Capt Wolf

Fun build, but remind me not to visit that doctor! The supply of green legs in his cart is quite disconcerting! Perhaps the Fontonajos need to do something about this apparent gangrene epidemic!

Beautiful interior build with great details! I love the candle holders, the fireplace, and of course the bed. Great work!

I've always thought that Eslandola was a mix of Spanish and Dutch, the trade companies being the Dutch element. The Dutch were once subject to Spain, after all. With the recent revelations about Mardier being Spain, perhaps Portugal substitutes for Spain in that model. But what we're doing is much more similar to the founding of the Dutch Republic in the 16th/17th C than the founding of Portugal's constitutional monarchy in the 19th C. Besides, I like the architecture.

Yes, it was confusing! And I'm cool with the each-player-gets-3-votes model (in which case the key numbers above would be 11 out of 21); I just used the 1-player/1-vote model to try to keep the example simple. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I think we are pretty close to agreement among those who have weighed in on what form the colonial council would take: * 7 members -- 1 for each of the 3 TCs (selected by TC members), 1 for each of the 3 regions (selected by citizens of that region) (with new regions resulting in new seats in the future), and 1 independent seat (selected by players not aligned with a TC) * Each player in the colonial council would get 3 votes (presumably cast by 3 different characters, thus splitting the 3 votes is possible) * 11 votes (out of 21, or 51% of total "characters" in the council) needed to pass a bill * A singular elected leader, called a Prime Magistrate or Stadtholder or some such * If a veto of actions by the continental council is needed (and some continental council -- i.e. leadership -- items could not be vetoed), a 2/3 vote (14 of 21) would be needed Some things that appear to still need to be determined: * Does the PM/Stadtholder always get a vote, or just in the case of ties (only possible at the moment if the vote is 10-10 with an abstention)? (and if he gets a vote, does that count against the quorum/51% requirements?) * Is the PM/Stadtholder elected by the colonial council, or by the populace at large? * How often are elections held (every 6 months? 9 months? annually?) * Are council members and the PM/Stadtholder paid positions? * Will the Fontanajos support the colonial council concept? What else?

@Sir Stig, Kai read it the way I intended it: If you have 7 players with 1 vote each on the council, you need at least 4 voters to make up a quorum, but all votes are decided best out of 7, regardless of how many votes are cast. Therefore, you need 4 votes to pass a bill. I've been using PM for gedren's suggested Prime Magistrate, but I would be in favor of Stadtholder rather than any of the PM alternatives. Or the PM/Stadtholder could be the tiebreaking vote, rather than having to juggle the number of seats to an odd number. And I think Sir Stig is correct that, in general, I don't see participation in the votes being an issue if we allow reasonable real-world time to make sure someone isn't away on vacation or such. I am hopeful that the Fontanajos will support the new government, and I agree that there is much for them to like in these proposals, but I can imagine scenarios where they wouldn't. That said, it would be helpful to hear from @Elostirion.

I must admit that I'm not a fan of an MOC competition weighting a bill vote. I much prefer other ways of encouraging MOC building in association with the council. Perhaps a bill isn't passed until an MOC relating to it has been built, or some such. But if MOC competitions grant votes, it just turns into a skill contest.

In this case, a quorum could be defined as needing at least 51% of votes possible to actually be cast for a vote to be valid, i.e., if there are 21 votes possible, there need to be at least 11 votes cast (or if 7 votes are possible, 4 would need to be cast). But if we require 51% of the possible votes for a bill to pass, that's the same thing as far as getting enough votes in favor. So, again, requiring 51% of possible votes for a bill to pass addresses the problem. Was that confusing enough? We are, but I think you and I might be the only ones coming out in favor of the council electing the PM so far. We need to hear from more players.

There's a position for Guy's uncle in the new government! A sound suggestion! Or herding cats, or something. Revolutions come into this world like bastard children... half improvised and half compromised

"Here, take these 50DBs and don't vote on this bill." That's how it is achievable. But, that's really no different than paying 50DBs to vote "no" on a bill. Given that requiring a percentage of the possible votes rather than a percentage of the actual votes requires the greater number of votes to pass, I would think that would be the harder approach to manipulate. How about this for an added level of intrigue: 51% of possible votes to pass, but 2/3 of actual votes to be veto proof.

