1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?Yes, the title is a bit sardonic. I hope you realize the humor inherent to this.
2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.
3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152995/#msg152995). Why do we need those powers?I'd like to see something other than direct democracy take the place of the current system. I see the system as a failure, it drives down the will to legislate/get stuff done. The minimalist Constitution has worked well for structuring the Ecclesia, yet has no room within it for alternate systems. We will utilize a convention within this failed institution to ensure that all who are participatory in the current legislature will shape the new system from the start.
4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152996/#msg152996)?I'm honestly confused by this question.
5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?This is a reference to the end of the French Revolution and the cessation of the French Republican Calendar. I've always particularly liked the calendar yet it is one of the things which often throws off new people, even when you tell them it's optional.
6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?Well we do still have a minimum discussion period of three days, so even with the zeal of our friends in putting this matter to a vote quickly it will have a minimum time. That said, should such be approved I would like to see us take a bit more time on the new constitution.
Edit: I checked and the stamp recruitment TG I had been sending has recently expired. I won't be starting a new one while I'm not sure if it will remain accurate in its description of Taijitu.Edit: That is fair, I suppose. Though nothing has actually happened as of yet, I can see how you wouldn't want the recruits to think your word to be misrepresentative of the place you are recruiting to.
On the one hand sure, on the other hand I'm sure somebody will be upset.1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?Yes, the title is a bit sardonic. I hope you realize the humor inherent to this.
How?2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.
Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152995/#msg152995). Why do we need those powers?I'd like to see something other than direct democracy take the place of the current system. I see the system as a failure, it drives down the will to legislate/get stuff done. The minimalist Constitution has worked well for structuring the Ecclesia, yet has no room within it for alternate systems. We will utilize a convention within this failed institution to ensure that all who are participatory in the current legislature will shape the new system from the start.
Your proposal says "All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates." This obviously excludes our alliance treaties, but does it include the Militia Act, which specifies how we actually meet our obligations under those alliances? It's ambiguous. Better to list the specific laws you're excluding from repeal.4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152996/#msg152996)?I'm honestly confused by this question.
/me goes and gets more coffee for his brain.
So it's thematic, ok.5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?This is a reference to the end of the French Revolution and the cessation of the French Republican Calendar. I've always particularly liked the calendar yet it is one of the things which often throws off new people, even when you tell them it's optional.
I would prefer not going to this hazy interim no-mans-land state. Could we not compose a new constitution or set of laws under the laws we have? Would that not avoid unnecessary ambiguity? (I.e. how will the convention work, what majority is needed to pass a new constitution, who decides what proposals are voted on when... We have Ecclesia Procedures that cover that sort of thing in the Ecclesia -- why throw them away before having something new?)6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?Well we do still have a minimum discussion period of three days, so even with the zeal of our friends in putting this matter to a vote quickly it will have a minimum time. That said, should such be approved I would like to see us take a bit more time on the new constitution.
My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.Edit: I checked and the stamp recruitment TG I had been sending has recently expired. I won't be starting a new one while I'm not sure if it will remain accurate in its description of Taijitu.Edit: That is fair, I suppose. Though nothing has actually happened as of yet, I can see how you wouldn't want the recruits to think your word to be misrepresentative of the place you are recruiting to.
1. The citizens are the legislature.This legaleeze has been ignored in the past for both installing SD's junta and subsequent removal, but I'm pretty sure citizens will make this choice.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.
Who's our Napoleon?I'd propose Wast. oh wait he was a military leader, so OT makes more sense.
The broad empowerment of all citizens lead to an atmosphere in which it was normal to expect work from others yet put in very little in return. The egalitarian spirit becoming its own form of tyranny.I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.How?
Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.Yes simple, I would like a more complex system than "everyone gets one vote/can vote and propose anything". Bringing a strong executive back to the forefront of our regional power structure via the constitution.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.
The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.
Your proposal says "All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates." This obviously excludes our alliance treaties, but does it include the Militia Act, which specifies how we actually meet our obligations under those alliances? It's ambiguous. Better to list the specific laws you're excluding from repeal.I can see your point and in reflection I would state that, the Militia Act is primary and one I would either exclude (from wiping the slate clean) or if we could work such directly into the constitution.
Also, I don't see why you'd want to repeal laws like the Holidays Act.
So it's thematic, ok.Great question, who do you believe it should be? Which character from this historical theme feels like the aspect you'd hope to bring to the table?
Who's our Napoleon?
I would prefer not going to this hazy interim no-mans-land state. Could we not compose a new constitution or set of laws under the laws we have? Would that not avoid unnecessary ambiguity? (I.e. how will the convention work, what majority is needed to pass a new constitution, who decides what proposals are voted on when... We have Ecclesia Procedures that cover that sort of thing in the Ecclesia -- why throw them away before having something new?)I can completely agree that we shouldn't be scrapping the old document without something to replace it. I would say that the current constitution should stand until the end of the convention when we have a new one to vote into being. If you see the ideology of scrapping our current system before having a new one fully formed as lacking something, I'd suggest looking for the same failings during each previous change of government. Also I would love your input on some of the ideas floating around for this new system.
My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.Totally understandable, I'm also not looking forward to redoing my telegram templates.
Settled. I will notify the on-site Taijituans, and I will make a Google Doc for the new constitution as soon as I can.I'd suggest merely letting them know that we are on the brink of a new day politically, not that the new day has arrived.
Doesn't this mostly happen with elected officers whom we expect to do all the work?The broad empowerment of all citizens lead to an atmosphere in which it was normal to expect work from others yet put in very little in return. The egalitarian spirit becoming its own form of tyranny.I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.How?
Would it not be more prudent to implement a more powerful executive by statute first, and only make it constitutionally required if we become sure we don't want to change it further?Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.Yes simple, I would like a more complex system than "everyone gets one vote/can vote and propose anything". Bringing a strong executive back to the forefront of our regional power structure via the constitution.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.
The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.
I look forward to seeing a revised proposal :)Your proposal says "All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates." This obviously excludes our alliance treaties, but does it include the Militia Act, which specifies how we actually meet our obligations under those alliances? It's ambiguous. Better to list the specific laws you're excluding from repeal.I can see your point and in reflection I would state that, the Militia Act is primary and one I would either exclude (from wiping the slate clean) or if we could work such directly into the constitution.
Also, I don't see why you'd want to repeal laws like the Holidays Act.
I would not advocate that we designate any Taijituan as Emperor.So it's thematic, ok.Great question, who do you believe it should be? Which character from this historical theme feels like the aspect you'd hope to bring to the table?
Who's our Napoleon?
I look forward to seeing a revised proposal :)I would prefer not going to this hazy interim no-mans-land state. Could we not compose a new constitution or set of laws under the laws we have? Would that not avoid unnecessary ambiguity? (I.e. how will the convention work, what majority is needed to pass a new constitution, who decides what proposals are voted on when... We have Ecclesia Procedures that cover that sort of thing in the Ecclesia -- why throw them away before having something new?)I can completely agree that we shouldn't be scrapping the old document without something to replace it. I would say that the current constitution should stand until the end of the convention when we have a new one to vote into being.
If you see the ideology of scrapping our current system before having a new one fully formed as lacking something, I'd suggest looking for the same failings during each previous change of government.I don't think I understood this part.
Also I would love your input on some of the ideas floating around for this new system.I would be
Thankfully, civics does make that pretty easy.My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.Totally understandable, I'm also not looking forward to redoing my telegram templates.
I've seen officers as the focal point of such not its source. I agree that there is more to it than policy reform, we also need to get back our sense of humor and to establish rules of conduct within the halls of legislation. Rule #1 Don't be a dick, Rule #2 see rule #1.Doesn't this mostly happen with elected officers whom we expect to do all the work?The broad empowerment of all citizens lead to an atmosphere in which it was normal to expect work from others yet put in very little in return. The egalitarian spirit becoming its own form of tyranny.I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.How?
I disagree, also, with the notion of policy disagreements being the root cause of discord which we should preferentially address. Unless we become a totalitarian dictatorship, we will always have policy disagreements. If we want to avoid the kind of flamewars we've seen recently we need to change something else, I think.
This is an alternative path, which I am open to taking should the current path of drafting this as a constitution should fail.Would it not be more prudent to implement a more powerful executive by statute first, and only make it constitutionally required if we become sure we don't want to change it further?Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.Yes simple, I would like a more complex system than "everyone gets one vote/can vote and propose anything". Bringing a strong executive back to the forefront of our regional power structure via the constitution.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.
The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.
Stating that all revolutions are messy, so don't mind the mess too much :)If you see the ideology of scrapping our current system before having a new one fully formed as lacking something, I'd suggest looking for the same failings during each previous change of government.I don't think I understood this part.
I'm looking at a triumvirate executive leading a representative democracy in which each branch of the executive would be a tiered group of volunteers ranked by ability to get things done/need of education in the top/bottom respectively. This is the basic summary. Domestic/Legislative, Military and Diplomacy would be my categories of executive.Also I would love your input on some of the ideas floating around for this new system.I would behappyentirely willing to comment on any specific proposals.
I love how much easier it makes it.Thankfully, civics does make that pretty easy.My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.Totally understandable, I'm also not looking forward to redoing my telegram templates.
