Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: Be able to move other player structure in my city.
Melayne wrote:
Ok let's take this bit by bit... *grin*
Melayne wrote:
That's also being a dictator... That is the same idea communist Russia had... force them to sell it for a bloody mini-mall
Faciest, Communist AND Capitalist? Well, if Mayors could deny residents the right to vote or send disidents to a Gulog in Siberia then maybe you'd have a point for the former two. The fact of the matter is Mayors are elected officials and every single resident has a right to run for office or vote.
You're twisting my words around in areas that are on different topics, sir.
Voter Apathy isn't Dictatorship. Being concerned about the needs of the Community is not Communist. The Minimall wasn't stated in context of Communist but it contrasts with your repeated theme of Russian Communism. When you give contradicting notions through a long thread putting them together is the only way to point it out.
You can't just pick up a person's home without their permission and move it.
For a Mayor to move a structure it would need to meet one of three criteria. The Mayor must be the owner or on the administrator list, the structure is condemned or the owner has not logged on for 4 weeks.
All but the last term would be good for the "contract". Four weeks isn't enough time to assume the person is gone for good. Four months maybe
Glood to see there is some conditions you could deem acceptable. I think Four months is too long but I'm sure an acceptable middle ground could be found.
Not all elections are "democratic"... some elections are forced and fear presides over who enters the elections and who wins, this has nothing to do with any in game things, but it is just to prove that not all elected officals were truely elected. Case in point... Saddam ... he lead and was re- elected out of fear. An older example, Hitler.
You said to keep politics out of this but you just keep going at it. Mentioning of Saddam and especially Hitler is inappropriate and I won't even grace this part with any more of a response than to say one word that DOES apply to the Star Wars Universe.
Palpatine.
Again, please don't take this personal. Yes, this is very colorful... ^_^
I don't take it personal but you do not convince me of anything by constantly comparing in game polititians to real world monsters.
Finally when folks talk about "Abuse of Power" why is it that a Mayor can totally destroy a city but they can't enhance it once these things are placed?
Jenya,
Spare me the lecture. You do not know me nor how I conduct business and you have no right to make assumptions about mymotives. There are good mayors and there are bad ones but this tendancy to paint any Mayor that wants the ability to manage their city as wanting "all-mighty power of smiting".
For my part I govern through concensus. If I asked for admin on someone's house to move it they trust me to do what's best for the city. The option to do so doesn't exist and it should and I have no problem with it requiring consent. Now if you want to discuss THIS and spare me the lecture about something you have no experience with I welcome it.
Just because my signature does not blazenly say for all to see that OMG I AM MAYOR HEAR ME ROAR as your does, does not mean that I am not a mayor, take you own words and eat them sir. You have blatently not cared about other people's opinions in this entire post, if all you wanted was a rant and to no hear anyone else out then you should have said so.
but it still remains - you are wrong.
/fin.. wait.. /cancelfin
It is not just about YOU, it is a game mechanic you want placed in for your advantage for your style of play. You may be responsible with it, but FAR too many others would not be, and this is the point you missed from the other person, maybe if I say it as well it will hit home. Just like you said there are good mayors, and there are bad mayors. What exactly do you think the bad mayors would do with power like this? They would re-arange the entier town so that they could be suited in their selfish desires to have "Random-Mayor's-Name's Village" If you can not see this as a real possible side-effect from your proposed change then you are indeed not paying attention to the rest of this game.
When I say 90% don't ever see this I mean it, it's true. Most people are content to continue exploiting Jedi/BH and other things. They simply do not care about what is said here, or even know it's said. The problem is that when some Mayors who are exploiters outside of their town discover a power like this they will use it.
THAT is why this proposal is wrong. I mistakenly thought that aspect of it had already been made clear.
Message Edited by Jenya_Malik on 07-25-2005 08:50 AM
- The Mayor is on the Admin List or is the Owner
- The Structure is Condemned
- The Owner hasn't been logged in for N weeks. (I say 4, May says 16, what say you?)
Fidgiter wrote:
I'm not here to discuss my signiture or the finer points of font size or title placement therein. If you have an issue with my signiture make a thread about it rather than trying to derail this discussion with such petty matters.