Yes! Pay no attention to the foreign rabble-rousers!

@Kolonialbeamter, you've never been in the TC monthly PMs. Trust me, there's plenty of intrigue that can be played out in the council. Operation KMA was the exception, not the rule.

And if it had to go to a faction-wide vote, the candidates would presumably still only be independents. While I am not familiar with the GoH precedents, I would be very opposed to voting for Eslandolan PM by anyone other than Eslandolans. That said, there's nothing stopping players from other factions from trying to influence the votes of Eslandolans...

So it sounds like we're leaning toward simultaneous elections, an independent seat on the council, PM elected nationwide, and no veto power for the PM. Votes for the PM still up in the air. As for votes necessary to pass a bill, I think 51% of all possible votes is the way to go. Using a percentage of only cast votes actually encourages vote suppression, and if you use percentage of possible votes, no one can complain of hanky-panky in the process. Is there any way the council could override a veto by the continental council? If there is, that's when a 2/3 majority would come into play. My bad! I really didn't mean to bring that up, believe me!

Actually, other than the PM having a vote, this was my plan first. Don't worry, I won't charge you. I've always imagined it the other way around: first the council is selected, then the PM. That might be influenced by the fact that I prefer a model where the council selects the PM, but regardless, I think the makeup of the council could influence who people want for a PM. And I have no problem with a member of the colonial council serving as PM simultaneously, especially if we go with the "each player on the council has three votes" model, where that player is already controlling multiple characters. I don't see why the PM wouldn't be available. New election if he isn't, or the council selects one until time for a new nationwide election. As long as there are no term limits, I imagine that some seats (TC seats, certain regional seats) would likely simply re-elect their representative in many cases with little to no fanfare, so the frequency of elections wouldn't really effect those cases. But I like the idea of different seats having different election cycles (unless I have to pay for use of the idea ). And, yes, we are talking real IC power here, and agenda should trump MOCing skill.

Other than adding a seat in the council for the PM, that is precisely what I currently propose. I am open to the PM being elected by the whole populace or by just the council. If the PM were already on the council, in your plan would he then have 2 votes? *** Edit: ok, almost what I currently propose, as I had voiced my support for each player on the council having 3 votes, representing other characters under that player's control. In that case, adding one more vote for the PM isn't too significant.

@gedren_y, I think the TC seats should remain controlled by the TCs. They're not just the money backing the political parties; for the most part, they ARE the political parties. They are the major power brokers in Eslandola, and it is totally IC for us to create a government that recognizes that. Given that, I was in error re-labeling your proposed seat for independents as an "at-large" seat. That was an OOC consideration based on the small pool of independent players. I now fully support that seat being truly independent, elected only by players unaffiliated with a TC. As for the King's Port Advertiser, how dare you mention that Mardier propaganda rag in polite company! @Bregir, you non-Eslandolans wanted political intrigue between the TCs in Eslandola; well, here you go. There's jostling going on to determine who will have power in the new government, and I think that, whenever possible, IC considerations should win out. That is why I'm now supporting @gedren_y's truly independent seat on the council. And "good" is in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure King Fernando thought our previous setup was quite good! @Kai NRG, well said. We posted at the same time. And while IC the TCs would likely not be wild about granting an independent seat on the council, if that satisfies a segment of the populace that could be problematic otherwise, it is a reasonable concession for them to make IC.

OK, you have persuaded me that multiple votes for each player on the council makes sense. And yes, I meant builds for the broadly elected seats, not the TC seats. As for frequency of elections, I'd be in favor of at least 6 months. Three months sounds like all we'd ever be doing is having elections, and I have trouble imagining that the council is going to have business before it every month. Now, that first term will be busy I'm sure, but I'd think things would calm down a bit. I'd still love to find a way to work the old unfilled cabinet positions into the game in some way. Presumably we'd still need a minister of war, minister of trade, etc., that could act periodically at the behest of the council or PM.

