why a small group of people think that they know what is best for the nation, and that we should subvert the rules to accommodate them when the majority of citizens have spoken on the issue.

Further, I find it troubling that this is what people are worried about when we have clear indications that the first turn chat under this new regime was a runaway train, making all kinds of decisions that should have been taken to the forums.

Frankly, I am concerned about more issues than if someone has a kingdom or a city, as we all should be...

Bill
Chief Justice
 
Frankly I am concerned at the rate at which you've put words into my mouth. I'll go educate myself on the history of this game if you'll educate yourself on the post you are replying to.


All legal changes in our history have taken effect immediately. It doesn't say that it does not take effect immediately. The historical precedent is there.
Click to expand...

It doesn't say a lot of things...it also doesn't say the changes HAVE to take effect immediately.

Historical precedent does not change the fact that this is very inconvienient. I doubt any rule change in the past has been as inconvinient as this to change at such a time therefore NO true historical precedent in place. Fionn has 2 options, either resign and sign up to be gov. of a larger province or else resign completely. And the first option does not include a gurantee.

And the following is not your fault:

The change was done at a bad time and if it was forseen we'd need new governers, didn't they think to start the poll sooner or much later?
 
Gonzo and Bill. Please continue this discussion without directing your comments towards each other. Rather, direct them towards the subject at hand.
 
I will say that the appointment of people to vacant posistions is the best way. The reason we do this is to fill the void left by resigned leaders quickly. These positions are very important, and as such should be filled quickly. Appointments are the best way.
 
Originally posted by gonzo_for_civ
Historical precedent does not change the fact that this is very inconvienient. I doubt any rule change in the past has been as inconvinient as this to change at such a time....

The change was done at a bad time and if it was forseen we'd need new governers, didn't they think to start the poll sooner or much later?
Click to expand...

The 24 hour notice of turn chat rule was very inconvenient back in the first demo game. :)

Poll sooner? We've been trying to do this since term 1!:crazyeye:
 
@ Octavian - I don't care if you are a cucumber, it's off to the pickle farm with ya.

As for the rest of this thread, it is so boring, I probably would not qualify it as toilet paper because it would put my asss to sleep. This manner of assigning Governors is an attempt by the new regime to get this game moving again and create enough intrest init that people will pull their eyes away from the RPG long enough to make Fanatika the nation it can be. Bill, we've been talking about these borders for six weeks? How many times was the subject of new Governors brought up in conjunction with these talks? Donsig, how many times did you present a thread on how we should proceed in selecting new Governors (or a new Governor) in the event we expanded enough to do that? Shaitan, how long have you had this plan of appointing Governors on your desk and why wasn't it brought up before it was needed immediately? Gonzo_for_civ, Gonzo law doesn't work here. Too much time and trouble was put into making Fanatika safe for the Gonzonians who live here. That's why we don't allow Dis to make laws anymore :) .

My point is "Stop the FREKIN' bickering. It's just a game. NO ONE is going to lose social standing over any method we take in obtaining Governors 3 weeks before the elections. It's just a game. We (you) should be working together and discussing your "legal" options as stated in the Constitution. No interpretations needed.

You people want instant results to instant whims. Well let me clue you in. The ONLY way that this can happen is with very long-range and flexible planning, with options and fire escapes available. So if you wanna dance, pay the piper. Stop looking for the wave you missed, 'cause another one is close at hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
2 QoL suggestions (good))
Replies
11
Views
991
azum4roll
A
M
Several ideas to expand the complexity of the strategy
Replies
3
Views
586
Monene
M
F
YAGM - Yet another governors mod
Replies
0
Views
2K
Feofilakt
F
B
Civilization splitting and coalition, and merging leaders with governors
Replies
4
Views
1K
BlessedBull
B
jorissimo
Jorissimo's opening training shadow thread
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
7K
jorissimo
jorissimo
Back
Top Bottom