Concern about Delegate option

[Marduk]

Thanks for the information, I'm looking into this.

[canuck101]

I have been over this before. I can access the web from my phone, but not freeciv.

I have been delegating after I log out from the client, and then rescinding before logging back in.

[Marduk]

I have been over this before. I can access the web from my phone, but not freeciv.

I have been delegating after I log out from the client, and then rescinding before logging back in.

Ok that explains the situation. I hope you'll be able to log in to the client again soon.

[det0r]

canuck, I am fairly sure there is a rule that states you are not allowed to delegate/cancel, and then delegate again within one week (can somebody confirm?). If you are delegating every time you go afk/can't be at your computer then you are probably in violation of the rules and you need to stop it before somebody starts throwing their toys around/asking for you to be removed from the game.

[mrsynical]

canuck, I am fairly sure there is a rule that states you are not allowed to delegate/cancel, and then delegate again within one week (can somebody confirm?). If you are delegating every time you go afk/can't be at your computer then you are probably in violation of the rules and you need to stop it before somebody starts throwing their toys around/asking for you to be removed from the game.

Delegation rules are here:
http://longturn.org/rules/

I think we might have lost some of the finer details about delegation (but I don't think most people were happy about putting down specific durations etc).

canuck delgated to pekka and while pekka was usung his acc. Is that allowed?
I thought that you can't login when you delegated.

This doesn't really make sense... the whole point of canuck delegating to pekka is so that pekka can use canuck's account (I presume you don't mean password sharing). Can you elaborate?

[det0r]

Never mind, the rule is quite loosely written:

'Delegation should occur only when really necessary, and canceled as soon as the player is able to do his moves again.'

There have been previous discussions about this, and I think one week was selected as an appropriate length of time between delegations to prevent people from being 'never afk'. Obviously we need to make polls to tighten up some of the rules and make them clearer.

[canuck101]

My situation is as follows:

My laptop is away for repairs, so I only have access to the freeciv client on weekdays. This is not me delegating halfway thru one turn and taking it back halfway thru the next. It's been 1-3 full turns usually.

Is it not better that I delegate each weekend than just delegate for the entire length of my technical issues, no?

pekka has never held control of my account while I have had access to freeciv.

I believe I have followed the rule as it is currently written.

[det0r]

Yeah if you're delegating once per week then there will be no problems canuck. As Kryon says, we obviously forgot to make sure the 'once per week' clause was clearly stated in the rules, so we can't punish people anyway. Once akfaew has finished exams he might have time to tidy up the rules a bit.

[canuck101]

What would once per week mean?

Let's say I delegate Friday and rescind it on Monday. Am I eligible to delegate again the next Friday, or do I have to wait for Monday.

Also, I think there needs to be something that prevents delegation every single week. We shouldn't have people delegating control every single weekend, unless it's for a short period of time due to technical issues or something like that.

[mrsynical]

Yes, it means you can delegate every Friday no matter when you undelegate and I do agree this rule is not enough. We should limit delegation duration in addition to frequency. I'd suggest something like max 10 days for duration and max once a month for frequency.

I think max 10-14 days is about right (but there are always going to be strange exceptions!). I think 1/month is definitely not enough - for example, you happen to travel away from hom twice in a givenmonth? or in this case you don't have access to the net in the weekends. I think 1/week is almost acceptable (maybe slightly short), but 1/two-weeks is more like it....

There should also be a minimum delegation period. The worst thing we can have is people delegate for part of a turn, so they can do special attack. I would suggest minimum of 2 days (possibly more).

[canuck101]

There should also be a minimum delegation period. The worst thing we can have is people delegate for part of a turn, so they can do special attack. I would suggest minimum of 2 days (possibly more).

I strongly agree with this. Minimum in my eyes would be one entire turn. (ie. If I delegate at any time during T40, I cannot take back control of my account until T42 starts.

[IllvilJa]

Hm. This discussion regarding periodic, regular delegation is a bit odd, it does not fit into the spirit of the concept of delegation.

