Should Ministers Pick City Names First?

[Jon Shafer]

Due to many people suggesting this, I decided to make it a poll, since some people wanted Random/ministers 1st, but the votes split either way.

Question:
Should Ministers (in the order of Administration, in that thread) get to pick names for cities before everyone else (either random or joining order). Also, should we skip inactive members (I will PM whoever's turn it is next, if they don't reply within 10 days, then they lose their spot. The first ones who are picked to respond get to pick first)? If people vote to still include inactive members, then their names will be used exactly (for example, if I didn't reply within 10 days, then my city would be named "Trip").

Options:
Group 1 - Ministers should get first pick
- We should skip inactive members.
- We should simply use inactive members' names for the cities.

Group 2 - Ministers don't get first pick
- We should skip inactive members.
- We should simply use inactive members' names for the cities.

Expiration:
2 Days

[jdd2007]

first of all, i assume the president (you) is counted as a minister here

definitely yes. the ministers are the people most involved in this game. they deserve the first cities to be named after them.

[Vlad Antlerkov]

I'm backing option 1-- ministers going first (in the order outlined in the Administration thread), then random, skipping over inactive members.

Basing activeness on responsiveness to PMs actually might work, since they could provide a reliable indicator as to whether one is still active or not. If based on posts, then we're ignoring people who just vote, but never state their opinions in posts.

Then again, am I assuming too much when I think that most of us have e-mail notification for PMs turned on?

[Switch]

I too agree with Group 1, Option A.

However, what about people who get PMed while on vacation? Perhaps people who are going for longer than 10 days could either PM a minister, or post it in a specific thread where it would get noticed by thee who PMs the populace.

I mean, I'm going to Newfieland for 2 weeks, so I don't want to come back and find I've missed my chance to name a city . I think that would be better than having someone who misses their chance saying it after the fact, 'cause then people who are generally inactive could use that as an excuse, when they didn't deserve their own city.

[Inverse Icarus]

we're not going to name the cities after the people right? we're giving the people a chance to NAME it whatever tey want, right?

[Jon Shafer]

If they respond, then they can name it whatever they like. If they don't, then we either skip them, or use their name for the city (depending on how the vote goes).

[Inverse Icarus]

skip them. (IMHO)

voted choice 1.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by SwitchMoO
I too agree with Group 1, Option A.

However, what about people who get PMed while on vacation? Perhaps people who are going for longer than 10 days could either PM a minister, or post it in a specific thread where it would get noticed by thee who PMs the populace.

I mean, I'm going to Newfieland for 2 weeks, so I don't want to come back and find I've missed my chance to name a city . I think that would be better than having someone who misses their chance saying it after the fact, 'cause then people who are generally inactive could use that as an excuse, when they didn't deserve their own city.

Members who are known to be active will be given leniancy on this issue.

[jdd2007]

Originally posted by Trip

Members who are known to be active will be given leniancy on this issue.

thats right. we should only pm people if there are any doubts about them being active...

[Switch]

k, good. Though we'll need to be PMed anyways to tell us it's our turn, and for us to reply with our city name.

[civman2000]

Also, if you're a major active member you should say somewhere (maybe just as a ps to a post or something) when you're leaving. For example, I'll say now that I'm leaving to go to Utah the night of the 28th and returning July 10th.

[Papa Chubby]

Personally I believe that it should not be a prerogative to be able to name a city if you are a minister. Why should the military advisor get to name the a city we have just recently constructed, I can´t see why. If it were a city recently captured after some heavy fighting or a stunning victory, then yes, but otherwise no.
If a minister´s should get the right to name cities it should only be the president and then only one city for his entire tenure.

It should be simply the people, randomly chosen that decide upon the names. The ministers can simply get a lottery ticket like the rest of us and hope for the best.

[Wojit]

And what happens when new elections are held? The order is screwed up? Ex-Ministers without cities lose their rights? What? WHAT!?!?!?!?
*cough*

[Kingof the Apes]

Choice one.

I'll be on vacation from July 6 to July 13.

And Wojit, maybe we could have former minesters with no city have higher priority over other citezens.

[hetairoi22]

Group 1-Choice 1

I'll be gone this weekend