Is CARE trying to subvert the Sim Planning process?

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 5:22 am

While strolling around Colonia Nova I noticed CARE's sim proposal outside the large CRAEDO offices near the tp point. The sign on it said:
"Those interested in pre-booking a plot in this sim should IM Michel Manen"

Michel was around at the time and changed it after I challenged him to the following text:
"Those who might be interested in booking a lot in the eventuality this proposal should win, check the map inside and contact Michel Manen"

I can't believe that Michel is offering 'pre-bookings' on a sim that not only hasn't been built yet but which has yet to be considered, never mind voted on, by anybody in the CDS. This looks to me like an attempt to subvert the democratic process through underhand tactics. It's very clever though. Get people to 'pre-book' a plot on the proposal (despite the fact that there hasn't been a vote yet) and then they have a stake in the proposal passing. If you get enough people to 'pre-book' prime land on the proposal then you have created a group of people with a vested interest in making the sim a reality. You can then put pressure on the RA to choose this design over any of the others that come out of the design process. It's brilliant, if sneaky!

When I challenged Michel about this he said it was 'for market research purposes' and that no one would be mislead. But I don't think we can believe that. Many people were conned into joining CARE before the last election not realising that they were joining a political faction and would not therefore be eligible to join another or select among their candidates for office. I don't think we can simply trust that Michel will tell prospective 'pre-bookers' that this sim isn't just not built yet, but may never be built! Imagine their disappointment and anger if they 'pre-book' in a sim that may never be built.

Michel - I think you should stop offering plots for 'pre-booking' or 'booking' in your proposal. It's misleading and it subverts the legitimate planning process.

Jon Seattle · Post by **Jon Seattle** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 5:43 am

I should mention -- really to all people with proposals -- that the winning sim, if approved, is built and owned by the CDS not by the proposer. You may not sell plots yourself.

If you want to design and build a sim on your own, of course, you are free to do so, but the competition is specifically for CDS expansion.

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 6:04 am

[quote="Jon Seattle":yd5omah5]I should mention -- really to all people with proposals -- that the winning sim, if approved, is built and owned by the CDS not by the proposer. You may not sell plots yourself.

If you want to design and build a sim on your own, of course, you are free to do so, but the competition is specifically for CDS expansion.[/quote:yd5omah5]Just to be clear, Michel said he was not selling plots (presumably the 'pre-bookings' are free). I still think that offering plots on 'pre-order' is out of order though when the legitimate, democratic process has not yet been completed.

Gwyneth Llewelyn · Post by **Gwyneth Llewelyn** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 6:20 am

If I may, I would just like to add that the "pre-booking" idea is something that, technically, falls under the realm of the Estate Owner, supervised by the Chancellor, and not of individuals (having a stake on a project or not). Unless, of course, the RA mandates otherwise.

I would just like to point out that we've done "market research before" â€” [i:1cx7wt4r]once the design for CN was approved[/i:1cx7wt4r], the former PIO asked, on an email to all citizens, to share their thoughts on if they would eventually buy plots there. But we cannot prevent people from doing market research on their own! A poll on a forum is also "market research". Asking people on the street if they would like a specific proposal to be approved is "market research". All that is allowed.

It's more a question of wording Implying, directly or indirectly, that a citizen of the CDS is 'able' to fulfill a specific official role (in this case, assigning citizens to [future] plots, which is [i:1cx7wt4r]not[/i:1cx7wt4r] the mandate of any RA member, unless specifically decided otherwise at the RA) is, IMHO, a violation of the [url=http://neufreistadt.info/id28.html:1cx7wt4r]CDS Terms of Service[/url:1cx7wt4r], which state, under [b:1cx7wt4r]5.1 Participant Conduct[/b:1cx7wt4r], that it is illegal to
[quote:1cx7wt4r]impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a CDS member, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity.[/quote:1cx7wt4r]
Directing people to contact a citizen "in the eventuality that a plan is approved" is a false statement of the mandate that Michel may have from the RA. One thing is promoting a specific plan, and I agree that this promotion â€” like any other political campaign â€” is allowed to be done in-world by whatever means (and "market research" is definitely one possible way of doing it). The other thing is indirectly implying that citizens who might have an interest in buying a future plot should contact anyone else but the Estate Owner (or any other similarly mandated offical of the CDS) â€” this is misleading and a ToS violation.

I would kindly request that the wording on the "market research" clearly states that, even in the eventuality that a specific plan is approved, who is the [i:1cx7wt4r]correct[/i:1cx7wt4r] person to contact (or not mention any person at all).

