Cities And Housing Archive
Thread: Be able to move other player structure in my city.
What I AM going to do is this. Ask people to transfer the structure to me so I can make the placement that works best for the city.Folks willdo this (because I have a good repluation due to long selfless service) and I will deliver on improvements to the city that will make the folks whose structures I moved happy and make the city as a whole better.
I guess you are right that there will be Mayors that can abuse it. In that light they better make it so Mayors can NOT destroy the city hall and restrict grantzoning so a person can't place 100 structures after being given zoning. There are so many ways a city can be totally and utterly trashed and so little tools to make a city better.
If someone wants to move a structure in a city right now they would require zoning and zoning can be exploited. That aside I've been placing structures since day 1 of the galaxy and know how to work the land to make the most out of it and in space restricted area's this is vital to the long term survival of the community. I find it tragic that folks feel they need to be protected by Mayors rather than just voting them out of office as is their right.
well considering the new housing changes where a player can pack up his on house on test center you could have the mayor select the house and have it packed up to the user datapad.
A player doesn't have to be a citizen it was a choice they made. maybe only letting a mayor move the house within current visible limits would be the answer. you couldn't move the house across town in one election period just a number of spaces in any given direction allowing a mayor to line up houses and factories in more of a city like pattern.
obviously some cities do turn over mayors. I am mayor of my second city. I turned over my first and it was in my mind well laid out. I am now mayor of another city and while the layout doesn't hinder me greatly it was a case of the citizens quickly placing houses near a city hall on day 1 and loose building codes through several mayorial changes.
Most of the residents of the current city are inactive and houses are condemned but there is a core set of residents and they would love to see moredefined streets, decorations, districts, etc. as well as some of the choice locations currently held by players that haven't played in 6 months to a year.
SPACE, GCW, PvP, PvE, DWB runs 
JediMasterCarlito wrote:
The Mayor is more or less just a "holder" of a plot of land where they can place city structures (including parks, lighting, etc). They also can restrict and manage zoning in the city limits. Even with careful use of these abilities there are some who can exploit the entire city and bring it to its ruin. A Mayor is also the "protector" of the city from the exploitations of those who would want do it harm.
Some here have pointed out that this holder of the land can/should be voted out if they abused their power. Sorry, doesn't work that way realistically. On my server at least, many of the Mayors I know are also the guild leader, and the entire city is run by and for a particular guild. Therefore there is no voting out of the mayor, as most side with their guild leader. Its real, and just the way it works.
If folks side with them then they are acting with the support of folks. If a Mayor does something with the support of the people they are not, by definition, abusing their authority. If 1 person in the town is mad at 119 are happy the Mayor has done good. That's democracy in action.
I'm all for giving Mayors more tools to beautify their city, but not at the expense of the players in their city.
The Mayor can be removed from office if they are not pursuing the cities interest. The replacement can then undo any changes made (short of destruction of the city hall) and the city will survive having learned a valuable lesson. Personally I'm far more concerned about the Mayors ability to destroy a city than their ability to abuse enhancements.
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
- The Structure is Condemned
- The Owner hasn't been logged in for N weeks. (I say 4, May says 16, what say you?)
Exactly how are you going to be able to tell if someone has logged in at any given time in the day.
Akkori wrote:If the Mayor abuses their power, they get booted, simple as that. A Mayor cant "abuse" the citizens for more than 3 weeks, if they are motivated to remove him. Trying to thwart new gameplay based on how people might "abuse" it is silly. There will always be *someone* who wants to be a moron. You cant avoid that. If you did not add functions tot he game if it would result in a moron abusing it, nothing would EVER be added to this game.
Mayors should have the ability to move a player structure inside the city limits. They should also be able to institute a voting process allowing the citizens to decide if the Mayor will have the power to evict a player form the city. If the majority of voters says its okay, the house should be auto-packed into the owners datapad. (this wold require that they add a feature to save vendors in the house too). Mayors are just people with a title right now. THey have no power in the city they "run".
Many mayors have destroyed their cities when they were at risk of losing their positions.
bluejanus wrote:
Many mayors have destroyed their cities when they were at risk of losing their positions.
If you want to make a post suggesting that Mayors should not be able to destroy the city hall without some form of limitation I'm behind you 100%.
When a Mayor goes to destroy a city hall all residents of the city get an email indicating the Mayor's intention. The action can not be completed unless the Mayor is still in office following the next bill cycle. If a Mayor is about to loose an election they couldn't remove the city hall; all they could do is declare their intention to do so if they loose. You can pretty much wager that unless it is a ghost town that will motivate folks to get rid of the bum.
Something like this could be done for relocation structures. The Mayor selects an option from the City Maintenance Terminal indicating he wants Relocation Rights within the city. If the city doesn't like the idea they can vote him out of office. If they vote him into office the majority vote of the city would authorize him/her to do this.
I really like that suggestion for a fail-safe about destroying a City Hall. *adds it to her lists*
Wow!
I didn't know it was such an hot subject. LOL.
I have maybe some solution to control th Mayor abuse of power.
- Put an option on the house terminal that allow such action from the Mayor. (Turn on/off)
- Allow a referendum whichall citizen must vote Yes or No. If 60% of them vote yes, the Mayor can move the house.
Fidgiter wrote:
The Mayor is elected and a Mayor that abuses his/her authority can and should be replaced with one who does. Should the majority of residents vote for a new Mayor that new Mayor could then correct the situation. The fundimental principle of Eminent Domain is where the elected government can choose to supersede the rights of an individual property owner to provide an enhancement for everyone else in the community.
Earlier an example was given related to that Naboo house on the lake.
If that structure wasn't place to make optimal use of the ground it could potentially prevent 2-5 other players from sharing a similar view. If the Mayor could move that structure the original owner could still have a good spot while other players could share in it.
Another thing may be a play the Mayor has where they want to put a garden on the lake with a shuttle port which would enhance the whole city. Yes, that one person may no longer have that nice view of the lake but instead of this every member of the community and everyone that visits that community can enjoy the view.
There are also cases where residents are willing to relocate but in doing so they'd haveto undo all their decorative efforts and have to juggle the contents of houses with their inventory and vault to make it happen. I've gone through this routine on a couple occasions and been held back from doing it in others.
I doubt it will ever happen and this is unfortunate. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and the Mayor is the elected representative of the Many. They are crippled in their ability to maintain their cities which in turn reduces the esthetic potential of cities.
Very well said Mr.Mayor.
If they did that it would be great imo. Truly give mayors the ability to govern players in a manner. .... now if they could put in a system for City mayors to report to an Imperial Governor, we would be getting pretty close to the real Star Wars Imperial gov.