Collab:Federal States/Archive: Difference between revisions

From OpenGeofiction
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Motorway section cleanup, adding 2020 Railway results)
Line 1,165: Line 1,165:


=====Next Steps=====
=====Next Steps=====
The draft framework created following the advisory survey was approved by the stateowners of the FSA by a vote of 31-2. Information about forming and creating railway companies in the FSA can now be found at [[OGF:Federal States/Railways/Companies]].
The draft framework created following the advisory survey was approved by the stateowners of the FSA by a vote of 31-2. Information about forming and creating railway companies in the FSA can now be found at [[Collab:Federal States/Railways/Companies]].


==History==
==History==

Revision as of 16:21, 5 April 2023

This page archives voting on important decisions made by the mappers of the FSA.

Submissions

Note: This information previously came from the page Collab:Federal States/Submissions. As of the time of this writing, it is still up, but blank and marked for deletion.

This page is the place to submit your suggestions for the issues that will be decided by the state owners and coordinators of the Federal States.

  • Anyone is welcome to submit suggestions, whether or not they are involved in AR120.
  • Please limit yourself to 2 suggestions per section. To propose a new section, post in the forum, where the community decide if/when they want to pursue it.
  • Please leave submissions unsigned. Do not comment on or debate submissions here, but please feel free to start a discussion in the forum.

Each issue will be voted on by the state owners and coordinators of AR120, using the "approval voting" method. (OGF admin may veto anything deemed unrealistic or otherwise objectionable.)

Basics

Name for the country

To reduce confusion with the real world, please avoid "USA" acronym... Template:SectionClosed

  • Unified States of Liberty (USL)

* Federal States of Archanta (FSA)

  • Union of the Federated States of Astrasia (UFSA)
  • Federation of the Astrasian States (FAS)
  • Allied States of Astrasia (ASA)
  • Federated States of Astrasia (FSA)
  • Astrasian Confederation (AC) - May be displayed in Latin on coins Confoederatio Astrasiana' (cf.Switzerland)
  • United Provinces of Archanta (UPA)
  • United Counties of Archanta (UCA)
  • Grand Astrasia (GA)
  • Federal Republic of Astrasia (FRA)
  • Commonwealth of Astrasia (CoA)
  • Republic of Vonia (RV)
  • Vonian Republic
  • United Provinces of New (Region of Ingerland) (UPN?)
  • Republic of Unified Astrasian States (RUAS)
  • Astrasian Collective (AC)
  • Astrasia
  • Astrasia's United Federation (AUF) or (UF)
  • Astrasian Union (AU)
  • Astrasian Federation of Unified States (AFUS)
  • Astrasian States (AS)

Design for the national flag

Flag cannot be too similar to the real US flag. For flag design tips see Help:Making realistic flags. Please label your submission with an option number, e.g. "Option 1." Please do not submit any explanations with your image. A backstory for any symbolism in the winning design can be voted on later. Template:SectionClosed

  • Ar120SampleFlag001.png

    Option 1

  • Ar120SampleFlag002.png

    Option 2

  • AR120 flag proposal.png

    Option 3

  • Proposal astrasia1.jpg

    Option 4

  • Proposal Astrasia 2.jpg

    Option 5

  • Ar120flagproposal.png

    Option 6

  • Ar120 flag 7.png

    Option 7

  • AR120 option8.png

    Option 8

  • Ar120SampleFlag009.png

    Option 9

  • AR120 flag proposal 2.png

    Option 10

  • AR120 option11.png

    Option 11

  • AR120 option12.png

    Option 12

  • AR120Option13.svg

    Option 13

  • Ar120SampleFlag014.png

    Option 14

  • Ar120SampleFlag015.png

    Option 15

  • Ar120SampleFlag0016.png

    Option 16

  • Option 17

    Option 17

  • AR12-Option18-flag.png

    Option 18

Proposal for the national motto

Template:SectionClosed * Semper Libertas ("Liberty Forever")

  • In Freedom We Stand
  • We progress and achieve as One.
  • Uniti in Saecula Stemus (Let us stand/May we stand united forever (lit. for the ages)
  • Simul Obtinebimus ("Together We Shall Overcome")
  • Forward!
  • Ab ordine libertas ("Through order comes liberty")
  • United, Great and Free
  • United for Eternity
  • Per ardua ad Astrasia (through hardship to Astrasia)
  • Forward Together
  • Veritas, Iustitia, Libertasque (Truth, Justice, and Liberty)

Design for the national seal

Not yet open for submissions. Will open after country name and national motto are chosen.

National anthem

Not yet open for submissions. Will open after country name is chosen.

Natural geography

This section has been moved to Collab:Federal States/Natural features. ==Name for the longest river in western AR120 - "1" on map==

File:AR120rivers.png

Running from AR120-75 south to the Grand Lakes

  • Rugged River
  • Colurona River
  • Brelee River
  • Akogama River - from akogamaa, Ojibwe for long body of water
  • Rio Vibrante
  • Remias River
  • Rio Serpiente
  • El / The Cardinal
  • Kabal River
  • Nascaha River
  • Tobittani River
  • Fiori River
  • Navota River
  • Flores River

Name for the longest river in central AR120 - "2" on map

Running from the Grand Lakes north to northern border

  • Alormen River
  • Lamahassa River
  • Chialappa River
  • Nantahalas River ("NAN-tah-AY-lah")
  • Garnet River
  • Mishika River
  • Tibah River
  • Sand River
  • Mennowa River
  • Beaver River
  • Fiori River
  • Emmet/Emmett River

Name for the longest river in eastern AR120 - "3" on map

Running from western AR120-18 northeast to AR120-04

  • Hunoset River
  • Settler River
  • Sadikady River- Name after a tribe that inhabited the area, Sadikadee (SAH-D-KAH-DEE
  • Winns River - From the river flowing in Winburgh
  • St. Anne's River - Named after the town of Anne Abbey
  • Lenox River
  • Murrburn River
  • Paxetbury River
  • The Imperial River
  • Roanache River
  • Osnare River
  • Callighan River
  • Pisco River
  • Rapid River
  • Paulivan River
  • Madison River

Names to be used for the Grand Lakes

File:Ar120lakes.png

Top 5 vote getters will be assigned to the 5 largest lakes. The coordinator of AR120 may remove a winning name if it is too similar to another.

  • Lake System
  • Grand Lakes
  • Lake 1
  • Long Lake
  • Lake Nibikaw ("much water")
  • Lake Majestueux/Lac Majestueux (based on French for "majestic water")
  • Lake 2
  • Lake 3
  • Lake Kanitario
  • Lake Augusta
  • Evergreen Lake
  • Lake Bengissimon (from bangishimon, or "sunset")
  • Lake 4
  • Lake Sauganash
  • Lake 5
  • Lake Nawauskee
  • Lake Nipewa
  • Uncategorized/Any Lake
  • Lake Wanalona
  • Lake Majestic
  • Lake Marset
  • Lake Quinnapoag
  • Lake Kawha
  • Lake Remarkable
  • Lake Bentree
  • Lake Vinton
  • Lake Poaxiwinnac (po-ax-ee-win-ack)
  • Lake Dyon
  • Lake Marion
  • Lake Abeta
  • Lake Nehasse
  • Lake Zihnoa
  • Lake Cirtanea
  • Lake Saviour
  • Lake Poole
  • Lake Bellefleur (Beatiful Flower in French)
  • Lake Grand
  • Lake Chieno
  • Lake Spirit
  • Lake Twizel
  • Lake Fiori
  • Lake Halsey
  • Kindred Lake
  • Lake Virtue
  • Surrounding state names (like Lake Ontario and Lake Michigan)

Name for main western mountain range - "A" on map

File:AR120mountains.png
  • Craggy Mountains
  • Great Mountains
  • Highland Mountains
  • Spine Mountains
  • Great Western Range
  • Ragged Mountains
  • Stony Mountains
  • Grand Mountains
  • Big Wolf Mountains
  • Santam Mountains
  • Praddallantain Mountains
  • Sierra Pradda Mountains
  • High Astrasia Mountains
  • Iron Mountains
  • Titan Mountains
  • Catpaw Mountains
  • Old Rocks
  • Sierra Morena
  • Ashanta Mountains
  • Morelo/Morello Mountains/Sierra

Name for main eastern mountain range - "B" on map

  • Annachala Mountains
  • Hatchahaw Mountains
  • Minor Astrasian Mountains
  • Salfalfa Mountains
  • Gooniwan Mountains - from Ojibwe gooniwan snowy, hence Snowy Mountains
  • Vaskatchewat Mountains (vas-cat-chu-waat)
  • Oprey Mountains
  • Dogtooth Mountains
  • Siouxs Mountains
  • Riddler Mountains
  • White Beard Mountains
  • Eastshelf Mountains
  • Black Cat Mountains
  • Chattanooquasca Range
  • Aposaca Mountains
  • Menasserrat Mountains

National capital

Name for the national capital

Template:SectionClosed

  • Name has been voted and decided upon: "Huntington"

Sketch for the layout of the national capital

This section has moved to Collab:Federal States/Collaborative States/Huntington. See also: Special:WikiForum/Discuss_possible_layouts_for_the_capital_city_of_AR120

Rough sketch only, please use template and do not draw too much detail.