Representative democracy seems to suggest that the legislature is a group of elected representatives.Elected representatives indeed is what I mean. Mind this could be the form of a Senate of Reps sitting above a Congress of Citizens.
Is that indeed what you meant? Or do you mean elected executive leaders, much like we currently have, but with a little more power?
Representative democracy seems to suggest that the legislature is a group of elected representatives.
Is that indeed what you meant? Or do you mean elected executive leaders, much like we currently have, but with a little more power?
And for Khem's idea of giving Taijitu a system of check democracy with the Senate being tiered, it won't work for such a small community. There won't be enough people to fill all positions.
The guild/committee system is our best option for a great compromise to make everyone happy. If we want a bit more representative elements in the system as well, we could have each member of a committee's vote for a bill relating to the committee count slightly more.I would prefer this kind of system but worry about how complex it would become without a tiered legislature, allowing for representatives of each guild (with such a group named for average citizens).
Personally, I would think things would be a lot simpler if we didn't have a tiered system for each committee. Perhaps we could give some degree of autonomy to each committee to allow them to decide what's best (and to find out what system works best), but my personal belief is that we are not a corporate ladder, and I don't think we should become one.The guild/committee system is our best option for a great compromise to make everyone happy. If we want a bit more representative elements in the system as well, we could have each member of a committee's vote for a bill relating to the committee count slightly more.I would prefer this kind of system but worry about how complex it would become without a tiered legislature, allowing for representatives of each guild (with such a group named for average citizens).
I disagree, also, with the notion of policy disagreements being the root cause of discord which we should preferentially address.Take it from someone who has talked with people who exist outside of your "sphere" here. They feel like the current system does not work for them.
Unless we become a totalitarian dictatorship, we will always have policy disagreements. If we want to avoid the kind of flamewars we've seen recently we need to change something else, I think.Well then what do you propose? Legislation won't deal with the problems not related to the current system. So if you'd like to deal with those issues, and I think everyone would like to, then it would need to be through some other means.
I will leave if Taijitu turns into a representative democracy. We don't want to be like every other region in NS, failing at that.That would be unfortunate :(
1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?It's called sarcasm.
2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.No reason not to change both.
3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152995/#msg152995). Why do we need those powers?For one thing. Why abide by the constitution that we plan to be rid of? For another, doing it this way requires fewer votes to pass.
4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152996/#msg152996)?That is intentional. Also, right now the militia is the last damn thing on our minds. Issues at home are more important to the regions interest right now than being party to the military agendas of others.
5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?It was fucking stupid.
6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?Simple. Less time debating means less chance that our legislation gets watered down and bastardized.
Google Doc is up (commenting is enabled for now, editing will be shortly)!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PUJtxOwUZx_2CI2vqoMC1eMVdtL169W7iaN-ky8Qato/edit?usp=sharing
Our constitutional convention will take place here, and in a forum post located here (http://forum.taijitu.org/proposals-and-discussions/taijitu-constitutional-convention/).
In my experience throughout NS, representative legislatures have never been in anyway inherently superior to direct ones, and more often than not put up an extra barrier to ordinary members getting discussions about whatever's on their mind going. I think the dysfunction we're currently seeing is not with the legislature, which has never had any trouble passing new laws when they were necessary, but with the executive.Except our region was at its peak under a representative democratic government.
We've had an explosion of various directly elected officers, and I think it's splintered the government somewhat to its detriment. A more effective improvement would be to alter the law to consolidate some of them under the auspices of a single one who can appoint committees or something of the sort.So basically a strong, centralised executive? :)
This is starting to feel like "some people say (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYA9ufivbDw)". I realize that some may be reticent to stand by their views, but I think that in a democracy, you kind of have to.I disagree, also, with the notion of policy disagreements being the root cause of discord which we should preferentially address.Take it from someone who has talked with people who exist outside of your "sphere" here. They feel like the current system does not work for them.
Is the current system the root of it all? No, but many feel it's limiting. Despite its egalitarian nature.
Yes, I think we need to talk those out. I just don't see how this legislation would remove those problems, unless one 'side' folds up and leaves over this passing... until the next factionalization.QuoteUnless we become a totalitarian dictatorship, we will always have policy disagreements. If we want to avoid the kind of flamewars we've seen recently we need to change something else, I think.Well then what do you propose? Legislation won't deal with the problems not related to the current system. So if you'd like to deal with those issues, and I think everyone would like to, then it would need to be through some other means.
Which either means getting together to talk it over OR just banning anyone who you disagree with re: those deeper issues. Which would be just the worst, given the origin of this region.
... How so?I will leave if Taijitu turns into a representative democracy. We don't want to be like every other region in NS, failing at that.That would be unfortunate :(
At the same time? We shouldn't hold the region hostage to the whims of a few members. Doing that is what caused so much stress here in the first place.
The Senate of 2007 was more like the Ecclesia of 2015 than the elected Senate of 2011-2013: Any Taijituan could join it and vote on legislation.In my experience throughout NS, representative legislatures have never been in anyway inherently superior to direct ones, and more often than not put up an extra barrier to ordinary members getting discussions about whatever's on their mind going. I think the dysfunction we're currently seeing is not with the legislature, which has never had any trouble passing new laws when they were necessary, but with the executive.Except our region was at its peak under a representative democratic government.
As for the current system not putting up barriers? Many people feel differently. And that's led, in part, to the dysfunction we're seeing.I really don't think "some people say" is at all a strong argument regarding facts.
What is this "quagmire of legislative supremacy" of which you speak? And what would make a new system immune from assumed victory?QuoteWe've had an explosion of various directly elected officers, and I think it's splintered the government somewhat to its detriment. A more effective improvement would be to alter the law to consolidate some of them under the auspices of a single one who can appoint committees or something of the sort.So basically a strong, centralised executive? :)
Which is what I plan to propose should we have a constitutional convention. Only that way would free the shackles from this quagmire of legislative supremacy that has left the region without direction and has promoted a culture of, well, assumed victory.
That's ultimately the problem with the Glorious Revolution. Utopia is a wonderful goal to strive for. Until you actually achieve it.Sounds nice but I don't see what it actually means.
Except our region was at its peak under a representative democratic government.This is simply not true. Our region was at its peak under our initial, directly democratic Senate.
That is intentional. Also, right now the militia is the last damn thing on our minds. Issues at home are more important to the regions interest right now than being party to the military agendas of others.The militia was commanded by and composed entirely of Taijituan citizens, not foreign agents. This sort of sentiment, that there's no place in Taijitu for people who participate in military GP, that they are somehow disloyal, is exactly what drove Myroria and Funkadelia away over months, and is now driving me away.
I really hope this fresh push for a new government is not adding to you feeling driven away, losing you would be multitudes sadder than nearly any other members. I would like to make the military an inherent aspect of the structure of the new and would prefer we didn't lose our most seasoned vets in the process. I am wondering if there is a means to settle the fears of one side or the other as to how to have both the GP and non-GP aspects of things mutually respected.Quote from: Sovereign DixieThat is intentional. Also, right now the militia is the last damn thing on our minds. Issues at home are more important to the regions interest right now than being party to the military agendas of others.The militia was commanded by and composed entirely of Taijituan citizens, not foreign agents. This sort of sentiment, that there's no place in Taijitu for people who participate in military GP, that they are somehow disloyal, is exactly what drove Myroria and Funkadelia away over months, and is now driving me away.
I'm using terms like "some people say" because these things have been told to me in private conversations. And I don't feel like sharing those sentiments publicly, much less tying people to them without their consent.This is starting to feel like "some people say (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYA9ufivbDw)". I realize that some may be reticent to stand by their views, but I think that in a democracy, you kind of have to.I disagree, also, with the notion of policy disagreements being the root cause of discord which we should preferentially address.Take it from someone who has talked with people who exist outside of your "sphere" here. They feel like the current system does not work for them.
Is the current system the root of it all? No, but many feel it's limiting. Despite its egalitarian nature.
Quote from: PrydaniaExcept our region was at its peak under a representative democratic government.This is simply not true. Our region was at its peak under our initial, directly democratic Senate.Quote from: Sovereign DixieThat is intentional. Also, right now the militia is the last damn thing on our minds. Issues at home are more important to the regions interest right now than being party to the military agendas of others.The militia was commanded by and composed entirely of Taijituan citizens, not foreign agents. This sort of sentiment, that there's no place in Taijitu for people who participate in military GP, that they are somehow disloyal, is exactly what drove Myroria and Funkadelia away over months, and is now driving me away.
The lowest form of wit :P1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?It's called sarcasm.
Yes reason, if doing one makes it harder to do the other.Quote2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.No reason not to change both.
How so?Quote3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152995/#msg152995). Why do we need those powers?For one thing. Why abide by the constitution that we plan to be rid of? For another, doing it this way requires fewer votes to pass.
Quote4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act (http://forum.taijitu.org/the-ecclesia/legislative-index/msg152996/#msg152996)?That is intentional. Also, right now the militia is the last damn thing on our minds. Issues at home are more important to the regions interest right now than being party to the military agendas of others.
