Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: Our mayor just deleted our R 5 City coz he was losing
JediMasterOldGez
Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:28 pm
#14
This is kinda off topic but im kinda stuck and was wonder How you disband a city, is it in the term in the city hall?
Xevious
Sat Sep 24, 2005 12:01 am
#15
Wow, such a fuss over my old city! I was the original Mayor (Okono Ishi)... I think I know the guy you are talking about. I handed the city over to him after I moved Medalvale to Talus.
Over 90% of the city was inactive, just old accounts and houses that never was moved.
Mayor Okono Ishi <GSW>
Medalvale, Talus
Message Edited by Xevious on 09-23-2005 12:02 PM
Darka-ce
Sat Sep 24, 2005 7:47 am
#16
Spyhunter,
Seek me out. I AM the nearest shuttleport to you in the city Silni Bogatyr. We'd be happy to accomodate your displaced citizens. My IGN: is Nokrad
Seek me out. I AM the nearest shuttleport to you in the city Silni Bogatyr. We'd be happy to accomodate your displaced citizens. My IGN: is Nokrad
RynnnDraggon
Sat Sep 24, 2005 1:49 pm
#17
LoboCA wrote:
Khristen wrote:
RynnnDraggon wrote:
Although I feel sorry for the poster, I was told that if someone Builds up a city from ground up, and the Mayour has made the payments and what not, it was that Mayours right to destroy his city for any reason.
I agree with submitting a CSR ticket, but it was his city to do with as he pleased.
Just like we mayours have the right to /citybann anyone we chose to, for any reason.
I do feel for the Original Poster, but don't hold your breath to much to getting your city back. You might get the same response that someone else got, and that was that it was the mayours right to do with his/her city that they wanted. /shrug.
Good luck and hope it turns out for the better part for you and the citizens,
It doesn't matter if they've put every credit into the treasury, a Mayor does not "own" a Player City. It is a community, not someone's personal property. The Mayor is the caretaker and can govern as they see fit while in office, but citizens would not have the ability to vote them out if it was the Mayor's personal property.
What part of "Purchasing the City Hall then placing it" isn't part of "owning" a player city. It cost the mayor some amount of credits and/or resources to place that City Hall. All the citizens do is declare citizenship. If they don't like who the mayor is, they can move out. They can also try and elect someone else to be mayor. If the current mayor decides that the citizens don't deserve the work he put into the town, it's his choice to destroy the city as he sees fit. See, he "owns" the city.
Now, if the mayor were elected into an existing city, then destroys the city at his leisure, that is a failure on the diplomatic part of either the mayor himself, or the citizens. The citizens elected him, trusting in his responsibility and good will. If they wanted someone else in his position, they should have figured out a way to have him resign peacefully.
Just because someone is a "Bad Sport", doesn't mean they have done anything wrong. It may be morally wrong, but morality has nothing to do with a game.
The election should be in there in case the mayor decides he doesn't want to be mayor any more. Then he can pass the torch onto someone that does want to be mayor.
If cities were meant to be communities, then it wouldn't cost the mayor anything to place a town, and there would be a city council. Cities in SWG are organized more like a military establishment. One "general" that says the way things are done.
Exactly.
And as TH has said before, we Mayours that Build our cities from ground up have every right to run it the way we see fit, as long as it does not violate the rules and play of SOE, and we are able to delete a city if we choose to. I have purchesed everything in the city myself, all the Structures etc. I am the one that has paid over 2 million credits into the City hall treasury, I am also the Only one, despite Emails that I have sent out to my citizens asking them to donate to the city. Also, I am the one that has decourated the City Hall with all of My belongings, so in all "reality" I DO own the city....so If I chose to, I could delete my entire city and there would be nothing the CSR's or devs could do about it because I am the one that is doing it all.
Now, if I was Voted into a city, than no, it would not be my right because I didn't purches or buy anything. Like I said, submit a CSR Ticket and see what they say, but if someone like myself Bought everything, paid money into it and decourated it all with my own stuff, than yes, it does "belong" to me, and there's nothing a CSR could do about it....However, I have worked extremely hard and invested a lot of time and credits into my city to even do such a thing, and all my citizens are happy.
Xevious
Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:12 pm
#18
Sorry to hear that Rynnn, GSW has really pitched in and made Medalvale what it is today. I never worry about maintenance, because they are there for the city and want to see it thrive. Maybe you should hit your citizens with a tax bump!
I just want to thank my GSW mates for doing what a guild is supposed to do!
Xevious aka Okono Ishi
Medalvale, Talus
raincries777
Sat Sep 24, 2005 7:29 pm
#19
I really think a Voting Feature should be added for City Disbanding.
You shouldn't be able to disband a City unless a vote is taken in city hall. Just like voting for mayor.
Think about it. Could the mayor of your home town just one day say "No more city" ?
A voting feature for this would be the best way I think.
Psihozny
Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:18 pm
#21
Sorry to hear what happened. That is terrible. If you were on Tarquinas I would run for mayor and replace all of the structures lost and pay for all mainanence, till I mastered politican and turn it over to a new guy. Sorry for your loss won't take someone long to master with the amount of people in your city.
