Do you think there should be a Code of conduct for Governors ???

[Modoc]

I,m looking for honest feed back please.
Shouldn't an official elected to office by the citizens of UO be require to conduct they're Governor Toon to in an appropriate fashion ?
I realize this is just a Game but when I see the conduct of some Governors It makes me wonder shouldn't there be some sort of "Code of Conduct" for the Office held ?

 

[Capt. Lucky]

I hear ya and in my heart I agree with ya. But UO enforcing conduct seems to have pretty much died off long ago. I know what typically passes through the chat channels these days would have been a perma ban 15 years ago. I'd suggest you document incidents and bring them up on your shard forums at election time. But with Stratics code of conduct I'm not sure you could even do that. Great idea, I just don't see it getting any traction with the people that would need to enforce it. Your kinda vague on exactly what your mean, so I'm not sure what to really say about it. But good luck with that!

 

[Modoc]

As a community trying to rebuild a wonderful game do we really want new and returning players to see a Toon with a Gov. Tag running around like a Griever holling "Shut The Front Door" at Anyone that doesn't agree with them.
Conduct that shouldn't be allow by anyone but especially not a Governor.
Sadly you are entirely correct about the Death of Enforcement and the Conduct which has arisen from the lack of it.

 

[Smoot]

to keep things more like real life, UO governors should be allowed to break more rules, get away with more, and be held to a much lower moral code than the average player.

sorry to burst your bubble, im not sure what country your from but the notion that Governors should somehow be respectable citizens / players is inherently un-American.

 

[Modoc]

to keep things more like real life, UO governors should be allowed to break more rules, get away with more, and be held to a much lower moral code than the average player.

sorry to burst your bubble, im not sure what country your from but the notion that Governors should somehow be respectable citizens / players is inherently un-American.

This would be Funny as Hell if it weren't all too true. Thanx again for your input.

 

[Merlin]

The governor program already has a lack of participation. There are many people who only do it to control a trade buff. Putting more restrictions on this would not help the cause. It would just add more in-game politics to the whole process.

While I wish certain governors would uphold themselves in a more respectful manner as you do, you also have to ask yourself - who would you expect to enforce a code of conduct for the governors? Someone from development? A volunteer GM or EM? Point being, I think it would just add another layer of unnecessary complication.

 

[Modoc]

As always you've raised some great points.

 

[petemage]

It would only be used to get rid of people not welcome to the party. I've seen too many veteran governors not being able to accept that they lost a simple election (Atlantic Magincia *wink*). As long as they keep the trade deals up, I couldn't care less what they do while sitting bank at Luna or whatever. It only gets sad when they leave the trade deal disabled for days.

 

[Merlin]

You always have the option to vote them out next time around. That's probably the best way, and only way, to beat them.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

Recall elections! lol

 

[OREOGL]

There is little benefit (if any) to be governor outside of simply role playing.

I mean what we do without a dock in minoc or that little governor house in each city (that have them)?

You add in conduct requirements for something that holds little value, you may as well cut the program.

This doesn't condone the behavior, but certainly holds no value to reinforce because someone wasn't acting what another deems as proper.

 

[Zeke]

Run against them in the next election.

 

[J. E. Tamer]

OOC:
Interest in the governor program is pretty low, as is the population. I've run on a "no campaign promises whatsoever" platform repeatedly. I trade my vote on another shard for an endorsement on my shard.

I do it for entertainment value only. My entertainment, which may not be the same as, and may conflict with, yours.

If you're ever in Baja Trammel Moonglow, talk to Doris.

 

[Dot_Warner]

There already is a list of things the Govs are supposed to do, you "agree" to it when you accept the governorship:

​

If BS wants to clean up general chat and moderate behavior, they could step up and enforce that ToS they plagiarized.

If you see a governor acting line a toddler, call them out on it. Campaign against them.

If your governor can't seem to keep a trade deal going, inform them of the autorenew feature on the town stones.

 

[cazador]

Isn't it "roleplay"? Maybe they are role playing the ******* governor...just a different play style no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jynxx]

The governor program already has a lack of participation.

Trim it down to only Britannia. I don't understand the need for so many Governors of these empty towns no one ever visits anyway.

Make it just one elected position and what little interest and participation there is will appear more robust.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Trim it down to only Britannia. I don't understand the need for so many Governors of these empty towns no one ever visits anyway.

Make it just one elected position and what little interest and participation there is will appear more robust.