Could we not call things that our fellow region members worked on and a majority agreed to include in our regional theme "fucking stupid"?Quote5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?It was fucking stupid.
So basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?Quote6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?Simple. Less time debating means less chance that our legislation gets watered down and bastardized.
You're describing the mission of the Militia as "being party to the military agendas of others." That's simply not the case. We voted to adopt a military agenda for the Militia. It's ours, we own it as a region.Quote from: PrydaniaExcept our region was at its peak under a representative democratic government.This is simply not true. Our region was at its peak under our initial, directly democratic Senate.Quote from: Sovereign DixieThat is intentional. Also, right now the militia is the last damn thing on our minds. Issues at home are more important to the regions interest right now than being party to the military agendas of others.The militia was commanded by and composed entirely of Taijituan citizens, not foreign agents. This sort of sentiment, that there's no place in Taijitu for people who participate in military GP, that they are somehow disloyal, is exactly what drove Myroria and Funkadelia away over months, and is now driving me away.
That is not what I meant at all.
You are saying that because I expressed a desire to put military issues on the back burner for a brief period while we sort out internal issues means that I feel there is no place for military GP and that I somehow think they're disloyal?
Do not put words in my mouth, please. What I am saying is that the military can just sit tight a bit while we get this sorted. It wont bring about the end of the world. And what I meant by agendas of others is that simply put, if another region needs us for military backing they would just have to chill out or find some other meatshields *shrugs* Like we have much of a military capability as it is at the moment anyway.
Please do not make this a GP vs Non GP thing.Please Gulliver don't make this GP vs non GP?
Alright. Minus the Google Doc (we'll get back to that after we vote), I would love to know one thing from all of you...I like a mixed system with a directly democratic legislature and elections for a few offices, which can appoint people to help them. If we move to electing just two offices (Delegate and Speaker) that won't be the end of the world. I'm not sure this is germane, though?
In a concise manner (6 sentences or less), what do you want Taijitu's government to be? A fully direct democracy with no elected positions? A representative system with tiers and elections throughout? A system of committees/guilds? Or something else?
Yes reason, if doing one makes it harder to do the other.
How so?
Do you mean that once you repeal the old, passing the new requires a simple majority?
Why should we buy this new law sight unseen in this way?
Gulliver has already addressed this, but I'll note that I'm also disturbed by the description.I have addressed the addressing.
See below.
Could we not call things that our fellow region members worked on and a majority agreed to include in our regional theme "fucking stupid"?Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. But Wast is right. This should be tabled as it is of minimal relevancy.
So basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?
You're describing the mission of the Militia as "being party to the military agendas of others." That's simply not the case. We voted to adopt a military agenda for the Militia. It's ours, we own it as a region.Already covered that. And again, I think Wast is right, so tabling this discussion.
Please Gulliver don't make this GP vs non GP?
Could we not call things that our fellow region members worked on and a majority agreed to include in our regional theme "fucking stupid"?
QuoteSo basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?
This isn't a me thing. Honestly this wasn't even my idea. But I fully support it. Also, we are following procedures within the current framework. This is 100% above board and legal. Obviously it was agreed upon that a minimum of three days would be sufficient discussion even if a proposal received the required motion to vote so quickly. This is the current democratic system in action and being followed. :)
So's very nearly everything else we're posting here. Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c) being very nearly a universal counter-argument is not very helpful toward reaching a conclusion.QuoteYes reason, if doing one makes it harder to do the other.
That's an opinion.
What I meant by buying sight unseen is that by voting to repeal the current law, we'd be voting to replace it, and then we would adopt the new law possibly by a bare majority. Thus any in the initial 2/3 majority who don't like the final outcome would be buying a bill of goods.QuoteHow so?
Do you mean that once you repeal the old, passing the new requires a simple majority?
Why should we buy this new law sight unseen in this way?
No one is saying to buy it unseen. This proposal is to basically call for a new constitution which we would all work on and have input on.
The you was plural.QuoteSo basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?
This isn't a me thing. Honestly this wasn't even my idea. But I fully support it. Also, we are following procedures within the current framework. This is 100% above board and legal. Obviously it was agreed upon that a minimum of three days would be sufficient discussion even if a proposal received the required motion to vote so quickly. This is the current democratic system in action and being followed. :)
My point was that I don't think Gulliver has caused this to be perceived as "GP vs non GP" or however you want to slice it. Indeed, I think the comment you made that Gulliver and I took issue with was an example of making this "GP vs non GP".QuotePlease Gulliver don't make this GP vs non GP?
Was it not clear to whom I was referring?
I don't mean to suggest it should be out of bounds to criticize something of that nature, but that it's probably unhelpful and certainly disrespectful to be so rudely dismissive of it. Hopefully Gulliver isn't actually offended, but he could have been.QuoteCould we not call things that our fellow region members worked on and a majority agreed to include in our regional theme "fucking stupid"?
You know, it's just their opinion, and while I don't think it's all fucking stupid, just because someone worked on it a long time doesn't make it great. Let's just focus on the pros and cons of it, not that someone worked on it a long time.
Thank you for explaining. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM6Bmyf4G8Y)QuoteSo basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?
This isn't a me thing. Honestly this wasn't even my idea. But I fully support it. Also, we are following procedures within the current framework. This is 100% above board and legal. Obviously it was agreed upon that a minimum of three days would be sufficient discussion even if a proposal received the required motion to vote so quickly. This is the current democratic system in action and being followed. :)
For the record this is a me thing, I brought it up to them, they were up for it, it has not gone nearly the way I expected, I am disappointed to see that Myro left, I had hoped that we would make him a place in the new government, and I do hope that he comes back when this is all sorted out.
Alright. Minus the Google Doc (we'll get back to that after we vote), I would love to know one thing from all of you...A collective of guilds with specific purposes (domestic, military, RP, foreign affairs, whatever else we want covered) each a collective of citizens voting within their sphere and delegating further responsibility and voting power up the ladder which would craft legislation for the citizens to vote on. Each guild would have an officer in charge, voted into office by their guild members, this executive would be headed by a triumvirate in order to keep balance and a deciding vote.
In a concise manner (6 sentences or less), what do you want Taijitu's government to be? A fully direct democracy with no elected positions? A representative system with tiers and elections throughout? A system of committees/guilds? Or something else?
Alright. Minus the Google Doc (we'll get back to that after we vote), I would love to know one thing from all of you...A collective of guilds with specific purposes (domestic, military, RP, foreign affairs, whatever else we want covered) each a collective of citizens voting within their sphere and delegating further responsibility and voting power up the ladder which would craft legislation for the citizens to vote on. Each guild would have an officer in charge, voted into office by their guild members, this executive would be headed by a triumvirate in order to keep balance and a deciding vote.
In a concise manner (6 sentences or less), what do you want Taijitu's government to be? A fully direct democracy with no elected positions? A representative system with tiers and elections throughout? A system of committees/guilds? Or something else?
Alternatively a simpler fusion of a strong executive with a guild system. Really I want a system that has to be worked on constantly or which will organically create opportunities to utilize the legislative process with constancy.
I mean I really don't want this to be composed of only my own vision but a more synergistic collaborative effort involving a diverse set of views.
Re: quote tags: I just copy+paste the opening quote tag over and over, and match the copies with quote end tags.So's very nearly everything else we're posting here. Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c) being very nearly a universal counter-argument is not very helpful toward reaching a conclusion.QuoteYes reason, if doing one makes it harder to do the other.
That's an opinion.What I meant by buying sight unseen is that by voting to repeal the current law, we'd be voting to replace it, and then we would adopt the new law possibly by a bare majority. Thus any in the initial 2/3 majority who don't like the final outcome would be buying a bill of goods.QuoteHow so?
Do you mean that once you repeal the old, passing the new requires a simple majority?
Why should we buy this new law sight unseen in this way?
No one is saying to buy it unseen. This proposal is to basically call for a new constitution which we would all work on and have input on.The you was plural.QuoteSo basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?
This isn't a me thing. Honestly this wasn't even my idea. But I fully support it. Also, we are following procedures within the current framework. This is 100% above board and legal. Obviously it was agreed upon that a minimum of three days would be sufficient discussion even if a proposal received the required motion to vote so quickly. This is the current democratic system in action and being followed. :)
With the process by which a new constitution would be written and adopted left unstated, I'm not sure how above board this is.
Yes it's a legitimate proposal, though unconscionably vague in parts, but it would not task the current system with evaluation of the new system. The new system would be drafted and considered outside of the current system, and I have no idea what the process would look like, exactly.My point was that I don't think Gulliver has caused this to be perceived as "GP vs non GP" or however you want to slice it. Indeed, I think the comment you made that Gulliver and I took issue with was an example of making this "GP vs non GP".QuotePlease Gulliver don't make this GP vs non GP?
Was it not clear to whom I was referring?I don't mean to suggest it should be out of bounds to criticize something of that nature, but that it's probably unhelpful and certainly disrespectful to be so rudely dismissive of it. Hopefully Gulliver isn't actually offended, but he could have been.QuoteCould we not call things that our fellow region members worked on and a majority agreed to include in our regional theme "fucking stupid"?
