First Party Congress

[Prydania]

Centre Party members...

I would like to kick off a discussion regarding shaping our platform. I'm going to list some proposals but I want to stress something.
None of these are final. These are simply some ideas SD and myself came up with over a Skype chat (btw, feel free to hit either or both of us up on Skype should the mood strike you). The point of this is to discuss. And shape. And develop a platform for our party that all of us have a say in.

Without further adieu...

• We recognize that the success of the Glorious Revolution has resulted in stagnant debate and political monopolization. We stand for progress and an alternative voice.
• We believe that a diverse government provides regional involvement via a tiered and rewarding system of participation.
• We believe in a well-rounded and balanced government.
• We believe in the sovereigntist ideal of Taijitu as it was founded. That Taijitu should act as needed, in accordance with existing law, to ensure the well-being of its interests.

What say you, fellow party members?
 

[AwesomeSaucer]

I personally think the ultimate goal of the CP should be to restore the original ideas of the Glorious Revolution without being hampered by silly logistics that over time have proven to failed.  We are a democracy, and we should try our very hardest to be the most democratic, open, free region in NS and gov-sim in the world.

Our duty should not be to promote a certain agenda just yet, but as of now it should be to find that agenda to work towards our ultimate goal: a participatory democracy where everyone has an equal say that is counted and means something.

Taijitu RP and community should not necessarily be our paramount focus just yet.  After we focus on the democracy, then we can go to things such as the forum design, the mentor program, and opening citizenship.

[Khem]

• We recognize that the success of the Glorious Revolution has resulted in stagnant debate and political monopolization. We stand for progress and an alternative voice.
• We believe that a diverse government provides regional involvement via a tiered and rewarding system of participation.
• We believe in a well-rounded and balanced government.
• We believe in the sovereigntist ideal of Taijitu as it was founded. That Taijitu should act as needed, in accordance with existing law, to ensure the well-being of its interests.
• [in]We believe in climbing ladders, alternating leadership, growing into leadership, the central role regional officer positions offer to gameplay, community centred activity, LOGIC.[/in]

Added.

[Sovereign Dixie]

• We recognize that the success of the Glorious Revolution has resulted in stagnant debate and political monopolization. We stand for progress and an alternative voice.
• We believe that a diverse government provides regional involvement via a tiered and rewarding system of participation.
• We believe in a well-rounded and balanced government.
• We believe in the sovereigntist ideal of Taijitu as it was founded. That Taijitu should act as needed, in accordance with existing law, to ensure the well-being of its interests.
• [in]We believe in climbing ladders, alternating leadership, growing into leadership, the central role regional officer positions offer to gameplay, community centred activity, LOGIC.[/in]

Added.

Good stuff, Khem. I approve!

[AwesomeSaucer]

...

I completely disagree.  That clause stands for something that completely goes against the Glorious Revolution's principles, in the fact that it believes officer positions and governmental hierarchy is a positive for the community.  It, in my opinion, has been made abundantly clear over time that that is not the case.

Our party needs to focus less on regional offices and officers, absolutely none on governmental hierarchies ("climbing leaders "), and all on making sure every Taijitu Citizen feels equal and empowered to have a real say, through proposing and voting on bills.

[bigbaldben]

I personally think the ultimate goal of the CP should be to restore the original ideas of the Glorious Revolution without being hampered by silly logistics that over time have proven to failed.  We are a democracy, and we should try our very hardest to be the most democratic, open, free region in NS and gov-sim in the world.

Our duty should not be to promote a certain agenda just yet, but as of now it should be to find that agenda to work towards our ultimate goal: a participatory democracy where everyone has an equal say that is counted and means something.

Taijitu RP and community should not necessarily be our paramount focus just yet.  After we focus on the democracy, then we can go to things such as the forum design, the mentor program, and opening citizenship.

Disagree.  That leads us into the trap of never getting anything done because we're always planning to do something later.  In general to Taijitu, but specifically to this party, we have enough folks to focus on the areas where they would like to apply their time.  I devote little of the time I spend here on the governmental structure of this region. Unless the structure will prohibit me in some way (aka dictatorship, etc.), I don't have a lot to add.

