Unofficial: Your opinion on Court Nominations

Kassiopeia · October 17, 2002, 07:34

Edit - I was so emotional that I forgot a 'was' from the question. In your head, add one in the most suitable place.

In my opinion the court nomination was handled very shoddily. I didn't even know we were going to elect Justices until I saw the election thread! Nowhere else was this mentioned. The nomination thread's title - "Court: Expressions of Interest" seemed to me like a thread about setting up the legislation system on a general basis. I don't have time to leaf through every single thread here, and this was among the *very few* I didn't check until it was too late.

The poll will last for three days (constitutional minimum).

Running election thread:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=64514

"Nomination" thread:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=63752

MrWhereItsAt · October 17, 2002, 07:47

Whilst I am less SERIOUSLY certain about redoing it, I certainly missed it completely. By not clicking on ONE innocuous, NGO-looking thread I missed the chance to be anything but a citizen with no access to the game for three months starting mid-November. And that sucks.

I had hoped to become a Judge (or at least running for it) so I could stay involved.

PS The hi-res copies of Death and Rebirth and EoE are in the mail.

Darkness' Edge · October 17, 2002, 08:02

While I sympathise with the two of you - it does suck that you missed the nominations, as far as I'm concerned, it was basically your own fault.

The nomination thread was topped. NGO threads are never topped.
I'll concede the title may have been a bit ambiguous, but if you were interested in being a judge, you still should have checked it - especially considering that nominations were open for a week.

I'm really against repolling this. We need to get started on setting up the court, and getting it up and running ASAP. I'd like to be completely up and running by November 1. But if this repoll happens, it'll be an unnecessary delay.

Why do I see this as un-necessary?
The thread was topped. The thread mentioned the court. While "Expressions of Interest" may have been ambiguous, if you wanted to be involved, you should have checked the thread. And it was open for a week.

If you were so keen to be involved, you're telling me you didn't check a topped thread about the court ONCE in the week it was open?

I apologise for my harsh tone, but I find this a bit annoying.

There's always the next elections in two months.

MrWhereItsAt · October 17, 2002, 08:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Darkness' Edge
If you were so keen to be involved, you're telling me you didn't check a topped thread about the court ONCE in the week it was open?

Yep. It looked like basic setup - "OK, will we use the Civ3 model? Sure why not? Just with this and this little changes. Great idea! Spam spam..."

Quote:

There's always the next elections in two months.

:

Reassuring.

Darkness' Edge · October 17, 2002, 08:18

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt Yep. It looked like basic setup - "OK, will we use the Civ3 model? Sure why not? Just with this and this little changes. Great idea! Spam spam..."

But you didn't read it to see!

Next time, maybe that might be a wise decision.

It couldn't have been that, because there were no justices elected, and the justices needed to be elected before any decisions were made on the direction their court would take.

He who doesn't bother reading thread misses out on nominating.

MrWhereItsAt · October 17, 2002, 08:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Darkness' Edge
He who doesn't bother reading thread misses out on nominating.

But he doesn't have to LIKE it.

Darkness' Edge · October 17, 2002, 08:46

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt But he doesn't have to LIKE it.

It's just the obvious. Say you want to stand as a Director. When someone tops a thread titled "Election Nominations" or something similar, you read the thread.

It's a little bit silly to come back whingeing "But I didn't read it, so I missed out!"

MrWhereItsAt · October 17, 2002, 08:50

Well I guess we can agree that next time the word "Nominations" needs to be put into a nominations thread.

Darkness' Edge · October 17, 2002, 08:53

Ambiguous wording; basically the same meaning.

FlameFlash · October 17, 2002, 12:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Darkness' Edge
While I sympathise with the two of you - it does suck that you missed the nominations, as far as I'm concerned, it was basically your own fault.

Disagree... read on...

Quote:

The nomination thread was topped. NGO threads are never topped.
I'll concede the title may have been a bit ambiguous, but if you were interested in being a judge, you still should have checked it - especially considering that nominations were open for a week.

I don't care if it was topped or not... back when this game was started I was signed up to received updates to almost every thread... and I did get all the threads that were pertient to playing... but as you've noticed, I've slowly become less and less active... you know why? Because unlike some (and probably like Kass and MWIA) I don't have the time to always check the main thread... I watch for links... pertinent links from the NGOs, parties (at least the ones left) and whatnot to gather my information. It's not my, or Kass, or anybody else's fault that they don't have the time to inspect the thread every day... and it's most certianly not our fault that sometimes threads are marked as being read when in fact, we haven't read them yet.

Quote:

I'm really against repolling this. We need to get started on setting up the court, and getting it up and running ASAP. I'd like to be completely up and running by November 1. But if this repoll happens, it'll be an unnecessary delay.

"unnecessary" to who? You? There are obviously others around here who don't think it's "unnecessary"... likewise I'd wager that there will be quite a few who even notice this thread. I'll try to do something about that by posting a link in the Rec Commons... but that's all I can think of at the moment to do...

Quote:

Why do I see this as un-necessary?
The thread was topped. The thread mentioned the court. While "Expressions of Interest" may have been ambiguous, if you wanted to be involved, you should have checked the thread. And it was open for a week.