You know, it's just their opinion, and while I don't think it's all fucking stupid, just because someone worked on it a long time doesn't make it great. Let's just focus on the pros and cons of it, not that someone worked on it a long time.Thank you for explaining. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM6Bmyf4G8Y)QuoteSo basically to impose exactly what you want without regard for the opinions of others?
This isn't a me thing. Honestly this wasn't even my idea. But I fully support it. Also, we are following procedures within the current framework. This is 100% above board and legal. Obviously it was agreed upon that a minimum of three days would be sufficient discussion even if a proposal received the required motion to vote so quickly. This is the current democratic system in action and being followed. :)
For the record this is a me thing, I brought it up to them, they were up for it, it has not gone nearly the way I expected, I am disappointed to see that Myro left, I had hoped that we would make him a place in the new government, and I do hope that he comes back when this is all sorted out.
Just dropping in to say the only reason the region is "objectively" in the worst shape you've seen it is because you all abandoned the region in 2012/2013 and you weren't around to see it then. You may think arguments are bad enough, but that pales in comparison to it being so inactive that people just wanted to turn it into an archive.(http://wiki.taijitu.org/w/images/0/05/Doge.png)
I enjoyed reading the half baked appeal to emotion though.
I'm going to fly away on my wonderful rainbow unicorn now. TTFN.
I am very done with having to deal with Taijitu.
We constantly come up with agreements to reboot the region, and then we sit on our hands afterwards. It is incredibly frustrating and pointless.
I don't want to have to deal with the frustration of trying to resurrect Taijitu anymore.
I resign from my Senatorship and my Cabinet position.
I'm heading out as well.http://forum.taijitu.org/general-discussion-archive/hiatus/msg159031/#msg159031
See you another time, maybe.
Gravy is best not thickened. I never ever put flour in my turkey gravy, usually just cider, turkey oils, chicken stock, and flavorings (bacon, turkey, onions, tomatoes, spices etc. that get strained out later).
Just dropping in to say the only reason the region is "objectively" in the worst shape you've seen it is because you all abandoned the region in 2012/2013 and you weren't around to see it then. You may think arguments are bad enough, but that pales in comparison to it being so inactive that people just wanted to turn it into an archive.
I enjoyed reading the half baked appeal to emotion though.
I'm going to fly away on my wonderful rainbow unicorn now. TTFN.
Just dropping in to say the only reason the region is "objectively" in the worst shape you've seen it is because you all abandoned the region in 2012/2013 and you weren't around to see it then. You may think arguments are bad enough, but that pales in comparison to it being so inactive that people just wanted to turn it into an archive.
I enjoyed reading the half baked appeal to emotion though.
I'm going to fly away on my wonderful rainbow unicorn now. TTFN.
Say or think what you wish. That is your right. But honestly.. look around you. Look at what this "Glorious" so called Revolution has brought. Sure, it did good for a while. But was that because of the government style itself, or because of the effort of others which would have produced similar results in nearly any environment?Efforts of others? I'm pretty sure I was one of those putting my efforts in.
Now, Elu. Ask yourself. Is this the Taijitu you want? Think back. Think back almost a fucking decade. Because yes, it really has been that long. Remember in your heart how this place used to be. Feel it. Deep down. Fucking. Feel. It. Now, again. Look around you! Is this what you want?It's been a little less than nine years since January 2007. For much of 2007, we had what amounted to a permanent government of yourself, myself, PoD Gunner, and TGR. (For parts of that year, TCM or Myroria would be part of it, if I remember correctly).
I know things changed while I was gone. That much is painfully evident. But a few years ago shit like this would not have been an issue. Procedure, minutia... none of that matters a hill of shit if there is nothing left to rule or legislate.You can't have a democracy without rules. Without rules you can have either anarchy or autocracy, but not democracy.
A year of rule by this "Revolution" and this region is objectively in the worst shape I've ever seen it in. And those who have seen this progressive decay have come together to say that this is not what is best for this region. This is not what we are. This is not what we wish to be. Vote for it. Vote against it. But those of us who wish to see this mindless decay come to an end have got to do something. And so we're doing it.It's not in the worst shape I've seen it in, not by a long shot.
Literally everything you said was on point...except for the "climbing ladder" part. If it were up to me, each member of a guild would be equal to one another.Alright. Minus the Google Doc (we'll get back to that after we vote), I would love to know one thing from all of you...A collective of guilds with specific purposes (domestic, military, RP, foreign affairs, whatever else we want covered) each a collective of citizens voting within their sphere and delegating further responsibility and voting power up the ladder which would craft legislation for the citizens to vote on. Each guild would have an officer in charge, voted into office by their guild members, this executive would be headed by a triumvirate in order to keep balance and a deciding vote.
In a concise manner (6 sentences or less), what do you want Taijitu's government to be? A fully direct democracy with no elected positions? A representative system with tiers and elections throughout? A system of committees/guilds? Or something else?
Alternatively a simpler fusion of a strong executive with a guild system. Really I want a system that has to be worked on constantly or which will organically create opportunities to utilize the legislative process with constancy.
I mean I really don't want this to be composed of only my own vision but a more synergistic collaborative effort involving a diverse set of views.
I'm also okay with this but wanted a tiered system for the purpose of teaching new members how to be part of a guilds projects before giving them full responsibility. It also would give these new folks the ability to get work under their belts (validating opinions about said work) before giving the capacity to alter the guild. I'm okay with not having such should that be the popular opinion.Literally everything you said was on point...except for the "climbing ladder" part. If it were up to me, each member of a guild would be equal to one another.Alright. Minus the Google Doc (we'll get back to that after we vote), I would love to know one thing from all of you...A collective of guilds with specific purposes (domestic, military, RP, foreign affairs, whatever else we want covered) each a collective of citizens voting within their sphere and delegating further responsibility and voting power up the ladder which would craft legislation for the citizens to vote on. Each guild would have an officer in charge, voted into office by their guild members, this executive would be headed by a triumvirate in order to keep balance and a deciding vote.
In a concise manner (6 sentences or less), what do you want Taijitu's government to be? A fully direct democracy with no elected positions? A representative system with tiers and elections throughout? A system of committees/guilds? Or something else?
Alternatively a simpler fusion of a strong executive with a guild system. Really I want a system that has to be worked on constantly or which will organically create opportunities to utilize the legislative process with constancy.
I mean I really don't want this to be composed of only my own vision but a more synergistic collaborative effort involving a diverse set of views.
Hmm...I'm also okay with this but wanted a tiered system for the purpose of teaching new members how to be part of a guilds projects before giving them full responsibility. It also would give these new folks the ability to get work under their belts (validating opinions about said work) before giving the capacity to alter the guild. I'm okay with not having such should that be the popular opinion.Literally everything you said was on point...except for the "climbing ladder" part. If it were up to me, each member of a guild would be equal to one another.Alright. Minus the Google Doc (we'll get back to that after we vote), I would love to know one thing from all of you...A collective of guilds with specific purposes (domestic, military, RP, foreign affairs, whatever else we want covered) each a collective of citizens voting within their sphere and delegating further responsibility and voting power up the ladder which would craft legislation for the citizens to vote on. Each guild would have an officer in charge, voted into office by their guild members, this executive would be headed by a triumvirate in order to keep balance and a deciding vote.
In a concise manner (6 sentences or less), what do you want Taijitu's government to be? A fully direct democracy with no elected positions? A representative system with tiers and elections throughout? A system of committees/guilds? Or something else?
Alternatively a simpler fusion of a strong executive with a guild system. Really I want a system that has to be worked on constantly or which will organically create opportunities to utilize the legislative process with constancy.
I mean I really don't want this to be composed of only my own vision but a more synergistic collaborative effort involving a diverse set of views.
I feel as though the Guild idea is muddying the issue. Not that I disapprove of it. I actually like it. I was pushing for it to become official Centre Party policy before recent events overshadowed things at the party level.I see your point. We may be getting a bit too ahead of ourselves here.
My point is simply that the Guild idea is one that can be given its due time should we vote to establish a constitutional convention and dissolve the current government. I think that should be the focus of this thread. Discussing the the proposed scrapping of the Glorious Revolution. Everything else, including the Guild idea, can be talked about at the proposed Constitutional Convention.
After the minimum three day discussion period. So the 30th of November at the earliest.I feel as though the Guild idea is muddying the issue. Not that I disapprove of it. I actually like it. I was pushing for it to become official Centre Party policy before recent events overshadowed things at the party level.I see your point. We may be getting a bit too ahead of ourselves here.
My point is simply that the Guild idea is one that can be given its due time should we vote to establish a constitutional convention and dissolve the current government. I think that should be the focus of this thread. Discussing the the proposed scrapping of the Glorious Revolution. Everything else, including the Guild idea, can be talked about at the proposed Constitutional Convention.
So, when shall we vote to begin the convention?
You can't have a democracy without rules. Without rules you can have either anarchy or autocracy, but not democracy.SD isn't saying we shouldn't have rules Elu. He's supporting legislation that specifically calls for a Constitutional Convention, which is essentially a place were we'd all agree on a new set of rules.