Mostly, I would like our party to be a party of "get things done, and I don't see that at odds with what we have so far.

--------

I am conflicted about the references to ladder-climbing and "tiered and rewarding system of patticipation."  Both imply that someone or something decides what is worthy of stepping up a rung or deserves a reward. 

On the other hand, it would give new folks a path to follow, rather than relying on their ability to comprehend and navigate our great big region.

Are there specifics yet? Or will we talk about that later?

[Khem]

On the other hand, it would give new folks a path to follow, rather than relying on their ability to comprehend and navigate our great big region.

Are there specifics yet? Or will we talk about that later?

I was thinking a few things but nothing concrete yet, don't misinterpret this as idealizing hierarchy for its own sake but indeed as a path to follow.

...

I completely disagree.  That clause stands for something that completely goes against the Glorious Revolution's principles, in the fact that it believes officer positions and governmental hierarchy is a positive for the community.  It, in my opinion, has been made abundantly clear over time that that is not the case.

Our party needs to focus less on regional offices and officers, absolutely none on governmental hierarchies ("climbing leaders "), and all on making sure every Taijitu Citizen feels equal and empowered to have a real say, through proposing and voting on bills.

Where as I vehemently disagree with everything you've stated. I've seen the officers largely as the ones getting things done since the Glorious Revolution. There hasn't been any abuse of power even with your own over-reach when holding a title. I definitely see officers as a positive. The fuck do we have to vote on with just a democratic chamber? Where's the drive for legislation? I've seen the legislative model we've established act as its own worst enemy. Mind I am not suggesting something non-democratic.

You have had the power to draft and propose any legislation you want this whole time, you are fully empowered as things stand to do so.  How could we hope to go about "making sure every Taijitu Citizen feels equal and empowered to have a real say", when they already are guaranteed such under the current system? How could such possibly be further pushed? If anything we are constricted by this rather than aided by it.

[AwesomeSaucer]

Look: we don't have to get rid of the officer position altogether; far from it.  We just need to focus less on elected single executive positions.

BBB is completely right (I believe he misinterpreted what I said), and I 100% agree that this needs to be the "get stuff done" party of Taijitu that can get us out of the virtual shutdown we've been in for the past few months.  If the way to get Taijitu to a new golden age is through specific proposals, consider my comment null and void.

--

Maybe I misinterpreted what Khem said, but perhaps we're actually just trying to say the same thing from two perspectives.  The only thing I hate is a single, executive position that directly controls and influences bills and can pass them without any input from the Ecclesia.

My personal hybrid concept that combines the importance of the Ecclesia, and the drive and fun that is being a public servant is a concept Delfos once proposed; but a bit tweaked.

There would be only one elected official: the Citizen-Delegate.  He/she would still focus on foreign policy; nothing would change there.  However, all other positions would be appointed in a fashion more similar to the new Citizen-Liaison act.  Instead of running for election, someone could simply apply to be a Liaison, or Mentor, or Initiator, or anything else.  One new position that would exist is the "Citizen-Judge" who has two major roles: judging current laws if necessary, and approving applications.  The Citizen-Judge would also be a position you apply for, but to be accepted, one requirement is that you must have served on any other position before.

I'll refine that idea, but it's just some thoughts of mine.  What do you guys think?

[Khem]

See I'm just not sure if the officer positions should be divorced from  the voting cycle, I do like the idea of people applying to be part of the "Liaison Group" or what have you but maintaining the person leading these groups as an elected official. I would almost want for each to be almost like a guild where in the initial stages you would just comment and vote on policies affecting the position and be assigned some minor responsibility, followed with a holonic structure of greater responsibility up the chain to the elected official. Hell I'd honestly like it if only "guild" members could vote for their leader (like honestly the militia should be electing its leadership sans my non-GP cavalier vote).

I do like a Citizen Judge but I recommend reading the Citizien-Mediator Act before the crafting of legislation, also look at the discussion in its creation to know the opposition you will face.

[AwesomeSaucer]

Lol I remember that wierd Mediator Act.  The Citizen-Judges would just be the one to accept or decline applications for any committee, and perhaps they could specialize.

