 |
Who should be Foreign Affairs Minister?
This poll is closed. |
| Arnelos |
   |
28 |
56.00% |
| adaMada |
   |
22 |
44.00% |
| Total: |
50 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Arnelos
|
 |
of the Free World
Sep 2002 time: 00:23
|
|
Yeah, I've been watching it pretty closely... it's been excruciating 
I gain 2 votes, then adaMada gains 3 votes, then I gain 4 votes, then we start going up in 1-vote increments again - repeat.
Over the past several votes on each side, it's just kept tying over and over. To the best of my knowledge there were ties at all of the following numbers:
4, 7, 9, (somewhere between 11 and 15), 17, 19
It's safe to say that we have no idea where this is going to end up, a real nail-bitter (almost literally...)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
E_T
|
 |
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001 time: 00:23
|
|
[EDIT] Wrong day, they have been running together lately.........
E_T
Last edited by E_T on 15-11-2002 at 01:56
|
|
|  |
 |
|
adaMada
|
 |
"The Iron" Stadium, Ubergorsk, Apolytonia (C3DG)
Mar 2000 time: 00:23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Arnelos
Issues Where It is Unclear if a Difference Exists
Institutional Transparency:
Arnelos: A campaign theme. Considers it his duty to post any plans made ahead of time for public scrutiny. Is a "stickler" for institutional transparency, meaning that the people know what the people running things are up to and why. Sites how he handled last turnchat's report as example.
adaMada: Did not comment on issue
Collaboration with Cabinet:
Arnelos: Considers it critical to consult with any elected official potentially impacted by a policy and, at the very least, obtain their opinion on the issue. Executive leadership style is "focused on consensus-building", in contrast to legislative leadership style 
adaMada: Doesn't mention it specifically
Tech Sales:
Arnelos: Would like to establish unsellable technologies in the future (suggests Atomic Theory and Electronics as the top candidates), but unsure if this is possible. Would consider putting any military target on a list of civs not to sell ANY tech to (such as potentially the Zulus) until just before war (to empty their treasury).
adaMada: Doesn't address issue directly.
|
Institutional Transparency:
I am a strong believer in providing the public with all the information it requires to make informed decisions without opening the game. A major goal of any term I should serve would be to create a strong, effective Intelligence Department charged with producing reports and analysis for public consumption. As for true 'Institutional Transparency', I have mixed feelings. I plan to hide nothing from the citizens, but I want to come forth with any underdeveloped plans. Rather, I plan to ensure that all plans presented by the Foreign Ministry are well thought out and considered. This isn't jargon for "I'm not going to tell you what we're doing" -- but I have no desire to waste the Senate's time by releasing plans that frankly aren't ready for it. Any plan we do go through with will obviously be available to the senate for inspection, and I'd always be very open in sharing information with any citizen who asks, as well as publishing information on what we've done and why. Honestly, I'm not sure if this is much different from what Arnelos'll do -- I think we both place a lot of emphasis on communication with other players.
Collaboration with Cabinet:
Collaborating with the Cabinet will be crucial for a successful Foreign Ministry office. Our nation requires government officials who are in sync. Furthermore, under NewCon, members of the Cabinet must agree with the FAM's proposals or else bills do not pass. As such, I'd make every effort possible to work with and for the other cabinet officials. I've always believed we are weak individually and strong as a team, which is the philosophy I'd take when dealing with the rest of the Cabinet. Lastly, I'd (as always ) be willing to consider the benefits of appointing a deputy to collaborate with the Cabinet, but would again want to ensure that such a position didn't hurt FAM-Cabinet collaboration rather than further it.
Tech Sales:
I see techs as another resource. If we can keep a monopoly on any tech, then I'd be all for keeping it to ourselves. On the flip side, if the AI were about to get it or if everyone had it except a given civ that is not a threat, I'd be for selling it. We must ensure that we don't give techs away, perhaps by bundling them with other deals, but we also want to make use of them before the AI does. As normal, I'd probably wind up considering this on a case-by-case basis, combining the strategies of conservative bargaining and liberal trading to create an effective tech-trade policy.
-- adaMada
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
I thought you were in Brazil reorganizing something, Aro
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23. Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|