Metaverse Council Elections

The Metaverse Council (MVC) has recently lost a representative to the Lord of the Rings Online Beta. We'd like to get a new representative to replace this loss. Previously, MVC representatives have either been appointed by an active empire or selected from the GC2 community by the MVC itself.

However, one of the issues that was discussed when we initially formed the MVC was how to make it a truly representative body of the GalCiv2 community. At that time in the interests of expediency we chose to start the Council with representatives appointed by the major metaverse empires that were active at the time. It was certainly hoped that at some point we would move to a more democratic MVC councilor selection process. I think that this point is now.

I want to quickly refresh everyone’s memory about the purpose and scope of the MVC. Although the MVC did none of the actual work it’s clear that the introduction of AltMeta Classes would not have occurred without the effort put forth by the MVC. The MVC has recently been sitting on it’s collective laurels, taking a break from all the effort expended in helping to define the AltMeta Class system and partly due to the major forum changes that have recently occurred at the Galactic Core. In any case it’s time to get back to work.

Speaking of work there’s clearly a lot more to be done. Cari has provided an endgame.xml that is saved by the game and is something that we have great hopes for providing a whole range of new functionality to the AltMeta. We’re looking to be able to support Metaverse Mods, Metaverse Scenarios and Tournaments. The exact nature of these functions and precisely how all this will work are currently very far from being defined let alone having any specific detail worked out. There are certainly many challenges and a whole new set of infrastructure that will be associated with providing these functions. Anyway the point of this is to give folks some idea of the work that’s ahead of us.

So back to the topic of an election, the MVC would like to select a single MVC representative determined by popular election here on the GalCiv2 forums. To give folks an idea of what we're looking for we have the following criteria. We're not really interested in a popularity contest, however the potential MVC representative must; want the job, want the metaverse to succeed and flourish, and, be willing to put forth the effort it takes to achieve this goal. An established forum presence is a plus but not absolutely essential, however the ability and willingness to stand up and promote themselves, the AltMeta and the Metaverse is essential. The ability to cogently express their own opinions and the willingness to actually listen to the opinions of others is also important.

Experience in the game is absolutely *not* required. We'd rather have an exuberant newbie, than a jaded expert (however by no means would we turn down an exuberant expert).

We're not really looking for the second coming of JFK but we are looking for folks that can stand up and say that they want the job, be able to explain why they want the job, and be able to convince others that they would be good at the job. People should feel free to nominate any that they feel are particularly worthy, but it is expected that anyone interested should be able to mount at least a minimal 'campaign' on their own behalf.

They only absolute requirement on any that wish to be a MVC representative is that you *must* have submitted at least one metaverse game. It doesn't have to be a high scoring game, it doesn't even have to be a win, but you must have submitted at least a single metaverse game.

Actually, none of the above is really set in stone, they're really just guidelines that we can use to start the discussion. Besides actually considering who should be the next MVC councilor, a large part of this discussion should be about the actual process of how we go about this. This is our first attempt at "free elections" on the GalCiv2 site. How do you think this should be held? Who should be allowed to vote? These and many more questions are ones that I’d like to address in this thread.



50,132 views 124 replies
Reply #1 Top
A quickie. It might be a good idea to list all the current members and how they were chosen, so everyone knows who shouldn't be nominated, since they are already a councilor. It also gives a human feel to how it worked in the past. If I had time, I would do it myself, but I have to run this morning...

AKA

Mumblefratz - Elected by the Galactic Diplomats
Reply #2 Top
It might be a good idea to list all the current members and how they were chosen

Good point. In alphabetical order we have the following.

