Save File for All?

[Harovan]

Between terms sounds good.

[Jethro83]

Between terms should do.

But if they can post saves at the significant events in the life of the empire (such as taking/razing an enemy's capital), that might be good as well.

[Timeline]

Jeeze, this is a close vote.

Allowing saves to be viewed between terms does not diminish the ministers responsibility. He still needs to post screenies and inform ppl of whats going on, esp during the second half of the term when alot has changed and elections are coming up .

Not allowing people to view saves is absurd. Hiding the save files from the citizenry is TYRANNY. By limiting the saves to a select few, we limit the fun to a select few. We could have over a hundred members, all voting, but only 10 or 11 or so would be able to know whats really going on.

The whole point of the democracy game is for all of us to work as a team and lead our civ to global domination, but how can the populace make good decisions if they cannot see what is happening in the actual game first-hand? Answer: they cannot. Restricting information could mean bad decisions on the part of the people. Remember Trip, the people control this nation, you are no "better" than anyone of us, and since the people call the shots the people should be extremely well informed (which means access to save files every month).

At this time, i feel compelled to quote an expert on this matter, a certain friend : "Beware of he who would deny you information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."

As we progress through the ages, we should ALL be allowed to look on at our progress with pride. Let's make the Demo game fun for all, and let everyone have an active part in forming our nation, and seeing it grow.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Franses
Besides, I do not see at all why ministers and presidents are more trustworthy than other people.

The difference is that the Ministers/Prez are elected, thus a certain degree of trust needs to be placed in them based on their merits and performance as seen by the rest of us. After a few terms of the Civ2 game it is very easy to note the top posting citizens - these are certainly the most dedicated members, and they tend to get the positions they want in the Council, as they are dependable posters and have done so for the game. It is only natural that it is a kind of "reward" for effort put in the game, and these ppl are also the ones with good (or at least outspoken) ideas and the time to properly devote to the game.

And what about those who don't have Civ3! Do they just sit here and imagine what the map looks like, or will the Ministers post screenshots for their benefit?

[MrWhereItsAt]

In response to Timeline:

it is not tyranny. It is the Minister's responsiblity to post all that is in their domain for the coming set of turns - all questions must be answered. It is Open Government.

The whole purpose for the time limit on Council positions is that everyone who shows some little dedication gets a go at it, and thus gets the save for a while. Else why bother having elections for Ministers' positions? They just get the dull job of trawling through the forum to find every piece of info posted here, before giving it to the Prez. Why should the Minister need to let ppl know what's happening when

1. the only person who saw the turn and can actually post on events is the Prez, and

2. everyone can see the state of things anyway - 'cause they have the save.

If they have no role that only they can perform, Ministers are hardly needed at all. Why not just do everything by a set of Committees? Or go for a REAL Tyranny (albeit benevolent) where all the ppl let the Prez know what they wish, and the Prez plays?

[Alex]

Between terms. Excessive power to the people will always disrupt any nation, because the masses are frequently misguided.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Franses
Unbelievable that people even think of not distrubuting the sav files. It is a game, guys. Give everyone the opportunity to view its progress. Besides, I do not see at all why ministers and presidents are more trustworthy than other people (perhaps in real life it is even the opposite? ). Furthermore GOTM games, PBEM games etc. they all give the opportunity to play false. Does that mean we do not play them anymore. No, of course not. So, why should it be different for this game?

Because the game is not up for anyone to come by and look at. Like MWIA said, what if someone working against from another forum/site came by, thought he'd be funny and downloaded it, then posted screenshots or something? Can you assure that that won't happen?

[Adagio]

I might have a solution to the problem! Is it possible to make a room (which is "under" this room) locked for newcomers and untrustfully people (If those exist). In this room the save games are posted. To get into this room you have to be trusted in that you don't play ahead or reveal some of the secrets...

Though anyway, if this is posible or not, then I say: "savegame for everyone", it's not fun just looking at screenshots...

[Timeline]

They get the privilege of being able to see the save every turn, rather than just once a term(month?).

Also they get to directly advise the president and have great influence over their department (sounds like fun to me).