It is just Britannia: the eight Cities of Virtue and Vesper. It's only 1 elected position per city.

Participation is flagging because governors can't really do anything. We can set trade deals, give out titles almost nobody wants, and go to one meeting a month. "Improving" our towns is virtually impossible if you're on a shard not named Atlantic, or if you aren't one of Mesanna's sycophants.

 

[Drakelord]

I ran mainly to get a better seat at the monthly meetings (J/K), no it was the role play. Currently, I am Governor on two shards, one is Siege (Minoc), but since EM Bennu does not do Monthly meetings on Siege I am not running in December there. Why be a Governor on a shard where there is no role play with the King. The other is Governor of Moonglow on Sonoma, here I ran (again to get a better seat) because I had run for Trinsic before but lost and the governor then for Moonglow never showed for any meetings so I decided to run for that city and won.

 

[Alex"Drake Iron Heart"CS]

No, and my reasoning is simple, they are elected, its not like they did a coup, so all the people who voted for them into office already know how they are, maybe in the RP aspect of things the Gov can be C*nt to all as its RP, so if he wanna shout/scream he can, its all in the RP side of things, now when you take it out of context and start to attack someone making it personal then its another ball game.
As mentioned before, add more rules to something very few have interest, is just going to drive it down even more.
A Gov seat is no more than a RP opportunity and maybe a small event if coordinated with the PECs or EMs.

 

[Modoc]

Trim it down to only Britannia. I don't understand the need for so many Governors of these empty towns no one ever visits anyway.

Make it just one elected position and what little interest and participation there is will appear more robust.

I believe the thinking for multiple towns so as to provide multiple Trade Deals. Limited to 1 single town would take a lot of Buffer choices away from different play styles.

 

[Modoc]

Isn't it "roleplay"? Maybe they are role playing the ******* governor...just a different play style no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great Point

 

[Dot_Warner]

Trade Deals are fairly terrible the way they're set up. Most cities chose SSI, SDI, FC and maybe HPR out of eleven choices. (Many of the buffs are fairly useless/undesirable.)

This creates a situation in which citizens aren't loyal to a city, or its governor, but to the trade deal which best suits their character. If the deal switches to something they don't want, they will change loyalties to a town with a buff they like. In other words, there is no true loyalty at all. This is an inherent flaw in the system.

Example: I'm a melee warrior, but the overwhelming majority of Britain citizens wanted the SDI boost. They get what they want, but its completely useless to me. I could switch it to the SSI boost, but then I'd be a selfish governor. So I don't.

The fix is fairly simple, but there is logic-defying resistance from BS: The trade deals should be selectable on a per-character basis. As long as there is the required weekly 2 million on the stone, a citizens may walk up and select the trade deal which best suits their needs. So all eleven buffs would be possible on a daily basis.

No more hopping cities for the deal you want.

 

[cazador]

The fix is fairly simple, but there is logic-defying resistance from BS: The trade deals should be selectable on a per-character basis. As long as there is the required weekly 2 million on the stone, a citizens may walk up and select the trade deal which best suits their needs. So all eleven buffs would be possible on a daily basis.

No more hopping cities for the deal you want.

Best idea ever! Dot that's logic...it'll never happen.

Meanwhile a new governor takes over, skips the roleplay shenanigans picks whatever buff they want, and I'm sitting on a 7 day timer..the roleplay is INTENSE!! Shweet shystem guiiiis


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MalagAste]

In all the time I've been a Governor I've been asked to give out a title 3 times... twice to the same guy the same thing... but after we realized that every time I got elected again I'd have to meet up with him and give it again.... we both I think decided it just wasn't worth it.

Honestly it's very sad to me that the Governorships are IMO basically a joke. Was clear from the start that you can't actually do ANYTHING at all to improve your city... Nothing to help anyone.... PvPers are the ones that really want the Buffs and Hard Core PvMers... usually those looking to get the drop from the EM events to sell for cash...

You can't see who or how many are actually using the trade deals... in the early days this money came from OUR pockets... and we paid them for the other players. But you couldn't tell if it was even being used.

I did a ballot 3 times to see what folk wanted and the consensus was most times FC1 which I don't blame them... but it does nothing for me. That character isn't a fighter... and I NEVER use her for hunting. She does my shopping and she's mostly RP...

I only ran for Governor since it was the logical thing to do afterall I was the "elected" Mayor of Yew for a great many years prior to the DEVs giving us Governorships. Figured if I lost I'd still be "The Mayor of Yew" so .... what did it matter???