AlexAtticus - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
DethAdder - Elected by the Galactic Diplomats
GW Swicord - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
Macmatt - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
MarshallONeil - Elected by the High Command Hegemony
MBM1215 - At large representative elected directly by the MVC
Mumblefratz - Elected by the Galactic Diplomats
Quixen - Elected by the High Command Hegemony
Syrrus K - Selected from the B. C. Space Orcas
Thagee - Selected from B.C. Space Orcas
TheGreatEmperor - Elected by the Arrakis Imperium
Vukasika - Elected by the Arrakis Imperium

Actually it's Thagee's departure to participate in the Lord of the Rings Online Beta that has prompted this election. I also want to point out that there were at least three different methods used to select the current set of representatives. The fact that are three different selection methods (and were about to introduce a fourth here) has no bearing on the legitimacy of any member of the MVC. Reality has to be dealt with each step of the way. Certainly we're all under no delusion that we have by any means a perfect representative system, but we have tried at each step of the way to be as representative as realistically possible. This election is just another step further in that direction.

The biggest problem that the MVC and the Metaverse faces is that there are far more people actively posting games to the metaverse than actively post to these forums. This results in a gross underestimation (IMHO) of the amount of folks interested in the metaverse, it results in empires that appear to be defunct when they really aren't, and it results in being very difficult to gauge the consensus opinion of metaverse players. I call this the “tip of the iceberg” problem.

I do want to stress what I mentioned earlier that the legitimacy of any MVC councilor is no less than that of any other MVC councilor regardless of the method used for their selection. With this in mind I want to point out a subtle difference in the wording from the above list of councilors that highlights the “tip of the iceberg” problem. You’ll notice that the representatives from the B.C. Space Orcas were “selected from” not “elected by” the B.C Space Orcas. The reason for this is that we couldn’t find enough Orcas posting to actually hold any sort of election. This implies that the Orcas were in a state of decline which was clearly not the case. At that time the Orcas were #1 in the metaverse. Using data provided by the AltMeta we see that 28 different Orcas have posted about 185 games to the metaverse in the past 6 months, 19 games in the last month alone. The Orca’s are by no means dead, they simply don’t post all that much to these forums.

I can probably go through the data and find many such examples, but I’ll limit myself to one more. The Qourth Empire, still currently 5th on the official metaverse with about 125 games posted in the last 6 months and 15 in the last month. We’ve never been able to make any contact with anyone from the Qourth Empire and it hasn’t been for lack of trying. Their most prolific player, Spindoctor (terrymc512003), has only made a single reply in a single thread in the year he’s been a member. Qourth, the emperor of the Qourth Empire, has posted more games this last month (6) than posts or replies that he’s made for the last year. I’m not trying to single any folks out here and I’m not being critical of people’s interest in these forums, I’m just pointing out that this is an issue that is difficult to deal with when trying to set up a representative body of metaverse players.

The reason I bring up this issue is in relationship to this election of a new representative to the MVC. I’d like the polling method that is used to be able to reach as many interested people as possible. Clearly if folks don’t read these forums at all then it’s pretty much impossible to reach them, but we can reach those that merely lurk these forums without posting. One of the ways we’re considering holding the vote is to provide an email address for folks to be able to vote anonymously. This is in attempt to reach those that don’t wish to post here.

Anyway these are all ideas that need to be considered.



Reply #5 Top
Now, this is the discussion thread right?

Because we still have a few things to decide, such as how we will accept the votes.

Also in your lenghty intro you mentioned one of the criteria to be one metaverse game, yet I dont remember us deciding that this was to be a requirement. I personally think it should not be for it will constrain possible nominations of people who do not want to use the Metaverse function because they dubed it unfair and unnecessary. But, that doesnt necessarily mean that they dont want to improve the system and make it better.

@PlayJeff: Well I personally dont mind, but we as the Council would want this thread to remain a bit more serious. It is only its beggining after all, so I dont think we should get sidetracked just yet.
Reply #7 Top
As this is a first attempt at a true public election, I'm sure there will be a few bumps and some kinks to work out.
btw: To get an idea of what we've been up to thus far(and a little insight into the job description) click below to check out the MVCs forum.

