Talk:382

From Nomicapolis

Voting is closed; proposal passed. Wooble 21:22, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Proposed by BobTHJ 20:44, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Contents 1 Proposer's summary and declarations 2 Debate 3 Vote 3.1 For 3.2 Against 3.3 Abstain

Proposer's summary and declarations

Proposer's summary

This proposal is designed to assign each player to a Canton for future rules that will actually give the Population and Canton system some use. Discussion on this proposal shall remain open through 00:00, 1 May 2007 (EDT) --BobTHJ 20:44, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Debate

Add comments

I like it so far...one question i have is what the purpose of increasing the adult population by one...if there is a future use for population, i think an increase of more than one would be relevant. I also had been contemplating reducing the stages of life to a more manageable (for the scorekeeper) to 3 or 4 stages...something i wouldn't mind some feedback on... --Tucana25 21:44, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think it's really necessary to increase the population of a Canton to reflect the individual Players residing there; for these numbers to become statistically significant we'd need a completely unmanageable number of Players (probably at least a few thousand). I've been thinking that perhaps the score and/or popularity of a Canton's leader (and, if this passes, I suppose its resident non-leader players) could be made to have an effect on monthly population growth, which would make things more interesting (at present, the 4 outer Cantons will all continue to have the exact same populations as each other forever). Combining the ages into fewer categories sounds good to me, though. We could even make the population growth formula more complicated so we have the same growth rate we have now with fewer different categories (for example, Elderly and Ancient could be combined into a single category and have 2/3 of that category die each month or combine Infant and Young and have 1/2 of that group move up to the next group each month.) I suggest the last paragraph be removed from this proposal (but I'd like to wait until this passes to revise the population system, so that Player residency can be included in a new system) Wooble 10:07, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

I removed the Population change provision as suggested. BobTHJ 10:36, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm still don't know that i necessarily like what i've created, but HERE was something I'd thought about for population growth related to popularity...--Tucana25 14:25, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

Seems like a good start, although I would like to see Residency factored into the equation should this pass. BobTHJ BobTHJ 15:27, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

So would I, but at the moment this is all tangential to this actual proposal. I suggest you move this to a vote early as the 3 of us don't really need 4 more days to debate what we could do after this is passed :). Wooble 18:33, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on. BobTHJ 21:05, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

For

Add FOR vote

1. BobTHJ 21:05, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
2. --Tucana25 20:04, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
3. Wooble 21:22, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

Abstain

Add Abstention