Mumblefratz Mumblefratz

Metaverse Council Elections

▼

Metaverse Council Elections

from GalCiv2 Forums
The Metaverse Council (MVC) has recently lost a representative to the Lord of the Rings Online Beta. We'd like to get a new representative to replace this loss. Previously, MVC representatives have either been appointed by an active empire or selected from the GC2 community by the MVC itself.

However, one of the issues that was discussed when we initially formed the MVC was how to make it a truly representative body of the GalCiv2 community. At that time in the interests of expediency we chose to start the Council with representatives appointed by the major metaverse empires that were active at the time. It was certainly hoped that at some point we would move to a more democratic MVC councilor selection process. I think that this point is now.

I want to quickly refresh everyone’s memory about the purpose and scope of the MVC. Although the MVC did none of the actual work it’s clear that the introduction of AltMeta Classes would not have occurred without the effort put forth by the MVC. The MVC has recently been sitting on it’s collective laurels, taking a break from all the effort expended in helping to define the AltMeta Class system and partly due to the major forum changes that have recently occurred at the Galactic Core. In any case it’s time to get back to work.

Speaking of work there’s clearly a lot more to be done. Cari has provided an endgame.xml that is saved by the game and is something that we have great hopes for providing a whole range of new functionality to the AltMeta. We’re looking to be able to support Metaverse Mods, Metaverse Scenarios and Tournaments. The exact nature of these functions and precisely how all this will work are currently very far from being defined let alone having any specific detail worked out. There are certainly many challenges and a whole new set of infrastructure that will be associated with providing these functions. Anyway the point of this is to give folks some idea of the work that’s ahead of us.

So back to the topic of an election, the MVC would like to select a single MVC representative determined by popular election here on the GalCiv2 forums. To give folks an idea of what we're looking for we have the following criteria. We're not really interested in a popularity contest, however the potential MVC representative must; want the job, want the metaverse to succeed and flourish, and, be willing to put forth the effort it takes to achieve this goal. An established forum presence is a plus but not absolutely essential, however the ability and willingness to stand up and promote themselves, the AltMeta and the Metaverse is essential. The ability to cogently express their own opinions and the willingness to actually listen to the opinions of others is also important.

Experience in the game is absolutely *not* required. We'd rather have an exuberant newbie, than a jaded expert (however by no means would we turn down an exuberant expert).

We're not really looking for the second coming of JFK but we are looking for folks that can stand up and say that they want the job, be able to explain why they want the job, and be able to convince others that they would be good at the job. People should feel free to nominate any that they feel are particularly worthy, but it is expected that anyone interested should be able to mount at least a minimal 'campaign' on their own behalf.

They only absolute requirement on any that wish to be a MVC representative is that you *must* have submitted at least one metaverse game. It doesn't have to be a high scoring game, it doesn't even have to be a win, but you must have submitted at least a single metaverse game.

Actually, none of the above is really set in stone, they're really just guidelines that we can use to start the discussion. Besides actually considering who should be the next MVC councilor, a large part of this discussion should be about the actual process of how we go about this. This is our first attempt at "free elections" on the GalCiv2 site. How do you think this should be held? Who should be allowed to vote? These and many more questions are ones that I’d like to address in this thread.



metaverse
50,214 views 124 replies
Reply #26 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
In short, I would love to join the MVC, but I will be away for at least two more months, and that seems like a large hurdle in the path of my running. Neilo is a great candidate, and I would be happy to throw my support behind him.

This is understandable and somewhat expected. Perhaps next time. We do have a policy to request a "sabbatical" due to real life issues, but I agree it's probably best not to start out needing one from the outset. BTW congrats on the promotion.

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

I guess I'm just simply not understanding what you're driving at here. My goal is to insure that the Metaverse Council remains true to is founding purpose which is to promote interest and participation in the metaverse. That's my sole reason for all of this. If this is going to be difficult then I would suggest we keep it simple and remain true to our core which is representation of metaverse players by metaverse players. In that case I suggest that we return to my original proposition and require both metaverse councilors and those that would elect them demonstrate interest in the metaverse by having submitted at least a single metaverse game. If the result of this means that less folks will participate then so be it. At least we will be reasonably assured that those that do participate actually have the best interests of the metaverse at heart.

If your goal is to have a GalCiv2 Council in which GalCiv2 players are represented by other GalCiv2 players then by all means you should feel free to start such an organization. However that has not been and is not the scope and purpose of the Metaverse Council. I also suggest that the discussion of a potential GalCiv2 Council has no place in a discussion thread dedicated to the election of a *Metaverse* Councilor to the *Metaverse* Council. I really don't know how I could be any clearer.
Reply #27 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
However, if someone was removed for being absent, it seems like being currently active is also an "absolute" requirement. I think I would be able to meet the requirements you laid out in your first post... but willing to put forth effort and being capable of so doing are, sadly, two different things.

Actually I didn't initially notice this interpretation and want to point out that it's not quite correct.

The councillor was not removed for simply being absent. The councilor was removed for being absent and making no effort to contact the MVC and let us know for sure what was going on once it became apparent he would be absent indefinitely. As I mentioned we have a policy of requesting a sabbatical on the occasion that real life gets in your way. We're all understanding that this is just a game after all and real life does take priority so any such request is automatically granted.

After more than a month of no contact we really had no choice. In fact if he returns even at this point I would expect that the Council would look favorably on reinstating him. After all this has happened before. But we have quorum requirements on our votes and very high levels of approval required to make any change to the status quo so the absence of a single councilor quickly begins to make it harder to get things done.

BTW should the missing councilor return it would require approval of 70% of the MVC at the time to reinstate him. As I said I would expect that such approval would in fact be given. If that were the case then we would simply have one more councilor. It actually just makes it easier to achieve quorum. If there gets to be too many councilors it could get unweildly but at the current 11 one or two more is no real difference. In other words the MVC is commited to electing at least one new councilor via general elections held on the GalCiv2 forums regardless of anything else. As I think I mentioned here these elections are as much about defining the process of elections as in who gets elected.

Actually, I think the MVC is still a little bit up in the air here about how many councilors to add. We really have been thinking of adding only one. However, I would expect that if we got a goodly number of fine candidates we'd be willing to consider adding two councilors, perhaps even more. All these things are up for discussion and are really predicated on the response we get here. So set right up and throw your name in the hat.
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Thanks to PlayJeff and Wyndstar for their support, i guess it's official, i am putting my name forward to be considered an MVC nominee.

"Metaverse Council" the title says it all. Should the MVC be representative of the whole GalCiv community? Why yes of course. Without new players joining the MV there would be little point in the whole endeavour. But should that come at the expense of putting the MV and it's users first. I would say not. Like you said Mumble, all else is secondary, even GalCiv itself. So, and i know my word here is purely a comment and carries no weight, but since a MV councilor has to have played 1 game does that not set a precedent for participation. Not to sound callous by why should the MV take the vote of someone who has no interest in the council or the MV, never has played a game and is purely voting for the sack of it. Yes like Mr Palpatine has said, if someone shows genuine interest in being apart of the MVC and they do not meet the 1 game requirement, then by all means make an exemption, but only if that person is willing to get 1 game under their belt ASAP as you did with the original council. This shows their commitment to the cause and fulfil's the requirement at the same time.

. If the result of this means that less folks will participate then so be it. At least we will be reasonably assured that those that do participate actually have the best interests of the Metaverse at heart.


This would be an unfortunate but necessary step i believe. First if we take car of our own (the MVC is for the benefit of MV players after all) and take great strides and make people (non MV players) sit up and take notice of our achievements, then the MVC may be able to tackle the wider GalCiv community as a whole. First one must learn to crawl before one can walk.

Perhaps one can look at it this way,

If in this thread many non MV players voice an opinion then let them vote, they have showed that they care if they take the time to read a lengthy post.

If this thread remains, as it is atm, in the interest of MV players only, then just allow MV players to vote.

This thread could be your measuring stick to see what interest, if any, non MV players have in the council and it's intention's.

Reply #29 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I thought you would be a good candidate wyndstar however I know your career takes a lot of your time. and as for myself, well computers are over my head. I'm a tradesman good with tools but terrible with mice and keyboards  
Reply #30 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
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?