I agree with @Dot_Warner that Citizens ought to be allowed to chose what they want and be loyal to the city they care about.... not the one with the best trade deal for them.

But then again UO has changed... used to be people cared about the Cities... they enjoyed the RPG aspect of the game... and they followed the in-game metafiction.... but now we don't have so much of that... now it's about items and what they are worth and how many bucks you can make off the game before it's closed or something... Few care about the stories or the fiction and all the shards have a different reality since the stories are all different and some EMs stick to the old lore and others go out of left field etc... Sure there is some base to some of it... but it's not like days of old where you had something to rally against... you know like Liches invading your town! Or Jukka! etc... you defended the land... But that was back when it was more fun to play for the people and the community and items didn't really have such a huge pricetag or relevance. The joy was in the company you kept... loyalty was to your guild... even guilds are losing meaning anymore... Since most the game is solo now who needs a guild?

 

[Spock's Beard]

Oh jeez Mal, speaking of items, what's the drop rate on those rose-colored glasses of yours? That was one of the cringier "back in my day" rants I've ever seen around here.

Like were we even playing the same game? Because I remember the old days. I remember PK death squads emoting sex acts on people's corpses. I remember GM Darwin getting fired for spawning items to sell for cash. I remember everyone being as greedy and obnoxious as they ever have been.

Also, look, it's totally cool if all you want to do in this game is walk around on ineffectual RP characters and hoard junk. I'm pretty casual myself these days. But maybe try to get over your seething resentment of people who actually do things. Griping that none of the town buffs help you because your character doesn't do anything is a complaint that's difficult to take seriously.

 

[Zalan]

I think Broadsword needs to enforce Governors showing up for meetings. There a certain player on Legends that elected themselves governor thru Multi-accounts. Has never showed up for a meeting.

 

[Capt. Lucky]

No, and my reasoning is simple, they are elected, its not like they did a coup, so all the people who voted for them into office already know how they are,

Actually on a smaller shard.... there are seriously people running around this game with like 20 accounts. They can pretty much vote themselves in. If a guy keeps the trade deal up and attends the meeting regularly I'm usually ok with them.

 

[MalagAste]

Oh jeez Mal, speaking of items, what's the drop rate on those rose-colored glasses of yours? That was one of the cringier "back in my day" rants I've ever seen around here.

Like were we even playing the same game? Because I remember the old days. I remember PK death squads emoting sex acts on people's corpses. I remember GM Darwin getting fired for spawning items to sell for cash. I remember everyone being as greedy and obnoxious as they ever have been.

Also, look, it's totally cool if all you want to do in this game is walk around on ineffectual RP characters and hoard junk. I'm pretty casual myself these days. But maybe try to get over your seething resentment of people who actually do things. Griping that none of the town buffs help you because your character doesn't do anything is a complaint that's difficult to take seriously.

I'm not talking about old Fel days.... I never had them... I'm talking about pre-AOS days when it actually took a guild to go through a dungeon because One guy couldn't solo everything in them.

You know when it wasn't about the LOOT and what it was worth but it was about the adventure and the friendship... and such.

 

[Deraj]

Should there be a code of conduct for governors. The first place to start on this question is, how it would it be enforced? Two ways, as I see it: The EM/King kicking a governor during a term, or the players/citizens voting out the governor at the end of a term.

In the former case, the King dismisses a governor because they are consistently absent from meetings. I am not sure if it is possible for them to dismiss a governor for purely RP reasons though (like if the governor was acting "too defiant" or openly treasoness). If you are comfortable with allowing an EM/King to exercise their judgement in this roleplay capacity, then this is at least one way to go. But this can also open the door to accusations of favoritism.

In the latter case, players can in theory vote out a governor. Of course as we all know this is rubbish because it's evident that governor seats go to whatever group can muster up the most influence / votes in order to gain a title or buff, rather than "citizens of X city voting for the better candidate". So until we see changes that require a greater amount of investment in cities from players and a voting system that reflects that, we will likely not see that as a viable way to enforce a conduct code on a governor.

 

[Dot_Warner]

The King can boot a governor, missing meetings is stated as a reason to do so. Emailing the EMs that you won't be able to make it solves that though.

However, lets not get carried away with that as a reason to kick a governor. It's not as if these meetings are important in any sense of the word. They are 100% RP and are sparsely attended at best. Two cities could go to war and the King would just verbally pat them on the head and tell them to play nice, lest the EMs get accused of favoritism for interacting with RPer's plotlines

The EMs are in an impossible damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't situation with this system. A situation I completely blame on Mesanna for listening to drama queen crybabies on certain shards.

 

[Longtooths]

who would you expect to enforce a code of conduct for the governors? Someone from development? A volunteer GM or EM? Point being, I think it would just add another layer of unnecessary complication.

The pinnacle of irony.....just sayin'

 

[Spock's Beard]

I'm not talking about old Fel days.... I never had them... I'm talking about pre-AOS days when it actually took a guild to go through a dungeon because One guy couldn't solo everything in them.

You know when it wasn't about the LOOT and what it was worth but it was about the adventure and the friendship... and such.

Speaking as someone who was around for the greed and obnoxiousness of the old T2A days right through to the greed and obnoxiousness of the AoS days, I can definitively tell you that the couple of years inbetween weren't some magical era where everyone cared about in-game fiction more than items and gold. You're just remembering your newbie days through a fog of nostalgia.

 

[MalagAste]

Speaking as someone who was around for the greed and obnoxiousness of the old T2A days right through to the greed and obnoxiousness of the AoS days, I can definitively tell you that the couple of years inbetween weren't some magical era where everyone cared about in-game fiction more than items and gold. You're just remembering your newbie days through a fog of nostalgia.

Probably remembering more of the guild I was in that was awesome.... and when there were more people around doing things... not soloing everything because they want it all for themselves... but maybe that's me... I don't know.

Was a lot of fun...

 

[GarthGrey]

IMO, poor conduct of Governors should be brought up at the next meeting. Get up out of your chair, approach the King and Gov's and voice your concerns. If the King chooses to let it go without a reaction, make note of it and pass that on to the citizenry who were unable to attend. If a Governor calls the citizens "peasants" and you stand and voice your concern to the King, and he does nothing, well...umm.....yeah.

 

[Deraj]

The King can boot a governor, missing meetings is stated as a reason to do so. Emailing the EMs that you won't be able to make it solves that though.

However, lets not get carried away with that as a reason to kick a governor. It's not as if these meetings are important in any sense of the word. They are 100% RP and are sparsely attended at best. Two cities could go to war and the King would just verbally pat them on the head and tell them to play nice, lest the EMs get accused of favoritism for interacting with RPer's plotlines

The EMs are in an impossible damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't situation with this system. A situation I completely blame on Mesanna for listening to drama queen crybabies on certain shards.

This is a part of my problem with the governor system specifically in regards to roleplay. It's been said many times now, "it's for RP, it's for RP", but it doesn't have any bite if the king cannot enforce his authority. Ideally yes, a player can take their grievance to the king in roleplay interaction. Maybe the king acts on it. Maybe the offending governor refuses to play along. What then? "I guess you can continue shouting treason since there is nothing I can do to stop it." Now we find the contradiction: a system said to be meant for roleplay, being thwarted by someone who is not roleplaying. This brings me back to the eternal question asked by so many here: Just what is this governor system supposed to do?

 

[Dot_Warner]

This is a part of my problem with the governor system specifically in regards to roleplay. It's been said many times now, "it's for RP, it's for RP", but it doesn't have any bite if the king cannot enforce his authority. Ideally yes, a player can take their grievance to the king in roleplay interaction. Maybe the king acts on it. Maybe the offending governor refuses to play along. What then? "I guess you can continue shouting treason since there is nothing I can do to stop it." Now we find the contradiction: a system said to be meant for roleplay, being thwarted by someone who is not roleplaying. This brings me back to the eternal question asked by so many here: Just what is this governor system supposed to do?

This has been the central question since the system started.

Originally, according to the live stream from the 15th Anniversary, the program was supposed to be a way for players to bring things to the dev's attention via elected player representatives. That took a left turn somewhere before launch and it morphed into the pure RP system we have now. (During the first cycle, we had several non-RP governors who attempted to bring up game issues (bugs, broken systems, delayed city banners, new ideas and the like) and found themselves being told (repeatedly) that the meetings weren't the forum to address these issues. Those people didn't stay in the system.)

I know that Atlantic had a month or two (or was it three?) of direct EM involvement with its governors and a murder/treason plotline which included the King sending aggressive NPC guards to Malas. That seemed like a good path for the system to take. The King was involved and participating instead of being a feckless bump on his far-too-phallic throne. GL also enjoyed some direct participation as well with a diplomatic plotline involving a treaty with Nujel'm. That just kind of ended one day (but is now being picked back up again...we think).