Moon Adamant · Post by **Moon Adamant** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 6:20 am

Attention everyone:

Perhaps this has not been left very clear: the running proposals will be voted down by the RA. [i:l5zcwb1w]The choice of a sim to build this summer is thus prerogative of the RA.
[/i:l5zcwb1w]
This to say:

- There are - to my knowledge - two or three proposals running. Seeing that a mailing to the citizens on the contest has been delayed, but was finally sent yesterday - and seeing that people have untill the 15th May to start a proposal and untill the 29th to perfect it - it is very possible indeed that we have several final contestants. I also would like to recall that the Guild is assuring and will continue to assure technical help to all proposals, untill the 29th.

- Until the 29th May, there will be a public consultation on the proposals. The final data of this consultation will be also handed to the RA. This data though is NOT binding on any RA's decision.

- The RA will be provided with ALL running proposals.

- All the above considered, we can not TELL atm that any proposal will be the winner, considering that the public is yet to be consulted and that the RA is yet to vote. So the pre-booking of plots in one proposal does sound a tad... optimistic

Mind that the proposals not chosen to implementation will NOT be trashed. They will be kept considering future implementation, [i:l5zcwb1w]with the safeguard of eventual modifications.[/i:l5zcwb1w] But we do not know - atm - what is the schedule for further expansion, thus we can't tell the eventually interested WHEN the sim will be up - or even that the layout will be exactly that, or that the price on plots will be that (please recall that the RA also votes on the sim budget).

I hope this helps to clear the matter.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:54 am

Gathering information about the existing interest both inside and outside CDS in any one of the sim projects is not only useful, but necessary in evaluating the viability of the proposals in question.
This clearly should be done before, not after a specific proposal is chosen by the public and (possibly) ratified by the RA. There is little point in carrying out any market research after a specific proposal has been selected by both popular vote and legislative confirmation.

There is no direct or indirect attempt to subvert any democratic process or mislead anyone that this is anything but a competition which has not yet begun, never mind concluded.

The text discussed above has been amended to say as follows:
[quote:3886g8px]
'Al-Andalus' sim proposal - for 1/10 scale model TP to CRAEDO Auditorium (use TP point behind you)
Those interested in the development of this proposal are asked to take a look at the marked map inside and contact Michel Manen for full Project details[/quote:3886g8px]

No mention is made of prebooking any parcels, no direct or indirect aassignment of lots to individuals is made either in writing or graphically on the map.

Thank you all for your valuable input and constructive criticism.

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 9:08 am

Michel-

I'm glad to see that you've changed the signs after I challenged you on this inworld and posted on the matter here.

Your new sign says to 'look at the marked map inside' which, when I looked at it, had lot numbers and markers to indicate which ones were vacant and which ones were taken. I assume you're going to remove this? Otherwise it still looks like you are offering specific lots on the proposal for reservation - something that you are not empowered to do before a decision is taken and a job, as pointed out elsewhere, that belongs to others in the CDS goverment.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 9:37 am

Get a life, Pat!

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 9:59 am

[quote="michelmanen":1tacg6a1]Get a life, Pat![/quote:1tacg6a1]LOL! I have a life, Michel. I don't need you to tell me to get one.

It's interesting to note your reaction to this issue. First you denied there was any problem at all when I brought it to your attention inworld. You told me it was all about market research and I 'didn't understand'. Then you tried to ignore me because I was telling you something you didn't want to hear and wasn't being 'constructive' enough for you. Now that you've been shamed into making changes to your illegitimate 'pre-booking' system you respond with insults. It's not a very mature way to behave and rather unbecoming for an elected representative, don't you think?

Reminiscent of the kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar - "What me? I was only counting them! Get lost and leave me alone!"

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 10:04 am

Is that all you got Pat? I'm really disappointed with you...

Aliasi Stonebender · Post by **Aliasi Stonebender** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:15 pm

[quote="michelmanen":1psato5z]Get a life, Pat![/quote:1psato5z]

Dare you to tell [i:1psato5z]me[/i:1psato5z] the same thing, Michel.

"Booking" - for market research purposes or any other - for a sim of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators is strictly none of your business.

It is, however, MY business.

If you wish to take your own money, purchase a sim, and display a prospective map on your property OF that sim - go nuts. We advertise for Roma, we have our friendly jibes with Caledon, no reason we can't have you in the fold. But you are not - under any circumstances - to advertise, mislead, or even HINT that anything [b:1psato5z]you[/b:1psato5z] do has anything to do with what the CDS or the Executive plans to do.

This is not meant to demean any honest attempt at publicity raising on your part. Simply a caution to be a little more careful in the future.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:02 pm

You have no idea what you're talking about Aliasi. Before making posts like this try to find out the facts first, or at least have the simple decency to talk to me face to face. But that, of course, would be too much to ask from you.....