They need to keep the ppl informed for their term, and can post screenies if they like, etc.

Even if saves are posted once a term I would still very much like to see the opening development of our nation for the first month or so, so I am running for Minister of Imperial Expansion.

[Timeline]

Trip: if you really feel that is a threat then the save files should be sent to Members only. Although I don't really care for that idea (as it would require e mail addresses from every member and possibly limit others abilities to follow the game). But it would solve your problem even though I don't esp care for it.

Perhaps members that *want* to see the save game can have it sent to them via e mail having that option would silence opposers to the "closed game" policy that you are proposing, and also not make those that don't want to see the file so they dont have to (yes the minister still posts information on how they are doing) it would also limit threats from curruption...

[Timeline]

Gotta run guys, catch ya in a bit!

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Timeline
Trip: if you really feel that is a threat then the save files should be sent to Members only. Although I don't really care for that idea (as it would require e mail addresses from every member and possibly limit others abilities to follow the game). But it would solve your problem even though I don't esp care for it.

Perhaps members that *want* to see the save game can have it sent to them via e mail having that option would silence opposers to the "closed game" policy that you are proposing, and also not make those that don't want to see the file so they dont have to (yes the minister still posts information on how they are doing) it would also limit threats from curruption...

Hmmmm, I'd be a little more comfortable with that (it limits things, but not as much as I'd like... sure 12 people can be as bad as any, but there's much less chance of them doing something wrong, accepting the responsibility of being elected, than the 60+ members). Let's see how the poll goes.

[kring]

Originally posted by Franses
Unbelievable that people even think of not distrubuting the sav files. It is a game, guys. Give everyone the opportunity to view its progress. Besides, I do not see at all why ministers and presidents are more trustworthy than other people (perhaps in real life it is even the opposite? ). Furthermore GOTM games, PBEM games etc. they all give the opportunity to play false. Does that mean we do not play them anymore. No, of course not. So, why should it be different for this game?

I agree wholeheartedly. What you wind up getting if you limit information is a disenfranchised people; check out America for example, which is a republic, that according to the Pledge, it's closer to a democratic republic than anything else.

What is the point of getting involved if you have limited input as a citizen? Sounds like paranoia that someone from another forum is going to come in here and ruin it. How many people here go to other sites? Probably most, do any of us ruin those sites, or try to ruin this one? Maybe if it's one of those Clan things I hear about: Skaven and Guardian. Even then, that's petty.

Ministers will still have plenty to do, even with saves always available. Since the higher ups are the ones doing the actual moves, it makes no sense to not allow people to see it.

If you limit saves to rarely be seen, then you will have less input from the people as more people will say Obviously you don't trust us, the people; our votes don't matter/count.

Do you trust the politicians in your country to be more reliable and trustworthy than yourself? If you do, I have a do it yourself building kit to sell you because politicians the world over have shown themselves to be unreliable, untrustworthy, etc., yet they still keep getting elected.

Timeline Jeeze, this is a close vote.

Allowing saves to be viewed between terms does not diminish the ministers responsibility. He still needs to post screenies and inform ppl of whats going on, esp during the second half of the term when alot has changed and elections are coming up .

Not allowing people to view saves is absurd. Hiding the save files from the citizenry is TYRANNY. By limiting the saves to a select few, we limit the fun to a select few. We could have over a hundred members, all voting, but only 10 or 11 or so would be able to know whats really going on.

The whole point of the democracy game is for all of us to work as a team and lead our civ to global domination, but how can the populace make good decisions if they cannot see what is happening in the actual game first-hand? Answer: they cannot. Restricting information could mean bad decisions on the part of the people. Remember Trip, the people control this nation, you are no "better" than anyone of us, and since the people call the shots the people should be extremely well informed (which means access to save files every month).

At this time, i feel compelled to quote an expert on this matter, none other than Commisioner Previnlov : "Beware of he who would deny you information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."

As we progress through the ages, we should ALL be allowed to look on at our progress with pride. Let's make the Demo game fun for all, and let everyone have an active part in forming our nation, and seeing it grow.

