[Poll] City Metric, City Report, City Forecast, and Seneschal

[Andruid]

I'm a little unimpressed with how the Foreign Quarter effects currently operate, as a result of unfavorable race relations.

You walk into an FQ, and ONE mob yells at you and transfers you out. Like, what is going on there? It seems highly unrealistic to me that my character would simply turn around and leave after being yelled at in a foreign language by a single irate tall guy.

I suggest providing a realistic/explanatory emote in addition to the angry mini-speech, to represent the FQ "border guard" calling his buddies to his side to block a person's way, shove them out, or to indicate that there's no way a person is getting past without an army, etc. I'm sure it can be done in a way that seems both realistic and gives people something to RP about. Right now, it just feels cheap and twinky and confusingly abrupt.

[Zeita]

While I like the concept and the potential, I'm feeling disenfranchised from it right now for the same reason that Marisa mentioned- right now, I can't participate. As it stands, I had more influence before I became a GL (getting my noble vote) than I do now (since the Court has 1 vote between 3 people, and I naturally leave that to Emma).

I discussed with Kinaed the other day, but do think the system should check if one is a noble first when counting a vote and then if you're a GL. This will resolve the issues that Marisa, Ariel and Margaux are experiencing.

I also think, as others have mentioned, we need to firm up what the votes actually represent and what representation represents. (REPRESENT!) I'm not sure that I like the Seneschal being able to see how people have voted, especially since it is implied that it isn't really a vote. If a vote measures 'Margaux is pulling the strings of these people over here to get her way' then I'm not sure that it should be obvious- wouldn't it be heretical to downvote piety or potentially illegal to work against law? I'd like it to be tangible but not obvious- whether through sporadic rumors, ic events or whatever. As it is, I see it steadily becoming a race to the center where the main driver is to keep everything on an even keel which is about as boring as could be- I'm sure that when drivers come out to encourage people to move it in certain ways it will help to alleviate that.

Lastly, I must admit that I was anticipating going into this, seeing city based plots coming out of high or low metrics.

[Gerolf]

I'm not sure that I like the Seneschal being able to see how people have voted, especially since it is implied that it isn't really a vote. If a vote measures 'Margaux is pulling the strings of these people over here to get her way' then I'm not sure that it should be obvious- wouldn't it be heretical to downvote piety or potentially illegal to work against law? I'd like it to be tangible but not obvious- whether through sporadic rumors, ic events or whatever. As it is, I see it steadily becoming a race to the center where the main driver is to keep everything on an even keel which is about as boring as could be- I'm sure that when drivers come out to encourage people to move it in certain ways it will help to alleviate that.

Down voting piety isn't saying we should be more heretical. It was always my understanding that it is just an allocation of resource spread. So if the Church has matters under control, lets go look at the economy. To me, down voting a metric would be akin to saying "You know, we can sacrifice a few resources in lawfulness to increase our public health." This nuance does seem to be causing confusion so I agree the help file should be updated.

I disagree with removing the seneschal's ability to see who is voting for what. His or Her role is to be the city whip and get sources to vote the same way. If they don't know who has voted and what resource then it makes that job stupidly difficult and I would approach it as no one has voted unless they send a letter saying they had. If I am supposed to be responsible for making sure everyone votes, but I can't track it, then people who don't self report will be assumed to be not playing along... I should clarify I don't know if you voted to support or subvert just that you are focusing on x metric.

I will have to see if I can find logs of the voting over the last couple of weeks, because I am sure I have seen Ariel and Marisa called out separately from Order and Court.

[Tremere]

So I've hardly been able to play lately. My dog has cancer, haven't felt up to playing much at all as a result of that. As a result I just haven't been voting and hadn't realized that the voting cycles for the metrics and stuff was so tight. I think that it is far too quick then, if that is the case and I really don't want to be like, singled out as being a lazy noble not doing his job if I just can't play the game for a period of time, because rply, Tomas is probably doing his job icly somewhere.

[Geras]

So I've hardly been able to play lately. My dog has cancer, haven't felt up to playing much at all as a result of that. As a result I just haven't been voting and hadn't realized that the voting cycles for the metrics and stuff was so tight. I think that it is far too quick then, if that is the case and I really don't want to be like, singled out as being a lazy noble not doing his job if I just can't play the game for a period of time, because rply, Tomas is probably doing his job icly somewhere.

Sorry to hear that. Hang in there.

[Dice]

I think I voted in a couple cycles when Order GLs did not, so my vote went through, but one cycle I voted, checked city report, and saw my vote/reason had been replaced by Renton's, so after that I haven't been voting unless I catch cycles close to over and there's no order vote. So you might have seen me one cycle or another.

I think I'd like the Seneschal being able to see the outcome, like, "10/20 people have voted; Health is leading", but maybe not specifically WHO is voting for WHAT; that could require RPA or an IP-based command that's cheap for the Seneschal or expensive for everyone else.

I DO think actively downvoting a metric is trying to sabotage Lithmore in some way - letting lawfulness lose some to support health would be upvoting health and ignoring lawfulness. But we need to make sure downvoting is 'allowed' - that is, that it won't result in everybody coming down on you like the hand of God. Hiding who voted for what by default might be a good approach to do that (as well as defining what votes mean - this thread is proving to me we're ALL all over the place on that).

[Zeita]

My use of the term downvoting isn't 'voting for something else' but more 'actively working against this metric by trying to push it down'. I can't see any way that trying to force piety down wouldn't be considered heretical, and since it is an option and a viable one for subversive types to take, I'm uncomfortable with anyone being able to see anything as clear cut as BobtheGL voted to push down piety.

I like Dice's suggestion of the summary of number of votes and a general gist of where they're currently falling (some sort of ladder, highest to lowest).

[Misstery]

I completely agree with Dice and Zeita it should be more annonymous, current system makes it hard to subvert piety or even vote for anything but, when requested as seen as a heretical act. I'd also really like to see GLs and nobles communicate more on this, my hope is they themselves ask for votes and provide rational, right now it's just something that needs to be done, very little behind it and that takes an active -group- effort to make this a valuable process. That's my encouragement for folks to get involved.

[Zeita]

Can I just confirm my understanding, as there seems to be some confusion in the general community?

Is a 'vote' for lawfulness an actual vote, or is it more along the lines of 'This week I'm spending my time training the Reeves on new arrest procedures, fine tuning their patrol routes and boosting their morale with free donuts'? I assume the latter, but want to be double sure.

[Misstery]

I like the above inturpretation, and that to me is more fulsome to RP because it is tied to IC Action. It might encourage guilds to get more people involved. Inside and out, and support player projects. It benefits engagement. It is what you did not what you hope to see. It still allows guilds to approach others for support and they could include that in their reason - I canvassed these people, etc.

I also think as more people become clear of how the system works, there will be more comfort to get involved.