  • TemplateAR120Capital.png

    Template

  • Sample-AR120-capital-proposal.png

    Option 1

  • Potential Capital District Layout.jpg

    Option 2

  • Huntplan3.jpg

    Option 3

  • AR120Capital MN.png

    Option 4

  • HuntingtonProposalWS.png

    Option 5

  • Huntington prop6.png

    Option 6

  • P73s Huntington Map.png

    Option 7

Flag for the national capital

Not yet open for submissions. Will open after capital name is chosen.

Eastern collaborative state (AR120-11)

File:AR120-11-map.png

See also: Special:WikiForum/Discuss_names_for_the_state_of_AR120-11_and_its_metropolis See also: Talk/New Carnaby.

State name

Template:SectionClosed

  • Name has been voted and decided upon: "New Carnaby"

Name of largest city

Template:SectionClosed

  • Name has been voted and decided upon: "Stanton"

State flag

Not yet open for submissions. Will open after state name is chosen.

Central collaborative state (AR120-43)

File:AR120-43-map.png

See also: Special:WikiForum/Discuss_names_for_the_state_of_AR120-43_and_its_metropolis See also: OGF:Federal States/Collaborative States/Mennowa.

State name

Template:SectionClosed

  • Name has been voted and decided upon: "Mennowa"

Name of largest city

Template:SectionClosed

  • Prairie City
  • Chelico
  • Chipache
  • Newbury
  • Eau Sable
  • Ventrea
  • Constable
  • Greyrock
  • Bison
  • Twin Rocks
  • New Winburgh
  • Foxville
  • Finley
  • Minneuka (min-ee-oo-kah)
  • Junction
  • Shawcross
  • Les Nonnes or Des Nonnes (the nuns - compare to Des Moines (of the Monks), Iowa)

State flag

Not yet open for submissions. Will open after state name is chosen.

Western collaborative state (AR120-84)

File:AR120-84-map.png

See also: Special:WikiForum/Discuss_names_for_the_state_of_AR120-84_and_its_metropolis See also: Collab:Federal States/Collaborative States/Cosperica.

State name

Template:SectionClosed

  • Caralovia
  • Sierra Nueva
  • Noramira
  • Fiore
  • Hesperia - Greek for west
  • Tierra del Asperia (some other alternative for the above name (Hesperia can be confusing))
  • Tierra del Firme
  • Arbolado
  • Blaniafora
  • Corasonia
  • Mesazona
  • Cartesia
  • Caminolado (Camino=Path/Lado=Solado = Sunny)
  • Cuanisania (Cua=strong in arabic, Anisa/Anisao=Woman in arabic, ania=land of). Just like california
  • Costa Aspérica (Asperic Coast in Castellanese)
    • Cospérica
  • Calafia
  • El Dorado
  • Rio de Oro
  • El Norte
  • Ceresa
  • Cascadas / Los Cascadas

Name of largest city

Template:SectionClosed

  • Las Rosas
  • San Jano
  • Bajatierra- Meaning Lowlands
  • Elmar/ El Mar
  • (Santa Maria de la) Esperanza
  • Rio de Septiembre
  • San Pasqual
  • Blaniapolis
  • Andreapolis
  • Santa Elena de Astrasia
  • La Mision
  • Las Valles
  • Ciudad de los Justos (City of the Righteous)
  • Ciudad Pacífica (peaceful city)
  • Yetin
  • San Joaquin Mesoquita
  • Enseada Major
  • San Juan
  • Los Salmos
  • Yarbok
  • Sansepolcro
  • Leto

State flag

Not yet open for submissions. Will open after state name is chosen.

Northern collaborative state (AR120-91)

See Collab:Federal States/Collaborative States/Alormen.

Highways

Name and letter prefix for national interstate system

See also Collab:Federal States/Highways. Template:SectionClosed

Please use the following format for submissions:

  • Official name of network (prefix, common name) prefix-2, prefix-66, prefix-408

Mapping without a prefix and/or using a different prefix for tolled highways will be determined after choosing a full network name.

  • "A" ("Autostade") A-2, A-66, A-408
  • National Autoroute System (A, Autoroute), A-2, A-66, A-408
  • "C" ("Continental") C-2, C-66, C-408
  • Federal Highways for Commerce and Economy ("C", "Federal Commerce Highways") C-2, C-66, C-408
  • Continental Highway System ("C", "Continental Route")
  • "E" ("expressway") E-2, E-66, E-408
  • National Express Highway System (“E”, “expressway”) E-2, E-66, E-408
  • National Express Highway System ("X", "expressway") X-2, X-66, X-408
  • "F" ("Federal highway") F-2, F-66, F-408
  • Federal Highway System ("F", "Federal highway") F-2, F-66, F-408
  • "FS" ("Federal States") FS-2, FS-66, FS-408
  • Federal States Defense and Commerce Motorway Network (“FS”, “motorway”) FS-2, FS-66, FS-408
  • "F" ("freeway") F-2, F-66, F-408
  • Federal States National Freeway Network ("F", "freeway") F-2, F-66, F-408
  • "H" ("highway") H-2, H-66, H-408
  • National Highway Network ("H", "highway) H-2, H-66, H-408
  • "I" ("Interstate") I-2, I-66, I-408
  • "IR" ("Interregional") IR-2, IR-66, IR-408
  • Interregional Superhighway System (“IR”, “interregional”) IR-2, IR-66, IR-408
  • "L" (" limited access roads") L-2, LAR- 66, L-408
  • National Limited Access Highway System ("L", "limited access roads") L-2, L-66, L-408
  • "M" ("motorway") M-2, M-66, M-408
  • Federal States Motorway Network ("M", "motorway") M-2, M-66, M-408
  • "N" ("national/nationwide highway") N-2, N-66, N-408
  • National Omni-State Transitive Roadway for Automobile Movement, AKA "NOSTRAM" ("N", "NOSTRAM") N-2 N-66 N-408
  • "NH" ("national highway") NH-2 NH-66 NH-408
  • National Highway Network ("NH", "national highway") NH-2, NH-66, NH-408
  • "S" ("superhighway") S-2, S-66, S-408
  • Federal Superhighway System ("S", "superhighway") S-2, S-66, S-408
  • "UC" ("urban connectors") UC-2, UC-66, UC-408
  • Federal Interurban Superhighway Connector System ("UC", "urban connectors") UC-2, UC-66, UC-408