Still... topped doesn't hold with me for my reasons stated above. Likewise "expressions of interest" was ambiguous... you know, I never even saw it at all? I finally even heard of this because, like I generally do in various threads to try to keep stuff on-topic asked if there was anything to

or

about... Kass pointed me here.

Quote:

If you were so keen to be involved, you're telling me you didn't check a topped thread about the court ONCE in the week it was open?

That's exactly what they're telling you... topped or not, there's the possibility that they didn't see it... and they didn't.

Quote:

I apologise for my harsh tone, but I find this a bit annoying.

I'm not going to apologize for my harsh tone... I can't believe you'd shrug off their concerns as much as you seem to be...

Quote:

There's always the next elections in two months.

Oh goody... and what do you bet that it won't be announced either...

DeathByTheSword · October 17, 2002, 14:41

.....you know this is not my problem so i am not going to say anything here

/me wanted so say something but he erased it

Kassiopeia · October 17, 2002, 14:49

DeathByTheSword, I hope you won't take this as anything personal. Because it definitely isn't.

Nubclear · October 17, 2002, 15:12

Quote:

Originally posted by FlameFlash
I don't care if it was topped or not... back when this game was started I was signed up to received updates to almost every thread... and I did get all the threads that were pertient to playing... but as you've noticed, I've slowly become less and less active... you know why? Because unlike some (and probably like Kass and MWIA) I don't have the time to always check the main thread... I watch for links... pertinent links from the NGOs, parties (at least the ones left) and whatnot to gather my information. It's not my, or Kass, or anybody else's fault that they don't have the time to inspect the thread every day... and it's most certianly not our fault that sometimes threads are marked as being read when in fact, we haven't read them yet.

No offense intended but thats your problem. Court: Expressions of Interest really told me that it was a threat to express interest, and it DEFINATELY told me it was a threat relating to the court, not some NGO.

Quote:

Still... topped doesn't hold with me for my reasons stated above. Likewise "expressions of interest" was ambiguous... you know, I never even saw it at all? I finally even heard of this because, like I generally do in various threads to try to keep stuff on-topic asked if there was anything to

or

about... Kass pointed me here.

No offense but again, thats your problem. You can't call for re-election because you failed to read a threat. Consider the following scenario:
"Hey......I want to be president! Why can't I run?"
"Well, you can run in 2004...."
"No, I want to be the 2000 election!"
"Well, you cant. Bush already won."
"Well I didnt even know they were having elections!!! They should hold re-elections!"
"Well duh, it was only on CNN twenty four hours a day."
"Well I dont watch CNN because its so geeky and boring! They dont report on elections, only exploisions in Kazakstan or whatever!"

It is your own fault that you ddint read a court thread. No, it didnt have somehting like "Save the Environment!" or "Big Industry for All", it was "Court: Expressions of Interest" which makes it a thread relating to the court. You should have read it, but you didnt and its your own fault.

Because we just can't have re-elections every time someone didnt "read the thread".

- Groucho - · October 17, 2002, 15:14

I was going to rant but instead I'll take my lead from the subject matter:

The doctrine of laches applies here - the court won't help those who sit on their rights.

FlameFlash · October 17, 2002, 15:24

First off, Kass is right, this isn't anything personal... so Tass, first off, back off and respond to what I mentioned as the problem. Please note I don't even give a rip about the courts... it's the fact that new threads aren't announced to those of us who would like to participate, but can't as easily becuase those who have more time than us are constantly making new threads.

((probably my favorite new smiley...))

Quote:

Originally posted by Tassadar5000

No offense intended but thats your problem. Court: Expressions of Interest really told me that it was a threat to express interest, and it DEFINATELY told me it was a threat relating to the court, not some NGO.

You missed what I was saying as far as the problem I'm complaining about... and that is not just my problem or else we wouldn't have others in the same boat.

Quote:

No offense but again, thats your problem. You can't call for re-election because you failed to read a threat. Consider the following scenario:
"Hey......I want to be president! Why can't I run?"
"Well, you can run in 2004...."
"No, I want to be the 2000 election!"
"Well, you cant. Bush already won."
"Well I didnt even know they were having elections!!! They should hold re-elections!"
"Well duh, it was only on CNN twenty four hours a day."
"Well I dont watch CNN because its so geeky and boring! They dont report on elections, only exploisions in Kazakstan or whatever!"

Again, don't know how this really explains anything... especially that president crap... that's not what I'm complaining about... I'm complaining about the fact that these things are either not properly announced in other threads or that I've missed the one thread that does announce all this stuff and would alert me to when something else goes up. And again... you're missing the point...

Quote:

It is your own fault that you ddint read a court thread. No, it didnt have somehting like "Save the Environment!" or "Big Industry for All", it was "Court: Expressions of Interest" which makes it a thread relating to the court. You should have read it, but you didnt and its your own fault.

Again... you've missed the point of my post...

And every other thread that has had nominations for positions has actually had nominations in the thread title. For all I, Kass, or anybody else knew, that could have just been more debate on the topic and because somebody thought it was important, it was topped.

