The end of spot votes in the chat?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My thoughts right now are to have it where spot votes are done in the forum, not in the chat. The vote would need to be open for at least 15 minutes and can be called after that point with a 2/3 majority vote. If it does not pass, then obviously more discussion is needed about the issue and can be discussed further and called for a vote again (using a new poll) or, if it is not vital, it can wait until it is worked out in the forums.

The chat as a whole seems to have evolved to the point where it, in of itself, is working out well. I doubt removing it would bring back players who have left, so I don't plan to change anything with respect to that.

Any final thoughts on this?
 
Do you mean the spot poll in the forum would need 2/3 of those voting in it for it to pass?
 
spot polls are undemocratic, they catch our president in a no-win situation. Eliminate the spot polls, and make the president only follow the wishes of the forum majority.
 
Originally posted by donsig
Do you mean the spot poll in the forum would need 2/3 of those voting in it for it to pass?
Click to expand...

Yes. My thinking is that if an item can't pass with 2/3 of the vote then it should be discussed more in the forums.

Spot votes should only be called when a matter arises that has not been already addressed in another way. Generally, the only other option to spot votes is to stop the turn session and bring the issue back to the forums. By bringing the spot votes into the forums those people who are available during the chat times, but cannot actually attend the chat are able to participate in the vote.
 
We should not be focusing our attention on what to do when a situation that cannot be decided in chat arises. We should be focusing our attention on preventing these situations from happening.
 
Originally posted by Immortal
We should not be focusing our attention on what to do when a situation that cannot be decided in chat arises. We should be focusing our attention on preventing these situations from happening.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. However, not every situation can be planned for ahead of time. The spot votes should be used only for those cases that have not already been planned for.
 
Your idea about putting the spot votes in the forum might be a viable one, Duke. It would allow people like Bill_in_PDX to join in the chats, even if it is a limited way. They would still be able to vote if they caught the poll in time. The 15 minute wait would constantly stretch the play time out of each chat, but this might reduce the number of spot votes also. I think the only foreseeable problem would be waiting the 15 minutes and not getting 2/3 majority either way (without any forum support, meaning only the people in the chat voted) and then trying to decide whether to reword the poll and wait another 15 minutes, knowing no one in the forum will vote on it, or stop the game. It might work, tho.
 
DOM: the spots are only adequate for popup situations in pre-turn. all decisions to be taken in turn when saving is possible should be brought to forum to decide.
 
I think that the effect this will have is that the DP will call for far less spot votes and simply make arbitrary decisions more often.

Disorganizer - it is not realistic to stop the game at every single unplanned option. The game would average a turn or less per chat.
 
Originally posted by disorganizer
where were the spot votes last turnchat?
Click to expand...

See Shaitan's post right before yours dis. PI #6 has already had the effect of drastically reducing spot votes. I hope I haven't been making arbitrary decisions though. BTW - the last turn chat was short and the next probably will be as well.
 
so it is possible to make 4 turns a chat without having a spot poll.
wouldnt this be ok?
so all decissions were done at the forum (and even without any special effort for planning it).
bravo!
 
so what was chosen for them? how were those decissions taken? what was decission base for them?

the civ2 game worked well without having a chat. no action was taken there without a poll.
civ3 is more complex, but should also work. it may be slower, but where is the problem in advancing slower? do we really need a pace of 20 turns per week?
 
I don't know how the decisions were made as I wasn't at the chat and have not read the log yet. I would imagine that immediate actions were based on interpretations of our long term plans, perhaps with some chat room discussion.

Yes, I think we do need to hit around 20 turns per week. Civ III is a long game. With the amount of micromanagment this game creates, it's even longer. We started out at 35 turns per week and have gone down to 20 or less. I do not think we can maintain interest in the long run if we go any slower.
 
Well, micromanagement is and will only be done in pre-turn, as micromanaging the mid-turn takes too long.

So it will even better with shorter chats because then micromanagement will be every 5 instead of every 10-15 turns.

Are you under time-pressure with the game? How many turns do we have left till 2050?
 
Well I am sorry that I missed this debate while out of town this weekend. However, I got in some much needed golf time.

I have learned that those who like the turn chat are very protective over it, and rightly so, it seems to be the fun part of this process for them. I am opposed to turn chat myself, but I also don't wish to bend the game to ruin it for others, any more than I am in favor of having it done to me.

I normally cannot attend the chat as it occurs during my workday, I can access forums during that time. So spot polls posted in forums could get my involvement as I usually have this forum up on screen while I work.

But to me, in my bigger picture view, I think the key is to ensure that major decisions are not being put to spot votes. I don't mind a spot vote on topics involved with implimentation of policies already decided in the forums, but to use a spot vote to decide on the sale of key technology that would (in my opinion) put our wonder building program at risk, should have been in the forum all along.

That is where my well documented frustration surrounding PI6 arose from. I didn't care if someone had ignored a spot vote, for that issue at hand should never have been a spot vote in the first place. I'm sure everyone involved had the best intentions for phoenatica at heart, but intentional or not, that vote, had it been implimented, would have been a perfect example of what DoM described...a small group of people setting policy and making major decisions. Plus we were using the constitution to further enhance the power of "chatters" versus maintaining it in check.

My compromise solution?

I'll support chat turns if we can agree to ensure that significant issues are always brought before the people in the forum.

Ahhh...who decides what a significant issue is? I am quite confident we could never complete an exhaustive list, so instead, I would recommend that we mandate the DP is always the President, or VP if an absence occurs. Those individuals should have the power to stop the game whenever they feel it is time to reach out to the public.

It's not a perfect solution either, but we get the most votes for presidential elections, so the mandate is there, and that person can be the point of contact for such issues going forward. We know already that they will be blamed for the issue anyhow. ;-)

Bill
...in PDX
 
Originally posted by disorganizer
Well, micromanagement is and will only be done in pre-turn, as micromanaging the mid-turn takes too long.

So it will even better with shorter chats because then micromanagement will be every 5 instead of every 10-15 turns.

Are you under time-pressure with the game? How many turns do we have left till 2050?
Click to expand...
Micromanagment is done as needed. I can guarantee that GreyFox micromanaged every aspect of the game. Donsig is a perfectionist too so I imagine he's micromanaging things as well. That's not what I was referring to though. I meant the micromanagment of the different aspects of the game. This adds time and effort to the game turns.

I'm not under any particular time pressure but I am a student of human nature. If the game gets slower, more people will leave. We'll also lose quite a few when Play The World is released. The faster and more exciting the game runs, the happier and more excited people are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
The Japan Thread
Replies
10
Views
939
Leoreth
Leoreth
Vahnstad
Ideas for "Belgian"-themed leaders deserving of being in the game
Replies
15
Views
772
RedCourtJester
RedCourtJester
TheBlueKing
"Build something that you believe in."... oh wait, let me play for you...
5 6 7
Replies
131
Views
8K
ThichN
T
C
End Game... The Use of Nuclear Weapons
Replies
6
Views
820
Charky
C
45°38'N-13°47'E
Persistent CTD toward the end of the game
Replies
11
Views
1K
Walter Hawkwood
Walter Hawkwood
Back
Top Bottom