This is basically a mixture of role-playing and competition, which is meant to be our version of the Olympics, from the bidding process to the actual staging.

The key is to get your city to win the Olympics (we as a whole will vote on that).


STAGE 1: POTENTIAL CANDIDATES


You can do either of the following:

-You pick a city, or you can have a joint bid (eg Seattle and Vancouver)

-Or, you look at the candidates, and decide to back up one or the other (say, for example, Berlin)

For Different Cities in the same Country:

Only one city can be chosen to represent a given country. This is meant to ensure that there will be variety, since the make-up of the board is overwhelmingly in favour of the US and Canada.

In case there are 2 or more cities from the same country (NYC, LA, etc.), the various candidates (and those supporting them) will have to have an initial round of competition where we will collectively decide to pick one (by voting).


STAGE 2: NARROWING DOWN THE CANDIDATES


The cities that remain from Stage 1 will then be voted on in 3 rounds. Why 3 rounds? Because, as more cities are eliminated, supporters of the loser bid might want to back up another one, and thus put their support behind that one.

Say for example:

Team Berlin, Team Amsterdam, and Team Copenhagen were in Round 1. Team Copenhagen gets eliminated. The supporters might not want to see Berlin win, so they will (secretly maybe) make up an alliance with Team Amsterdam, and vote for it over Berlin.

The PM boxes should be busy during the process :razz: As with the real Olympics, sleazy back-deals are part of the process. You cannot publicly criticize another bidder, but you can talk sweet deals in the back alley (WINK).

Anyways, ROund 3 will have 5 Cities remaining, and those will be the 5 Official Candidates


STAGE 3: 5-CITY CAMPAIGN


Same as with the initial process, but here, the do-not-criticize-policy will be gotten rid of. Do as you like \:D/


STAGE 4: PICKING THE WINNER


As with the real Olympics, this has 3 stages (well, real Olympics has 2). Btw, These 3 stages are done in succession. So we're not talking about 3 days here; by the end of that day (whenever it is), we'll have the winning bid.

First Round: last place city is eliminate

Second Round: last place among 4 is eliminated

Third Final Round: 1st among the 3 is picked to host.


At this point, that is it. If you guys want to, we can extend this to include the preparation stage, and the actual hosting of the games with all the fanfare and competitions, etc.


Let me know what you think.

Cheers \:D/



P.S., if you want to do this, expect it to start in April or May. You can start the city selection whenever you like, but voting won't happen anytime soon.

Sounds interesting, but the real Olympics don't have a set amount of stages with their final voting. It's just whichever city gets half the votes plus 1 in any round of voting - Vancouver did it second round, Beijing did it third round...Also if there was a tie in the final round between two cities the president of the IOC, in this game you, would cast the deciding vote.

Also have questions with who gets to vote? Would it be board wide? or just people who have participated in the game at one point or another? By the beginning of the post I got the impression that anyone would be able to vote, and I think that would be a mistake. If someones going to take all the effort to prepare a bid, you would hope that the people voting for or against it would have been somehwat involved in each stage of the process. Plus it would stop organizers from mass PM'ing everybody telling them to 'vote for me'.

It does sound like one of the more...ambitious games and am deeply interested.

Hey AgentX, thanks for clarifying that. Sounds great, we'll go that route then. I think the first round of voting, that is Stage 2, when the 5 candidates are chosen, we'll leave it with 3 rounds, just so that people will have greater freedom to choose among various candidate cities.





The problem is that we have a rather limited pool of voters/participants. I mean, realistically, how big could this end up being, right?

We can definitely have a discussion about the voting, that'd be great.

Some suggestions:

For Stage 2, since the pool of choices is broad and (presumably) most of those involved will have some kind of candidate or other, it'd probably be best to allow everyone to vote.

To offset rampant favouritism (which is inevitable), since we do have 3 rounds, most cities will be eliminated, so the losers will have to opt for a choice that is not theirs. I personally think the back-dealing itself is part of the fun, kind of like 'Survivor', where you have alliances, etc. It's all in good fun, of course. The final 5 candidates should be a pretty decent selection; it's hard to imagine it being unfair after 3 rounds of voting.


For Stage 4, picking the winner, those who voted in Stage 2, and those who actively were involved in Stage 3, will be eligible for voting, since that is an indication that they have actively participated in the overall process. Some members of the bidding cities, say the bidding director, etc. will not be eligible, as they are obviously biased.

Let me know what you think.

Thanks for your interest, btw

:grin:


..........


NOTE:

There are plenty of roles, occupations, positions, jobs, etc. that have to be filled. I'm just trying to see if there is interest here or not. I will then give a more detailed overview. We need people who are part of, for example, the evaluating committee, and bidding cities have to do their presentation, obviously.

I'm thinking perhaps maybe politicking shouldn't be a factor in that early round where the many candidate cities are whittled down to the shortlist of 5. Since you mentioned the evaluating committee, they should be the ones who decide on the final candidate cities, no one else. They should be free of back door deals and discuss amongst themselves on what cities make the list.
This makes it so that the organizing committee has to make sure the bid has some substance, and not rely solely on influence to win the games.


That's true, and I think the Eval. Committee deciding the 5 cities solves some of that problem, do we really want people voting 5 or 6 times? But yeah, I guess the problem won't be that big for the final round all things considered.



I agree everyone should be allowed to vote, but perhaps in an earlier stage, where so much time hasn't gone into the process - hence Eval. Committee for stage 2. Perhaps in stage 1. Since only a certain amount of countries can viably hold an olympic event I imagine a lot of people will choose a city in those countries. A general vote held in the case of more than one city in a country wanting to bid. If the loser still wants to participate they can choose a backup country where the likelyhood of another bid city is unlikely.


This is probably the best way of doing Stage 4 voting. People who have been involved with S1 voting and asked questions during Stage 3.


Yeah, that might be the biggest hurdle (oh, I slay myself) with this project. It can be done really well and I imagine it being great fun, but in order for that to happen interest has to be high and consistent.