But we can try.

Checked the first post on this thread days ago - really got a lot of attention so far.
I argee that the MV needs some new ideas. I remember when the Orcas started and we had the discussion about the scoring system. The MV changed a bit since then, but still the system is unfair. As others said, only military victory is rewarded. This only one point I would like to see changed. (But I have some doubts that SD is going to change anything on that.)
I welcome the idea of having some new competitive events in the MV. I think this could help to get the attention of "retired" MV players again. So I support this idea you are creating here.

For those who have ideas about new rankings for the altmeta, this is the data kept on each game:

Score
Size
Difficulty
Alignment
Years
Race
Result
Date posted

The actual altmeta scores and rankings are precalculated each day after the data is updated, as all that is actually very database-intensive.

Note that the Race data is not really useful at present, since due to a bug in the Meta RSS it is only given for custom races. So all the altmeta knows is whether the game was played with a custom race or not.

I did mention the first person I tried Dark-Star, so maybe I'll get to correspond with him eventually through this.

If you want him direct, try gmarsack@.

For those who have ideas about new rankings for the altmeta, this is the data kept on each game: Score Size Difficulty Alignment Years Race Result Date posted

Does Result include the ability to tell the difference between the four victory types: Conquest, Technological, Influence and Alliance?

the possible values of result are conquest, technological, influence, alliance, military defeat, and resigned

Great, this implies we could define brackest based on victory types. Which ones and how many types are definitely TBD but it's nice to know the possibilities.

Thanks.   

What's with all the new icons.

If you're still seeing Connery or Death With an Umbrella by my name, refresh your browser. After Mumblefratz reminded me in another thread, I figured I might as well just embrace it.

Yes, if we get the most influencial others will come, word will spread. It will take time.

Now, if we are going to be working towards a system of representation i think some people should step forward now if they have a plan they want considered. This way we wont waste all this in between "yes, no time" of the empires' decidsions. So anyone have anything they want to propose?

Well, it matters some empires are "open" some are "closed". Open empires will let you join by just clicking on their name and the clicking on the "Join Empire" button besides their icon. Closed empires will send you an invite via email wheter or not they want you to join. I am personally of the Arrakis Imperium, we would be glad to have you, though i cant recruit so youll have to wait. Otherwise there are a bunch of other empire out there looking for members just put yourself out there and be patient.

So anyone have anything they want to propose?

To start the discussion I think each of the four current empires get two representatives each and we try to find two unaligned players to represet everyone else. That gives us a manageable number of 10 reps to deal with. As far as voting within the council I think strong agreement should be required to do anything. As a start I'd say you'd need 7 of 10 yes votes to actually do something.

Other ideas and suggestions welcomed.

[edit] GreatEmporer, it bodes well that we both took time to answer the noob before getting the thread back to it's point. [/edit]

Though i think an uneven number would be better for making decisions.

Uneven would only be required if we are looking for a simple majority to approve something. That's certainly one way to do it, but I would think that to validate that the things we did had closer to universal appeal, requiring greater than 50% approval was a reasonable thing to do.

As far as another empire joining at that point it could be decided by the council in the manner the council chose. I don't think we need to write a constitution and bill of rights stipulating every possible action the council may take.

At this point since the council is effectively taking it's validity from the empires that authorize it, I think what does need to be specified and agreed to by the empires is the number of representatives from each empire and the voting percentage of those representatives required to authorized a change. Given that validity derives from the empires, I could live without unaligned player representatives, although I would prefer to have at least one from the point of view of fairness. That would get your odd number anyway.

Once that's complete the council as a duly authorized and representative body of metaverse players would be free to define the precise joining requirements and the manner in which representatives are chosen. However I do like the idea of term limits and also the idea of elections. I just think it's not necessary to write these things into a charter prior to forming a council.

Its necessary to have something written down, it helps to create a sense of order, plus it gains validity for what we are doing.

Yes this is true. But let's try to keep it as simple and succinct as possible.

You can begin to see some of the issues were going to have just talking about some of these things. The length of post (this one for example) involved is far longer than the normal post. I'm really not looking forward to reading (even less looking forward to writing) multiple 20 paragraph posts about the pros and cons of something that at it's basis is pretty simple.

The other thing that can help ensure validity is a requirement for a high percentage of agreement to make any change. People are less likely to question decisions that have for example 80% approval. If we decide things based on a narrow margin, that's when people can wonder if we're really speaking for the metaverse as a whole or whether one faction that happens to be slightly more powerful is pushing something that a good percentage of folks don't want.

As far as percentages go, each rep should have equal say.

Absolutely. Also I think the rep should not just operate on his own opinions but should canvas his constituents (empire) and vote his constituents (empires) preferences not his own. But again I wouldn't want to try to legislate such behavior.

number of reps would be readjusted as the population of the Metaverse increases

Yes.

we should let everyone present ideas, no matter if they are on the council or not.

Absolutely.

i think, the representatives should be chosen by the Empires' consent.

Agreed. Also since it is the empire's consent to be represented, the empire could chose to change a rep if it felt that it's views weren’t being properly represented.

Now, as far as elections go.

This is actually a dicey topic. At this point I'm not sure how the empires will chose their representatives. I'm not even sure the empires will use the same method. I intend to have a poll within the Diplomats, but even so I'm not quite sure what that will mean. Technically empires have emperors. The last time I looked, emperors weren't required to have free elections. AFAIK they can do anything they want.

I am *pretty* sure the emperors we have are what I would consider "enlightened despots" and have predominately democratic leanings at heart. But this is by no means guaranteed.

Anyway, as I mentioned before, I think it's up to the council to decide how to set up elections or whatever method used to pick new representatives. I personally would favor going towards a system that ended up with a single representative from each active empire (senators) and the remaining elected "at large" (representatives). Though I still would think that the different reps would be equal for voting purposes. But again I would leave this as decision for the council once formed.

I really think we have the chance to do something productive. I hope we aren't tempted to try to do too much. I also hope that we don't get so tied up in the picayune and pedantic that I regret suggesting the idea in the first place.

The written document, will just state or means, purpose, and general rules. It shouldnt be longer that 1 page, maybe 2 if we highlight certain things. And yes i think that amedments should have an overwhelming majority of approval, and decision doubly so. Though with some touchy ones we might even want to submit those to a public poll.

Glad you agree with most of my ideas.

Now for elections, those will be troublesome. So for the time being the empires should be able to choose which way they want to do what. They will have free reign untill the Council itself will gain respect within the community. Then we will start voting on this and that. As soon as everything starts running smoothly though, i think we should get rid of Imperial elections and make the public. However, the empires should have a right to reserve seats on the council and present the candidates. That way the Empires will still have some power over who is a nominee, but Emperors wont be able to dictate who actually gets to be on the Council. Hopefully, this will reduce the potential power grabbing, though hopefully none of the issues we present will call for this.

A big thanks to AlexAtticus for the update! As soon as we get word froma few more empires we will send a general message to everyone to send pretty much anyone they want. The first meeting, in my opinion, will not be one of strict representation, it will be more public. Though we might impose a limit on the number of votes accepted(to cut down on counting, and the confusion) we will try and keep it open to as many as possible.