I have no idea what the process would look like, exactly.I imagine that it would look like any other constitutional convention. We'd all put forward proposals and discuss them, until something workable emerged. I know that's vague, but conventions like that ALWAYS are. Just as an example. The very first constitutional convention for Taijitu. What happened there? What were the rules? The procedure? It was a loose collection of people who came together and worked out a system.
I would consider our first Senate a representative democracy. Every citizen could apply to join the Senate, but the Senate itself could approve or reject applicants.Quote from: PrydaniaExcept our region was at its peak under a representative democratic government.This is simply not true. Our region was at its peak under our initial, directly democratic Senate.
We do not need this negativity, either come back when you have something constructive to say instead of feeling like you were targeted, believe me you were not, others were, you were not one of them, nor was Myro. Or, alternatively get the fuck out, you say you are going to leave, and you don't and honestly, I'm glad for that, I like to see you around, I like having the old people around here, the fact that we are fighting over such stupid stuff is also driving away new people, Taijitu will never be the perfect place, but that's because we will never be perfect people, some of us are assholes, some of us are trolls(most of us), whats disheartening to see, is that you and Myro, hell, the region as a whole has lost its sense of humor, things like this used to be taken as jokes. Myro said specifically at the beginning of the glorious revolution that he did not want to be involved in GP so he could focus on writing and RP, he went right into GP and now is feeling like hes been targeted, its not him, he wasn't targeted, he did exactly what he said he didn't want to, and its getting to him. I think GP causes a lot of stress because of how it is, I'd like to see Myro return, maybe even you, if you stop being so melodramatic, every one here likes you, you just think they don't. Taijitu is my home on the internet, you guys are my family, some just friends who over stayed their welcome and ended up part of the family anyway, but seeing everyone fighting like this for imagined, and real slights makes it even more like that, my family fights all the time over shit like this, we may be angry now, but in the future everyone is going to realize that they said something that they now regret(except for maybe Delfos, but we all know he has no emotions.) I just hope that when all is said and done, Taijitu is working again, it hurts to see it broken as it is right now, but this is the way it always is.
It's not that you haven't done anything, I just think that people keep trying to write Taijitu history as if they are heroes and this is one of those things that don't help the region at all, nor it has any base in truth, SD has factually abandoned the region less times and although I do call the aftermath of his dictatorship in 2008 the Grey March because...the violence drove away some of the interesting characters that were around, we can't really say at this moment is bad (it's clearly not as bad as 2008-2010) and can't blame SD for this time around, if anything his junta helped bringing people back and there was a french revolution that endured until now. It's very unfair to impose such personal point of view just because they're not exactly what you would like Taijitu to be.*applauds both OT and Delfos*
Let's see where this goes. I truly hate the status-quo they are trying to enforce but at least it's in-your-face government instead of an invisible-hand pretending we all live as equals.
Looking back, I've let it slide more than I'd wish, I really didn't have time to counter, and it was clear you and your friends didn't want me to propose anything. I can quote myself saying "The revolution was hijacked" and posts where I denounced how fake this "direct democracy" felt to me. At least what this guys are proposing doesn't seem fake, at least I will know who exactly to blame, who to contest the ideas with, I will know where it comes from and I'm sure it won't be a "half baked" french revolution theme.
Say or think what you wish. That is your right. But honestly.. look around you. Look at what this "Glorious" so called Revolution has brought. Sure, it did good for a while. But was that because of the government style itself, or because of the effort of others which would have produced similar results in nearly any environment?Efforts of others? I'm pretty sure I was one of those putting my efforts in.Now, Elu. Ask yourself. Is this the Taijitu you want? Think back. Think back almost a fucking decade. Because yes, it really has been that long. Remember in your heart how this place used to be. Feel it. Deep down. Fucking. Feel. It. Now, again. Look around you! Is this what you want?It's been a little less than nine years since January 2007. For much of 2007, we had what amounted to a permanent government of yourself, myself, PoD Gunner, and TGR. (For parts of that year, TCM or Myroria would be part of it, if I remember correctly).
The region came to be viewed as an oligarchy, and probably rightly so.
Our enormous activity came from being one of very few regions to have a truly large scale recruitment effort at the time. Today that sort of dominance of recruitment is impossible. To get to 1000 nations in the current circumstances would require maximized effort not for three months (http://www.taijitu.org/nationcounts/taijituVgatesville.png) but more like seven (http://i.imgur.com/iYMGCuZ.png). (At that, that region still (http://www.thenorthpacific.org/world_wa_counts.html) has a lower WA population then Taijitu was able to achieve UN population in 2007, 379 to 545).
I don't believe our activity was fed by pursuit of higher status roles.
Edit: That said, we could be much more active than we had been the last few months, it just takes effort.I know things changed while I was gone. That much is painfully evident. But a few years ago shit like this would not have been an issue. Procedure, minutia... none of that matters a hill of shit if there is nothing left to rule or legislate.You can't have a democracy without rules. Without rules you can have either anarchy or autocracy, but not democracy.A year of rule by this "Revolution" and this region is objectively in the worst shape I've ever seen it in. And those who have seen this progressive decay have come together to say that this is not what is best for this region. This is not what we are. This is not what we wish to be. Vote for it. Vote against it. But those of us who wish to see this mindless decay come to an end have got to do something. And so we're doing it.It's not in the worst shape I've seen it in, not by a long shot.
PS: In case one's curious, us side by side with TCB (http://i.imgur.com/METJee8.png).
Edit: And the current UCRs in the top 25 by WA population (http://i.imgur.com/wWnEdEA.png). (Excluding [region]St Abbaddon[/region] which is under occupation).
Of course you put your effort in. You put your own effort into the region plus enough for probably half a dozen others. I would never deny that.The point of my question was that I didn't understand what you meant by "the efforts of others". I suppose we'll have to move on.
And Prydania is correct, I'm not saying to not have rules. I was saying that right here, right now, I do not feel is the time to get so damn hung up on dotted "i"s and crossed "t"'s. But I realise that I'm probably barking up the wrong tree on that one.By voting on this proposal, I would effectively be voting on replacing the current system with ???. I don't want to do that, I would prefer to vote between two clear alternatives. Ah well.
Now, with regards to the Senate at the beginning, the "accept or reject" aspect. I remember that debate quite well through the bourbon soaked haze. As is the case now, some wanted it, some didn't. I will say now what I said then. I never seen the "application" as a barrier to entry. It was only ever intended as a fun way to get to know the new applicant and was intended to have an atmosphere of levity. It was never meant to be a SRS BUSINESS type of deal and most assuredly any system adopted to that end would have similar intent unless someone thought it may be a good idea to additionally perform some kind of security check but I personally dont see the need for that either.Yes, I see the original Senate as having been a form of direct democracy, at least in practice. I don't actually have any serious objection to returning to that model of legislature. I would object to electing a small legislative council, as we've tried that 2011-2014 and it didn't work anywhere near as well as we wanted it to. I would object to giving legislative power to a single leader, as I imagine would most of us. I wouldn't object to a legislative body of all citizens who bother to join and bother to get through some sort of rite of passage. (I'd prefer to let all citizens vote in elections, however).
Now, you said, Elu, that the region came to be seen as an Oligarchy. Well, that's how most of us see it now to be honest with you. More of an Oligarchy honestly, because at least in the old days you could clearly see who was calling the shots. Now, not so much. And before you mention "some people say" I will tell you that pretty much the people supporting this proposal plus a couple others not present are in agreeance with that.Who is the "us'" most of whom see the region as an oligarchy today?
A collective of guilds with specific purposes (domestic, military, RP, foreign affairs, whatever else we want covered) each a collective of citizens voting within their sphere and delegating further responsibility and voting power up the ladder which would craft legislation for the citizens to vote on. Each guild would have an officer in charge, voted into office by their guild members, this executive would be headed by a triumvirate in order to keep balance and a deciding vote.Lazarus tried this exact same system with various "cadres" and an elected legislature. Most of the cadres hardly did anything, and even citizens who had a good idea about how to shake up things in their sphere couldn't act on it since they had no legislative powers. Unsurprisingly, they've since abandoned the system. From what I've seen, an open legislature and having executive offices hire newbies into deputy positions as needed has had better results in involving people.
From what I've seen, an open legislature and having executive offices hire newbies into deputy positions as needed has had better results in involving people.
Myro said specifically at the beginning of the glorious revolution that he did not want to be involved in GP so he could focus on writing and RP, he went right into GP and now is feeling like hes been targeted, its not him, he wasn't targeted, he did exactly what he said he didn't want to, and its getting to him. I think GP causes a lot of stress because of how it is, I'd like to see Myro return, maybe even you, if you stop being so melodramatic, every one here likes you, you just think they don't.
I don't disagree with that, and that's essentially what I think those of us currently backing this proposal would have in mind. Ultimately its just a matter of terminology used in description but at the end of it the functionality is more or less the same.If the open legislature is not a problem (which contradicts my possibly mistake impression so far that you want a representative democracy), we already have that and should be considering the executive side of the equation. We can easily replace the current executive officer laws and replace them with a more consolidated, effective system without burning everything to the ground. It sounds like you want what we already have. So why are we debating repealing it all and replacing it with nothing.
