Politician Archive

I dont care about the details, thats for soe to figure out.

There needs to be a way to

1: Kick troublesome citizens out of your city
-persons would get a time limit, say a week, and then they would be removed from the city, this gives them enough time to pack thier bags and leave

2:Kick troublesome structures out of your city or destroy them.
-Owners of troublesome structures would get a warning telling them thier structure was going to be moved to be outside of the cities boundries after say a week.

By not destroying structures theres not much potential for griefing

This option could be available only to cities of class 2-3 or larger to esnure that it is not used to grief others.

Currently idiots with personal harvestors are able to grief a city with relaitive ease, this needs to be fixed.

I agree, put it on the voting terminal, need 75% vote for approval.

~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
"The FS system only rewards the Veruca Salt's of the MMO world . . . not the Charlie's"

Agree. 100% agree. We need this. Badly.

why is this such a problem.... lol

While I realize that a piece of "competition" was enabled to allow people to move into cities with "takeover" attempts, there should be some way to remove troublemakers who plop a house/harvester/factory/whatever down with the intent to just cause trouble, rather than moving in and taking over via political means. I'd love to see a way that the troublemakers could be removed/discouraged while still remaining "fair" to the person who wants to become a citizen and then eventually run for governance of that city.

I would suggest this be something more....shall we say noteworthy?

...hmm... such as flagging a structure, giving it a week or so, then the structure getting a TEF or something similar....allowing any citizen to obliterate the structure by whatever means at their disposal, (flamethrowers, rockets, bats, fists, etc etc).

As uncivilized as this may seem on the surface, it does serve a purpose. Think of it as a change in zoning, or a way to "condemn" a property once it has been deemed obsolete. I mean who wants a rackity unsafe shack in their neighborhood? In addition, it is in the owner's best interest!

So let us welcome progress and begin the process of building a safer and happier tommorrow!

/sign

The answer to this is to introduce the plebiscite.

Have certain categories of things that people can vote for:
1) kicking citizens
2) deleting structures
3) vote of confidence in the mayor

and let the majority rule rather than let the majority vote in a dictator or artifically limiting a mayor's powers for fear that they could use them to solidify their position.

Mayor Rules all. Im the Dictator and If I think you might intend me harm in my political power you are to be kicked out. Add this in with the silly thread about giving zoning rights for the full 450m on town creation and you got some serious power under your wing Dictator.

There definately needs to be a way to force people to move a structure that's inside a city.SOE is trying too hard to protect individuals rights by limiting a cities power. A large group of people banding together to spend the time, effort and credits to build a city should have the power, not a single individual with an army of personal harvesters or small houses that they want to set up around your borders 5m from the entrance to your city hall just to cause grief.

---

** edit ** around your borders OR 5m from the entrance to your city hall

---

/sign

/sighn

Not so much to boot trouble makers, but destroy the never decaying houses of inactive people or those who have quit but there homes/harvestors never decay...compound this by a few months and we have a real ghost town situation =( And the CSR's already have said sorry nothing they can do...

/sign