Perhaps I'm a bit late getting in this discussion, however I feel like the position of councilor implies an ability to advise people in a wide range of subjects, and that the advice given would be best if the background knowledge were creditable. E.G. - How could anyone possibly tell someone how to overcome a problem with posting games to the Metaverse without first-hand experience of the process?

Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Good to hear of your candidacy Neilo, and starting it with an insightful, honest post at that. I think the game submission criteria should stay as is for now. In a way I'd like to believe that we already have the interest of all players in mind, some as Meta players, and some as potential Meta players. Having played at least one meta game shows that the player potentially knows not only how the Metaverse works, but what changes or improvements they would like to see within it. TheNew AltMeta already shows how improvements can help cater to a larger player base. This type of improvement was partially aimed at the non-meta GC2 player, in allowing them to compete playing the size/type of game they prefer. Something that was a turnoff to those who didn't want to play the Gig/all abundant military conquest games that it took to compete within the official meta.


Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I guess I'm just simply not understanding what you're driving at here. My goal is to insure that the Metaverse Council remains true to is founding purpose which is to promote interest and participation in the metaverse.


Yes, but through the community, encouragement in participation from the entire community is what we should aim for if we are to truely improve the metaverse.

In that case I suggest that we return to my original proposition and require both metaverse councilors and those that would elect them demonstrate interest in the metaverse by having submitted at least a single metaverse game.


But we agreed not to do this already, however it is simingly impossible for the two to coincided so we can either have both or none at all.

I personally think that those who vote will truely care about the metaverse, so the game requirement would just be extra 'red tape' to make sure those who dont cant participate. But, I dont think those who dont care would participate in the metaverse, and those who want to see us fail would proably easily submit a game and vote anyways.

I personally think that extra requirements will just get in the way.

However that has not been and is not the scope and purpose of the Metaverse Council. I also suggest that the discussion of a potential GalCiv2 Council has no place in a discussion thread dedicated to the election of a *Metaverse* Councilor to the *Metaverse* Council.


I do not wish to form another Council, you are twisting my means out of proportion. All I am saying is that we would be nothing without the community, so why not encourage them to participate more.

Not to sound callous by why should the MV take the vote of someone who has no interest in the council or the MV, never has played a game and is purely voting for the sack of it. Yes like Mr Palpatine has said, if someone shows genuine interest in being apart of the MVC and they do not meet the 1 game requirement, then by all means make an exemption, but only if that person is willing to get 1 game under their belt ASAP as you did with the original council. This shows their commitment to the cause and fulfil's the requirement at the same time.


It seems I dont carry much support, I drop my arguement, let this election presume with the game requirement.

If this thread remains, as it is atm, in the interest of MV players only, then just allow MV players to vote.


We did agree earleir overwhelmingly that the voting should be free. If it is to be placed under discussion again, then I do think we need to work out some more kinks.

Reply #33 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm glad to see some response coming in and I'm also happy with Neilo's acceptance of the nomination. As I said if we get a good response we probably are willing to elect more than one councilor and we're certainly willing to allow our opinion on this to be swayed by that of the community.

All in all I'm willing to be flexible, but I think I am being flexible in saying that I'm fine with eliminating the requirement of a game submission on either the councilor *or* the voter but not both. The arguement that I've heard that's the most compelling for allowing voters to not have a requirement is to attract those that just haven't decided yet. Many have played the game for long periods of time before posting a game to the metaverse. If having some input into how the metaverse is operated by having a vote gives someone just that bit more incentive to participate then I'm for it. But on that condition I would just like to take due dilligience in ensuring we get a councilor that has the best interest of the metaverse at heart.

Another point to make is that it would be silly to pretend that everyone will always agree and "toe the line". That's not what we're looking for in a MVC councilor. A variation of opinion is a good thing and TGE's willing to speak strongly for something he believes is a good thing (slightly misguided in this case in my opinion but still a good thing). If everyone were to come on and say wait a minute we think there should be no requirement on anyone one then I would have to be willing to bow to the obvious will of the people.

The people we need are precisely of this type. They have strong opinions that they're willing to fight for but at the same time they're willing to really listen to the other side of the arguement and to change their opinion when it becomes apparent that the consensus is against them.
Reply #34 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
While I was writing my previous post I had seen neither TGE's nor DA's posts.