I'm in favour of the original Taijitu Senate. Which you claim was a direct democracy. And I called a representative democracy.Quote from: Sovereign DixieI don't disagree with that, and that's essentially what I think those of us currently backing this proposal would have in mind. Ultimately its just a matter of terminology used in description but at the end of it the functionality is more or less the same.If the open legislature is not a problem (which contradicts my possibly mistake impression so far that you want a representative democracy), we already have that and should be considering the executive side of the equation. We can easily replace the current executive officer laws and replace them with a more consolidated, effective system without burning everything to the ground.
If we want the same thing, then why this proposal to tear everything down? We already have a direct legislature, we could easily add an additional step to getting into it if we think it would be beneficial.I'm in favour of the original Taijitu Senate. Which you claim was a direct democracy. And I called a representative democracy.Quote from: Sovereign DixieI don't disagree with that, and that's essentially what I think those of us currently backing this proposal would have in mind. Ultimately its just a matter of terminology used in description but at the end of it the functionality is more or less the same.If the open legislature is not a problem (which contradicts my possibly mistake impression so far that you want a representative democracy), we already have that and should be considering the executive side of the equation. We can easily replace the current executive officer laws and replace them with a more consolidated, effective system without burning everything to the ground.
So is it possible it's the best of both worlds, and thus a compromise?
The writing I do do in TNP feels more fulfilling for my creative impulses and in many cases I find myself striving to become as good as some of the other writers there, as hard as the idea of good writers in TNP is to believe for some people.Well Myro, I'm sorry this region doesn't provide the stimulating experience you want. I had hoped to provide for a more active RP experience, before I saw my friends feeling as if the current system was either unfair or not working.
Whatever "stress" I feel from what is, in the end, a browser game, comes from looking at this forum and seeing people calling each other "bitches", "whiny", or any of the other words I see that are so well-suited to reasonable debate. There is a line between good-natured ribbing and polemicism. I get more than my fair share of stress from the rigors of daily life, so why would I stay here and subject myself to it some more?I understand entirely, though I do feel you may have created a degree of this in your own head. I've NEVER had an issue with you. Not once. I know you've spoken about how you think SD isn't friendly to you before, and I can assure you he's never had a problem with you until he started feeling the cold shoulder on your end.
I think the idea bandied around that because there is some sort of "invisible oligarchy" we should institute a real one is the height of stupidity. Supporters of this bill are gladly turning away from a system where they have a say to enter one where that say is restricted or even eliminated, for no reason other than that it feels "honest". This is baffling to me, but I suppose Taijitu has jumped headfirst into stupider things.There are people here who feel the current system, despite its egalitarian nature, is restricting.
"Many people agree with us and are not saying anything" sounds a lot like an attempt to portray a position as having more support than it does.Ask Elu privately about this. I did my best to illuminate the subject without betraying privacy. Needless to say? If you think this is just a few people who don't like you? It's nothing of the sort. Hell, I support this proposal. And I've always liked you as a poster and RPer, even if I've sensed the feeling hasn't always been mutual.
Essentially every successful democratic region is moving away from contrived, unnecessary representative democracy, not towards it. But I suppose that's a reason to go the other way, isn't it?My preference would be to return to the system used for the original Taijitu Senate. Which is either representative democracy or direct democracy. Depending on who you ask.
If the Militia Act is scrapped there will be valid doubts about whether Taijitu is capable of meeting its treaty obligations.You assume something akin to, but not an exact copy of, the militia act can't be passed by whatever new government emerges from this.
Taijitu has a tendency to wander from government type to government type, trying to legislate itself into activity and create a successful region from thin air. How will this be different? Please, go into detail, and avoid the word "synergise".I really don't want you gone Myro. I really don't, because I feel your RP talents alone make you a regional asset. Plus I've known you for a really long time, and have grown fond of you.
To paraphrase someone I once considered Taijitu's only true revolutionary: yes, let's embrace the junta.Fun fact. The Glorious Revolution only exists because of the last Junta. You're welcome.
Well I very much doubt you or Elu would have been up for that had this been a "let's reform the Ecclesia along the lines of the First Taijitu Senate Act" proposal. Maybe threatening to tear it all down (in a perfectly legal manner ;) ) is what it took to make certain people realise that their way of doing things wasn't working.If we want the same thing, then why this proposal to tear everything down? We already have a direct legislature, we could easily add an additional step to getting into it if we think it would be beneficial.I'm in favour of the original Taijitu Senate. Which you claim was a direct democracy. And I called a representative democracy.Quote from: Sovereign DixieI don't disagree with that, and that's essentially what I think those of us currently backing this proposal would have in mind. Ultimately its just a matter of terminology used in description but at the end of it the functionality is more or less the same.If the open legislature is not a problem (which contradicts my possibly mistake impression so far that you want a representative democracy), we already have that and should be considering the executive side of the equation. We can easily replace the current executive officer laws and replace them with a more consolidated, effective system without burning everything to the ground.
So is it possible it's the best of both worlds, and thus a compromise?
There are people here who feel the current system, despite its egalitarian nature, is restricting.You keep saying that "some people feel" or similar without ever naming concrete names or concrete grievances about how the current system is "restrictive". Some unknown people might feel bad about something is not the basis for repealing an entire legal system.
Wait, you said something about that...
You assume something akin to, but not an exact copy of, the militia act can't be passed by whatever new government emerges from this.What specific issues do you have with the current Militia? This relates the point above. Instead of identifying a concrete issue and tailoring legislation to fix it, we're discussing just repealing everything with no concrete replacement to actually address any of the unmentioned concerns.
From my own perspective though? We need to stop worrying about what TNP thinks. I sometimes feel as if they're Great Britain to our India circa 1890.
I suppose to remain on-topic I will share my thoughts about this proposed change. Speaking of polemicism:
- I think the idea bandied around that because there is some sort of "invisible oligarchy" we should institute a real one is the height of stupidity. Supporters of this bill are gladly turning away from a system where they have a say to enter one where that say is restricted or even eliminated, for no reason other than that it feels "honest". This is baffling to me, but I suppose Taijitu has jumped headfirst into stupider things.
- "Many people agree with us and are not saying anything" sounds a lot like an attempt to portray a position as having more support than it does.
- Essentially every successful democratic region is moving away from contrived, unnecessary representative democracy, not towards it. But I suppose that's a reason to go the other way, isn't it?
- I remember the golden days of Taijitu's Senate, when we voted on how to decide the founder issues.
- If the Militia Act is scrapped there will be valid doubts about whether Taijitu is capable of meeting its treaty obligations.
- Taijitu has a tendency to wander from government type to government type, trying to legislate itself into activity and create a successful region from thin air. How will this be different? Please, go into detail, and avoid the word "synergise".
- To paraphrase someone I once considered Taijitu's only true revolutionary: yes, let's embrace the junta.
Well I very much doubt you or Elu would have been up for that had this been a "let's reform the Ecclesia along the lines of the First Taijitu Senate Act" proposal. Maybe threatening to tear it all down (in a perfectly legal manner ;) ) is what it took to make certain people realise that their way of doing things wasn't working.All it's done is raise the stakes of the debate needlessly high. And it certainly hasn't done anything to make me realize how things aren't working, because no specific issues are being identified, everything is just being wiped out for the sake of it. And I certainly know I feel more hostile to this than I would to a more concrete reform proposal.
There are people here who feel the current system, despite its egalitarian nature, is restricting.
Wait, you said something about that...
Ask Elu privately about this. I did my best to illuminate the subject without betraying privacy. Needless to say? If you think this is just a few people who don't like you? It's nothing of the sort. Hell, I support this proposal. And I've always liked you as a poster and RPer, even if I've sensed the feeling hasn't always been mutual.
My preference would be to return to the system used for the original Taijitu Senate. Which is either representative democracy or direct democracy. Depending on who you ask.
You assume something akin to, but not an exact copy of, the militia act can't be passed by whatever new government emerges from this.
From my own perspective though? We need to stop worrying about what TNP thinks. I sometimes feel as if they're Great Britain to our India circa 1890.
Fun fact. The Glorious Revolution only exists because of the last Junta. You're welcome.
No one has spoken of eliminating anyone's say. In fact all of us supporting this bill are in favour of a fully democratic legislature. The only "representative democracy" aspect of it is that we've kicked around the idea of bringing back the "question period" for shiggles. We have no issue with a democratic legislature, we simply do not think it should be the end-all-be-all ultimate power of the region. We believe that there should be a system of checks and balances.
As for the Militia... *shrugs* I really don't care one way or the other about that at this time. So no harm in keeping it running but to be honest with you, I really don't think it would be capable of fuck all at the moment. Hence me not really caring much.
A lot of people here like the current system. Some people even say it works well.I don't doubt it. People like systems that give them everything they've ever wanted.
I didn't say there were hidden people who disliked me. I said that there are people not commenting who you say agree with you, but you are not citing this.Again, ask Elu about what I mean when I say "a lot of people don't like the system."
The proposal calls for what...a constitutional convention? I suppose that will be where we hammer out the specifics after getting rid of this current quagmire.QuoteMy preference would be to return to the system used for the original Taijitu Senate. Which is either representative democracy or direct democracy. Depending on who you ask.
You might want to get this straight before voting to get rid of the current system.