Numbering plan for the national interstate system

Template:SectionClosed

  • Option 1: East/west routes are even numbered, ranging from 2 in the north to 98 in the south; north/south routes are odd numbered, ranging from 1 in the east to 99 in the west; loops and spurs add a digit in front, similar to US (e.g. 498 is a loop of 98)
  • Option 2: East/west routes range from 10 in the south to 49 in the north; north/south routes range from 50 in the east to 99 in the west; nearby routes may add any third digit on the end (e.g. 640, 641, 642, etc, may be located near 64)
  • Option 3: Two-tier system. Numbers 1-19 for more important routes, 20-99 for less important routes. East/west routes are even numbered, ranging from 2 in the south to 18 in the north, and 20 in the south to 98 in the north; north/south routes are odd numbered, ranging from 1 in the east to 19 in the west, and 21 in the east to 99 in the west. loops and spurs: pick one from the other options
  • Option 4: Two-tier system. Numbers 1-19 for more important routes, 20-99 for less important routes. For branch-off routes (spurs) add an additional digit at the end. For loops use easy-to-remember numbers like 100, 200, 300 etc.
  • Option 5: Odd numbered higways east-west, increasing in number east to west; even numbered highways north-south, increasing in number north to south. Main long highways designed multiples of five (5, 15, 25... for N-S and 10, 20, 30... for E-W). Loops would be a 3-digit number ending with 0, spurs would add a 3rd digit from the highway they branch from, adding a 0 in the left if the highway has only one number (051 would be a spur of highway 5, for example).
  • Option 6:
-East/west routes are even numbered, ranging from 2 in the north to 98 in the south; north/south routes are odd numbered, ranging from 1 in the east to 99 in the west.
-Spurs would add a 1,2,3, or 4 in front of the highway it branches off of (ex. 134 and 234 would be spurs of highway 34) and adding a zero before the single digit if the highway is only one digit (ex. 103 or 203 would be spurs of highway 3).
-Loops would be independently numbered 500-999
  • Option 7: Two-tier system. Numbers 1-19 for more important routes, 20-99 for less important routes. East/west routes are even numbered, ranging from 2 in the south to 18 in the north, and 20 in the south to 98 in the north; north/south routes are odd numbered, ranging from 1 in the west to 19 in the east, and 21 in the west to 99 in the east. For branches/spurs, add a zero to the beginning of the number (if single digits the middle number should be a zero). For loops add a zero to the end of the number (if single digits add two zeroes). Exits are numbered in order from south to north, west to east, and clockwise (for loops).
  • Option 8: East-west routes are even-numbered (2-100), north-south routes are odd-numbered (1-101). Coast-to-coast or border-to-border routes end in either 0 or 1. Low-numbered routes in the south and east; high-numbered routes in the north and west. All spur routes have an added leading digit, which increases southeast to northwest (e.g., Route 110 and Route 710 are both spurs of Route 10, with Route 710 significantly further west than Route 110). Spurs of Route 100 or Route 101 simply replace the first 1 with a different digit (e.g., Route 300 is a spur of Route 100; Route 601 is a spur of Route 101. This may result in the same route number as a spur of Route 1, but they will be on opposite sides of the country and therefore difficult to confuse.)

Summary Table

Option Name General E-W Primary E-W Low-to-high E-W General N-S Primary N-S Low-to-high N-S Spur Routes Bypass Routes Notes
1 evens (<100) north to south odds (<100) east to west add digit to front of parent route
2 <500 (except 50-99), first two digits correspond to nearest primary 10-49 south to north >500 (except 50-99), first two digits correspond to nearest primary 50-99 east to west
3 evens (<100) evens 2-18 south to north odds (<100) odds 1-19 east to west No preference on spur route numbering
4 Primary routes are 1-19, secondary routes are 20-99, regardless of direction add digit to right of parent number easy-to-remember numbers (100, 200, 300, etc.)
5 odds end in 5s north to south evens end in 0s west to east 3-digit numbers ending in 0, might or not be related to main highway add an additional digit right of parent number. If this makes it 2 digit, add 0 in the left spur example: from highway 50: 501, 502, etc. From highway 7: 071, 072, etc.
6 evens north to south odds east to west add digit <5 to front of parent number three digits, >500
7 evens (<100) evens 2-18 south to north odds (<100) odds 1-19 west to east add zero to left of parent number add zero to right of parent number
8 TheMayor evens (2-100) end in 0 south to north odds (1-101) end in 1 east to west add digit in front of parent route, increasing southeast to northwest spurs of 100 and 101 replace the first digit
9 Rhiney boi odds (1-99) 1-19 south to north evens (0-98) 0-18 east to west Odd number in front of parent route indicates a route that only connects with the system ONCE. Even number means more than one. Ie. Bypasses, connectors, loops... in no specific order Spurs and bypasses of 0-9 (X0Y, where X is the number of bypass/spur and Y is the Highway Number).

Design for the national interstate route shields

Template:SectionClosed Designs can be viewed here.

Numbering plan for other national highways (analogue to US highways)

The Federal States does not have a non-motorway national highway system.

Design for the national highway route shields

The Federal States does not have a non-motorway national highway system.

Numbering plans and route shields for state highways

These are the responsibility of the individual state owners. Those who would like help are encouraged to make a post requesting assistance.

Highway Discussions and Votes

This section is meant to archive the development of the FS-motorway system. This information was previously located at Collab:Federal States/Highways.

System Name

System names were submitted and put up for ranked-choice voting. The following official names, colloquial names, and initials were considered:

  • National Autoroute System ("autoroutes", A)
  • Federal Highways for Commerce and Economy ("federal commerce highways", C)
  • Continental Highway System ("continental highways", C)
  • National Express Highway System ("expressways", E)
  • National Express Highway System ("expressways", X)
  • Federal Highway System ("federal highways", F)
  • Federal States National Freeway Network ("freeways", F)
  • Federal States Defense and Commerce Motorway Network ("motorways", FS)
  • Federal States Defense and Commerce Motorway Network ("motorways", M)
  • National Highway Network ("highways", H)
  • National Highway Network ("national highways", NH)
  • Interregional Superhighway Network ("interregionals", IR)
  • National Limited Access Highway Network ("limited access roads", L)
  • National Omni-State Transitive Roadway for Automotive Movement ("nostrams", N)
  • Federal Superhighway System ("superhighways", S)
  • Federal Interurban Superhighway Connector System ("urban connectors", UC)

FSA members were also asked if the network should be mapped without a lettered prefix, and if tolled highways should be labeled differently than non-tolled highways. In the case of the latter, members were also asked for their preferred way to label toll highways.

Round 1 Ballots

Round 1 Results

Valid ballots: 23
First-choice votes needed to win: 12
25% threshold for exhausted ballots: 6

Exhausted ballots: 0

Exhausted ballots: 0

Exhausted ballots: 2 (Fluffr Nuttr, Rhiney boi)

Exhausted ballots: 3 (Fluffr Nuttr, Rhiney boi, Ruadh)

Exhausted ballots: 6 (Fluffr Nuttr, Rhiney boi, Ruadh, histor, whateversusan, Alessa)

Prefix Labeling
Choice Votes Percentage
Yes 18 94.7%
No 1 5.3%
abstain 3 ----
Free/Toll Labeling
Choice Votes Percentage
Yes 15 75.0%
No 5 25.0%
abstain 3 ----
Toll Highway Labels
Choice Votes Percentage
T-xx 6 30.0%
TOLL _-xx 6 30.0%
_-xx (TOLL) 6 30.0%
_-xx (T) 1 5.0%
other 1 5.0%
abstain 3 ----

Round 2 Ballots

Round 2 Results

Valid ballots: 34
First-choice votes needed to win: 18

Screen 1 - Highways
Option First Choice Votes Second Choice Votes Third Choice Votes Results
autoroutes (A) 13 10 11
motorways (FS) 12 11 11
expressways (X) 9 13 12 Drop
Screen 2 - Highways
Option Reapportioned Votes Results
autoroutes (A) 16
motorways (FS) 18 Selected Option
Screen 1 - Tolls
Option First Choice Votes Second Choice Votes Third Choice Votes Results
TOLL _-xx 9 15 10
_-xx (TOLL) 18 14 2 Selected Option
T-xx 7 5 22

Shield Design Nominations

  • Option 1, proposed FSA shield.png
    Design #1, a cutout equilateral hexagon. Shield is dark blue with white lettering and white border. Numerals for 3-digit routes are reduced in size compared to 1 & 2 digit routes, as the shield itself would not be modified. *Border is not shown due to the background]]
  • FSAMotorwaySymbolProposal2.png
    Design #2, a regular pentagon with a triangle tip. Color variations for regular motorways, business motorways, and tollways for easy distinction. Font is Segoe UI Bold. An attempt at a simplified design that still takes inspiration from real life shields. Also includes sample directional signage and blank versions for templates.
  • FSAShields MN.png
    Design #3, heavily inspired by the FSA flag. Variations for regular motorways, business routes, and tolled motorways shown.
  • Fsdcmn designSJB.png
    Design #4, inspired by the FSA flag. Variations for 2 and 3 digit FS routes shown. Toll and business routes would not be modified on the shield itself, a separate sign would be placed overhead.
  • FS5.png
    Design #5, with digits for auxiliary routes shown (3). Same font size used for 2 or 1, but recentered. Toll and business would be a part of a separate tag on the sign, either below or above.
  • FS route sign (proposal 6).png
    Colors taken from the national flag. Design a simple rhombus. Font is Nevis; bold, legible and modern.
  • FSA shields concept.png
    Design #7, a square with two colored stripes at the top and bottom, taken from the country flag. The top shields are for normal use, while the bottom is for tolled motorways. Font used is Roadgeek 2014 Series D.
  • FSAShields MNv2.png
    Design #8, which is an alternative of Design #3 intended to improve legibility and reduce shield size.
  • FS sign proposal 10.png
    Design #10, Simple and readable.

