Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-data: August 2000:
[freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Primary & Secondary sets of nations

[freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Primary & Secondary sets of nations

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [freeciv-data] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Primary & Secondary sets of nations
From: Steve Hodge <shodge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 10:20:46 +1000
Reply-to: freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx

Dmitriy Genzel wrote:
> Given the fact that there are seem to be objections on the ground of
> certain nations, and that some are clearly included in others, I suggest
> we clearly separate some of the nations into a separate set which is
> included in the distribution perhaps, but not available to the user by
> default. Another reason to do this is so that the screen won't become
> unusably cluttered when choosing a nation.

Sounds reasonable.

> I don't suggest (yet) that we need to remove any nation that is a nation
> in its own right existing today, or a separate nation of great importance
> that has disappeared. But, nations like Bavarians, Texans, Dunedain &
> Mordor and the like should go into the second set. If Nazis get included
> (and I am against that) they should go there too.
> Here's a suggestion on rigid criteria. We include a
> nation in the first set, only if
> 1) It is in existense today in the form of a national state
> or
> 2) It has been an ancient civilization that has no clear successor (e.g.
> Franks & French) of sufficient importance

So are the romans in the first or second set?
Maybe a "offensiveness / controversiality" criteria is needed as well?

Steve Hodge

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]