Again, I wholeheartedly agree. Why should a person even consider being involved if this is the case? At least IRL, you can see what your politician is doing and take action quickly to get him out of office, even during their term if it is bad enough.

Trip, can you assure us it will happen? Also, only you can ruin your own fun. Something I learned a long time ago: we are in control of our emotions and emotional responses: If we ALLOW someone to ruin our fun, it is because we allowed it to happen; we chose to let it get ruined.

This debate is turning off people from getting involved. Just because some posts a lot doesn't mean that have more to contribute than others, just spending more time posting, even if they are posting great material. Others post elsewhere: CivFanatics, 1BigCommmunity, AllCiv, etc. Others spend more time learning the nuances of the game. These people are just as deserving to run for office, and get elected. I suspect it will be mostly a popularity contest anyway based on comments currently out there. That is a bad reason to elect someone. Of course, it is ONLY a game. Let us remember that?

These comments are meant as criticisms, just legitimate concerns, informed voter issues.

As it now stands, all is winning. How can everyone having access be a bad thing, other than what has been already posted? Overinformed voters is preferable to underinformed voters, unless you want to stay in power, and have reasons to keep them underinformed (which is what most IRL pols subscribe to; after all, if enough of the people knew what they were doing, they wouldn't be reelected.).

[Jon Shafer]

The reasons that the same corrupt politicians keep getting elected is for a few reasons. First, people don't really care enough to do something about it. Second, most people wouldn't run for political office even if they would win, so the same group of people is always up for election. Third, for the more prominant political positions, expensive campaigning and financial issues limit office to the wealthy elite. None of these is the case here, or if it is, then it has no significance upon what we're doing.

At the Infogrames forum, I can name you at least 3 or 4 times in the past year where someone has tried to ruin what was going on by some means or another... massive spamming, hacking, you name it, and that could be the case here as well. I'm not saying it will, but that it's a possibility. It's not that I don't trust the regular people who visit here, it's simply an external security issue. I don't trust full-time politicians because they've been bred and shaped to work within the system. If that involves being corrupt, then that's how it will be. I don't anticipate the same issues arising here.

Kring, I believe the issue is that it might happen, not whether it might not. No one can say either way if it will (unless they plan on doing it, or having someone do it), and that's why we must take precautions. I don't see how I would be ruining my own fun if I became upset after someone from another forum/site came, downloaded the .SAV, and posted screenshots of the map and all the civ locations everywhere. Are we supposed to shrug it off and keep playing as if we didn't know where the Japanese were? Or that there's a huge, incredibly resource-laiden uninhabited continent just a few tiles away from our visible sight?

So far you've been focusing on why having an open save file is good. If nothing else, tell me how you would address such a situation, should it occur, since that is the only reason I advocate keeping the .SAV distribution restricted.

[kring]

Several ways have already been mentioned. Banned the person; possibly permanent. I am an Admin at another site; as such (and I would think a similar thing here), I can see someone's IP address, and ban that IP address if needed; it hasn't ever been needed BTW; this would be to prevent the person from getting a new name and coming back in. Of course, they are ways around this as well). Emailing the file would also work; a hassle for those who have limited email access. Public humiliation would work against some people. Limit access to the Democracy board; as an Admin, I can limit access to a specific board so I would think the Admins and mods here would have that same power. I could see where some people (I won't mention names, but you could probably think of more than I can) would not be allowed to join, since they could be too disruptive.

Mightism rarely occurs, so I am not going to worry about it. How many mights actually come to pass? Very few. I have this same kind of discussion with a co worker, always worrying about mights that don't happen. I might get hit by an asteroid, but do I prepare for it? No, in case there was any doubt. I do have a firewall since I have been hacked myself, so I do understand that issue full well. Some people can be full of mischief;

I have yet to see a good reason for not allowing full access: Isn't that what democracy is all about? My biggest concern is that not allowing people full access is going to discourage people getting involved, as I mentioned earlier. It will become like some secret society. Limit who can join and have access would be an option, but a poor one.

On the issue of major money for campaigns, media have said over and over again, that it doesn't win races, except for when a media backed person loses to someone that spent a lot of money. LOL.