Shield Design Voting

Use this section to vote on shields. Each FSA mapper can vote for up to three times. Add a line and use the standard wiki signature feature to add your name (:* -~~~~).

  • Option 1
  • Option 2
  • Option 3
  • Option 4
  • Option 5
  • Option 6
  • Option 7
  • Option 8
  • Option 9
  • Option 10

Railways

2020 Advisory Survey

In June 2020, an advisory survey was posted on the FSA forums to better understand the opinions of the FSA community in regards to planning and organizing freight and passenger railroad companies and routings. The survey was posted for approximately one week, with 22 valid responses received.

Narrative Summary

Respondents generally felt that a national consistent standard for tagging railways and route relations was important, but not essential. Only three tags were considered "essential" by a majority of respondents: name, operator, and service. Most respondents had already reached out to neighboring states regarding the creation of interstate routes and feel quite comfortable doing so; the community significantly prefers a more regional approach to organizing routes than a nationally-led initiative. However, respondents were split evenly on whether individual states should be permitted to deny, block, or otherwise opt out of participating in railway collaboration efforts. There is strong -- but not overwhelming -- support for mapping routes through vacant states.

Most respondents had a general understanding of the existing rail structure in the United States, and all respondents supported a system with multiple competing railway companies throughout the country. There is strong support for a single national passenger rail provider that operates low-speed low-frequency trains throughout the country; however, there is also very strong support for independent regional passenger rail companies to supplement the national network with higher speed and/or higher-frequency services in areas that warrant it. There is also strong support for high-speed rail (HSR) in the FSA; however, the high-speed rail network should consist of several regionally-organized networks rather than a single national HSR network. There is also strong support for companies and individual routes to be tagged with route relations nationwide; however, mappers should get the permission of each affected stateowner before applying the relation to other states.

Data Summary

Twenty-two valid responses were received. Aggregated results are below.

Tagging
  • How important do you feel it is to have a standardized tagging system for railways throughout the FSA? (1-5 scale, 1=low 5=high) Average: 3.45/5
  • How important do you feel it is to have standardized route relations for railways throughout the FSA? (1-5 scale, 1=low 5=high) Average: 3.68/5
  • What tags should be considered *essential* for all main-line railways in the FSA?
gauge operator usage name service electrified frequency voltage rail (write-in)
10 (45.5%) 18 (81.8%) 11 (50.0%) 19 (86.4%) 12 (54.5%) 6 (27.2%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (4.5%) 1 (4.5%)
  • Free response: Are there any other comments or suggestions you have in regards to tagging railways?
  • "In general I think the more detailed the better, especially because of how much it would be helpful to get all the data in a multimap."
  • "Relations are probably helpful especially for when multiple railways temporarily share tracks but we probably need to add the tracks to the relations ourselves individuallly to minimize edit conflicts"
  • "We should just refer to OSM documentation for tagging"
  • "The tag name=* should be used for the subdivision, division, or line name and not for the full operator name (e.g. Lake City Subdivision (MCRR))"
  • "I've no clue why the obsessive interest in this aspect of mapping. Realistic and interesting beats technically correct tagging every single time."
  • "For the purposes of infrastructure, including rail yards and establishing routes, it's important to determine whether the rail system in the FSA will be privately operated or government operated. Since rail yards are constructed in locations to maximize efficiency of the rail system, determining the rail lines is important."
Routes
  • Have you already coordinated with neighboring states to plan and/or map a specific interstate railway route?
  • Yes: 16 (72.7%)
  • Not yet, but I am planning to: 3 (13.6%)
  • No: 3 (13.6%)
  • How comfortable do you feel reaching out to your neighbors to collaborate on a railway route? (1-5 scale, 1=low 5=high) Average: 4.09/5
  • Choose the option below that best describes how you think railway routes and corridors should be planned.
  • Neighboring stateowners should work directly with each other to plan and assemble individual routes as needed: 4 (18.2%)
  • Regions should create their own planned corridor network with input from each state in the region, but some states can choose to "opt out" or not participate in the exercise: 6 (27.3%)
  • Regions should create their own planned corridor network but individual states should not be able to prevent a corridor from running through their state: 10 (45.5%)
  • The railway network should be master-planned at the national level through ongoing discussion, debate, and participation of all the states: 1 (4.5%)
  • The railway network should be master-planned at the national level by a small group of interested mappers, with stateowners expected to comply with the final plan: 1 (4.5%)
  • Choose the option below that best describes how you think corridors should be planned through inactive states, or states with owners who do not want to map a railway through their state.
  • We should respect that each stateowner is free to map their state as they see fit, which includes the right to outright deny a rail corridor: 1 (4.5%)
  • A stateowner should have a very good rationale for not permitting a railway in their state; if they do, that decision should be honored and other alternatives should be sought: 10 (45.5%)
  • Being a stateowner in the FSA project means making some compromises: a stateowner should be required to map a railway corridor if neighboring states on both sides agree: 8 (36.4%)
  • If a stateowner is unwilling or unable to map a rail corridor that is agreed to by neighboring states, another stateowner should be permitted to go ahead and map that corridor in their state: 3 (13.6%)
  • Choose the option below that best describes how corridors should be mapped through vacant ("green") states.
  • Rail corridors that are planned should be mapped in vacant states so the next stateowner knows what corridors and connections are planned regionally: 13 (59.1%)
  • A "clean slate" is important for new mappers to start their state with. Planned corridors should be included on the wiki so future stateowners know they exist, but they should not be added to the map until a state is claimed: 9 (40.9%)
  • Each stateowner should be able to start their state with a fully clean slate. Planned connections through vacant states should not be permitted: 0 (0.0%)
  • Free response: Are there any other comments or suggestions you have regarding routes and corridors?
  • "More information and discussion needs to go via the forum, not everyone is going to use discord and the perception that a small number of discord users are pushing the agenda is damaging to the FSA project and OGF as a whole."
  • "While railways need to be planned regionally and between neighbors first and foremost, especially for class IIs and IIIs, for class Is there may need to be a larger national conversation to ensure that corridors connect all the way through and names are consistent."
  • "In general I think that regional coordination but with more general national level planning is essential. There wasn't really an option for that, so here you have it."
  • "As mentioned previously, the construction of rail infrastructure will be contingent upon the rail system as a whole."
Railway Companies
  • How familiar are you with the existing overall structure of railway companies in the United States? (1-5 scale, 1=low 5=high) Average: 3.00/5
  • Which statement best describes your thoughts on how major FSA railway companies should be organized?
  • The Federal States should have one nationalized railway company that covers both freight and passenger operations: 0 (0.0%)
  • The Federal States should have a small number of major railway companies that provide the majority of freight and passenger rail service nationwide, with no dedicated individual national passenger rail provider: 8 (36.4%)
  • Like the United States, the Federal States should have a small number of major railway companies that provide the majority of freight service, and a single national passenger railway company that operates on those freight routes: 9 (40.9%)
  • The Federal States should have dozens of railway companies that provide freight and/or passenger rail service over shared railways using "trackage rights" nationwide: 5 (22.7%)
  • How should the names of the FSA's major freight railway companies be determined?
  • A list of names should be submitted by stateowners, with the names of the largest companies chosen by the FSA community and applied to a master-planned network of routes: 6 (27.3%)
  • A mapper should be permitted to create their own company and apply that name to only one mainline inter-regional corridor and some smaller branch lines: 2 (9.1%)
  • A mapper should be permitted to create their own company and is allowed to create an extensive network themselves (with the permission of each state in their network): 6 (27.3%)
  • Each region should have its own major railway company, with names and regional networks to be determined at the regional level: 7 (31.8%)
  • A mapper should be permitted to create their own company for class IIIs and some class II railroads and create limited network themselves within their state or with the permission of each state in their network, but each region should work together to ensure a cohesive network that matches up across borders (write-in): 1 (4.5%)
  • What best describes your opinion on the FSA's passenger rail *company* structure?
  • The Federal States should have a single nationalized railway company that includes both freight and passenger operations: 1 (4.5%)
  • The Federal States should have a single nationalized passenger railway company that operates all passenger rail in the nation (except commuter railroads): 5 (22.7%)
  • The Federal States should have a national passenger railway company that provides minimal but basic service nationwide, with states or regions that have higher demand organizing their own passenger rail companies: 11 (50.0%)
  • All passenger rail services should be organized at the regional level, with no national passenger railway company: 5 (22.7%)
  • Each freight railway company should operate their own passenger rail service: 0 (0.0%)
  • What best described your opinion on the FSA's passenger rail *service* structure?
  • The Federal States should have a nationwide high-speed rail network that connects all major population centers and operates entirely independently from freight service: 4 (18.2%)
  • The Federal States should have regional high-speed rail corridors that connect logical population centers, but nationally passenger service is provided on shared freight tracks at lower speeds and lower frequencies: 12 (54.5%)
  • The Federal States should not have high-speed rail, since the nation has a robust motorway and commercial aviation network; however, a national low-speed, low-frequency passenger rail network should be created: 5 (22.7%)
  • The Federal States should not have any national passenger rail network, with passenger trains operating regionally only: 1 (4.5%)
  • The Federal States should not have any passenger rail service at all: 0 (0.0%)
  • Should each railway company use route relations to identify where they operate?
  • Yes, and mappers should feel free to add relations to railways outside their state to complete networks as needed: 5 (22.7%)
  • Yes, and mappers should be able to add relations to railways outside their state with the permission of the stateowner: 13 (59.1%)
  • Yes, but mappers should only add relations to railways within their own state: 3 (13.6%)
  • No, we do not need to use route relations: 1 (4.5%)
  • Free response: Are there any other comments or suggestions you have regarding railway companies?
  • "We should really use route relations, and any mapper qualified to make should whenever possible. Other then that, this isn't really my area of expertise, so I'm not totally sure."

