Politician Archive

In the case of a banned character for selling on EBay, I believe its SOE policy to erase the character. This is one that came down when Jedi accounts started popping up.

If he sold on EBay, the toon would have been wiped. The CSR inserted himself in the Mayor slot to prevent the city from going completely bust because of it. Now, it was still on the city's residents to put a citizen mayor in place and go from there, all this CSR did was balance the enforcement of rules on SOE's behalf while protecting the interests of the players. Kudos on a tough ass call.

All I am hearing from these other cities is p*nis envy over not watching someone else's hard work fall to dust in favor of theirs. Really quite pitiful.

Congrats to this CSR for stepping up on behalf of the players and the company.

Mayor since cities came out.(former) Master Politician.

Based on what I've read - agree with CSR's decision.

If I was a citizen of Caserta I'd be upset, but some of the silly things they've done in this thread, like one-starring all of Abido's comments, are just infantile. Facts are that in-game you had a crappy mayor, and should have had to pay the consequences (smaller city) of this fact. The out-of-game stuff was dealt with by SOE. There was NO DANGER of your city collapsing, just that you might lose a structure or size due to your own poor judgement. It's supposed to be a dynamic world shaped by player actions. If a CSR is going to come in and arbitrarily change things as a deux ex machina, then it ruins the dynamics of the game.

Having a mayor (Emperor/Dictator) with all of the abilities and no check and balance in play is asking for trouble. It would have been better to set player cities up with the option to be ruled by a council of three.

Two of the three could make changes to the city and thus eliminate the 'griefing' that the mayor did in this instance.

I've established a council of six not including myself (my vote is the tie-breaker). This allows me to please a lot more people and if someone is not pleased they have seven individuals to turn to with their concerns.

Good luck with your city and I understand the heartache that is associated with another city getting helped out while yours stands to gain something from the loss of the other city. However, the CSR was right in intervening and aiding the citizens. I would want that to happen to Caritas if I were to go schizzo.

Bloodfin.Storme

Oh I absolutely agree that there should be some sort of checks and balances to prevent "enligtened despots" from turning to a scorched earth policy however that doesn't exist so we should live with the game the way it is and continuously ask for them to make better options. Plenty of great posts about this have been made suggesting requiring a majority vote with no being the default or no default vote, or a super majority, also the council idea that you brought up. There are almost infinite ways to fix this ability to hinder the gameplay of other people but the devs haven't enacted them. Actually this makes me want to do a poll as to what is the most generally wanted form of checks and balances for Baj to present to the developers. Why put the judgement on them...thanks.

---

Abido wrote:

I'm writing this thread with a bit of emotion. This one has me rather upset.

The Player City of Caserta on Naboo, Eclipse was recently saved from disaster. This City is also a single PA town. The Mayor, through various reasons, began hiking taxes of the City through the roof, kicking members of his PA, and taking small, but regular, withdrawals from the City Hall Treasury. The Citizens of Caserta were, understandibly, outraged,and filed complaints......as well as posted their concerns on the boards.

What wound up happening was, a CSR then inserted themselves as Mayor.....thus saving the City, and made it easy for the new Mayor Hype to take over and try and rebuild. They CSR Mayor also lowered taxes to previous levels. The old Mayor is no more.

The issue that has meupset is this. On Naboo Eclipse, the original 10 Cities placed in the first 15 minutes of the first day are still the top 10, and still the ones with Shuttles. No new Cities can have a chance until another one falls. There are many many cities Caserta's size or much bigger waiting for the chance. Cities that have stood since 13 homes were placed on the 3rd day of release. Caserta should have fallen.

The CSR had no business effecting the Naboo Political environment on Eclipse. He tried to help a Player Base, and in turn, made a "tough luck" situation for a much larget Player Base. There are at least 7 Player Cities on Naboo Eclipse all without shuttles, all capable of growth.......waiting for their chance, including mine.

There are many reasons why a Player City can fall. Bot Homes destroyed with timers, inactive towns, a more preferred Player City, dissatisfaction with the current Mayor, failure in replacing current Mayor, and many other reasons. Having a Mayor go "Goofy" is a REASON for folks to leave a City, and thus have that City fall.