Quote:

Because we just can't have re-elections every time someone didnt "read the thread".

No, but we can when they're improperly announced...

For instance, I know that near the end of every month there will be an election for the next term... nothing like that was known about the courts, so therefore there should have been more of an effort to post the announcement in some of the more popular threads (ie. Rec Commons, other NGOs, the last party threads, etc.) When something new and important comes out, it's certainly not my fault.

With your president example, it would be, just for the sake of it not even fitting into what I'm complaining about.

Nubclear · October 17, 2002, 15:36

Quote:

Originally posted by FlameFlash
First off, Kass is right, this isn't anything personal... so Tass, first off, back off and respond to what I mentioned as the problem. Please note I don't even give a rip about the courts... it's the fact that new threads aren't announced to those of us who would like to participate, but can't as easily becuase those who have more time than us are constantly making new threads.

((probably my favorite new smiley...))

I'm sorry. Given the context of your entire post, the contents of it, you were not ranting simply about how it wasnt properly announced....You sounded like you were ranting about how you didnt see it, how it wasnt announced correctly, how you dont have the time to see it....And give the other posts in the thread, it just sounded like you wanted re-elections.

My mistake. Sry

Quote:

Again... you've missed the point of my post...

And every other thread that has had nominations for positions has actually had nominations in the thread title. For all I, Kass, or anybody else knew, that could have just been more debate on the topic and because somebody thought it was important, it was topped.

Well you should have read it because it obviously WAS important. bring it up to the court.

Quote:

No, but we can when they're improperly announced...

No, you can't. Not unless.....unless the poll is unconsititiuonal, and therefore the court would have to make a ruling

FlameFlash · October 17, 2002, 15:53

*sighs*

Oh well, now at least my main complaints are known...

1. Lack of announcement of brand new items that have a possibly large impact but could be unknown to some.
2. Lack of new items being announced period.
3. The feeling that sometimes these things are snuck in thanks to the fact I have no idea where to subscribe so I'm always in the know when a new poll pops up... the Rec Commons would be a great place to drop links like that.
4. The new threads... the NGO Network Node was made for the purpose of announcing science related things, was it not? So shouldn't polls, when created, be mentioned there so members have something to actually debate? Likewise, general populace things could go into the Rec Commons or other proper NGOs...

There's a reason I signed up for them all, after all... to stay informed... but they haven't served their purpose (in my mind.)

I have the same complaint about the News Network actually... when and how often is that published? And would it be possible to drop a copy (via a link) on one of the Rec Commons' tables?

You go into a lot of work on that, Tass (haven't noted one recently so I'll just assume you alone work on it) and you do a good job with it, but when one comes out, unless I know when to check the board, I won't have a clue as to when it'll come out.

Kass' topic about the courts just spurred all this ranting, you're right, I had originally focused my

out on just the court situation, but I'm extending it to everything going on here... I want to participate, but I can't because often times I don't know (thanks to time) that I can. Partly my fault, yes, but I stay true to all the threads I'm subbed to, so also not totally my fault.

Lastly, while a lot of the disappearances of citizens may, in fact, be because of lack of interest, others may have subbed to older threads and just not be as faithful about returning to 'poly unless something new pops up.

Take the Citizen registry for example... I'm subbed to that and the first citizen count... there was an update to the way we were going to count our citizens, and it was announced in the proper place, I and others like me were able to see it, and respond to the new thread.

That's what I'd like to see on a grander scale.

Pandemoniak · October 17, 2002, 16:26

What does shoggily or whatever means ?
It seems I agree with FF and Kass, though I think we cant repoll it.

Kassiopeia · October 17, 2002, 16:33

Shoddily, as in in a lowsy, bad, unkempt manner.

MrWhereItsAt · October 17, 2002, 18:11

I was going to tell everyone to calm down a little - we didn't intend to stir up vicious debate here - but thankfully it looks like everyone has realised that we shouldn't get too upset about one little thread.

The purpose of this was really to register our (Kass' and mine) annoyance at having completely missed the Court Nominations thread for not having clicked on only ONE innocuous looking thread. DE - it may have been topped, but there are TONNES of topped threads in the forums and lots of them are a waste of time (look at the Civ3 game

)

We're not trying to do anything silly like impeaching or immediately demanding a renomination/poll period, but we had to make our thoughts known and I think that we have every right to do so within the constrains of the site rules and the game. There may have been others who missed out completely from the same cicrumstances as our own, and this thread is for them too. Hence the poll. If the poll shows we are clearly in the minority and just plain idiotic to have somehow missed one of the most important threads to date, then blah. Nothing further happens, but I of course retain every right to sulk for a bit. BUT, if there were enough who missed it as well, then I am sure it would be in everyone's best interests to at least know this for next time.

I wanted to be a Justice to ensure I could participate for the few months I will not be able to be anything else. It looks like I can't. Bugger. But please, at the UTMOST LEAST, next time can nominations threads be clearly labelled "Nominations"? Both words "nominations" and "election" draw attention. "Expressions of interest" does not.