Conclusions and Next Steps

Consensus Points

There appears to be a strong consensus that the FSA should have the following:

  • Numerous freight railroad companies
  • A single low-speed, low-frequency national passenger rail company
  • Independent regional passenger rail and regional high-speed rail companies
  • Route planning at the local/regional level rather than at the national level
  • Including at a minimum the name=*, operator=*, and service=* tags when mapping railways
  • Route relations
  • The ability to plan routes through vacant states
Outstanding Issues

There does not appear to be any clear consensus on the following:

  • Route planning collaboratively at the regional level vs. led by individual mappers
  • How the largest rail companies are formed and names chosen
  • Whether states can opt out or decline routes or companies within their state
Next Steps

The draft framework created following the advisory survey was approved by the stateowners of the FSA by a vote of 31-2. Information about forming and creating railway companies in the FSA can now be found at Collab:Federal States/Railways/Companies.

History

Famous national historical figures (creating a list for naming purposes)

This section has moved to Collab:Federal States/Important persons. The real USA has famous names that appear throughout the country — Washington, Lincoln, MLK, etc. This section is where you can submit names that will appear throughout AR120.

  • Please submit names only, no other information.
  • No real people, or any names too reminiscent of real people.
  • To create realistic old-fashioned names, check out which names were popular in old-fashioned times.

Voting results will determine each name's place on an overall list of names, ranked by level of importance. Names at the top of the list will be encouraged to appear all over the country, as street names, park names, town names, highway names, county names, etc.

If you take a name for a biography, then please set a link to mark, that this name is used

Submitted names

  • Gerald Henderson
  • Andrew Frankmont
  • Louisa Hatherford
  • Joshua Margette
  • Benedict Currey
  • James Lee
  • Aaron Hiramson
  • Jedediah Marks
  • Morris Gault
  • Theodore Thrompton
  • Digby Birch
  • David Davidson
  • Henry Golbrunner
  • John Beck
  • Charles Miller
  • Emile DuPlaisant
  • Castobel Mateo
  • Junsan Ten
  • Albert Johnson
  • Abe Grant
  • George Willson
  • Martin McCarron
  • Leonard Smith Jr.
  • Angelica Newsome
  • Olive Glindon
  • Vanessa Archbold
  • Maisie Riggs
  • Arabella Chalmers
  • Saskia Deckard
  • Harriet Greentree
  • Jackson Whitbourne
  • Jacob Sloan
  • Emily Massey
  • William Warburton
  • Benoit Dumais
  • Eliange Mongrain
  • Elaine Marzelle
  • Dean R. Isaacson
  • Iago Cartés
  • Catherin Hansburg Scott
  • John Decker
  • Herbert Rasselton
  • Oskar Vernymb
  • Carl Benzer
  • Ilona Cerny
  • Detlev Grigli
  • Luigi de Rossanto
  • Faye Rutherson
  • Milicent Corx
  • Meredith Todd
  • David Roberts
  • John Shaw
  • Evan Morris
  • Elizabeth Ignoli
  • Marco Romero
  • Hunter Hill
  • Ruth Becker
  • Harrison Winthrop
  • Michael Duke III
  • Morgan Shaw
  • Grant Hanson
  • Abraham Hargraves
  • John Chapmann
  • Daniel Fordyce
  • Paul Fiornino
  • Dean-Charles Grain
  • Edward van Poole
  • William Farrington
  • Albert Gant
  • Sherlock Van Hopkins
  • Bastion Amalga
  • Mornsey O'Brien
  • Louis Huntington
  • Lee Kent
  • Marion Seymour Peters
  • Patrick Epaphroditus Ballard

Government

This section has been moved to Collab:Federal States/Government.

Vote History

August 2019

n=30

  • Coordinator (TheMayor) Vote of Confidence: 29/30 (96.7%), retained

February 2020

n=17

  • Coordinator (TheMayor) Vote of Confidence: 16/17 (94.1%), retained

June 2020

n=35

August 2020

n=40

  • Coordinator (TheMayor) Vote of Confidence: 37/40 (92.5%), retained

January 2021 (Omnibus #1A)

Coordinator Vote of Confidence

None; TheMayor stepped down as FSA Coordinator prior to the vote.

FSA Coordinator Nominees

n=36, Nominees needed a 75% vote of confidence to advance to the second ballot

Davieerr

Did not receive 75% of primary ballots.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? 2-4 years
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? 3-6 months
  • What is your FSA state? Atascadera
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? At least once a day
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "1. Guarantee that the FSA keeps itself inspired by American mapping, but also guaranteeing originality and creativity. 2. Regional cooperation/planning being priority for mapping. 3. Maintain the project alive all-together."
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "The lack of involvement, specially in certain areas of the country."
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? Yes
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? Yes, I would step down from other OGF duties to manage the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "Listening to both sides, then seeing if there is a middle-ground that can be reached. If no middle ground is possible, analyze the general situation and how would that affect the region in general and make the decision that projects the integrity of the region's mapping/collaboration."
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "Is something bigger that just an american-inspired territory, is a place that tries to understand why the US is what it is, to be able to create something original. Part of working in the FSA is about dissecting and understanding the world around us to be able to map with coherence."

Fluffr_Nuttr

On the general ballot.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? 2-4 years
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? More than 2 years
  • What is your FSA state? Arghenna
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? Several times a day
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "As coordinator, I'd focus on 1) continuing to foster discussion and collaboration between participants, both on and off-wiki; 2) Reviving the Federal States wiki page and the Collab: namespace; and 3) Listening to the opinions and recommendations of the people involved in this project so we can keep it as a nice, chill place."
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "The main wiki page has always been a bit unorganized, and I think as a community it'd be nice to come together and make something that looks like an actual Wikipedia page."
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? No
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? n/a – I do not map outside the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "I'd listen to both sides of the argument, taking into consideration what would be best for the region/country as a whole, and hopefully find a comprimise."
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "The diversity. There are so many different styles and perspectives put into these little pieces of an imaginary America. And still, we're all able to come together and give each other advice and collaborate, helping our country grow as a whole."

jbobinman, aka AnimationSky

Did not receive 75% of primary ballots.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? 2-4 years
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? 6-12 months
  • What is your FSA state? Oronotia
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? Several times a week
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "Collaboration, Morale, Activity."
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "Low regional activity levels (e.g. "East Coast Slack")"
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? No
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? n/a – I do not map outside the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "Depends on the scale of the incident, but I'd try to push a compromise between the two."
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "The collaboration (subject to regions). Being surrounded by a welcoming environment."

