New forum for polls ?

Brum wrote:

In my country we had 6 or 7 registered Princes when I took office.
The players didn't support most of them. The players did not ask for them to do anything and preferred to go to other Princes's events.
I see the players choosing their representatives right there.

Besides, I think that the players should interact with their NCs more. NCs are not there just for the Princes.
In fact most of my work is with the player base.

I might have a disturbed view because my country is small, VtES-wise.
But for what I know in Sweden and Spain, the NCs are in constant feedback with the Princes and Players.

Yes, but that have nothing to do with what I did say. You said that v:ekn was a very democratic orginisation. I then laid out the fact of how it is organized, and ask how that in anyway could be democratic.

Im not saying its not working, Im not saying it should be changed. Im just saying, that branding the organization as being democratic may be an over stretch.

/Jesper

Damnans wrote:

Mael wrote:

Is it possible to also get the "problematic card" threads moved there as well?

Why do you think they should be moved there?

Because the card ideas forum is currently being dominated by them instead of ideas for new cards.
Also, as all the current polls were about the balance (or lack thereof) of existing cards, I thought that's what the new sub-forum was going to be for. Guess I should have checked the name of it first.

Xaddam wrote:

VEKN as a democracy, huh? Yeah, that's pretty idealistic and non-realistic. White-wolf did a great job. They did it by steering the game with professionalism, steering being the key word. A forum filled with people trying to shout over each others' voices is not the professionalism which an organization like this requires.

The VEKN has to draw the line somewhere with player-interaction, else we won't get new cards until some time next decade.

If you feel like there should be a players' organization which (mal-)functions as a democracy, maybe try to make a new one.

There is no line for player interaction drawn. There is no formal way that rank-and-file players can participate in the process. I understand that most players are distrustful of a "democratic" or interactive process; I would say it is 60% autocratic vs. 40% participative.

I think there is room for both. I live in a country whose political system is putatively participative, but in reality was set up so that the upper-classes could run things themselves. Nonetheless there are some mechanisms in place through which the rest of us can make our voices be heard if we are really loud. I think having some kind of limited participatory mechanism would serve the VEKN well. That does not mean that I think it should be run by direct democracy.

Brum wrote:

Aaron wrote:

VEKN is self-appointed, (...)

No, it is not. In fact it has a better representation leadership than most so called "democracies".

You appoint and support Princes.
Your Princes nominate and support your National Coordinators.
National Coordinators elect the Inner Circle.

Most Inner Circles are such respected and awesome people that we were merely too happy to have them take office.
It was consensual, but it was still a group decision.
They do their job and I trust they do the best they can.
I have no doubt the Rules Team know more about the game than you, me or the most of us.
Our opinions here are valued and taken into account.
But we must be ready to have them make decisions that make no sense to us. Or make no decisions at all.

Whatever the type of organization that you can conceive, it will always happen. Always.

I have no idea how VEKN organizes itself or chooses positions. I know how to become a Prince, but I live in a city whose Prince title was claimed long ago, and the players in the area were certainly never asked for our opinion about who should be appointed to what. The current Prince does organize tournaments, but only rarely has time for casual play. The person currently doing the most to keep VTES alive in the LA metro area right now is James Lin, in my opinion, but he cannot get a Prince title because the title for his city is already taken. That is not to cast aspersions on others, it is just that he has the time to organize casual play often.

I understand that things run more smoothly when those in authority have the cooperation of those under them. Nonetheless, I see room for improvement, as do others. Hugh Angseesing, one of the "inner circle" of VTES players by any stretch of the imagination, criticized several card from KoT, such as Villein, in a recent web interview. From my perspective there are a lot of older rulings out there that don't make sense with the current state of the game or that directly contradict card text (even if there has been 10 years or more to update card text in subsequent printings). Updating the rulebook and judges guidelines on a yearly basis to reflect actual changes just seems like the right thing to do. Overturning weak rulings just seems like the right thing to do. Who knows, maybe those things are happening, but without communication from VEKN, it's hard to say.

LA can have N Princes.
The greater Paris has several. The greater Lisbon had several of them too.
Yes, only one can have the City Title. The others must have zone or neighborhood titles. Is that enough to stop them?

How do players choose their Princes? Bad Princes have been known to appear from time to time.
When the players don't agree with one, they nominate another Prince and start going to his events. Also the players should inform the NC.

What Hugh criticized the most about those cards was availability.
I agree. Wrote allot about the subject here.

Back to the subject - if people prefer to express themselves through polls, good.
Johannes already declared that VEKN looks at them very seriously.

Aaron wrote:

I know how to become a Prince, but I live in a city whose Prince title was claimed long ago, and the players in the area were certainly never asked for our opinion about who should be appointed to what.

That is how the system kinda works: an active player declares herself a Prince. I guess in theory a NC could oppose this and remove the title, but that seems kinda far fetched. If someone is willing to put an effort for the game they ost certainly are welcome to do so. So you kinda decalre yourself a Baron (or actually a Prince).

That being said, I've had to let go one or two inactive Princes uring the years. Not having organized any tournaments or casual play, or not having done anything for years kinda warrants that...

Aaron wrote:

The current Prince does organize tournaments, but only rarely has time for casual play.

Life tends to interviene. Especially as you get older.

The Prince doesn't have to organize each and every causal game. No one has time for that.

Have you guys tried out a certain fixed weekly game night in a suitable standard venue (bar, FLGS, whatever)? If weekly is too often, then biweekly is perhaps better suited? When people know the standard date/place they don't need the Prince attending every time.

In Helsinki we have a weekly gamenight that alternates between Wednesdays and Thursdays (works rather well for those who also have other fixed commitments). In Turku (pop 175000) they at least used to have three weekly gamenights!

Greater Helsinki metropolitan area has 3 Princes and the NC. This means one of us can easily host a monthly tournament. In weekly games none of us have to be present. To make it easier to see the number of players attending one of the Princes did a webpage where you can sign up beforehand:
vtes.orava.org/wiki/weeklygames

LA is a vast place. I'm sure that there is a place for another Prince (you can think of them being like a Baron or an Archbishop)