Talk:355

From Nomicapolis

Current revision as of 05:47, 21 December 2006

I declare this proposal passed. --Dayd 00:47, 21 December 2006 (EST)

Proposer's summary and declarations

Proposer's summary

This proposal, like 330, does nothing by itself, but creates a framework that allows for regional politics. Anyone declaring themself the ruler of a canton would do well to make it the first order of local business to give it a more interesting name :) chuck 14:28, 12 December 2006 (EST)

I move that debate close early. Can I get a straw poll (down in Debate, please) on whether this needs further editing before I close debate and put it up for a vote? chuck 12:33, 14 December 2006 (EST)

I think any outstanding issues are taken care of, so I'm closing debate early as of now. chuck 01:27, 17 December 2006 (EST)

Debate

Debate on this proposal will end on 00:01, 19 December 2006 (EST)

Add comments

I played too much Morrowind, thus my choice of the term "canton". If it's a classic city-state, then it's more like surrounding counties with the city itself at the center (though it's certainly been depopulated in that case). If it's a single city, then there's a small center of administrators and/or elites. I deliberately leave this sort of thing out for future rules and amendments to cover.

Other things I left out: I gave the cantons a topology (since borders can create interesting rules) but otherwise left out the geometry on purpose. Unless one can manage to interpret "border" as "point", it can't be a perfect grid (otherwise the corner cantons wouldn't border the center), but pretty much anything that respects the borders is possible. I'm thinking an oval shape myself. I think it'd be fun to "build" Nomicapolis with rules that gradually define the specific geography. chuck 15:57, 11 December 2006 (EST)

I personally think that 9 is too many to start with. I mean there are only 8 active players. In my mind's eye the "canton" would be player run, but it almost seems that this would cause them to be on autopilot. Also if there were fewer it might be easier to split them later. Also "The borders of each canton shall be initially drawn such that they share a border with three and only three other cantons: the center canton, and the two adjacent cantons as implied by their compass names." well obviously the center canton is going to border 8 cantons and not 3. --Dayd 21:44, 11 December 2006 (EST)

Oops, the center canton got edited away from those borders. But overall you're right, there should be less cantons than players (where's the politics if everyone's a mayor?). I got rid of the corner cantons, now down to five. chuck 22:27, 11 December 2006 (EST)

I would like a clause added in allowing me to be nomadic if desired... --Tucana25 00:07, 12 December 2006 (EST)

You aren't actually a citizen, you're a player, so you aren't a resident of a canton. Like rule 330, all this does is state that something exists, and it's up to further rules to make use of it. chuck 09:33, 12 December 2006 (EST)

The population distribution algorithm (such as it is) now no longer considers the center canton as a special case, except insofar as it's still more sparsely populated initially. All cantons grow and shrink equally now -- I'm not imposing a truly proportional algorithm because I didn't feel like making the maintainers cosine-normalize the populations in their heads. The reason for the center canton could be whatever your imagination comes up with: perhaps it's a small administrative center of the city, perhaps it's a town surrounded by many peaceful farm villages, or perhaps it's the smouldering ruins of a city in an apocalyptic wasteland. chuck 12:41, 14 December 2006 (EST)

What is the randomization mechanism that distributes or withdraws population? Also, I would like to be allowed to declare myself a nomadic warlord that exists independently of any canton. --Tucana25 21:54, 14 December 2006 (EST)

The only randomness comes from choosing from cantons that are tied for highest or lowest populations. A uniform random distribution should be assumed, and it's probably outside of the scope of the rules to require a specific random number source. Rolling dice would work fine, as would echo $((RANDOM % $numcantons)). I don't call it a show-stopper, I think it can be left to judgement. And again, no rule makes players citizens -- we're all assumed to be gods of a sort, meddling in the affairs of the mortals below. Thus none of us have home cantons. If you want to officially be a rambling man, you're of course free to make a proposal that says so. chuck 00:51, 15 December 2006 (EST)

Don't know if this was what the formula would apply to, but this was the sentence i was questioning: "Any remaining count of citizens to be removed shall come from the canton with the highest population. In the event that multiple cantons are "tied" for the highest population, the canton shall be chosen randomly from those that are thus tied." Certainly not a big deal...I was just wondering if you wanted to specify a randomizer now or leave that to future debate. --Tucana25 17:04, 15 December 2006 (EST)

The whole "random" thing was starting to bug me, and I waffled between that, "arbitrary", making the admin decide (or delegate), some day-of-the-week thing, and finally I just decided the hell with it, the Center Canton takes care of the remainders again. It's shorter that way too. chuck 18:13, 15 December 2006 (EST)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on.

For

Add FOR vote

1. chuck 01:32, 17 December 2006 (EST)
2. --Dayd 20:37, 17 December 2006 (EST)
3. --Tucana25 09:04, 18 December 2006 (EST)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

1. --TomFoolery 12:26, 19 December 2006 (EST)

Abstain

Add Abstention