David F

Did not receive 75% of primary ballots.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? 1-2 years
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? Less than 3 months
  • What is your FSA state? Osaquoya
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? Several times a day
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "1. Encourage mapping in untouched areas 2. Get East Massodeya up and running 3. Attract potential stateowners to Michisaukee as means to open them up to mapping in the FSA"
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "I'd put in place shorter primary FSA routes, mostly to serve as a direct link between cities with no direct route between each other"
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? No
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? n/a – I do not map outside the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "attempt to reach a compromise between the two state owners if at all possible"
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "being able to work with neighbors to create a great project at large"

MiePrzKom

Did not receive 75% of primary ballots.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? 3-6 months
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? I have not mapped in the FSA
  • What is your FSA state? n/a [Note: MiePrzKom is an Ardencia mapper]
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? At least once a day
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "stop any conflicts between state owners, clean up railways and highways, make FSA look even more realistic"
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "giant West Massodeya-Eustacia wasteland"
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? Yes
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? Yes, I would step down from other OGF duties to manage the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "Ask each other for their version and propose a compromise or see, who is right."
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "big number of active users in FSA, that I could cooperate with"

yoyo21

On the general ballot.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? More than 4 years
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? More than 2 years
  • What is your FSA state? Fellshire
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? At least once a day
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "I would expand the current motor trail system, encourage mappers to collaborate with their neighbors and regions, and promote development of Federal States wiki pages."
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "I would want the collaborative states to become more active than they are currently."
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? Yes
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? Yes, I would step down from other OGF duties to manage the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "I would attempt to find a compromise, but if none is able to be reached, pick the side that has the more realistic proposal. If the disagreement leads to problems on a national scale, I would open up the discussion to the FSA community.”
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "There's nothing like it in OGF, a successful project with so many different mappers and mapping styles and it all blends together pretty well to create a unique and realistic country."

Brunanter

On the general ballot.

  • How long have you been an OGF mapper? 2-4 years
  • How long have you mapped in the FSA? 1-2 years
  • What is your FSA state? Sierra
  • How frequently do you log into OGF? At least once a day
  • As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "promote natural mapping, work with other FSAers to find suitable mappers for unclaimed states, promote FSA to the OGF world"
  • If you could change one thing about the FSA, what would it be? "number of states"
  • Do you currently map anywhere in OGF outside of the FSA? Yes
  • If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? Yes, I would step down from other OGF duties to manage the FSA
  • Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "try and find a civil solution, starting with the provided facts and help them to find a way to come to agreeable terms without escalation"
  • What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "the variety in mapping and ideas"

Results

Overview

Having reviewed all the ballots and having tabulated the results, there was no clear community choice to recommend a single candidate as the next FSA Coordinator. According to the results, each of the three candidates had a plausible claim to be the community choice and therefore the FSA community could not recommend a single candidate. More information about this decision, and the claims for each of the candidates, is below.

Process

Before the polls closed, 41 ballots were received during the voting period. 39 of these ballots were considered valid; the other two ballots were from stateowners who inadvertently voted twice. In both of these cases, the initial ballot was approved and the second ballot was taken out of the total count.

The vote tally was as follows: Fluffr_Nuttr: 12 first-choice votes, 16 second-choice votes, 9 third-choice votes yoyo21: 14 first-choice votes, 7 second-choice votes, 18 third-choice votes Brunanter: 11 first-choice votes, 15 second-choice votes, 10 third-choice votes None of these candidates: 2 first-choice votes, 1 second-choice vote, 2 third-choice votes

First runoff

As part of the instant-runoff ballot system, if no candidate has a majority of votes (50%+1, or 20 votes out of 39), the candidate with the lowest-number of first-choice votes is removed from consideration and those votes are reallocated based on the second-choice candidate selected on the affected ballots. For the first runoff, the "none" option was removed from consideration, with the two ballots reallocated to each voter's second-choice candidate, which led to these results: Fluffr_Nuttr: 12 (no change) yoyo21: 15 (+1) Brunanter: 12 (+1)

Second runoff

With none of the three candidates having the required 20 votes after the first runoff, a second runoff was required; Fluffr_Nuttr and Brunanter were tied for 2nd at 12. Here is where the paths for each candidate's victory claim diverge.

  • Winner: Fluffr_Nuttr
Since no tiebreaker procedure was established prior to the vote, additional voting metrics were considered to break the tie. With more initial first-choice votes (12 vs 11) and more total ballot selections (12+16+9=37 vs 11+15+10=36), Fluffr_Nuttr is determined to be the stronger candidate and as such Brunanter's 12 ballots are reassigned. In the second runoff, Fluffr_Nuttr gains enough votes to achieve the smallest possible victory over yoyo21, 20-19.
Fluffr_Nuttr: 20 votes (+8)
yoyo21: 19 votes (+4)
  • Winner: Brunanter
Since no tiebreaker procedure was established prior to the vote, a coin is flipped to break the tie, which comes up in Brunanter's favor, and as such Fluffr_Nuttr's 12 ballots are reassigned as follows. The second runoff gives Brunanter a 21-18 vote win, larger than Fluffr_Nuttr's margin of victory in the previous scenario.
yoyo21: 18 votes (+3)
Brunanter: 21 votes (+9)
  • Winner: yoyo21
Since no tiebreaker procedure was established prior to the vote and there is no way to break the tie without relying on chance, a second runoff cannot be performed and by default yoyo21 is named the winner with a plurality of the vote. To strengthen his claim of victory, yoyo21 notes that he received the most first-choice votes and was the only candidate to appear on all 39 ballots as a top-3 choice, suggesting all voters would at least somewhat approve of him being the recommended nominee.

Results

Since each of the three candidates had a plausible claim to be the recommended candidate, the ballots must be considered inconclusive. The FSA community therefore does not have a single candidate to claim as their preferred candidate, and likewise all three candidates were recommended to be considered by the OGF admin team.

Following the announcement of the ballot results, Brunanter volunteered to step down from consideration for the position. The OGF admin team chose to name yoyo21 as the next FSA Coordinator, taking effect 15 Feb 2021.

February 2021 (Omnibus #1B)

National Park System

n=28

  • Old Whalebury Light National Historic Site: 11/28 (39.3%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Fort Shutter National Park: 12/28 (42.9%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Eladian Culture National Historic Site: 5/28 (17.9%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Betaouais National Park: 27/28 (96.4%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Santa Elena National Park: 20/28 (71.4%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Shinuteupca National Historic Site: 11/28 (39.3%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Heathlands National Seashore: 25/28 (89.3%), approved (needed majority)
  • Norottuck Watershed National Wildlife Refuge: 20/28 (71.4%), approved (needed majority)
  • Burton Commerce National Heritage Site: 10/28 (35.7%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Panalstow National Wildlife Refuge: 17/28 (60.7%), approved (needed majority)
  • Penquisset National Seashore: 14/28 (50.0%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Hess Valley National Cultural District: 8/28 (28.6%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Arghenna Mountains National Forest: 15/28 (53.6%), approved (needed majority)
  • Pinkani National Protected Area: 19/28 (67.9%), approved (needed majority)
  • Rucani National Reserve: 23/28 (82.1%), approved (needed majority)
  • Arecales National Volcanic Maritime Protected Area: 25/28 (89.3%), approved (needed majority)

August 2021 (Omnibus #2)

National Park System

n=32

  • One Central National Historic Site: 28/32 (87.5%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Outer Islands National Park: 25/32 (78.1%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Fort Walprove National Historic Site: 26/32 (81.3%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Carreras Canyon National Monument: 17/32 (53.1%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Hetko Butte National Park: 25/32 (78.1%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Knockaert National Park: 30/32 (93.8%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Lennon Crater National Monument: 30/32 (93.8%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Confluence National Forest: 14/32 (43.8%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Beaugendre National Wildlife Refuge: 7/32 (21.9%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Pancanli National Wildlife Refuge: 7/32 (21.9%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Mouton National Wildlife Refuge: 7/32 (21.9%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Chilombich National Wildlife Refuge: 4/32 (12.5%), not approved (needed majority)
  • Petra Cavalli National Wildlife Refuge: 30/32 (93.8%), approved (needed majority)

Coordinator Vote of Confidence

None; yoyo21 stepped down as FSA Coordinator prior to the vote.

FSA Coordinator Nominees

n=32, Nominees needed a 75% vote of confidence to advance to the second ballot

Mapping Expert

Did not receive 75% of primary ballots.