Reply #8 Top
Also in your lengthy intro you mentioned one of the criteria to be one metaverse game

This can certainly be discussed but I was under the impression that there was reasonable agreement on the criteria of a single metaverse game for any potential councilor. It's certainly been used as a requirement for any councilors elected thus far. This was an implicit requirement for those councilors elected from an empire, but it was an explicit requirement for the four councilors elected "at large" directly by the Council. IIRC we even waited a bit so that GW would have his first metaverse game submitted before we finalized the nominations for the At Large reps.

Previously I had suggested a single metaverse game as a criteria even for voting but it was apparent that this was not well received. At this point I agree that it's not a good idea to have this constraint as a rule for voting.

I do see your point in suggesting that there may be those that have felt that the current system is unfair but would still be willing to work to improve it. However, I think we have already taken significant steps to improve it as represented by the changes introduced into the AltMeta. The only way for a game to get into the AltMeta is for it to have been submitted to the official Metaverse. Also I would submit that a person that held the metaverse in such distain that they wouldn't be willing to submit a single metaverse game would probably be not all that interested in improving it.

I personally don't see it as a great barrier to entry that a *Metaverse* Council representative have had the experience of at least one metaverse game. We are after all trying to represent metaverse players. How well can someone represent metaverse players if they have never submitted a single game of their own. If it's really felt that we the need to vote on this specific aspect we can certainly do so. But as I said I think this has been at least tacitly agreed to by a substantial majority of councilors.

[edit]
Perhaps we should add one additional requirement on being a MVC councilor, the ability and willingness to read and author lengthy posts. Actually I'm sort of joking here. I certainly don't think that this should be an explicit requirement. However, I'm sure this thread will become fair warning to any that wish to become MVC Councilors that there's not much glamor in it and a whole lot of verbosity and tedium. Consider yourself warned.
[edit]
Reply #9 Top
Well the emperor may not like what I have to say but.....Nobody else is submitting. I think we need (and yes i say we) somebody with fire. It may upset Stardock but I don't care. I believe somebody like Neilo or wheelofire would be perfect. they are on the sites all the time.(not the wheel anymore). Wyndstar if he had time. My 10 cents worth cause my time is worth more than 2 cents. chat later.
Reply #10 Top
It may upset Stardock but I don't care. I believe somebody like Neilo or wheelofire would be perfect. they are on the sites all the time.(not the wheel anymore). Wyndstar if he had time. My 10 cents worth cause my time is worth more than 2 cents. chat later.


This sounds like a nomination. If you would like to nominate them then you can.
Reply #11 Top
Wyndstar and Neilo are both reasonable nominations. Certainly anyone "nominated" would have to express the desire to be on the Council. In some sense the benefit of nominations are to encourage folks and give them a reasonable confidence that there is support for their candidacy.

I do agree with the concept of someone with some fire and drive but I'm not so enthralled with the idea of someone known to annoy Stardock. After all without Stardock we have absolutely nothing. It's also good to have differing opinions. As you can see TGE and I don't always agree on everything, but generally when there's something that we both can agree on then it's pretty well assured that it will benefit the community. Perhaps the biggest example of this is our selection of GW Swicord as a councilor. We wanted someone willing to be the devil's advocate that looked at things from a different perspective. So far we have not been disapointed.
Reply #12 Top
Back to the game criteria. I want this to be an open election, no constraints besides the will and want to help improve the community in general, not just the metaverse or the Altmetaverse.

If someone wants the job, and wants to help, then I dont think it would matter if they have a meta game or not.

I know it has been a protocol from the begining of the Council, but back then it was different. We were a bunch of people who were concerned about the meta and participated regularly, now as far as I can see to us it wouldnt effect us if we had the criteria. It wasnt ever set down in stone, it was just there to begin with, we all had games already, so we all already fulfilled the unwritten requirement. Now GW was a different case just because some Councilors did not support him as a potential member, at least in the begining. Him getting a Meta game I think subtely proved that he cared and wanted change, dispelling the doubt.