I don't want to dig up and rehash many weeks of arguements that have been previously made. Most of these discussions took place in the public forums over on the Core but of course by being there were not made before this large of an aduience.

My rememberance of the discussions that occured was that the concensus opinion was exactly as I stated in my preamble to this thread and that was that we would explicitly keep the metaverse game submission requirement on the councilors and remove it from the voter. There were a lot of reasons for this, certainly the "red tape" of verifing a whole bunch of voters is far more difficult than simply verifing a couple of candidates.

You seem to be saying in your last post that it should be all or nothing. I accepted the possibility of it being all or half. Between these two selections we only seem to agree on the all part. But the half seems closer to your position and is in fact what was previously agreed to. I have no problem relaxing the submission requirement on voters. I agree the more folks we can interest sufficiently to make them want to bother to take the time to vote the better. But I think I've made my arguement clear as to why I'm not willing to do both. If you are insistent on all or nothing then all it is. I'm just saying that I'm willing to relax the requirement on one or the other but not both. If you see this as some kind of paradox then I'm sorry I can't seem to explain my position to you sufficiently.
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It seems I dont carry much support, I drop my arguement, let this election presume with the game requirement.


I of course meant no disrespect nor did i want that to come off as a hardline statement, just an opinion. I would sure hate for someone to drop an arguement because they were outnumbered, stick to your guns. Your points are valid.

We did agree earleir overwhelmingly that the voting should be free.


Very well. The council's decision's are fine with me.

On to Mumble's original question,
How do you think this should be held?
, is there a need or want for any anonymity of the voters? This alone could decide the voting structure to be used. Being hard to do being the obvious hurdle of an anonymous vote, but also the fact that it could well lead to multiple votes from the one user. Perhaps a dedicated thread in the name of each candidate and all voters need do is leave a post in their preferred member' thread, to be then counted by all the council members.

Reply #36 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Most forums have a voting system set up, so that you can't vote if not registered, and if registered, you can't vote more than once. I'm not sure how that would work on this forum, but I'd guess that Mumble might know (or be able to find out without much trouble). Sorry to suggest more work for you, Mumble, as I'd gladly do it myself were it not that I'm terrible with computers beyond the most basic user interface!

It would be nice to have a thread solely dedicated to nominations, even if they're self-nominations. I think that there's no way of avoiding a "popularity contest" to some degree, but isn't that what elections are after all? Anyway, we could decide on something like the top five or six nomination-getters to be on a ballot (really a voting thread). That way those who really aren't at all interested, but might be nominated/nominate themselves just for a fling, will most likely not get through all the way to winning the highest percentage of votes. Not a guarantee, to be sure, but at least a way of making it more likely to get a decent set of candidates.





Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I did this post separately from the above post because this one is purely of a selfish nature..Mumblefrtaz asked for "minimal" campaigning from nominee's so i thought a little info on me and my interest's here might be prudent.

Here goes,

I'm 30 years old in 1 week, married with 1 son. I work in a Security monitoring centre and have been playing the game since the day it come out in stores (in Australia anyway). I actually did not use the MV at first since modding the game was a huge appeal for me so i jumped straight into that. I bored very quickly of not being able to rate myself against the rest of the community, so i jumped head first into the MV only about 10 months ago. I have enjoyed the game sooo much more since, and have been able to measure myself far better in the process. What i did not expect was the level of dedication that i found to one's empire and the MV as a whole. I thought and still do, that that was great and have come to enjoy chatting about the game as much if not more than playing it at times. Be it strategy, or aar's or even arguing about the most trivial things. But in the end it is the MV that is the glue that holds me here and remains my main focus.

Upon hearing about the MVC's intension's regarding the new Alt-meta, tournaments and a mod MV, i have certainly taken more of an interest, although rather passive, until now.

I would love the chance to help shape those initiative's and make the MV far more accessible to those who have not had the want or drive to take part. Actually, there is also a more selfish reason i want to do this. I want these changes. I like the idea of the tournaments, Wyndstar's two were great and i enjoyed the competition they brought. A mod Metaverse...Wow! Now that would be cool. I want to participate in these types of games and the best way to ensure that i can, would be to help them into fruition.

