game policy question - refugees

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Dis
I just figured it should be up to the individual teams who they allow into their civ.

But I'm all for people shifting teams upon their defeat. It's up to each civ to decide how to implement that.

I would say this assumption or statement is exactly why we need a team vote. Some people in this thread have said conqueror only, and some others have said only if they have contact.

If we leave it up to the teams to police it themselves, then I am going to recruit Daddy-O right now, and get some good intell on where the other continent stands

See my point

[Daddy-O]

Even with the yellow? Bananoj gismorte!

[conmcb25]

We will even let him post in yellow in our private forums

[Daddy-O]

YES!

[binTravkin]

I just figured it should be up to the individual teams who they allow into their civ.

As long as it's about person who is not or haven't been in other team in the very same demogame.

[Lacero]

Originally posted by conmcb25
We will even let him post in yellow in our private forums

Alpha Centauri is so much more civilised, the UN Charter against atrocities is in effect from the start :P

[Daddy-O]

I gave up on yellow.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=5074302&t=8568#post5074302

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Dis
I just figured it should be up to the individual teams who they allow into their civ.

But I'm all for people shifting teams upon their defeat. It's up to each civ to decide how to implement that.

well said

let the good times roll, and let the people play

[binTravkin]

I'm afraid there's little objective argumentation in this thread, as this should've been decided before game started.

We should be conservative in this matter, meaning that if something could hurt the game, we better not do it.
Knowledge passed over would certainly leave an impact, as con suggested.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by binTravkin
I'm afraid there's little objective argumentation in this thread, as this should've been decided before game started.

We should be conservative in this matter, meaning that if something could hurt the game, we better not do it.
Knowledge passed over would certainly leave an impact, as con suggested.

But it wasn't decided ahead of time, and I don't want the Banana guys to suffer because the rest of us were too lazy to do so.

Im all for more participation in these games as they seem to be more tests of perserverance than skill

And I dont see what the big deal is about deciding now. Take a team vote, everyone abide by it, the Banana's know there options, then we move on.

Right now we are in limbo and no one knows what to do, and inaction leading to less participation in this game is unsat IMHO

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Kloreep
You can have multiple badges within the same demogame, nothing about the civgroups system disallows that. I think I remember some of the Lux Invicta refugees in the PTWDG having two badges after their defeat.

Look at me for example

Okay, we have to have a decision here. I want every team to PM me with their vote out of the following options:

1. Refugees are done with the game, sorry for the losing bit.
2. Refugees may join other teams on their same continent only.
3. Refugees may join other teams not at war with their current civ.
4. Refugees may join any other team without restrictions.

AND

1. Refugees are barred from discussing any details of their prior civ or knowledge that the current team does not have.
2. Refugees are free to discuss anything they want.

I will note that I will not aggressively purse people if the latter vote comes out to (1); I will only take actions if it's obvious to me that someone is using unfair knowledge.

Unless one of 1-4 wins at least 4 votes, or unless there is an obvious compromise that has enough support to win outright, there will be a runoff between either the two top vote getters, or my opinion on the two most likely winning selections if there are not two clear top vote getters.

The vote will be open for a week, but I will go aggressively after anyone who doesn't vote

If there is a 3-3 tie, I will ask Banana what they think to break the tie, as they should've had a vote in this had it been decided earlier. They do have a bias of course, but it's somewhat unfair to disenfranchise them from something they should've had an opinion on

[snoopy369]

If there are any options not covered in 1-4 I will accept them if at least 2 teams PM support adding that option; if only one team supports adding it I will not add it (as it won't have enough support anyway). I'm doing my best to narrow it to 4 based on discussion, and would rather have narrowed it to 2 or 3

[conmcb25]

snoop I would prefer #2 to be:

"2. Refugees may join other teams with which they have contact with."

That one once the continents hook up someone could jump continents if they prefer.

I would also take that a step further and say when the two continents hook up, Banana (or any other team eliminated before contact) could then join a team on the other continent. Thats my interpretation however, I dont think that specifically needs to go into the rules.

[snoopy369]

If others agree i'll change that (or add it as #2.1).

I would interpret any rule that we made that way - ie, if there is a provision in it that is not met now but is met later, any rule we make will be enforced based on the conditions at the moment of enforcing, not at the moment of creation.

[conmcb25]

I think it would be better to change (in the spirit of narrowing options )

But hopefully another team (s) will feel the same.

Enforce comment

These things need to be done with some sense of reality