Now I am willing to agree to the criteria, if and only if, it does not shun anyone who wants to participate from the election. Meaning that if someone does show up clearly wanting the job that we allow him/her to have a chance at winning.

After all I judge the people of the community to pick who is best, regardless of what we say.
Reply #13 Top
Well why don't we treat it as a true election.

You have already stated approximately the criteria for running. Have it firmed up and then post it.

All those who want to run i.e. want the job, would then have to post an application expressing their desire to fill the position and why they would like to do so.

You would then have a list of potential candidates with their election criteria.

At this point the candidate list (with the criteria)could be posted and members would need to second and third a candidate. From this you will obtain a list of candidates that have been 2nd and 3rd by the community. This list would make the final posted lists of the candidates and an election could be held.
Reply #14 Top
A good method, and no principal denial criteria.

A vote?(To the Council Chambers!! AWAY!!)
Reply #15 Top
I'm certainly flattered at your gesture PlayJeff, and would be interested of course. I will say, that Wyndstar would be a great asset to the MVC and would be a shoe-in if he had the time to dedicate to the cause.

I have to agree with Mumble in that for someone to be considered for the position that they have completed at least 1 MV game. One would not elect someone to a fishing club committee if that person had never cast a line before.

In a perfect world i guess you would want someone who posts games often and posts on these forums often. Someone who fits that description would undoubtedly have my vote.

I am though, keen to see the MV succeed. I play mainly in the MV and enjoy the changes made to the Alt-Meta (hey i'm 12th on there ) and am really keen on seeing more initiatives being implemented. That being said though am i the person for the job?

I don't know. Certainly you would want someone who plays in the MV often and is on these forums alot too. Not that i don't like the core but i am here far more than i am there, and i do have a "fire" in the belly. I don't believe i have ever gone out of my way to annoy Stardock, but yes Kryo has had to remind me to cool down once or twice. That being said, i have not had a any reprimand or a cross word with any of the dev's at all. But hey, that's what you get with me, i give respect where it is deserved and tell it like i see it.

Will i accept a nomination. Yes, if one was submitted, i would be glad to help out. Am i the person your looking for, you decide. Either way if the MVC and the MV as a whole is to succeed i would like to see a real fight over this last position, and to see that the person elected is out to help the MV not themselves.


but I'm not so enthralled with the idea of someone known to annoy Stardock.


Well, i hope i am not perceived to annoy Stardock. I never believe in biting the hand that feeds you...

After all I judge the people of the community to pick who is best, regardless of what we say.


Would not a little lee-way here be prudent. I mean, you don't need someone who is just going to pay lip service to the council. Might a little research by the council into all nominee's be worthwhile, just to affirm that they are indeed widely active.

PS. Another feather in the cap of "played 1 Metaverse game". By having this criteria does this not ensure that the person elected has a legal copy of GalCiv2. I don't think you can post a MV game without a serial. By getting a non-mv player you/we might unknowingly have someone who has a pirated copy. Just another way of keeping stardock happy i guess.



Reply #16 Top
Well, i hope i am not perceived to annoy Stardock. I never believe in biting the hand that feeds you...

My intent wasn't to imply that you specifically, or anyone else for that matter, is perceived to annoy Stardock. My comment was merely in response to the implication in PlayJeffs comment that someone with fire may upset Stardock.

It's often hard enough to remember how I feel about any one person on this board let alone remember how anyone else gets along with Stardock or gets along with anyone else for that matter. It's so hard to keep track of who does or doesn't get along with one another. That's why I prefer to get along with everyone. You never know but today's worst enemy could become your best supporter on the next issue that comes along. Plus I always prefer to give folks the benefit of the doubt. If someone happens to annoy me one day perhaps it just because he's having a bad day. Or perhaps it's me that's having the bad day to be annoyed in the first place. There's generally no real benefit in trying to assign blame, the blame is as likely to be yours as it is to be anyone else's.

