Names For Cities

[DarkCloud]

These are the choices for how we shall name our cities in the Democracy Game... If there are any others, please list below.

Cabinet Ministers
All Players
Historical Names (UR, Nineveh, etc.)
Active Members (Posting in last 2 weeks)
Other

[civman2000]

what does "cabinet ministers" mean? Does it mean tthe cities are named after them or they take turns naming them?

[Adagio]

I'd say all active citizens...

[Vlad Antlerkov]

All active players within the last two weeks get to name a city.

Now, in what order they go, I don't know. Maybe in order of joining...

[Spiffor]

I go for active players too :
- this is very democratic, and gives an incentive to follow the game, even to those who aren't in the cabinet.
- the definition of "active player" is very wide. You won't have to do as much work as Moral Hazard or Gramphos to be considered one.
- the game won't be stuck when waiting for a completely inactive player, who checks the forum rarely (that's why I voted "active players" rather than "all players").

I think that order of joining is the easiest to implement, so I'd go for it too.

Civman2000 :
As we'll quickly run out of ministers to name the cities after , I think it means the ministers get to name the cities as it pleases them (or the polls they hold).

[Moral Hazard]

I agree about active citiizens naming the cities. But more importantly the first city should be named Trippen.

[Inverse Icarus]

other. you should have a combination of active players and histoical events.

on example of a historical event in the civ2 demo. game was when they lost an elephant to the babylonian forces. they captured Ellipi and renamed it "Babar" after the elephant from childrens books.

[Jon Shafer]

I agree with Hazard and Uber. We should be able to name cities after important events/battles/etc.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Trip

I agree with Hazard and Uber. We should be able to name cities after important events/battles/etc.

and presidents?

[Inverse Icarus]

the first city should be named "Apolyton". it just has to

[huntergatherer]

perhaps if regional governors were introduced a la Civfanatics, then they would be responsible. Otherwise, I think those who have participated actively should be able to suggest names/Hazard & Uber's ideas are both good solutions.

[Chandragupta]

In my view, the ideal way to have these cities named would be to, when new city construction is imminent, to issue an open call on ideas, take the reasonable (determined by the cabinet) names, and then have the populous vote.

[Kuciwalker]

Active citizens choose the name, though not necessarily in the order that they joined.

[Purple]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I go for active players too :
- this is very democratic, and gives an incentive to follow the game, even to those who aren't in the cabinet.
- the definition of "active player" is very wide. You won't have to do as much work as Moral Hazard or Gramphos to be considered one.
- the game won't be stuck when waiting for a completely inactive player, who checks the forum rarely (that's why I voted "active players" rather than "all players").

I think that order of joining is the easiest to implement, so I'd go for it too.

I agree with Spiffor on these points , the argument for which I outlined more fully in this thread, but for those who don't want to read it, basically the idea is to encourage participation by everyone.

Players may decide whether to name cities after people, events, or the Banana .

Captured cities should either be left with their original name or renamed, whatever the next person in line decides. Other player can lobby for a given name. Or in the case of a monumental event, the cabinet could decide to suspend the process temporarily and give a city a special commemorative name.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Trip

I agree with Hazard and Uber. We should be able to name cities after important events/battles/etc.

Erm, usually it's the other way round