The Guild idea I don't really think is compatible with the committee idea, for the simple reason of: why does climbing ladders matter?  There wouldn't be any more responsibilities higher up than lower down, so why even bother setting it up?  Remember, the committee idea does not involve getting more power to do things: that's completely the opposite of a participative democracy.  Instead, it simply allows citizens to specialize in whatever they're interested in

[bigbaldben]

See I'm just not sure if the officer positions should be divorced from  the voting cycle, I do like the idea of people applying to be part of the "Liaison Group" or what have you but maintaining the person leading these groups as an elected official. I would almost want for each to be almost like a guild where in the initial stages you would just comment and vote on policies affecting the position and be assigned some minor responsibility, followed with a holonic structure of greater responsibility up the chain to the elected official. Hell I'd honestly like it if only "guild" members could vote for their leader (like honestly the militia should be electing its leadership sans my non-GP cavalier vote).

Could people be a member of more than one "guild?"

[AwesomeSaucer]

See I'm just not sure if the officer positions should be divorced from  the voting cycle, I do like the idea of people applying to be part of the "Liaison Group" or what have you but maintaining the person leading these groups as an elected official. I would almost want for each to be almost like a guild where in the initial stages you would just comment and vote on policies affecting the position and be assigned some minor responsibility, followed with a holonic structure of greater responsibility up the chain to the elected official. Hell I'd honestly like it if only "guild" members could vote for their leader (like honestly the militia should be electing its leadership sans my non-GP cavalier vote).

Could people be a member of more than one "guild?"

It's probably advised to stick to one or two, but if they can handle it, OK!

[Khem]

See I'm just not sure if the officer positions should be divorced from  the voting cycle, I do like the idea of people applying to be part of the "Liaison Group" or what have you but maintaining the person leading these groups as an elected official. I would almost want for each to be almost like a guild where in the initial stages you would just comment and vote on policies affecting the position and be assigned some minor responsibility, followed with a holonic structure of greater responsibility up the chain to the elected official. Hell I'd honestly like it if only "guild" members could vote for their leader (like honestly the militia should be electing its leadership sans my non-GP cavalier vote).

Could people be a member of more than one "guild?"

Absolutely, though the Regional Officer position leading each should be held individually.

[Prydania]

It seems to me that while we have two distinct camps here we both ultimately want a platform that does the same sort of thing. Empower the citizens of the region.

My own personal preference for hierarchy is that it does provide a path. In that sense I tend to think of Taijitu, via NS, as a game first and foremost in that people are more likely to play if they see a path of advancement. You become a cabinet member, maybe take on more responsibilities, and then suddenly you're ready to run for Delegate.
It's less based on the ideological implications of a structured, hierarchal government and more on the idea that this system is what will get people engaged and interested. The Glorious Revolution's biggest drawback is its lack of reward for people who are interested in participation.
You sign up, you become a citizen, and then what? You're automatically part of the legislator. You can propose legislation and if it doesn't pass that's sort of it. You're fully empowered the moment you join. It would be like installing World of Warcraft and immediately getting a max level character with Mythic-tier gear. Sure, it would be fun for a while, but there's nothing making you want to come back.

Now that being said...AS is right re: aspects of the Glorious Revolution. Introducing a vetting process to limit participation in the legislator (ie bringing senators back) isn't something I think we need to be doing. I also agree with him that the fundamental aim of our party should be to get people excited in exercising the rights they hold under the laws put in place by the Glorious Revolution.
My point is simply that this can be done with a gameplay path that a cabinet system establishes. People can strive for that, and become active members of the legislator. This catches the eye of a Delegate candidate or two, and maybe they're in line for a position in a new administration.

I don't think we need to focus on an overly developed hierarchy at the moment though. My proposal would be as such....
One elected position, the Citizen-Delegate. They would have the right to name up to, say, four deputies who will aid them in the running of the region in whatever way the Delegate chooses. We're not focusing too much on hierarchy, but we're also promoting the idea of a clear path to engage the citizenry.

[AwesomeSaucer]

I like the system of the Delegate appointing a few people to help with foreign affairs!  It would be like the penultimate prize to be the assistant to the one and only Delegate.  Count that into my proposal!