Anyway, I digress. I think we should resolve the submission of a metaverse game as a first course of business otherwise it will begin to undermine everything else that we're trying to do here.

We have some picayune and pedantic rules surrounding the taking of votes on the MVC. The primary purpose of these rules is to ensure that there has been sufficient discussion of a topic and to ensure that folks have had time to give and form their own opinion.

In any case I move that the MVC take a vote on whether or not the submission of a metaverse game should or should not be a requirement for a MVC councilor. Do I have a second?

To let everyone else know how we go about things in the MVC, at the point I get a second we will have another three days for discussion prior to the taking of the vote. Any councilor could also request and be granted another three days of discussion, althouth to date this has never occured. After the three days we will have a poll (publically accessible) over on the MVC Forums at the Galactic Core that can last up to 5 days. Any change to the status quo (and in this case the requirement of a single MV game submission for a councilor must be considered the status quo) must be approved by a 70% majority of the council.

Anyway, it's clear on which side of the topic that TGE's and my opinion fall. What would be most instructive is to have the GC2 community weigh in with their opinions. If we get a clear signal one way or the other then I'm sure that will sway our opinion in that direction.
Reply #17 Top
I do have to say that there is some merit underneath what TGE is suggesting. Basically it's saying that the MVC isn't necessarily representative of only the Metaverse but is actually representative of all GalCiv2 players, not merely just those interested in the metaverse.

Actually, I think that this is a fine potential goal for the council but I think that's getting a bit ahead of ourselves. We have definitely started as a representative body of metaverse players. I think we're still really trying to establish that we truly do represent *all* metaverse players. The upcoming elections are part and parcel in helping to establish this.

I'm all for eventually trying to expand our charter to include representation of *all* GalCiv2 players, but I believe that's too big a bite to take at one time. Maybe next year.
Reply #18 Top
Well I believe Neilo fits the description the MVC is looking for. I do'nt know if I am allowed to nominate anybody but if I can, then thats who I nominate.  
Reply #19 Top
Well I believe Neilo fits the description the MVC is looking for. I do'nt know if I am allowed to nominate anybody but if I can, then thats who I nominate.

Your opinion is always welcomed. And you're always allowed to express it.   

BTW it's really not necessary for folks to explicitly nominate someone. In reality a nomination is just encouragment to someone to run. The person nominated still needs to be willing to put forth the effort. However, just because someone hasn't nominated you doesn't mean that you shouldn't be considered. If someone would like to be a councilor, has the time required to dedicate to the effort and thinks they would be a good representative, then I encourage you to just step up and say so. Please don't stand on the formality of being nominated.

Also, just because you may think you don't have a chance *this* time that's still no reason to be shy. Most real politicans run knowing full well they won't win this time but do so that their name will be recognized the *next* time. The current crop of councilors are probably not going to stick around forever, heck I may even be looking for someone to replace me next time. This does turn out to be a lot of work after all.
Reply #20 Top
At this point the candidate list (with the criteria) could be posted and members would need to second and third a candidate. From this you will obtain a list of candidates that have been 2nd and 3rd by the community. This list would make the final posted lists of the candidates and an election could be held.

As good a suggestion as any, we’ll probably end up doing something pretty much like it. However, as any good politician would do we'll probably hem and haw for a bit before we get down to the real meat of the elections.

This may appear to be plain old procrastination but there is some method to my madness. I'm in no real rush here, to me anyway the process is probably more important than the outcome. I want to give folks time to consider and to contribute their opinion.

The apparent slowness with which we move is also good training for the potential MVC councilor. Nothing that involves gathering a consensus opinion and getting others to do what it takes to actually accomplish it happens very quickly. This was certainly true in defining the changes to the AltMeta and it will be no less true in developing a system supporting Metaverse Mods, Metaverse Scenarios and Tournaments. I know from personal experience that the slowness of progress can be very frustrating, but I’ve also found from experience that when people are all gung ho about getting something done right this very instant that nothing usually comes of it. The only proven way to change is slow and methodical.