Another reason is the life of the MV itself. I have seen a few threads were the decline in MV activity was noted. I enjoy the MV and these fourms, more than any other online community i been part of. I do not wish to see it's demise and if i can do anything to help stave off such events, i'd be more than happy to do so.

Now why am i a good candidate?

Well who's to say i am, that is for you the community to decide. I have been around these forums for a while now and most of you would know me or of me. Am i opinionated? You betcha. But i am as happy to hear your opinion as i am to give mine. I may not agree with your opinion, but i would fight for your right to give it.

In the event you act like a jerk here on the forum, i will call you on it. But i can take what i give out and rarely has it left a horrible taste in anyone's mouth. I have been known to have had strong words before, but i don't take kindly to disrespect. Be that of me or Stardock or anyone who does not deserve it. Criticism is fine, but when not in a constructive way or in a demeaning manner i feel the need to let you know how i feel. Be that as it may, i have never been banned nor made myself an annoyance of Kryo or any other dev's. Has Kryo pulled me inline once or twice? I'll be honest, yes. And in those times i have respected his call and stuck my head in the sand.

I am here on the forums quite a bit and want to see the MV and GalCiv as a whole succeed and be as prosperous as it can be.

Thanks for taking the time to read all this, and if you think i can bring something to the table, then thankyou and please show me your support. If not, fine but why not throw your name in the hat and we'll show everyone that the MV is far from being anything but alive and well.


Reply #38 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Very nice. No less than expected.


One thing that I want to point out is that some folks might get intimidated by the experience level and forum presence of some of the candidates or current councilors. This really is not exactly what we’re going for. We want candidates and councilors of all kinds. We really have no shortage of game experience or forum presence already on the council (in some cases perhaps a bit too much ). While admittedly these things are good to have it’s by no means the only thing, nor even the most important thing.

Everyone certainly has their own opinion, but in my opinion the prime requirement of a MVC Councilor is the desire to see the metaverse thrive and increase, everything else is just gravy. I’m not suggesting that folks with experience and presence don’t have this trait as well, I’m just saying that they by no means have exclusive rights to this trait.

I would like to see some candidates that perhaps don’t have quite the experience or presence that Neilo so clearly has. Everyone likes the underdog and although you may not win this time, you would have at least stood up and contributed in a very important way. I assure you that, in and of itself, this would be both noticed and appreciated. In some sense the "tilting at windmills" attitude that this represents is all the more to be admired.
Reply #39 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Hey, couldn't agree more Mumblefratz. A fresh pair of eyes could be the best thing for the MVC. Some of us "old timers" might be a little lethargic and set in our ways by now.

A new member might be just what the doctor ordered, there is nothing like the views of the pure and innocent....

If someone has the desire to see the Metaverse succeed and flourish, it should'nt matter if they a have nice long row of flashy, nicely colored little icon medals or not. Sitting there reading these post's though, won't do you any good, stand up and let yourself be heard.

I would love to see this election turn into a huge sign post for the Metaverse, with 5 or 6 guys all up for the position.
Reply #40 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I apologize now. This thread has been on for several days with very little interest from the community. You want somebody new then a self admiited somewhat good computer user who is young is losthero. so i also nominate him. Nobody else seems to be remotely interested except NEILO. It seems he actually wants to do it so lets get on with the so called election.  
Reply #41 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't really agree with self nominating, but I'll write this spiel and if any one would like to nominate me I would be willing to stand.

I'm 48, married with four children and live in Australia. I have been playing GCII and posting on the forums since the day it was released. I love the game, MV and the community. I've posted 24 games to MV and I am a senator with the BC Orca's. (Please don't hold that against me). I even attempted a Mod (Precurser Sun Flare Mod). So I feel that I have some credence with the community. I work as a lecturer for the University of Sydney and most of my spared time is spent in some manner with GCII.

All this being said I feel I would be able to spend the time necessary to assist the council and try to improve the MV for all concerned. I was more than happy to try out the beta's for Stardock and I am willing to give my knowledge (what little their is) opinons and insight for the benifit of the MV. If you want someone who is willing to give it a fair dinkum Aussie go, then I'm your man.