Another objection against delegation is the impact it has on the suspension of disbelief. I know, the game is a game and as such it is supposed to have some quirky, non-realistic elements. But still consider this case: during WW2, Roosevelt and Churchill were allied, but still neither of them could sort of literally take the seat of the other and run that persons office. LT30 example, through delegation, I run my friend's country Brazil while he's travelling with his family for a few days. Consequence for the fairness of the game is fortunately negligible (no, really, as Brazil and Sweden are far apart, sharing no enemies or allies) but the impact on the sense of disbelief is a bit more than neglible, so he will get his company back as. soon as possible.

One way to counter these and other concerns expressed regarding delegation is to somehow 'pool' players together so you only may delegate to others in the pool.

One such pool could be the concept of multiple players for one country (Freeciv already is aware of players and nations as different concepts). Simple example is having two players running, say, Sweden. When both players are around, they can run one half of the country each. When one player is absent the other runs the full shop. This way noone need to worry that the delegation system is abused and also from a role-playing/simulationist perspective this would work fine too. ("Swedish prime minister's office, vice prime minister speaking. Yes, this is right number. No, the prime minister is not available, but you can speak with me as I run Sweden this week.")

Another option is to use small teams (each team created to establish a small union of countries forming a bigger nation from the start) and then only allow delegation within that team. (The idea is that such teams then form alliances with other teams)

Just a few thoughts.

(disclaimer: I wrote this using a phone, in the case of any broken English)

/IllvilJa

[canuck101]

Another objection against delegation is the impact it has on the suspension of disbelief. I know, the game is a game and as such it is supposed to have some quirky, non-realistic elements. But still consider this case: during WW2, Roosevelt and Churchill were allied, but still neither of them could sort of literally take the seat of the other and run that persons office. LT30 example, through delegation, I run my friend's country Brazil while he's travelling with his family for a few days. Consequence for the fairness of the game is fortunately negligible (no, really, as Brazil and Sweden are far apart, sharing no enemies or allies) but the impact on the sense of disbelief is a bit more than neglible, so he will get his company back as. soon as possible.

One way to counter these and other concerns expressed regarding delegation is to somehow 'pool' players together so you only may delegate to others in the pool.

One such pool could be the concept of multiple players for one country (Freeciv already is aware of players and nations as different concepts). Simple example is having two players running, say, Sweden. When both players are around, they can run one half of the country each. When one player is absent the other runs the full shop. This way noone need to worry that the delegation system is abused and also from a role-playing/simulationist perspective this would work fine too. ("Swedish prime minister's office, vice prime minister speaking. Yes, this is right number. No, the prime minister is not available, but you can speak with me as I run Sweden this week.")
/IllvilJa

Have you read the rest of the thread? We've already stated that this is impractical multiple times.

[IllvilJa]

Have you read the rest of the thread?

Yes I have, prior to writing that post of mine that you quoted. This thread is an interesting read indeed, and I highly recommend it for your reading pleasure as well, especially as you will find that I am actually participating in it.

We've already stated that this is impractical multiple times.

(emphasis mine in the quote above)

What does the word "this" refer to in your reply? I am curious on that as you quote quite a bit of text covering various things and "this" becomes a bit ambiguous (mildly speaking).

Once we know what you actually mean we can continue the discussion .

Thank you for your cooperation!

/IllvilJa

[canuck101]

Have you read the rest of the thread?

Yes I have, prior to writing that post of mine that you quoted. This thread is an interesting read indeed, and I highly recommend it for your reading pleasure as well, especially as you will find that I am actually participating in it.

We've already stated that this is impractical multiple times.

(emphasis mine in the quote above)

What does the word "this" refer to in your reply? I am curious on that as you quote quite a bit of text covering various things and "this" becomes a bit ambiguous (mildly speaking).

Once we know what you actually mean we can continue the discussion .

Thank you for your cooperation!

/IllvilJa

Hmm...looks like I should take my own advice and do a little more reading. I saw the word 'pool' and jumped to a previously suggested idea of having a pool of players outside the game who could take control of a nation for a bit.

Your suggestion sounds interesting, but I don't believe there is currently a mechanic set up to make this possible. It would involve some pretty heavy code changes to accomplish.