[Discuss] Prestige req for ruler changed?

[Thomas Dalton]

> Re-read my message. It's when he *doesn't* refuse rulership and is the only
> eligible one that's the problem. I was asking for (not even asking for,
> mainly asking if anyone else thought it might be a good idea) a maybe a
> feature like a "if you don't have 2 fully eligible people accepting, then
> all the partially eligible people are treated as eligible". Otherwise it's
> not a voting system, or at least, it doesn't work. I know a case in point
> where we had 11 nobles refuse to vote at all or voting for ineligibles, and
> the only eligible guy got in by two votes (presumably his own). Seems like
> abuse, but not qute, and it's the dancing on that line that I don't like.
>
> I know how voting works.

Your message didn't actually make sense ("if then not refusing
rulership" - I see now you means "if they're not"), so I guessed at
what you meant - I got it wrong, sorry.  I think it's an excellent way
to manipulate the elections.  Rulers shouldn't be selected by
popularity, that's just the easiest way to handle it.  There being
only one person eligible (eg. the former King's son) is far more
realistic.


-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss