Good point. In alphabetical order we have the following.

AlexAtticus - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
DethAdder - Elected by the Galactic Diplomats
GW Swicord - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
Macmatt - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
MarshallONeil - Elected by the High Command Hegemony
MBM1215 - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
Mumblefratz - Elected by the Galactic Diplomats
Quixen - Elected by the High Command Hegemony
Syrrus K - Selected from the B. C. Space Orcas
Thagee - Selected from B.C. Space Orcas
TheGreatEmperor - Elected by the Arrakis Imperium
Vukasika - Elected by the Arrakis Imperium

Actually it's Thagee's departure to participate in the Lord of the Rings Online Beta that has prompted this election. I also want to point out that there were at least three different methods used to select the current set of representatives. The fact that are three different selection methods (and were about to introduce a fourth here) has no bearing on the legitimacy of any member of the MVC. Reality has to be dealt with each step of the way. Certainly we're all under no delusion that we have by any means a perfect representative system, but we have tried at each step of the way to be as representative as realistically possible. This election is just another step further in that direction.

The biggest problem that the MVC and the Metaverse faces is that there are far more people actively posting games to the metaverse than actively post to these forums. This results in a gross underestimation (IMHO) of the amount of folks interested in the metaverse, it results in empires that appear to be defunct when they really aren't, and it results in being very difficult to gauge the consensus opinion of metaverse players. I call this the “tip of the iceberg” problem.

I do want to stress what I mentioned earlier that the legitimacy of any MVC councilor is no less than that of any other MVC councilor regardless of the method used for their selection. With this in mind I want to point out a subtle difference in the wording from the above list of councilors that highlights the “tip of the iceberg” problem. You’ll notice that the representatives from the B.C. Space Orcas were “selected from” not “elected by” the B.C Space Orcas. The reason for this is that we couldn’t find enough Orcas posting to actually hold any sort of election. This implies that the Orcas were in a state of decline which was clearly not the case. At that time the Orcas were #1 in the metaverse. Using data provided by the AltMeta we see that 28 different Orcas have posted about 185 games to the metaverse in the past 6 months, 19 games in the last month alone. The Orca’s are by no means dead, they simply don’t post all that much to these forums.

I can probably go through the data and find many such examples, but I’ll limit myself to one more. The Qourth Empire, still currently 5th on the official metaverse with about 125 games posted in the last 6 months and 15 in the last month. We’ve never been able to make any contact with anyone from the Qourth Empire and it hasn’t been for lack of trying. Their most prolific player, Spindoctor (terrymc512003), has only made a single reply in a single thread in the year he’s been a member. Qourth, the emperor of the Qourth Empire, has posted more games this last month (6) than posts or replies that he’s made for the last year. I’m not trying to single any folks out here and I’m not being critical of people’s interest in these forums, I’m just pointing out that this is an issue that is difficult to deal with when trying to set up a representative body of metaverse players.

The reason I bring up this issue is in relationship to this election of a new representative to the MVC. I’d like the polling method that is used to be able to reach as many interested people as possible. Clearly if folks don’t read these forums at all then it’s pretty much impossible to reach them, but we can reach those that merely lurk these forums without posting. One of the ways we’re considering holding the vote is to provide an email address for folks to be able to vote anonymously. This is in attempt to reach those that don’t wish to post here.

Anyway these are all ideas that need to be considered.

Sorry for that comment, will have to think?

I will apologize again, dont know what got into me  

This can certainly be discussed but I was under the impression that there was reasonable agreement on the criteria of a single metaverse game for any potential councilor. It's certainly been used as a requirement for any councilors elected thus far. This was an implicit requirement for those councilors elected from an empire, but it was an explicit requirement for the four councilors elected "at large" directly by the Council. IIRC we even waited a bit so that GW would have his first metaverse game submitted before we finalized the nominations for the At Large reps.

Previously I had suggested a single metaverse game as a criteria even for voting but it was apparent that this was not well received. At this point I agree that it's not a good idea to have this constraint as a rule for voting.

I do see your point in suggesting that there may be those that have felt that the current system is unfair but would still be willing to work to improve it. However, I think we have already taken significant steps to improve it as represented by the changes introduced into the AltMeta. The only way for a game to get into the AltMeta is for it to have been submitted to the official Metaverse. Also I would submit that a person that held the metaverse in such distain that they wouldn't be willing to submit a single metaverse game would probably be not all that interested in improving it.

I personally don't see it as a great barrier to entry that a *Metaverse* Council representative have had the experience of at least one metaverse game. We are after all trying to represent metaverse players. How well can someone represent metaverse players if they have never submitted a single game of their own. If it's really felt that we the need to vote on this specific aspect we can certainly do so. But as I said I think this has been at least tacitly agreed to by a substantial majority of councilors.

[edit]
Perhaps we should add one additional requirement on being a MVC councilor, the ability and willingness to read and author lengthy posts. Actually I'm sort of joking here. I certainly don't think that this should be an explicit requirement. However, I'm sure this thread will become fair warning to any that wish to become MVC Councilors that there's not much glamor in it and a whole lot of verbosity and tedium. Consider yourself warned.
[edit]

This sounds like a nomination. If you would like to nominate them then you can.

Back to the game criteria. I want this to be an open election, no constraints besides the will and want to help improve the community in general, not just the metaverse or the Altmetaverse.

If someone wants the job, and wants to help, then I dont think it would matter if they have a meta game or not.

I know it has been a protocol from the begining of the Council, but back then it was different. We were a bunch of people who were concerned about the meta and participated regularly, now as far as I can see to us it wouldnt effect us if we had the criteria. It wasnt ever set down in stone, it was just there to begin with, we all had games already, so we all already fulfilled the unwritten requirement. Now GW was a different case just because some Councilors did not support him as a potential member, at least in the begining. Him getting a Meta game I think subtely proved that he cared and wanted change, dispelling the doubt.

