I'm going to create an acctually Atlas fantasy

[Platypus]

I'm happy with Gus's scores, although I reckon debating might be a bit high. I'm good at getting my point across, but my typing...

[7,052,770]

Harry, I'm not comparing anyone to the actual PF-scores, since I think those are generally way off. 3 is the default value, and I would say you're below that due to your tarnished past. I'm not necessarily saying that you're a bad person, but to the public I don't think you have a good reputation when it comes to integrity.

Give me a reason to give you higher leadership then. I haven't really seen any proof of those qualities, and I've given most people low leadership scores.

Texasgurl, there are a lot of people to do...I hope you're not offended by not being included yet. I've focused on people who have ran for the presidency or the nomination or held the position. You have done none of these things.

as far as integrity goes, I don't think the majority of Atlasia thinks I have a tarnished reputation that would justify giving me a 2 integrity.  3 would be fine.
As far a leadership goes, that's much harder to pin down, but I have served as VP and PPT, and have been a senator since the senate came into being, and came quite close to be elected president.

[Alcon]

What defines a "serious candidate"?

I do not run in the Atlas elections, but would like to be included, because although I do not have much time I do enjoy the fantasy elections...although I might have low experience/issue knowledge. And I love President Forever. Would I qualify?

BTW, it's perceived, not actual, integrity/etc.

[Akno21]

How exactly will this work? Would you just put all Dems in a primary, and then have a general election against the GOP and UAC?

[Platypus]

Alcon-exactly. The percieved integrity, wrongly or rightly, is low but not appalling for Harry.

[??????????]

I'd like to be in this game. You can use Stephen Douglas as my picture.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You can use Stephen Douglas as my picture.

I would have thought John C. Breckinridge or maybe even Edmund Ruffin would have been more to your taste.

[Hermit]

I'd like to be in this game. You can use Stephen Douglas as my picture.

[??????????]

You can use Stephen Douglas as my picture.

I would have thought John C. Breckinridge or maybe even Edmund Ruffin would have been more to your taste.

Breckinridge yes. Ruffin? Naw, I wouldn't have committed suicide when the south lost. Though I know a direct descendent of Ruffin and he is just as crazy as his ggggrandaddy was.

[ilikeverin]

I'm happy with Gus's scores, although I reckon debating might be a bit high. I'm good at getting my point across, but my typing...

At least it's not as bad as 'an acctually Atlas fantasy' *cough erhem*

[Gustaf]

Akno, my scoring is based on what I see on the forum. But I'll make changes when requested if I find them justifiable. I'll swap your stamina and issue knowledge scores, since I consider your point valid. I will also add a point to JFK's experience score and, on his request, lower his issue knowledge a step.

[Gustaf]

StatesRights:

4-4-3-4-3-3-3

Total: 21

WildCard:

3-4-5-3-5-3-3

Total: 26

[Akno21]

Akno, my scoring is based on what I see on the forum. But I'll make changes when requested if I find them justifiable. I'll swap your stamina and issue knowledge scores, since I consider your point valid. I will also add a point to JFK's experience score and, on his request, lower his issue knowledge a step.

Sure, I respect your decision, and I wouldn't have been offended if you didn't change it. I just think I know me best, and it's not as if it actually changed my total score.

[Alcon]

I suppose you wouldn't consider including me, Gustaf?

If not, that's totally fine. I can add myself. All fives, of course.

[Gustaf]

Akno, my scoring is based on what I see on the forum. But I'll make changes when requested if I find them justifiable. I'll swap your stamina and issue knowledge scores, since I consider your point valid. I will also add a point to JFK's experience score and, on his request, lower his issue knowledge a step.

Sure, I respect your decision, and I wouldn't have been offended if you didn't change it. I just think I know me best, and it's not as if it actually changed my total score.

People can always state things about themselves, they have to show them on teh forum.

Alcon, I haven't seen much from you on the forum so you'd get low and generally unfair/uninteresting scores.

[Josh/Devilman88]

What about me Gus??? PUT ME!

[TheWildCard]

StatesRights:

4-4-3-4-3-3-3

Total: 21

WildCard:

3-4-5-3-5-3-3

Total: 26

Interesting ratings...  I'd probably take away one from charisma and add it to leadership but that's just me.

[Platypus]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm happy with Gus's scores, although I reckon debating might be a bit high. I'm good at getting my point across, but my typing...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

one slight quiblle-any chance of swapping one from debating to integrity? I blieve that is what I stand for most-integrty-and I also believe that my integrity hasn't been sucessfully challenged. I don't want extra points, but i'm just not so great a debater and I reckon it'd be a better reflection if those were swapped. Up to Soulty of course, though.

[Gustaf]

Note to all, there's nothing forcing Supersoulty to adopt my scores, he hasn't said anything to me to that effect, so if you're after your actual game scores you might want to adress him rather than me.

Secondly, I'm growing a little wary of people swapping scores...they're supposed to be fair and if you think a score is unfairly high it shouldn't necessarily be compensated, hard as that might be to take.

Hugh, you do have a lot of integrity, and you got a 4 on it. You have participated in some dealings and the like. I'll consider it though.

Hm, ok then. come to think about it...

[7,052,770]

I hate to say it, but wouldn't being gay lower "perceived integrity" to some people.....if a non-scandal and a comment taken out of context can lower me to a 2, then being gay can certainly make hurt someone (sorry, hugh.)

[12th Doctor]

I hate to say it, but wouldn't being gay lower "perceived integrity" to some people.....if a non-scandal and a comment taken out of context can lower me to a 2, then being gay can certainly make hurt someone (sorry, hugh.)

No.  Why would it?

[Peter]

I hate to say it, but wouldn't being gay lower "perceived integrity" to some people.....if a non-scandal and a comment taken out of context can lower me to a 2, then being gay can certainly make hurt someone (sorry, hugh.)

In the real world, probably. In here, probably not.

[7,052,770]

I hate to say it, but wouldn't being gay lower "perceived integrity" to some people.....if a non-scandal and a comment taken out of context can lower me to a 2, then being gay can certainly make hurt someone (sorry, hugh.)

No.  Why would it?

well I seem to remember quite a few people responding that his marriage to Fritz was "disgusting."

[Alcon]

For those who don't like the setup, always remember that PE candidate files can be edited. If you'd like to run yourself how you'd like, or add yourself, just use the Candidate Editor. It may not make it to the scenario, but it's always an option.

By the way, I see a lot of 5's and 2's on things like leadership. I think that the scale is generally accepted as:

5 - Legendary, almost possible to beat. For integrity, virtually no scandals. For experience, President or holding a high position for a long time. Even being a VP just means 4 in most cases.

4 - Outstanding. An area where someone is notably strong. A true talent.

3 - Good. The baseline. This doesn't mean not great, this just means not amazing. A candidate with all 3's is not bad at all. In the default PE, most candidates have scores of 3's with some 4's.

2 - Not so great.

1 - Dismal. Should be reserved for only the most special of cases.

Seeing these numbers, I honestly think 2's and 4's/5's are being used too much. The numbers do not need to swing so wildly. Candidates with 4-3-3-3 may not be interesting, but they are more realistic than 2-5-4-3 or the like.

Just a suggestion.

[Sarnstrom]

Was this ever finished?