My initial reaction: Oh no! More cotton! But you've done a great job working the natural terrain into the build. Well done!

Beautiful ship! Great collaboration! You are all to be congratulated! There's lots to admire here, and I've already spied some seemingly simple details (like those lanterns) that I'll have to steal borrow in the future.

@gedren_y, I'd like to hear more about how you'd use MOCs with regard to Council votes. Would this be for all votes or just certain votes? Build-offs or just storytelling required before the vote can happen?

I don’t see the need for multiple votes per council member, or multiple characters for each player in the council. It all seems like an unnecessary layer of complication to it. The players will either make this interesting or not with what we do with it (building, creating stories, etc) and I don’t think this makes that any more likely. Let’s keep things simple. (And involving 7 out of 15 players doesn’t sound very elitist to me! That’s half the active members of the faction in the council! And those seven would be representatives of constituencies that can tell their own story in builds – and replace them at the first opportunity – if their rep isn’t doing what they want.) And while I like the idea of incorporating building into a campaign for PM, I wouldn’t want the position decided on quality of build. Ultimately, the players should choose the PM in some fashion, and there should be builds involved to tell the story, but pegging it all on a build-off will, in my opinion, drive DOWN participation, not increase it. (See my idea below for how to incorporate building into this process.) Also, until PIPs and FIPs are actually used in the game, I think we should keep all mention of them out of this process. Essentially, they don’t exist yet (at least as a usable entity). Furthermore, emphasizing PIPs and FIPS will drive this toward an elitist system that we’re trying to avoid. As for how often there would be elections or whatnot, by “bi-yearly” do you mean twice per year or once every two years? I would object to the latter; I would say it should be no more than a year between elections. Elections themselves could be simple polls of the faction members. Trade company members would vote for TC reps to the council, and mayors/governors would vote for reps from their region. Players who are not mayors/governors could simply choose which region they are most connected to and vote in that poll. I’d throw the other council position open to the faction citizenry at large. However, to be eligible to receive votes for any council seat, a player would have to build a campaign MOC of some sort. As for the PM, this could either be a faction-wide vote, or a vote of the colonial council. Personally, I think the latter adds a level of intrigue and will get the TCs maneuvering against one another moreso than anything else.

Regarding size of the Colonial Council, I have to agree with Bregir: the size is too big for the player base. I think 1 seat for each TC instead of 2, and 1 seat for independent traders instead of 3, would work better. Additionally, 1 seat for each region of colonies (currently 3, but presumably will grow). That gives us 7+, which would be about half of the 12-15 active players in the faction right now. I actually think the Premier Magistrate shouldn't be controlled by leadership, nor set policy, but should be able to prompt the councils to consider issues if necessary. The colonial council (with strong TC representation) will be the real power (and the continental council is leadership's check on the players). The PM would be beholden to the councils, so couldn't actually set policy and such, but would be able to carry it out with a cabinet of characters from other players. Something to consider: in this scenario, would a player/character be able to fill both a cabinet role and a seat in the council?

Kwatchi, glad to hear that we're succeeding in entertaining the other factions! And, seriously, thanks for your input! You do hit upon something that I like: that there needs to be a continued emphasis in some fashion on the power of the trade companies.

Faladrin, great reminder! I had forgotten all about this, probably because leadership never used it! I think it could be used in an IC fashion, with the requirements really just being a way to confirm that the player is active in the game. That said, given that we never used it, coming up with a new form is really no different at this point than using the old form, except that changing the form of government is essentially an IC thing. That said, I think it would be fun if we actually followed through with building an Eslandola cabinet of ministers with characters in the game. It wouldn't have to be part of the High Council or Colonial Council, but essentially an extension of having a High Magistrate. It provides roles for prominent characters to play in the game.

Makes sense to me, too. Although it may still be simpler to have the colonial council serve as that electoral college. As for the composition of the colonial council, what about a council of 7 (although that may grow as we explore more)? It could include one representative for each of the three TCs, one representative for each of the three colonial sea regions (sea of storms, sea of thieves, prio seas), and one at-large seat.