I have every faith a new government could replace the Militia Act, but this proposal is not about instituting a new government. It is about dissolving the current one.So a new one can be formed.
Ask Elu.Quote from: PrydaniaThere are people here who feel the current system, despite its egalitarian nature, is restricting.You keep saying that "some people feel" or similar without ever naming concrete names or concrete grievances about how the current system is "restrictive". Some unknown people might feel bad about something is not the basis for repealing an entire legal system.
Wait, you said something about that...
What specific issues do you have with the current Militia?Sovereigntism. And the idea that we ought to go on the offensive against folks who have never threatened Taijitu.
Also, we have treaty obligations with plenty of regions other than TNP."All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
The Glorious Revolution wouldn't have happened without the Junta getting everyone to give a crap.QuoteFun fact. The Glorious Revolution only exists because of the last Junta. You're welcome.
I suppose you telepathically instructed everyone to get Taijitu to 500 nations while you were away - doing what again?
Drastic times call for drastic measures. Sometimes you need to shock the establishment into acting via extreme action.Quote from: PrydaniaWell I very much doubt you or Elu would have been up for that had this been a "let's reform the Ecclesia along the lines of the First Taijitu Senate Act" proposal. Maybe threatening to tear it all down (in a perfectly legal manner ;) ) is what it took to make certain people realise that their way of doing things wasn't working.All it's done is raise the stakes of the debate needlessly high.
Drastic times call for drastic measures. Sometimes you need to shock the establishment into acting via extreme action.I hardly see how times are "drastic". We have 373 nations and are ranked 27th in the world. In fact, since you returned we had been continuing to grow between Eluvatar purchasing stamps and my finally publishing a manual recruiters' manual. It's only gone down the past few days because 1) Eluvatar's stamps ran out and he didn't want to keep sending the message when there was such uncertain about the future form of the region, and 2) I stopped maintaining the script and manual recruitment infrastructure because I was unsure if people wanted me to stick around.
Hello everyone. I know I am new here
(...)
Since I am new here I can not possibly assume I can tell you how to run your region or your board, I simply wish you take what I have to say into consideration
(...)
I would like to address that not many people who are active citizens address their thoughts or wants publicly within these comments, you can look at all of posts within the Ecclesia and you won't find more than three people other than you commenting. It's always you who start and end discussions, and its always you with the post counts ranging in the hundreds(and don't think being here longer has much to do with it). Now look outside the Ecclesia: the general discussion page is filled with all of your faces
(...)
As I write this, I'm the only one new citizen to speak my mind.
(...)
to me and to anyone else who strolls in, all they see is a bunch of laughing people sitting and eating around a moldy table in an abonded Castle
(...)
being too indulged in this fakery. I mean this in two ways, one of which is the fact that before now you all ignored this issue which was apparent from the start, (...), this is such an egalitarian region the only people who don't participate are those who left and although that is sad, look, we got Jerry and Tom and Lisa, the whole crew (...) you all insist your the great elders of the nation, but you act like the joker while you have a tragic backstory, its uncanny.
(...)
those not expecting it or those not accustomed to it may see it as unfriendly activity, especially if they don't bother to read the names of the posters.
(...)
How does a direct democracy work if no one is being direct? How does a representative democracy work if no one is represented?
(...)
every successful country runs on WHAT THE PEOPLE UNDER YOU WANT, and honestly your not even doing the former correctly.
(...)
You can't make an active board unless your active with everyone, no style of government changes that fact. (...)
It's not the solution Taijitu wants, it's the solution Taijitu needs.
(stuff)The points you make are very good, and are part of the reason for this, the humor in the whole French Revolution was lost to almost everyone, and was seriously just ruining bringing in new people, not many are looking for that style. I am glad to see that its drawn in a few new people, we have been lacking in those recently, though there have been a few new people recently(bigbaldben and Awesome Saucer are among the few) there have not been many to stick around. You can't always legislate a region into growing, but at this point I don't think very many people are interested in the Revolution any more.
Hello everyone. I know I am new here (and by new I mean this is my third post, my only others being getting citizenship and introductions), but please hear me out and consider what I have to say. I am not sure exactly what order I want to put my thoughts in and I'm not really knowledgable in the specifics of politics, and often it will seem like I am rambling on, but everything I say here has a point to it, which will ultimately lead directly into the core of this topic, and so I really fell that I need to say what is on my mind. Remember that is all the perspective of one guy looking from the outside and taking a quick look at everything.I appreciate your contribution to this dialogue. In relating to point 3, I very much doubt myself or many other old timers are capable of giving up mixing silly and serious (it is merely a game after all). How would you bring about greater numbers of new participants within the structures of RP, Community and GP?
First, I am making it clear now that when I say "you" I am talking about "all of you here within this thread and those of you who have been actively RPing or GPing for the longest out of all of the citizens(basically long time members). That's right, THIS POST IS FOR ALL OF YOU, ahhh...excuse my caps :P . Since I am new here I can not possibly assume I can tell you how to run your region or your board, I simply wish you take what I have to say into consideration when deciding on whether or not to scrap the government and what to do thereafter. I'll be upfront and honest though, I don't really care about the specifics of what is going to happen or how anything is going to change, but I always hate seeing the destruction of a community and the people within it.
I would like to address that not many people who are active citizens address their thoughts or wants publicly within these comments, you can look at all of posts within the Ecclesia and you won't find more than three people other than you commenting. It's always you who start and end discussions, and its always you with the post counts ranging in the hundreds(and don't think being here longer has much to do with it). Now look outside the Ecclesia: the general discussion page is filled with all of your faces; the rps and world building is inactive and filled with all of your countries, with some of the regular citizens' countries put on the map but not on the board, many of those rps on the board are incomplete. This very thread, the thread that can literally change the region as we know it forever, and yet it's all you, no one from the outside and no newbie with a fresh mind, just you here, as usual. As I write this, I'm the only one new citizen to speak my mind. Now look at the greetings board. There are so many new people being introduced into Taijitu, and yet so many don't post anything, me included of course. Why is it that so many people join in the boards but then rarely participate? I think I see a few reasons:
1. also mentioned by a lot of you, the place used to be a ghost board...perhaps people were scared by the inactivity? No there is a bit of activity recently, enough to look like a regular board, the problem is is that this board has a population of around 400(one of you mentioned some point in time the pop was between 350 and 500 or something like that), and an amount of about 7 who get daily sunlight.
2. The atmosphere around here fells too stuffy/ preppy/ absolutely suffocating while everyone is laughing their butts off. Now don't get me wrong, you all seem like nice people, and the way you all carried out conversations and deal with problems is more civilized than most boards, of course this doesn't apply to everyone but I haven't known you for long. The thing is is that while all of you are having fun and giggling, well, your having fun and giggling because you all have been here so long, you all know each other and you all know the story, but to me and to anyone else who strolls in, all they see is a bunch of laughing people sitting and eating around a moldy table in an abonded Castle(because admit it, your the only ones really here, and your decor is old and unrefined). Also you see all this sillyness, like kittens and such and really silly discussions and then you look at the other posts and you get an array of serious and heavy matters, like "getting activity back", or " changing the entire Taijitu government", and amongst this you still see sarcasm and jokes lying around. I know you all like being funny, but half your threads are serious matters that need to be taken completely seriously. It makes you all look immature, look you don't really care, but perhaps it was because of this next issue.
3. being too indulged in this fakery. I mean this in two ways, one of which is the fact that before now you all ignored this issue which was apparent from the start, it was always "Jerry left, we need him back, the place just isn't the same", " hey, Jerry's back, I am so glad", "where is all the other members who don't participate", " what do you mean, this is such an egalitarian region the only people who don't participate are those who left and although that is sad, look, we got Jerry and Tom and Lisa, the whole crew, oh look Timmy has been here half a year isn't that fantastic ". The other fakery was that you all try so hard too be funny within a role that yourself has set to bet a serious duty, people like consistency, either be serious within a serious duty, or be funny within a satirical role, mixing the two don't work, yet you all insist your the great elders of the nation, but you act like the joker while you have a tragic backstory, its uncanny.
4. Jerks. It's doesn't need to be said that jerks will make people leave in an instant, we already see Myr leave because of jerks, and the thing is is that when I first looked at some of the posts, they seemed quite jerkish(if that's a word), I could tell the difference because I use dry humour a lot around my friend, but those not expecting it or those not accustomed to it may see it as unfriendly activity, especially if they don't bother to read the names of the posters.
You might ask, what is the relevance in this, well here is the revelance: How does a direct democracy work if no one is being direct? How does a representative democracy work if no one is represented? How does a country work if the people don't exist? It doesn't. And that is because the only ones here are you. You all see yourself, you hear yourself, and you agree with your yourself. Because there is noone but yourself. You all WANT WHAT YOU WANT, but every successful country runs on WHAT THE PEOPLE UNDER YOU WANT, and honestly your not even doing the former correctly. If you want simply what you want then nothing good will come of it. You need to see what you HAVE(which I have showed you in the third paragraph and bullet point of this rant), then you decide what you want the RESULT to look like. Then you decide what NEEDS to happen, and if you CAN FIT IN what you WANT to happen. or lack thereof depending on if the situation right now is what one of you had always envisioned the place to be. As for the latter, you can't keep being so closed minded, only a few of you have asked what the others think or want. You can't make an active board unless your active with everyone, no style of government changes that fact. Before you all consider what type of gov or what type of leadership, really look at everything and everyone, before you start disagreements and heavy stuff starts to fill the board(though its a bit too late for that). Everyone has something different they want. But was is truly needed never changes, so you all shouldn't be proposing what you want or don't want for this region, but what this region needs. Haven't you ever heard the expression, "It's not the solution Taijitu wants, it's the solution Taijitu needs.