Since then, I've been informed that there is now a strict 'no interaction' mandate from Mesanna due to spurious cries of "favoritism" on a certain shard. Which means she essentially shot the system in the leg and is letting it slowly bleed out. Its pointless to even invite the King to an event anymore, he won't go.

The PECs can only do so many events at once and their hands/powers are needlessly hampered.

 

[cazador]

I think the devs have too much on their plate already. But adding a zone where u can lock whatever you want down that has a 2 month timer and poofs shouldn't be too rough. You can release it if you want and reset the timer. Would be a hassle, but you can set up for events and such with crafted stuff and let it disappear or lock down cool stuff to show off your bling. Makes for more interaction I think. And for gods sake let the governor appoint actual people, like a treasurer or something fun to add more interaction. I roleplay gen chat ass clown usually..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dot_Warner]

They've said no to letting governors lock things down within the city. Which, to be honest, is extremely shortsighted. But, we can ask the PECs to do that to some extent (if there is an event).

They definitely need to allow for the appointment of a Vice Governor at the very least.

 

[Merus]

The King can boot a governor, missing meetings is stated as a reason to do so. Emailing the EMs that you won't be able to make it solves that though.

However, lets not get carried away with that as a reason to kick a governor. It's not as if these meetings are important in any sense of the word. They are 100% RP and are sparsely attended at best. Two cities could go to war and the King would just verbally pat them on the head and tell them to play nice, lest the EMs get accused of favoritism for interacting with RPer's plotlines

The EMs are in an impossible damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don't situation with this system. A situation I completely blame on Mesanna for listening to drama queen crybabies on certain shards.

I wonder if we can book the King for failing to show up at the meetings...

 

[Dot_Warner]

I wonder if we can book the King for failing to show up at the meetings...

Has that happened somewhere?

 

[Merus]

Has that happened somewhere?

Yup.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Yup.

Somewhere other than Siege?

 

[Merus]

Somewhere other than Siege?

Yup.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Yup.

Ugh.. Did the EM apologize?

 

[Merus]

Ugh.. Did the EM apologize?

Yup.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Yup.

That's good at least, mistakes happen.

 

[Lord Gareth]

I think Broadsword needs to enforce Governors showing up for meetings. There a certain player on Legends that elected themselves governor thru Multi-accounts. Has never showed up for a meeting.

I think the Event Moderators need to be a little more flexible with meeting days and times. For a player to be removed from office for not attending the Governors Meeting on Sunday because they work every Sunday is a bit Re-diC if you ask me. Are they suppose to quit their job so they can attend and be a Governor? If so does that mean @Mesanna is accepting applications for Sovereign Assistance? and/or handing out Fruit Basket Stamps?

 

[Scribbles]

If they allowed reds to control bucs den perhaps you would see the scalawags you are talking about move to a less honorable city where they belong. You would also see a ton less involvement in the trammel side of government as i feel most players (at least on ATL) only care about the governors for the trade buff.

Get rid of the trade buff for fel, and most of the "bad" people will stop being involved in your governor RP stuff.

 

[cazador]

I think the Event Moderators need to be a little more flexible with meeting days and times. For a player to be removed from office for not attending the Governors Meeting on Sunday because they work every Sunday is a bit Re-diC if you ask me. Are they suppose to quit their job so they can attend and be a Governor? If so does that mean @Mesanna is accepting applications for Sovereign Assistance? and/or handing out Fruit Basket Stamps?

I don't know..like not many people to coordinate with. Just pick a day that works best for the whole, or most of the crew. If people can not make a mandatory meeting. The EM could maybe just throw a second account in there and just role play it. People can't always drop everything if an emergency occurs. Now with that said, if you get elected for the gov knowing you'll never make a Sunday..don't run, but an emergency here or there..help em out. Never mind that..I'm sure if the gov would let someone sit in their place. Like an emissary of the gov, because the gov is having "RP gripes" with the king. Some fun pseudo Lore for RL interference..so many solutions!!

I personally would use the excuse of over sleeping after a long night of drinking at the Jhelom pub and being over run with bar maidens..not enough time in the night, ya kno


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zalan]

@Lord Gareth there is a difference, between real life issues and just not showing up. It also states that if you can't meet the terms then resign.

It's one thing to miss do to work, family, and emergency. However, to choose not to attend because you feel like it is disrespectful to the EM and other players that made the commitment.