As most of my characters have been town leaders for many RL years, I want to validate what Sherman said (that getting town citizens to help lead is hard). I can also say that my characters have been both complimented and hated (both in game and by players) for their leadership even though their manners of leading have been rather similar. Long ago I took the stance of continually looking for people to help lead the town, as I don't have time in real life. One of the main reasons I play Cantr is out of a sense of responsibility, because someone has to take care of the tedious work of leading towns. However, my characters have received a lot of hate just for existing as a leader when things are going downhill, even though they exist to serve. If you want to change things, then lead. And if you're somewhere where the current leader isn't looking for new leaders, then lead anyway (not necessarily the government). You don't need a position, nor keys, to enliven a town.
And I've seen people leave even relatively large and active towns (not that that means much) because they feel like it's too quiet. I'd be interested to learn they found more activity elsewhere. It's a problem wherever you go, perhaps even no matter who leads, although one or two characters can at least create a constant chatter if they choose..and one person can make a big difference. But I'd say blaming the current characters or leaders doesn't do much good.
Now I want to say that I think Jota's questions are good:
Jota wrote:Was there a clear distinction between what belonged to the leader and what belonged to the community? Or is this line was fuzzy?
How they were rewarded for their responsabildiades characters? It was clear this system?
What expectations had your subordinates to fulfill their own goals? Could they possess very title or exchange goods freely share (a considerable amount based on the work they did) I mean; The value of their work (or production) was proportional to the property that could be as personal property (or private, as desired interpreting).
A little more formality for what rewards leaders receive and what they can do might help in some cases, although I've also seen cases in Cantr where there's too much formality and process. One thing a couple characters of mine have tried is providing a rewards system, but even material benefits isn't enough on its own to attract people. You can say, put your name on this list for a free vehicle, and you might be surprised how many don't sign. I haven't quite tried that one yet though. Not a bad idea..
I've experienced cases where there was a clear distinction between town resources and a leader's personal resources and also where the line is fuzzy, and really that distinction doesn't seem to make much difference. It's just the leaders that have to pay attention to it anyway.
On the other hand, giving everyone more access to town resources and allowing them to decide how to use them does seem to at least decrease complaints and the sense that the town leaders are hoarding things. But keep in mind that even if all resources and items are left unlocked and everyone has access to them, they still sit around.
If by this post I'm proposing anything, it's that putting energy into discouraging current leaders doesn't do much good, but that acting on your own in positive ways despite what others are doing does do good. Adamantly expressing that Cantrian life is crumbling causes people to focus on the fact that it's crumbling and in my view accelerates the crumbling, because people then have a negative view of Cantr. Don't underestimate the power of positive thinking.
I say these things because I've witnessed them, years after years, circles of life after circles of life.
I am not sure what I'll do as of yet, but... we'll see.