  • 1. How long have you been an OGF mapper? "I have been an OGF mapper for more than 2 years."
  • 2. How long have you mapped in the FSA? "I have been mapping in the FSA for about 2 years."
  • 3. What is your FSA state? "My state is Trinity Island (AR120-16), officially known as Commonwealth of Trinity Island. It is located in the Southeast Region."
  • 4. How frequently do you log into OGF? "I log into OGF every day, I try to keep myself updated on what is happening in the community. Although I map less frequently, I am constantly involved in what is happening at FSA and OGF."
  • 5. As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "My top three priorities as FSA coordinator would be:
  • Develop strategies to promote interstate and general cooperation, as well as preserving current cooperation initiatives and boosting their application.
  • Encourage the entry of new users to the project, both in collaborative and non-collaborative territories.
  • Promote the discussion of worldbuilding initiatives and their subsequent application in the canon and on the map."
  • 6. If you could change anything about the FSA, what would it be? "Although I believe that the FSA has made great progress on the map and in the overall coordination of the project, I feel that more cohesion between zones is needed. We can achieve cohesion through interstate coordination at the time of mapping, in which we seek to identify the differences and take advantage of them to develop a unique and organized project."
  • 7. Do you currently map anywhere outside the FSA? "I don't have any active projects outside of FSA in OGF. My only active project in the community is Trinity Island. Outside of OGF I have coordinated and contributed to the integral development (both in mapping and worldbuilding) of Imperium, a collaborative project in Arhet."
  • 8. If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? "Since I don't have any project other than Trinity Island, I would not have any problem with this point. If this happens, I would still accept the role."
  • 9. Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "In the event of a disagreement between 2 stateowners, I would use the Root analysis method to find a solution. Finding the root of the problem is more objective than developing a discussion that can increase disagreement, so I believe that this method would offer us a more efficient and appropriate conflict resolution to current requirements."
  • 10. What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "My favorite part of being part of the FSA project is being able to collaborate with other users, develop unique and creative mapping collaboratively; encourage the study of politics, culture, economics and other aspects of the United States to take as an example in FSA, as well as the opportunity to learn from others and help others to be better every day."

Trombonist2003 (aka varnel_maiser) and CartographerKing, joint application

  • 1. How long have you been an OGF mapper?
  • Trombonist2003: "I have been mapping on OGF since June of 2017. So over four years now."
  • CartographerKing: "I have been mapping on OGF since April of 2017. I'm also over four years now."
  • 2. How long have you mapped in the FSA?
  • Trombonist2003: "I've been mapping in the FSA since October of 2020, so about 10 months."
  • CartographerKing: "I've been mapping in the FSA since June of 2020, so just over a year."
  • 3. What is your FSA state? "We share Nishowigan - it's the result of a merger between our former states (Nishowigan and Wychelle, respectively)."
  • 4. How frequently do you log into OGF?
  • Trombonist2003: "I log on to OGF several times per day, though much less in recent days due to my situation. That situation will be clearing up soon, so I'll be back onto OGF many times a day again."
  • CartographerKing: "While I check OGF several times a day, I edit once or twice a week during most of the year. I check my email a lot, so if something pops up I'll see it."
  • 5. As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be?
  • "a. Cohesion across states and regions. This includes critical amounts of communication from us to you, and you to us. It's a two-way agreement."
  • "b. Making sure mappers who need help can get that help (ideally by making ourselves available to provide that help and knowing who to contact when specialised mapping help is needed)."
  • "c. Supporting collaborative conversations and mapping within regions and state to state."
  • 6. If you could change anything about the FSA, what would it be?
  • Trombonist2003: "Nothing - the FSA's culture is already quite beautiful as it is. But of course, there are a few sharp edges that need to be smoothed out (you know who you are)."
  • CartographerKing: "While the FSA is an amazing project in itself, I believe that there are some stereotypes of what the project is and I hope to make it seen as a collaborative and productive workspace across the community."
  • 7. Do you currently map anywhere outside the FSA?
  • Trombonist2003: "Yes, I map in Cabelia, Tarephia."
  • CartographerKing: "I currently do not map outside of the FSA"
  • 8. If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role?
  • Trombonist2003: "I'd be reluctant, but I think I could work something out with my Tarephian neighbours to do so."
  • CartographerKing: "Yes, the FSA is my only project until we finish Nishowigan, which will always require fixes and tweaks."
  • 9. Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "Generally, the main issue that sparks disagreement is a lack of proper communication between the involved parties. We'd start by allowing the stateowners to try and sort it out themselves, but if there is a visible issue that comes up, then it would be time to try a moderated channel of communication, one that includes both of us, so that we can ensure that both stateowners get their point across, and that there are no misunderstandings. We won't always be active (because we want to give as much of a chance for the owners to sort it out on their own), but we will both intervene if things don't go well or drag on for too long. If a disagreement still persists, then the next step would be to figure out what sort of compromise can be reached between the two. There are no all or nothing situations here, and We're sure a compromise can be reached in the end. But even if that fails, or any agreement is still many days or weeks in the distance (to the point that productive mapping stops completely as well, and the situation is no longer about what is on the map), then we would not have an issue with making a more executive suggestion to the two. This 'solution' may please neither stateowner, but it would be a necessary step at that point, and we believe that it is the job of the FSA Coordinator(s) to take that difficult step."
  • 10. What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project?
  • Trombonist2003: "I love the diverse ideas, styles, and cultures of mapping represented by our community and what it puts on the map. I think that this is our strength, and being able to contribute to that diversity is a great honour."
  • CartographerKing: "The collaborative aspect of the FSA is my favorite part of being part of the project. This not only allows our mapping to be more seamless, but also fosters a community that is supportive to everyone's hard work and dedication."

Fluffr_Nuttr

  • 1. How long have you been an OGF mapper? "2-4 years"
  • 2. How long have you mapped in the FSA? "More than 2 years"
  • 3. What is your FSA state? "Arghenna, I also help coordinate the Eustacia project."
  • 4. How frequently do you log into OGF? "A few times per day"
  • 5. As FSA Coordinator, what would your top three priorities be? "As coordinator, I'd focus on 1) fostering discussion and collaboration between participants and establishing consensus through a system of poll initiatives, 2) Reinvigorating activity in dormant projects and regions; and 3) Sprucing up the FSA Wiki page and related articles, perhaps working towards an FSA Portal as proposed at the beginning of this project- we'll have to see how things develop."
  • 6. If you could change anything about the FSA, what would it be? "I think the question of project leadership has been somewhat unclear since TheMayor left the coordinator office, and this is for a few reasons (nothing against either of the two previous administrations, both have done great things for the community). This can mainly be solved through a more active coordinatorship, and perhaps a small "ministry" to help out. I'm also willing to explore options for ownership of the discord."
  • 7. Do you currently map anywhere outside the FSA? "No"
  • 8. If the OGF admin team required you to step down from any or all other OGF projects before allowing you to become the new FSA Coordinator, would you still accept the role? "I do not map outside the FSA, although I've been somewhat interested in expanding to other projects. However I can definitely put this on hold, at the very least limiting myself to occasional small contributions to non-Effesian collaboratives."
  • 9. Briefly describe how you would handle a disagreement between two stateowners. "I'd listen to both sides of the argument, taking opinions from interested parties to find what actions would be best for the region and nation, and hopefully find a comprimise."
  • 10. What is your favorite part about being a part of the FSA project? "The diversity. There are so many different styles and perspectives put into these little pieces of an imaginary America. And still, we're all able to come together and give each other advice and collaborate, helping our country grow as a whole."

Results

First Runoff

  • Mapping Expert did not achieve 75% confidence.
  • CartographerKing/Trombonist2003 achieved 75% confidence.
  • Fluffr_Nuttr achieved 75% confidence.

Compromise

An agreement between the two candidates and admin was worked out, seeing CartographerKing and Trombonist2003 as FSA Coordinators, and Fluffr_Nuttr as the Eastern FSA Coordinator, taking effect 2021-08-15.

February 2022 (Omnibus #3)

n=31

National Initiatives

National Park System

  • Woodhaven Railway Museum National Historic Site: 7/31 (22.6%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • First Lighthouse National Historic Site: 11/31 (35.5%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Fort Shutter National Park: 16/31 (51.6%), not approved (needed 75%)
  • Hurricane Caverns National Park: 28/31 (90.3%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Great Deep National Park: 26/31 (83.9%), approved (needed 75%)
  • Bass Dunes National Lakeshore: 29/31 (93.5%), approved (needed majority)

Coordinator Votes of Confidence

  • No National Coordinator; position vacant
  • Eastern Coordinator (Fluffr_Nuttr): 11/11 (100%), retained