Thanks for reading. An good luck to all who nominate.
Regards, Lynx xxx
Reply #42 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
2 nominees and we're both Australian. Now that is a small world...

Great to see someone else has taken an interest, Good Luck
Reply #43 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I apologize now. This thread has been on for several days with very little interest from the community. You want somebody new then a self admiited somewhat good computer user who is young is losthero. so i also nominate him. Nobody else seems to be remotely interested except NEILO. It seems he actually wants to do it so lets get on with the so called election.

Ah. Another trait that a MVC councilor needs quite a bit of is patience. This seems something that our friend PlayJeff doesn't have very much of.

Several days is nothing, we have discussed things over and over for weeks. The introduction of the AltMeta brackets took 3 months at the very least. The only way to get anything done is to be persistent. Nothing is going to change in a few days.

Actually computer skills are of virtually no benefit whatsoever. As far as very little interest from the community I feel the jury is still out. You've seem fairly interested if also a bit anxious and you're certainly part of the community. I think this thread is read with interest by far more folks than actually reply to it and as you say it's *only* been several days so far.

See it's a matter of perspective. We have two obviously qualified nominee's. We also had a bit of a row between TGE and myself on the voting criteria. We've had a few suggestions about how to proceed with the elections. However, there's still a lot to discuss and decide.

A far as the game submission requirement I still believe that the concensus opinion of the council was the one I originally proposed which was that MVC councilors would be required to have submitted a game, but anyone interested enough to vote should be allowed to vote. I agree that the MVC never had a formal vote on this specific wording but that was certainly the gist that I got out of weeks of discussions that we had on the subject. I think we should move forward based on this assumption. In the meantime I will submit the above explicit wording to a vote within the MVC just so that it will be explicit. [edit] Opps. A bit redundant with the explicits, but you get my drift. [/edit]

As far as voting I think the best way is if we could manage a front page poll on this site. I'm not quite sure if SD would be willing to allow it but I think that would be the best. Failing that we could open a specific thread for voting. Another possible suggestion has been made of providing a special email address to submit votes to.

BTW Lynx's self nomination is prefectly fine and acceptable. In fact that's a harder thing to do. It's easy to stand up when others have suggested you (not to take anything away from neilo). It's much harder to stand up without knowing if anyone even knows who you are.

Lynx I definitely thank you for having the courage to stand up and be counted.

We also have a number of current MVC councilors that need to show up and weigh in their opinion on these goings on. Certainly one of the biggest downsides of a lack of patience is that it does take time to get folks together. People have jobs and other significant real life concerns. To expect instant response from all of these folks is not very realistic.

However, PlayJeff, please don't take this as a personal admonition. I can understand wanting to get on with something and often share those feelings, it's just that slow and steady does indeed win the race.
Reply #44 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I don't really agree with self nominating, but I'll write this spiel and if any one would like to nominate me I would be willing to stand.


An unexpected surprise  . Thank you for showing your support.

I have learned from being in the council that patience is indeed needed when trying to initiate discussions over a medium such as a forum. It can take a while at times to even get the council all together in a conversation. Fortunately GC2 has the longevity and community support that not a lot of games have, therefore I believe time is on our side.


Reply #45 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I apologize, being Canadian I have a lack of patience. Please do not hold that against me. Good luck Lynxx. By the way, I guess your the only lynxx in Australia  Now about my lack of patience, you have to understand that I work with salesmen occasiionaly which is worse than being a kindergarten teacher. And then after that try and run a crew of tinbashers. Both reeeeaaaalllly fun. So I am very sorry if I come off hard sometimes  
Reply #46 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
As far as voting I think the best way is if we could manage a front page poll on this site


The front page poll doesnt require registration and allows anyone to vote more then once, however it does use some kind of random key to chose the people it allows to vote.

It could be a good preliminary vote, but not so much a formal one.