There are literally hundreds of good ideas that come up on these boards on at least a weekly basis. They’re usually a flash in the pan with everyone having a definite opinion and excited about it but within a few days the topic is usually forgotten and nothing ever comes of it. A phrase that I’ve used many times is very apropos. There are hundreds of good ideas each having a handful of people supporting them but what we need are a handful of ideas that have hundreds of people supporting them.
Reply #21 Top
Either way if the MVC and the MV as a whole is to succeed i would like to see a real fight over this last position,


It is by far not the last, however it is an experiment. We arent sure how well this method would work, so we would like as many candidates as possible. A wide variety encourages more voters.

Would not a little lee-way here be prudent. I mean, you don't need someone who is just going to pay lip service to the council. Might a little research by the council into all nominee's be worthwhile, just to affirm that they are indeed widely active.


We have discussed this and we have agreed to not influence the elections whatsoever. Sure we will make sure that a candidate is able, but we wont favor one over another, nor will we advertise and help campaign for any one of them.

In any case I move that the MVC take a vote on whether or not the submission of a metaverse game should or should not be a requirement for a MVC councilor. Do I have a second?


I second, however I am not throughly convinced, I want the rule to be that this criteria will not bar any able candidate from the race.

Actually, I think that this is a fine potential goal for the council but I think that's getting a bit ahead of ourselves. We have definitely started as a representative body of metaverse players. I think we're still really trying to establish that we truly do represent *all* metaverse players. The upcoming elections are part and parcel in helping to establish this.


This is where the contradiction comes in. We already dont have a voting requirement of one game submition, so essential this election will represent all Gal Civ2 players.
Reply #22 Top
In any case I move that the MVC take a vote on whether or not the submission of a metaverse game should or should not be a requirement for a MVC councilor. Do I have a second?

I second, however I am not throughly convinced, I want the rule to be that this criteria will not bar any able candidate from the race.

In this case then I guess you would have to vote no then. The current status quo of the MVC is that a MVC councilor is required to have submitted at least a single metaverse game. What you are proposing is a definite change.

Actually, I think that this is a fine potential goal for the council but I think that's getting a bit ahead of ourselves. We have definitely started as a representative body of metaverse players. I think we're still really trying to establish that we truly do represent *all* metaverse players. The upcoming elections are part and parcel in helping to establish this.

This is where the contradiction comes in. We already dont have a voting requirement of one game submition, so essential this election will represent all Gal Civ2 players.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. By not having a one game submission requirement on people casting ballots for a metaverse councilor (which I was against btw) all we are doing is allowing non metaverse players to cast ballots for metaverse councilors. If you really want to open this up for discussion I would want to reopen allowing non metaverse game submitters to vote.

The point that I had was that if all voters are qualified metaverse players as indicated by having submitted a metaverse game then I wouldn't require the metaverse councilor to have submitted a game. Since all voters would be metaverse players, if they wished to vote for a yellow dog then that would be the will of metaverse players and so be it. If we are to open up the voting on a *Metaverse* Councilor to all then I insist that at least the metaverse councilor have some metaverse certification. One or the other of all voters or all councilors should have some indication of the desire for the success and increased participation in the metaverse. My initial preference was that both groups should have submitted games but I relented (without a vote IIRC) on the basis of encouraging the widest possible participation. However if you really want to open up the question of whether or not councilors need to have a game submitted then perhaps we should reopen whether or not voters should be required to do so as well.