I may point out that you assumed I was not a politician because it was not in my sig first, then you proceeded to point out the councilman section.
only natural that I may fight back. (but anyway.. on to the important stuff)
Now how about we talk about the compromise. Would you have an issue with a Mayor being able to move a structure if:
- The Mayor is on the Admin List or is the Owner
- The Structure is Condemned
- The Owner hasn't been logged in for N weeks. (I say 4, May says 16, what say you?)
Breaking it down
- How often are you going to see a mayor on the admin of every house in his/her town? almost never. I would not arbitrarily give admin on my guild hall (which has millions upon millions worth of decor) to anyone but myself. But that is mostly because mine is a branch of the guild and only a second location. They have a main building, and if my leader wanted admin I trust him enough to give it to him (I have had admin on his house and he has had admin on mine before) I however would not trust just any mayor for example.
- Condemning just needs to be removed and let people suffer the consequences of not having enough maintenance in their houses. This would solve the entire issue. In my opinion condemnation is just a stupid thing to have.
- You can't just say"X" amount of time, this is why the character purge has not come yet, what happens when there is a legitimate real-life reason for not being in game? Some people are not "active" yet still pay for their accounts. My motherboard failed on me and I was out of game for almost 2 months, does this mean I should have lost my houses, and my character? What about people in the military who had to go to places like Korea, or Iraq? Do they have to lose all progress because the government said they have to fight for them? I was still paying. Now if it is just "canceled" accounts that you are talking about then, yes they should be purged (I rather like the 6 months idea myself) In fact, that's also why I do not believe in condemnation.
Jenya_Malik wrote:
Not that any of this matters because the devs hate politicians, and non-Jedi/non-BH professions. They never listen to anything we say in these forums anyway.
Which is why we need to try and find common ground to stand on. We are too few to be at each others throats. Thank you for the civil response.
How often are you going to see a mayor on the admin of every house in his/her town?
You do have a point on this. How about a new option added to the Structure Permissions specifically authorizing the Mayor to perform this task? This would allow them to perform the action with consent and without risk that they'd steal from the owner.
Condemning just needs to be removed and let people suffer the consequences of not having enough maintenance in their houses. This would solve the entire issue. In my opinion condemnation is just a stupid thing to have.
If you think the structure should be straight out removed (whichI agree on) then I can't see you as having an issue with relocating the structure.
You can't just say"X" amount of time, this is why the character purge has not come yet, what happens when there is a legitimate real-life reason for not being in game? Some people are not "active" yet still pay for their accounts. My motherboard failed on me and I was out of game for almost 2 months, does this mean I should have lost my houses, and my character? What about people in the military who had to go to places like Korea, or Iraq? Do they have to lose all progress because the government said they have to fight for them?
I never said anything about removing someone's account and property after 2 months. Big difference between a house being moved 250m and it being destroyed and the latter is not something I would consider. I have a couple members in RSO who spent time in Iraq and I honor their service.
In test center right now there is a feature being tested to allow people to move their houses with all items in it, in the same locations of the house they were in before. With this feature coming out, most people would be willing to move without any ill-will towards it.
On Scylla there are folks who bribe or trick militia into graning zoning then they place their houses on every available spot and try to take over the city. If they succeed they then remove every civic structure and destroy the city hall. If they fail they leave the city congested and try again until eventually the city crumbles under the stress they cause.
For this reason I very closely manage the land. If I didn't do this Dune Retreat would have been griefed into extinction long ago. If folks get the ability to relocate their house will they require zoning? Will I be able to permit folks to do this without the risk of the city suffering a hostile takeover intended to destroy it?
Eviction is also being discussed here
Eviction can be abused and I don't support it.
There are alternatives, and I simply feel the method you propose is the easiest one to exploit. It is nothing personal, like I said you may be responsible with it, but others are going to abuse it.
If I didn't offer restrictions which ultimately involve consent, a structure properly maintained or the person being an active account on the server the structure is located at you'd have a point. However, I'm not talking about unrestricted power of relocation.