I apologize, being Canadian I have a lack of patience. Please do not hold that against me. Good luck Lynxx. By the way, I guess your the only lynxx in Australia Now about my lack of patience, you have to understand that I work with salesmen occasiionaly which is worse than being a kindergarten teacher. And then after that try and run a crew of tinbashers. Both reeeeaaaalllly fun. So I am very sorry if I come off hard sometimes


Everyone has their differing traits, it is becaues of those traits that conversation tend to vary and become interesting. I am glad you are chipping in, everyone needs a heckler to keep them moving sometimes.

I of course meant no disrespect nor did i want that to come off as a hardline statement, just an opinion. I would sure hate for someone to drop an arguement because they were outnumbered, stick to your guns. Your points are valid.


I know they are, but the worst thing that could happen here is a stale mate between me and Mumble, I would rather drop my arguement now in favor of progress then keep it up and risk postponing this election to a less favorable date.

Anyway, we could decide on something like the top five or six nomination-getters to be on a ballot (really a voting thread).


I would say three or four, having too many would split the vote too much.

I've posted 24 games to MV and I am a senator with the BC Orca's. (Please don't hold that against me).


Empire division have never had a place in the MVC and they wont now
Ah. Another trait that a MVC councilor needs quite a bit of is patience. This seems something that our friend PlayJeff doesn't have very much of.


, though we are housed at the Core we dont answer to the Diplomats.
Reply #47 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Just a post to say thanks for all the good wishes. The bit about the BC Space Orca's was just a joke. If I get nominated everyone will have to get used to the Australian sense of humour (and spelling)
Reply #48 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The front page poll doesnt require registration and allows anyone to vote more then once, however it does use some kind of random key to chose the people it allows to vote.

I didn't know that. Certainly if true then of course that wouldn't be a good choice, however, I've voted in a number of front page polls here and could never do so if I wasn't logged in. Nor was I ever unable to vote if I was logged in nor have I ever been able to vote more than once. I'll check it out with the powers that be (i.e. Kryo) or perhaps they may simply choose to respond here exactly how front page polls work.

Empire division have never had a place in the MVC and they wont now

though we are housed at the Core we dont answer to the Diplomats.
Both absolutely correct.



I do admit that perhaps we've had a sheltered existence over at the Core and that we should probably make a point to hold more of our conversations over here for all to see.

In our defense most folks would probably thank us for this as most of our discussions can take quite some time and are often as interesting as watching paint dry. However, other than Wyndstar's tournaments I don't really believe there's been a player led endevour that has actually come close to accomplishing anything let alone anything near the significance of the new AltMeta. This only comes from hard and painful work over long periods of time.

Also the change of the Core from phpBB to Invision Power Board has been a significant shakeup. Personally I'm still not used to the changes.

Anyway, to see the kind of excitement we deal with on a regular basis I'll give you a few links. Both links can be followed by all and all posts within these forums can be read by all. The first link is a the general MVC Metaverse Forum that any Core member can post to. The second is the MVC Council Voting Forum that can be read by all but only MVC Councilors can post to. It's instructive in that it contains all the issues that have ever been decided by vote in the MVC. I encourage all that are interested in the MVC, in what we have done and in what we plan to do, to check out some of these threads. It can be very instructive. In the voting thread we currently have an ongoing vote about the metaverse game submission requirement for MVC councillors (and potential councillors) and also for those that would vote for them.

Core Forums > Galciv & Other Games > Galciv II > GCII Metaverse

Core Forums > Galciv & Other Games > Galciv II > GCII Metaverse > Council Voting

Reply #49 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I apologize, being Canadian I have a lack of patience. Please do not hold that against me. Good luck Lynxx. By the way, I guess your the only lynxx in Australia Now about my lack of patience, you have to understand that I work with salesmen occasiionaly which is worse than being a kindergarten teacher. And then after that try and run a crew of tinbashers. Both reeeeaaaalllly fun. So I am very sorry if I come off hard sometimes

No apologies are necessary, your interjection was an excellent foil with which to make a point. There are quite a few Aussies that play the game and they certainly need to be represented. In fact I don't find you come off hard at all, although I must admit I truly have no clue what a crew of tinbashers is or does.
Reply #50 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
2 nominees and we're both Australian. Now that is a small world...



I hereby nominate myself purely on the basis that I'm neither Australian nor Canadian


No, that was just a joke (the nominating part, I mean). I'm not so good on councils and such!