They had no business "helping" this town, and making all other Player Cities on the planet wait .... even.........longer.

If a City has elected a Mayor, and that Mayor does everything they can to disband the town that the very same Mayor created..........then that City should fall, and another take its spot. We don't need support "helping" these Cities........ there are many more Cities waiting to take their places just fine.

The first 15 minutes of the first day was bad implementation enough. But saving a town that should fall while others have been playing the game as its intended, and biding our time, should be able to take their place. CSR's shouldn't be able to come in, and save this process. This disrupts the very meaning of a fluctuating Player City environment. Having a Mayor do crazy things is a possible REASON for folks to leave a City.

Either make all cities Level 4 and shuttle capable if their population permits, or let these Cities fall. Thats the only way it can be fair.

End of Line...

Message Edited by Abido on 03-17-2004 07:54 AM

---

1. Taxes were not being hiked.
2. Members were not being kicked.
3. He was not taking small, large, frequent, or any other type of withdrawals from the treasury.
4. We were outraged by what did happen... however non of the aforementioned events took place.
5. The CSR did insert himself as mayor, although really that didn't help us much as I will explain.
6. He did not touch the taxes AT ALL, they were at the same point and still are at that point at this moment.

The rest of your post seems to pretty much complain about the above events so I won't bother to address it. But instead explain what really happened.

Our mayor was caught, by us, attempting to sell his account as the mayor of a city (Caserta) and the leader of a PA (GTA) on ebay. When we found out we reported him and I Immediatly ran for mayor. However the election had just been that day so we would have to wait a week. At this point non of us had even seen the previous mayor for awhile, he wasn't even playing much anymore.

Although we were not told so because of privacy reasons his account was banned, basically they can't tell us that they banned his account and the CSR made himself mayor until the point where someone was elected. Now in order to get elected mayor even after all that I still had to get over 50% of the population to vote for me, now had the CSR not placed himself as mayor... which is all he did with us with respect to the city, then I still would have had to gain 50% of the vote in that week. either way you look at it I was elected fairly, and I can't see how you have a problem with what really happened or why you believe what you have written.

Hype Lightly
Mayor of Caserta
Eclipse

---

Abido wrote:

There have been alot of flames about this and that. Time to remind some folks what the issue is.

I am fully aware that I cannot get the CSR to go back on their decision, and I'm fully aware that nothing will change. What I want to remind you all of is the issue of CSR intervention, and the reasons to which a city can fall. Its a fun issue, and one that should be discussed here, and not kept quietly in the shadows.

Unfortunately, those from Caserta have felt a need to call this "witch hunt" and "I didn't know the facts." Well, I'm not sure what you think I'm hunting, and if I didn't get all the facts, I was darn close without being directly involved, yes?

The issue is (bum bum bum), Legitimate Reasons on why a City can fall. Bot Houses are being dealt with in their own right, but what of the bad mayor. I say its a valid reason for a City to fall (decrease in size, AGAIN, not full blown destruction to a pile of ashes).

Also, once again, I appreciate anyone's post who doesn't agree with me. This is a topic that deals with why a City can fall ("decrease in size" for the overly paranoid). If you posted on why you think the CSR was right in this matter (even if you felt it was indeed an exception), then I thank you for posting. What I certainly don't care for is the flaming of me for even posting the issue. Its uncalled for, and more importantly, off topic.

<--- fully supports a dynamic Player City environment with many reasons to allow the "top 10" on each planet to fluctuate greatly.

---

No you weren't "darn close" the only thing you got right was that a csr replaced our mayor temporarily... the reasons and effects of this were no where near "close". And the fact that you would come in here and try to convice people that this happened is a bunch of bull. I will not stand for my city's name to be libeled (yeah its writing people) by the likes of you. You obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about so why don't you simply apologize and bow out.

Hype Lightfly
Mayor of Caserta
Eclipse

Spammy, which is appropriate here, maybe check the dates?

Necro attack!!