Xevious
Mon Sep 26, 2005 5:01 pm
#22
Spyhunter, after reading your post again. I realize you are claiming that you built the city up to a metropolis. You are very mistaken. Old Medalvale on Rori has been a Rank 5 city for over a year and has not ever been demoted.
I believe you came into this city expectingto take overthe city, which was my city that I created almost 2 years ago. I gave that city up toone of my guild matesso we could move to Talus and build New Medalvale.
I have followedup on Old Medalvaleseveral times a month and I truely believe you were trying to aggresively take over Old Medalvale.
Okono Ishi
Mayor of Medalvale
Message Edited by Xevious on 09-26-2005 05:02 PM
BT-Trajan
Tue Sep 27, 2005 12:09 am
#23
It doesn't matter if they've put every credit into the treasury, a Mayor does not "own" a Player City. It is a community, not someone's personal property. The Mayor is the caretaker and can govern as they see fit while in office, but citizens would not have the ability to vote them out if it was the Mayor's personal property.
This is an interesting statement. While I absolutely agree that destroying a city hall and/or the city civic structures is just darn mean and ill spirited, I do believe that the Mayor has a right to do this. It is the game mechanics that allows them this ability. I am not saying that this is a good thing or the right way to act, as a community leader. But I can see where it it might have to happen.
If I knew that someone had moved into my community of 130+ persons and in some way intended to wrest control from myself then destroy the city anyhow, I would choose to set the self destruct and rebuild the city rather than let some other bastardoes come in and ruin the community.
If anyone was taking count of the 270 structures in Aurora and asked who built the majority of them. The answer would be me. I have donated the vast majority of structres and monies to this community. I take VERY personal pride in running a successful online community which has weathered the storms of developer idiocy which take their course with every publish. Despite the best efforts of the developer teams to ignore or cause harm to the player cities, we survive. We survive because of the dedication of the long-term Mayors/Caretakers and those community members that put in effort, with little or no payback, to support and grow the community's in which we live in SWG.
It is the Mayor that spends the majority of theiir time recruiting new citizens, builds or acuiring new structures, organizing the city, ensures that the streets are well lit, that mission terminals and trainers are placed, recruits merchants and ensures that they are well inventoried in the city malls or shops, balances the budget, works to set up community events and runs them efficiently, places gardens, builds a supportive and responsible militia, makes sure that yearly community surveys are sent out, collated and reported on, and does a whole host of other things that in my eyes makes the Mayor the "owner" if anyone were to hold that title, of any city. Also, Mayors are not paid for thier effort. We dont get special loot. We dont get special titles. We dont even get abilities for our Master Politican box. We cannot move other people's houses. We cannot remove derilict houses. We dont even get recognition by the game developers and managers for the vonguard role we play in mitigating the problems of the communities which we manage.
The community of Aurora is often identified with my Mayor Toon. I take it very seriously when someone talks poorly of the community of Aurora and work hard to clear up any disputes or problems which any player has when they are playing in or around the community of Aurora. I am disgusted when I hear of someone destroying an online community which other players have worked hard to set up for the last two years. And I become very defensive when people beginto reduce the importance of the role of Mayor of a player built city.
All that having been said -- and by goodness that was a lot; I would sooner turn over my Mayor Acct to a trusted community member, let them run the city, leveraging the respect and honor which I have built up over the last two years, while I went off and played a new game or played on an alternate toon, before I would destroy the community of Aurora. This community has long since passed from my ownership or that of any one guild. The community now belongs to the members of Aurora. I work as Mayor with the single goal of making their online time as enjoyable as possible, despite the clear idocy of the developers over the last few years. I take it personally when something goes wrong in the community and work very hard to protect the community.
This is a great game, the members of the player built communities make it great and without us, this game would have died a miserable death long ago.
Cheers!
Hadrian
Starstrider6
Tue Sep 27, 2005 11:34 am
#26
Khristen wrote:
It doesn't matter if they've put every credit into the treasury, a Mayor does not "own" a Player City. It is a community, not someone's personal property. The Mayor is the caretaker and can govern as they see fit while in office, but citizens would not have the ability to vote them out if it was the Mayor's personal property.
I have to disagree with this sentiment. I don't know the whole story of what happened with the city mentioned by the OP (although later posts indicate that the OP wasn't being entirely truthful), however I think circumstances would dictate the validity of a player ending a cities existence.
The city I live in was conceived, planned, and built because of one person. She purchased the City Hall, all the decorations, fountains, statues, parks, cantina, medical center, and garage, and has maintained the Treasury on her own. She sent out the emails, bought/crafted the houses to give to new citizens, etc. It is my opinon that she doesn't just own the town, she *is* the town.
With all the horror stories of grief-players "planting" houses in anticipation of growth so they can take over the town (for whatever reason), I can't believe that using the term "community" really applies in all situations. If a group of players deliberately attempted to "steal" the town in that fashion, not only would I understand my Mayor destroying City Hall, I would be standing there cheering her on when she did it.
As I said, it would be different if all the citizens paid into the Treasury, bought their own houses, and contributed to the costs of the improvements. There is no option for "Anarchy" in running a city, so elections - and the possiblity for abuse - exists. As such, I would be more inclined to look at a situation like the OP describes on a case-by-case basis.