Now I am willing to agree to the criteria, if and only if, it does not shun anyone who wants to participate from the election. Meaning that if someone does show up clearly wanting the job that we allow him/her to have a chance at winning.

After all I judge the people of the community to pick who is best, regardless of what we say.

A good method, and no principal denial criteria.

A vote?(To the Council Chambers!! AWAY!!)

My intent wasn't to imply that you specifically, or anyone else for that matter, is perceived to annoy Stardock. My comment was merely in response to the implication in PlayJeffs comment that someone with fire may upset Stardock.

It's often hard enough to remember how I feel about any one person on this board let alone remember how anyone else gets along with Stardock or gets along with anyone else for that matter. It's so hard to keep track of who does or doesn't get along with one another. That's why I prefer to get along with everyone. You never know but today's worst enemy could become your best supporter on the next issue that comes along. Plus I always prefer to give folks the benefit of the doubt. If someone happens to annoy me one day perhaps it just because he's having a bad day. Or perhaps it's me that's having the bad day to be annoyed in the first place. There's generally no real benefit in trying to assign blame, the blame is as likely to be yours as it is to be anyone else's.

Anyway, I digress. I think we should resolve the submission of a metaverse game as a first course of business otherwise it will begin to undermine everything else that we're trying to do here.

We have some picayune and pedantic rules surrounding the taking of votes on the MVC. The primary purpose of these rules is to ensure that there has been sufficient discussion of a topic and to ensure that folks have had time to give and form their own opinion.

In any case I move that the MVC take a vote on whether or not the submission of a metaverse game should or should not be a requirement for a MVC councilor. Do I have a second?

To let everyone else know how we go about things in the MVC, at the point I get a second we will have another three days for discussion prior to the taking of the vote. Any councilor could also request and be granted another three days of discussion, althouth to date this has never occured. After the three days we will have a poll (publically accessible) over on the MVC Forums at the Galactic Core that can last up to 5 days. Any change to the status quo (and in this case the requirement of a single MV game submission for a councilor must be considered the status quo) must be approved by a 70% majority of the council.

Anyway, it's clear on which side of the topic that TGE's and my opinion fall. What would be most instructive is to have the GC2 community weigh in with their opinions. If we get a clear signal one way or the other then I'm sure that will sway our opinion in that direction.

Well I believe Neilo fits the description the MVC is looking for. I do'nt know if I am allowed to nominate anybody but if I can, then thats who I nominate.  

As good a suggestion as any, we’ll probably end up doing something pretty much like it. However, as any good politician would do we'll probably hem and haw for a bit before we get down to the real meat of the elections.

This may appear to be plain old procrastination but there is some method to my madness. I'm in no real rush here, to me anyway the process is probably more important than the outcome. I want to give folks time to consider and to contribute their opinion.

The apparent slowness with which we move is also good training for the potential MVC councilor. Nothing that involves gathering a consensus opinion and getting others to do what it takes to actually accomplish it happens very quickly. This was certainly true in defining the changes to the AltMeta and it will be no less true in developing a system supporting Metaverse Mods, Metaverse Scenarios and Tournaments. I know from personal experience that the slowness of progress can be very frustrating, but I’ve also found from experience that when people are all gung ho about getting something done right this very instant that nothing usually comes of it. The only proven way to change is slow and methodical.

There are literally hundreds of good ideas that come up on these boards on at least a weekly basis. They’re usually a flash in the pan with everyone having a definite opinion and excited about it but within a few days the topic is usually forgotten and nothing ever comes of it. A phrase that I’ve used many times is very apropos. There are hundreds of good ideas each having a handful of people supporting them but what we need are a handful of ideas that have hundreds of people supporting them.

In this case then I guess you would have to vote no then. The current status quo of the MVC is that a MVC councilor is required to have submitted at least a single metaverse game. What you are proposing is a definite change.


I'm not sure what you're saying here. By not having a one game submission requirement on people casting ballots for a metaverse councilor (which I was against btw) all we are doing is allowing non metaverse players to cast ballots for metaverse councilors. If you really want to open this up for discussion I would want to reopen allowing non metaverse game submitters to vote.

The point that I had was that if all voters are qualified metaverse players as indicated by having submitted a metaverse game then I wouldn't require the metaverse councilor to have submitted a game. Since all voters would be metaverse players, if they wished to vote for a yellow dog then that would be the will of metaverse players and so be it. If we are to open up the voting on a *Metaverse* Councilor to all then I insist that at least the metaverse councilor have some metaverse certification. One or the other of all voters or all councilors should have some indication of the desire for the success and increased participation in the metaverse. My initial preference was that both groups should have submitted games but I relented (without a vote IIRC) on the basis of encouraging the widest possible participation. However if you really want to open up the question of whether or not councilors need to have a game submitted then perhaps we should reopen whether or not voters should be required to do so as well.

The main difference between these two groups is that we have a status quo for councilors and that status quo is to have submitted a metaverse game. That can only be changed by a 70% majority vote of the MVC which I view as extremely doubtful. However, we've never had voters before other than the voters within our empires that elected us in the first place so there really is no status quo for voters unless you want to argue that as members of empires they obviously had submitted metaverse games. I don't really feel the need to press the issue as long as someone in this process chain has some proven vested interest in the health and well being of the metaverse. I'm not willing to turn over a metaverse centric group carte blanche to a group of folks that contain an element of folks that have expressed a complete and utter distain for the metaverse.

But we are no longer limiting represetation, all we are limiting now is the choices people have for who gets to represent them.