1>>> Once Mayor initiats house replacemenet all zoning in city is turned off.
2>>> House or structure can only be place within City Limits.
3>>> Mayor has 15 min to complete movememt of structure or the structure will automatically be placed in original location.
4>>> Said structure can only be moved once per election period.
5>> Structure owner will receive email, and onscreen msg upon first login about movement and new location.
With the following rule set it would only help the people that still actively play the game.
I'm going to chime in, since I've been a part of two huge cities since their inconception. One became a ghost town (all the players quit) and the city burned to the ground. The other is alive and thriving well. I'm also starting my own city on Naboo soon, using the experiences I've gained over the past 1.5 years worth of living in player cities.
Fidgiter wrote:
I'm not here to discuss my signiture or the finer points of font size or title placement therein. If you have an issue with my signiture make a thread about it rather than trying to derail this discussion with such petty matters.
Now how about we talk about the compromise. Would you have an issue with a Mayor being able to move a structure if:
- The Mayor is on the Admin List or is the Owner
No, a Mayor should have no power, whatsoever, to move any player houses, factories, or harvestors.
- The Structure is Condemned
Another big no. With that said, anyone who has CANCELLED (read that please, not "hasn't logged in", but flat out cancelled) their account, and said account has been cancelled for three (3) consecutive months, should have their house andfactories "packed" (using the new system) automatically and any harvestors removed from the game world. If they live within a city radius, obviously their citizenship needs to be revoked from said city as well.
- The Owner hasn't been logged in for N weeks. (I say 4, May says 16, what say you?)
Not a chance! See #1. No player in this game should have the ability to do such a thing. I'd like to see the amount of hatred built up for a Mayor who decides that John Smith, who although is still paying for the game monthly, had to leave for Iraq for six months, comes back, and sees his house on the other side of the city.
John: "Um, why the heck did you move my house?!?! I was one of the first residents here, I choose that spot because of X."
Mayor: "Sorry John, you were away for more than my liking, so I wanted to give your spot to some other residents who log in more often."
John: "But I was serving in the military you moron! You know that."
Mayor: "Sorry John, but just like in real life, when you're away from your home, the HOA in your subdivision destroys your home so a newer, livelier family can move in. It is for the best of the community John. If you're unhappy, run for Mayor or start your own town."
JediMasterCarlito wrote:
The Mayor is on the Admin List or is the Owner
No, a Mayor should have no power, whatsoever, to move any player houses, factories, or harvestors.
I can understand your not going with the other two but this makes absolutely no sense to me. You are effectively saying a player should not be able to CHOOSE to authorize a Mayor to do a relocation on a structure they own? Why?
Fidgiter wrote:
JediMasterCarlito wrote:
The Mayor is on the Admin List or is the Owner
No, a Mayor should have no power, whatsoever, to move any player houses, factories, or harvestors.
I can understand your not going with the other two but this makes absolutely no sense to me. You are effectively saying a player should not be able to CHOOSE to authorize a Mayor to do a relocation on a structure they own? Why?
For the same reasons given by other people. Abuse of power. Sure, a new player to the game who is joining your city might say "ok" to this power of the mayor and add him to the administrator list. However, say for example that the player is gone for two weeks, and during that time you as mayor "need" to move his house. Well since you can't give him a warning and he did give you those rights after all, now you pack up his stuff and move his house to some other spot in the city he might not have wanted to go to.
Not to mention that how could you feasible do this in there? The mayor just packs a house that he has admin rights on (I agree if he's the owner, obviously he can move it wherever he wants - you may as well not have even included that in your post as it doesn't really relate to the subject, if he's the owner already), and then what?
- Does it just sit in his datapad until he's ready to place it down, pigeon-holeing the player?
- Would the player be able to confirm via a radial option on the house that he/she accepts this new location?
- Or is it timed, where you have X amount of minutes/hours before it is put back to where it was originally?
- And if thats the case, what happens if the mayor already put up a new structure where the original house spot was located?
- And if the mayor can't replace that spot with a new structure until the old structure is put in a valid location, then what is the point?
Message Edited by JediMasterCarlito on 07-26-2005 02:05 PM