The main difference between these two groups is that we have a status quo for councilors and that status quo is to have submitted a metaverse game. That can only be changed by a 70% majority vote of the MVC which I view as extremely doubtful. However, we've never had voters before other than the voters within our empires that elected us in the first place so there really is no status quo for voters unless you want to argue that as members of empires they obviously had submitted metaverse games. I don't really feel the need to press the issue as long as someone in this process chain has some proven vested interest in the health and well being of the metaverse. I'm not willing to turn over a metaverse centric group carte blanche to a group of folks that contain an element of folks that have expressed a complete and utter distain for the metaverse.
Reply #23 Top
It is by far not the last, however it is an experiment. We arent sure how well this method would work, so we would like as many candidates as possible. A wide variety encourages more voters.

This is indeed true. This is hopefully the first of many although it may not be starting out as well as I hoped.

We have discussed this and we have agreed to not influence the elections whatsoever. Sure we will make sure that a candidate is able, but we wont favor one over another, nor will we advertise and help campaign for any one of them.

This also is true for as far as it goes. However, if I personally was convinced that a candidate did not have the best interests of the metaverse at heart, I would do everything in my power to ensure such a candidate was *not* elected to the MVC, any agreement to the contrary notwithstanding.

I want to remind all of the reason and purpose of the formation of the Metaverse Council. I dug through the archives and dusted off a copy of our duly ratified constitution such as it is. In particular I want to highlight the 2nd sentance. This group is, has been, and will continue to be a *Metaverse* Council. All else, even GalCiv2 itself is secondary.




We, the active members of the Metaverse, as represented by the four founding empires: B.C. Space Orca’s, The Galactic Diplomats, The High Command Hegemony and Arrakis Imperium, have approved the formation of the Metaverse Council. The purpose of this Council is to increase interest and participation in the Metaverse by the general Galactic Civilization II community. To achieve the stated purpose the Council is presumed to act with the combined weight and authority of all those the Council represents. This document defines the rules under which the Council must act and requires ratification by all four founding empires. Once ratified these rules may only be changed by an 80% majority of the Council itself.

1) Any and all votes that require a change to the status quo require a 70% majority of voting representatives. The votes of all representatives carry equal weight. In such a case where no status quo exists a simple majority of voting representatives is sufficient.

2) Initial representation shall consist of 2 representatives selected or elected from each of the four founding empires. The nature of the selection of future representatives and the inclusion of future empires in the Council shall be determined by the Council itself, but the inclusion of representatives; unaligned to any empire or from empires deemed too small for direct inclusion in the Council, is to be a priority.

[edit] Color added to highlight my point. [/edit]
Reply #24 Top
I'm not sure what you're saying here. By not having a one game submission requirement on people casting ballots for a metaverse councilor (which I was against btw) all we are doing is allowing non metaverse players to cast ballots for metaverse councilors. If you really want to open this up for discussion I would want to reopen allowing non metaverse game submitters to vote.


But we are no longer limiting represetation, all we are limiting now is the choices people have for who gets to represent them.

Reply #25 Top
Man, its a plot! Running elections while I am out of commission

I would love to join the MVC, but I'm not sure I should run given that a) I'm away at trial currently and b) I never know when another trial will pop up on the horizon. You lost a councilor to a Beta Test, I'm not sure my presence would be much better. When I'm around and have time, I will always do anything I can to help support the metaverse and the galciv community.

however the potential MVC representative must; want the job, want the metaverse to succeed and flourish, and, be willing to put forth the effort it takes to achieve this goal. An established forum presence is a plus but not absolutely essential, however the ability and willingness to stand up and promote themselves, the AltMeta and the Metaverse is essential. The ability to cogently express their own opinions and the willingness to actually listen to the opinions of others is also important.


They only absolute requirement on any that wish to be a MVC representative is that you *must* have submitted at least one metaverse game.


However, if someone was removed for being absent, it seems like being currently active is also an "absolute" requirement. I think I would be able to meet the requirements you laid out in your first post... but willing to put forth effort and being capable of so doing are, sadly, two different things.


In short, I would love to join the MVC, but I will be away for at least two more months, and that seems like a large hurdle in the path of my running. Neilo is a great candidate, and I would be happy to throw my support behind him.

Good luck with this,
Wyndstar