Naming new cities

[Purple]

Do we have a procedure or policy for naming newly founded cities or renaming captured cities?

If not, here's a suggestion: let each member offer one name. This will create a pool from which a city name will be selected, perhaps randomly, when needed.

We also need Great Leader names.

I hereby apply for the post of Minister of Nomenclature.

[Purple]

Personally, I favor retaining a captured city's name. However, I can see where renaming might be a Good Thing, for example to honor a prominent person or significant event.

Names should not include the word "New."

We should keep in mind that shorter names obscure less of the map.

For convenience, names should be pronounceable.

[punkbass2000]

Perhaps naming rights could go down the CoC (as soon as the CoC is decided). For example, the first city would be named by the prez, second by the vice prez, whoever's next (military?).

[Jon Shafer]

I agree with punkie. If someone from the citizenry comes up with a good name, just give it to one of the members of the Senate, and then we can run down a list or something. Not that it really matters anyways.

[Kuciwalker]

We should name them after active members, though not in the order that they signed up. If we decide to name it after someone, though, they can choose to name it themselves instead of just using their name (everyone with me? that was a little odd).

[Spiffor]

I think it's a good idea, but 2 problems arise :
In what order should we give ppl the right to name a city ?
Whhat if our number of cities exceeds the number of people ?

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Whhat if our number of cities exceeds the number of people ?

The go from the end to the beginning again.

[Kuciwalker]

We should name them only after active members, and then we go through again, but then they have to choose a name that's not their own.

[Spiffor]

I'd rather say they chosse the name, whatever it is (say, Uber will cal his city "UberKrux", I'll call my city "Production" for example). The only restriction we should give to players is not to offend someone when namin the city (say, "Togas sucks" or something )

[Captain]

I like Purple's suggestions.

I also favour the practice of declaring a 'hometown' and if ministers mess up my hometown, then that's a blackmark against them when the next elections come up. It's completely arbitrary since I don't really have any stake in the digital town, but it'll give me more reasons to vote for/against people when their playing strategies are indistinguishable.


Names I popularly use are:

Citadel (capital)
Verdant (fertile city)
Bastion (military stronghold city)
Omnicron (high production city)
Venture (city with potential, but risks being captured)
Resurrection (city I rebuilt over ruins)
Morass (city I placed stupidly)

Just my 0.02$

[Moral Hazard]

Whats wrong with offending people

I like the idea of cycling the naming right through the counsel (cabinet). Of course there is a poll on this.

[atawa]

Let the citizens come up with names, have the president select the 5 best and poll on it

[Timeline]

I too, like the suggestion of cycling down through the cabinet members and letting each one name a city. Citizens can give a name to any cabinet member, and if the official chooses to ignore it, then he/she will naturally lose popularity. And also, this idea let’s everyone have some fun, instead of just one group or one person.

[mordok]

Every member should name one city.

[Spiffor]

I think Timeline has a good idea. It's easier cycling through cabinet members than the whole population (which would be very frustrating for the 85th member or so)...
Influencing the cabinet members is a good idea, as every active citizen can have some creativity fun.