Advisory Questions

  • How should an FSA Coordinator vacancy be handled?
  • A member of the OGF admin team should officially serve as Acting Coordinator: 15/30 (50.0%)
  • The position should remain vacant until a nominee is found: 9/30 (30.0%)
  • We should consider restructuring the FSA Coordinator role entirely: 6/30 (20.0%)
  • If an admin is named Acting Coordinator, in what way should they serve?
  • An Acting Coordinator should have the full roles and responsibilities as any other FSA Coordinator and should be able to oversee new national projects and initiatives: 10/29 (34.5%)
  • An Acting Coordinator should handle the day-to-day business of FSA Coordinator (updating the wiki, moderating forums, etc.), but any new national initiatives should be on hold until a new FSA Coordinator is officially named: 16/29 (55.2%)
  • An Acting Coordinator should have no proactive role in advancing the FSA project at all; the Acting Coordinator's role should solely be to find a new FSA Coordinator: 3/29 (10.3%)
  • [free response]: None
  • If the position is to remain vacant, how should the vacancy be filled?
  • The position should remain vacant through the current term (through August 2022), with a full nomination process executed before the next omnibus ballot: 5/29 (17.2%)
  • The position should only be vacant as long as needed; ballots should be issued as soon as a mapper declares themselves a nominee for the FSA Coordinator role: 24/29 (82.8%)
  • If we restructure the FSA Coordinator role, which of the following options should be considered: (voters could choose multiple options)
  • We may not need a dedicated national coordinator at all; we should consider dissolving the role: 6/28 (21.4%)
  • We should consider replacing the National Coordinator role with additional regional coordinators, similar to the Eastern Coordinator: 12/28 (42.9%)
  • We should consider replacing the National Coordinator role with topic-based coordinators (transportation, history, wiki, etc.): 12/28 (42.9%)
  • We should not consider reforming the FSA Coordinator role: 13/28 (46.4%)
  • [free response] "Although I'm open to creating new regional coordinators as needed (such as in the East Lakes), unified non-admin leadership is a positive for the FSA."
  • [free response] "Alongside a National Coordinator, we can discuss about regional coordinators (like Brunanter for The West)"

July 2022

n=24

Advisory Questions

  • I am a:
  • Private stateowner: 20/24 (83.3%)
  • Collaborative state coordinator: 3/24 (12.5%)
  • Collaborative state contributor: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • Former FSA mapper: none
  • Non-FSA mapper: none
  • FS-1/FS-2 Proposal - Do you approve or disapprove of the proposal for the FSA extend FS-1 to the Asperic Ocean and create a new FS-2 "diagonal" route to create two national core routes to better connect the rest of the country to Huntington and Massodeya City?
  • Strongly approve: 10/23 (43.5%)
  • Somewhat approve: 10/23 (43.5%)
  • Total approve: 20/23 (87.0%)
  • Somewhat disapprove: none
  • Strongly disapprove: none
  • Total disapprove: none
  • No opinion: 3/23 (13.0%)
  • Federal Postal Service: 12/23 (52.2%)
  • Federal States Couriers: 3/23 (13.0%)
  • Federal States Postal Bureau: 8/23 (34.8%)
  • Federal Post Office: 11/22 (50.0%)
  • Federal States Post Office: 6/22 (27.3%)
  • Courier Office: 5/22 (22.7%)
  • NNAA## (NN = OGF ID numbers, AA = letters determined by stateowner, ## = numbers determined by stateowner): 7/22 (31.8%)
  • NN#### or NN-#### (NN = OGF ID numbers, #### = numbers determined by stateowner): 5/22 (22.7%)
  • CC##XX or CC-##XX (CC = state abbreviation, ## = numbers determined by stateowner, XX = numbers or letters determined by stateowner): 8/22 (36.4%)
  • No opinion: 2/22 (9.0%)
  • Time Zones - How many time zones should the mainland FSA use? (Does not include Arecales or other overseas territories):
  • One (+9 or +10): none
  • Two (+9, +10): 14/23 (60.9%)'
  • Three (+8, +9, +10): 4/23 (17.4%)
  • Three (+9, +9:30, +10): 4/23 (17.4%)
  • Four (+8:30, +9, +9:30, +10): 1/23 (4.3%)
  • Time Zones - If you were able to choose your own time zone for your state, what time zone would you select? (See Index:Time zones for more information about OGF's global time zone structure.):
  • +8: 1/22 (4.5%)
  • +8:30: none
  • +9: 12/22 (54.5%)
  • +9:30: 1/22 (4.5%)
  • +10: 7/22 (31.8%)
  • I'm not sure: 1/22 (4.5%)
  • Time Zones - Should the FSA use Daylight Savings Time (DST)?
  • Yes, the entire country should use DST: 3/23 (13.0%)
  • Yes, but it should be up to individual states whether or not to use it: 14/23 (60.9%)
  • No, DST should not be allowed in any parts of the FSA: 6/23 (26.1%)
  • How would you rate the current state of the FSA?
  • 1 (Needs improvement): none
  • 2: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • 3: 12/24 (50.0%)
  • 4: 9/24 (37.5%)
  • 5 (Excellent): 2/24 (8.3%)
  • Average: 3.50/5
  • How would you rate the current direction the FSA is heading in?
  • 1 (Very problematic): none
  • 2: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • 3: 10/24 (41.7%)
  • 4: 10/24 (41.7%)
  • 5 (Very promising): 3/24 (12.5%)
  • Average: 3.63/5
  • How frequently do you use the FSA wiki forum?
  • 1 (Never): 2/24 (8.3%)
  • 2: 12/24 (50.0%)
  • 3: 7/24 (29.2%)
  • 4: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • 5 (Daily): 2/24 (8.3%)
  • Average: 2.54/5
  • Which statement best describes the current "Regional Coordinator" pilot model of FSA coordination?
  • The three regional coordinators (North, South, and East) pilot should continue for the next full term: 17/24 (70.8%)
  • We should go back to the previous hybrid system (an FSA National Coordinator and an extra FSA Eastern Coordinator): 1/24 (4.2%)
  • We should eliminate all regional coordinators and only have a single National Coordinator: none
  • No Opinion: 6/24 (25.0%)
  • [free response]: none
  • Should non-stateowners be able to vote on omnibus ballots and coordinator votes of confidence?
  • Yes, non-stateowners who contribute in all collaborative states -- including Michisaukee -- should be able to vote the same as stateowners: 5/24 (20.8%)
  • Yes, non-stateowners who contribute to purple states should be able to vote the same as stateowners: 7/24 (29.2%)
  • Yes, non-stateowners who contribute to purple states should be able to vote, but their votes should not carry as much weight as stateowners: 7/24 (29.2%)
  • Non-stateowners should be able to vote for meta things like votes of confidence, but should not be able to vote on other omnibus ballot issues: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • Non-stateowners should be able to vote for omnibus ballot issues, but should not be able to vote for more meta things like votes of confidence: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • No, stateowners should be the only eligible voters for omnibus ballots/votes of confidence: 1/24 (4.2%)
  • No Opinion: 2/24 (8.3%)
  • [free response]: none

August 2022 (Omnibus #4)

Note: Effective in August 2022, ballots are now offered to all active mappers of the FSA regardless of stateowner status, but ballots cast are now weighted on a 1-4 scale based on the mapper's status in the FSA. More information regarding how votes are weighted can be found on the main FSA collaboration wiki page. Weighted vote totals are shown below.

National Park System

  • Wompscott Battlefield National Park: 81.1%, approved (needed 75%)
  • Fort Perrine National Monument: 95.5%, approved (needed 75%)
  • Fort Sauganash National Historic Site: 88.9%, approved (needed 75%)

Coordinator Votes of Confidence

  • Eastern Coordinator (Fluffr_Nuttr): 100.0%, retained
  • Northern Coordinator (ruadh): 100.0%, retained
  • Southern Coordinator (Alessa): 100.0%, retained

February 2023 (Omnibus #5)

n=29

National Initiatives

National Park System

  • First Lighthouse National Historic Site: 51.4%, not approved (needed 75%)
  • Acayacan National Forest: 92.8%, approved (needed majority)

Coordinator Votes of Confidence

  • Eastern Coordinator (Fluffr_Nuttr): 100%, retained
  • Northern Coordinator (ruadh): 100%, retained
  • Southern Coordinator (Alessa): 100%, retained
Flag of the FSA.svg Federal States Project Pages
Collaborative Projects States: Alormen Flag.jpg Alormen • Cosperica • Eustacia • Unknown Flag.png Michisaukee • New Carnaby • WM flag.png West Massodeya
Territories: Flag of Arecales.png Arecales • Huntington
Protectorates: PiscipulaFlag.png Piscipula
Natural Environment National Parks • Natural features
Commerce Franchises • Industries
Infrastructure Government • Military • Transportation
Worldbuilding History • Important persons • International relations • Non-governmental organizations • Sports • State profiles
Project Communication Main project page • Discord (request access) • Federal States Forum (archive) • Newcomers Guide • Archives
Neighboring projects: Flag of Ardencia.svg Ardencia • Blu e Verde (Strisce).svg Astrasia • 2560px-FP-Deodeca.svg Deodeca
Retrieved from "https://wiki.opengeofiction.net/index.php?title=Collab:Federal_States/Archive&oldid=16178"