I have no comment other than to say I agree with almost the entirety of Zaradai's post. New people are what make a region thrive and the forums have a chronic problem appealing to anyone.
I don't think creating more artificial barriers to participation will encourage people to come and participate, but perhaps if we got more comments from what new people might want in a forum government we could work something out. In the end, this is all about them and not us.
I would also like to say that, as someone who spoke to other regions on behalf of Taijitu for months, the French Revolution theme is what people found most interesting and what I got the most questions about. If people want to get rid of it, fine whatever, but I think people are forgetting it did have a purpose and it was successful, at least for a while.
I don't think this is a helpful attitude to take.A lot of people here like the current system. Some people even say it works well.I don't doubt it. People like systems that give them everything they've ever wanted.
That I have a list of concerns and a list of names (uncorrelated) does not mean I can publish them, or pass them on even.QuoteI didn't say there were hidden people who disliked me. I said that there are people not commenting who you say agree with you, but you are not citing this.Again, ask Elu about what I mean when I say "a lot of people don't like the system."
Describing the current system as a 'quagmire' is the sort of dismissive approach that has got some up in arms.QuoteThe proposal calls for what...a constitutional convention? I suppose that will be where we hammer out the specifics after getting rid of this current quagmire.QuoteMy preference would be to return to the system used for the original Taijitu Senate. Which is either representative democracy or direct democracy. Depending on who you ask.
You might want to get this straight before voting to get rid of the current system.
As I've argued, it's just as possible to replace the government directly. Yes, it would require rallying support around a specific proposal, and yes that specific proposal would be directly compared to the current arrangements. I don't think those are problems.QuoteI have every faith a new government could replace the Militia Act, but this proposal is not about instituting a new government. It is about dissolving the current one.So a new one can be formed.
Again, yes, I have seen some confirmation that there are several actual Taijis you refer to, but in a democracy we kind of need to provide evidence publicly to use it.Ask Elu.Quote from: PrydaniaThere are people here who feel the current system, despite its egalitarian nature, is restricting.You keep saying that "some people feel" or similar without ever naming concrete names or concrete grievances about how the current system is "restrictive". Some unknown people might feel bad about something is not the basis for repealing an entire legal system.
Wait, you said something about that...
Technically speaking, invader groups did threaten to invade Taijitu in at least one instance in 2013 when the founder nation was occasionally ceasing to exist and the region was very small.QuoteWhat specific issues do you have with the current Militia?Sovereigntism. And the idea that we ought to go on the offensive against folks who have never threatened Taijitu.
I actually would expect that, Funkadelia, say, would be more concerned about our treaty with Lazarus.QuoteAlso, we have treaty obligations with plenty of regions other than TNP."All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Maybe.QuoteThe Glorious Revolution wouldn't have happened without the Junta getting everyone to give a crap.QuoteFun fact. The Glorious Revolution only exists because of the last Junta. You're welcome.
I suppose you telepathically instructed everyone to get Taijitu to 500 nations while you were away - doing what again?
Hello everyone. I know I am new here (and by new I mean this is my third post, my only others being getting citizenship and introductions), but please hear me out and consider what I have to say. I am not sure exactly what order I want to put my thoughts in and I'm not really knowledgable in the specifics of politics, and often it will seem like I am rambling on, but everything I say here has a point to it, which will ultimately lead directly into the core of this topic, and so I really fell that I need to say what is on my mind. Remember that is all the perspective of one guy looking from the outside and taking a quick look at everything.I was very, very, glad to see your post. Thank you for making it, and don't worry about its length. (Though line breaks between paragraphs might've made it more readable for those less fanatical about this than I).
First, I am making it clear now that when I say "you" I am talking about "all of you here within this thread and those of you who have been actively RPing or GPing for the longest out of all of the citizens(basically long time members). That's right, THIS POST IS FOR ALL OF YOU, ahhh...excuse my caps :P . Since I am new here I can not possibly assume I can tell you how to run your region or your board, I simply wish you take what I have to say into consideration when deciding on whether or not to scrap the government and what to do thereafter. I'll be upfront and honest though, I don't really care about the specifics of what is going to happen or how anything is going to change, but I always hate seeing the destruction of a community and the people within it.I would very much be interested in your opinion on the actual laws, too, but only if you want to of course.
I would like to address that not many people who are active citizens address their thoughts or wants publicly within these comments, you can look at all of posts within the Ecclesia and you won't find more than three people other than you commenting. It's always you who start and end discussions, and its always you with the post counts ranging in the hundreds(and don't think being here longer has much to do with it).To some extent the prevalence of these posters is somewhat inevitable, but I would definitely agree that we have way too little input being aired by others right now.
Now look outside the Ecclesia: the general discussion page is filled with all of your faces; the rps and world building is inactive and filled with all of your countries, with some of the regular citizens' countries put on the map but not on the board, many of those rps on the board are incomplete.It may be a good idea for us to talk about how we can better help people get started with and complete their tales.
This very thread, the thread that can literally change the region as we know it forever, and yet it's all you, no one from the outside and no newbie with a fresh mind, just you here, as usual. As I write this, I'm the only one new citizen to speak my mind. Now look at the greetings board. There are so many new people being introduced into Taijitu, and yet so many don't post anything, me included of course. Why is it that so many people join in the boards but then rarely participate? I think I see a few reasons:Very much want to look at these reasons!
1. also mentioned by a lot of you, the place used to be a ghost board...perhaps people were scared by the inactivity? No there is a bit of activity recently, enough to look like a regular board, the problem is is that this board has a population of around 400(one of you mentioned some point in time the pop was between 350 and 500 or something like that), and an amount of about 7 who get daily sunlight.One thing to keep in mind is that the regional population never matches the active forum population. Generally something like 5% of the region will be active on the forum.
2. The atmosphere around here fells too stuffy/ preppy/ absolutely suffocating while everyone is laughing their butts off. Now don't get me wrong, you all seem like nice people, and the way you all carried out conversations and deal with problems is more civilized than most boards, of course this doesn't apply to everyone but I haven't known you for long. The thing is is that while all of you are having fun and giggling, well, your having fun and giggling because you all have been here so long, you all know each other and you all know the story, but to me and to anyone else who strolls in, all they see is a bunch of laughing people sitting and eating around a moldy table in an abonded Castle(because admit it, your the only ones really here, and your decor is old and unrefined). Also you see all this sillyness, like kittens and such and really silly discussions and then you look at the other posts and you get an array of serious and heavy matters, like "getting activity back", or " changing the entire Taijitu government", and amongst this you still see sarcasm and jokes lying around. I know you all like being funny, but half your threads are serious matters that need to be taken completely seriously. It makes you all look immature, look you don't really care, but perhaps it was because of this next issue.I'm not sure that requiring serious discussions to be humorless would help.
3. being too indulged in this fakery. I mean this in two ways, one of which is the fact that before now you all ignored this issue which was apparent from the start, it was always "Jerry left, we need him back, the place just isn't the same", " hey, Jerry's back, I am so glad", "where is all the other members who don't participate", " what do you mean, this is such an egalitarian region the only people who don't participate are those who left and although that is sad, look, we got Jerry and Tom and Lisa, the whole crew, oh look Timmy has been here half a year isn't that fantastic ". The other fakery was that you all try so hard too be funny within a role that yourself has set to bet a serious duty, people like consistency, either be serious within a serious duty, or be funny within a satirical role, mixing the two don't work, yet you all insist your the great elders of the nation, but you act like the joker while you have a tragic backstory, its uncanny.:(
4. Jerks. It's doesn't need to be said that jerks will make people leave in an instant, we already see Myr leave because of jerks, and the thing is is that when I first looked at some of the posts, they seemed quite jerkish(if that's a word), I could tell the difference because I use dry humour a lot around my friend, but those not expecting it or those not accustomed to it may see it as unfriendly activity, especially if they don't bother to read the names of the posters.Yes, we really do need less unkind behavior.
You might ask, what is the relevance in this, well here is the revelance: How does a direct democracy work if no one is being direct? How does a representative democracy work if no one is represented? How does a country work if the people don't exist? It doesn't. And that is because the only ones here are you. You all see yourself, you hear yourself, and you agree with your yourself. Because there is noone but yourself. You all WANT WHAT YOU WANT, but every successful country runs on WHAT THE PEOPLE UNDER YOU WANT, and honestly your not even doing the former correctly. If you want simply what you want then nothing good will come of it. You need to see what you HAVE(which I have showed you in the third paragraph and bullet point of this rant), then you decide what you want the RESULT to look like. Then you decide what NEEDS to happen, and if you CAN FIT IN what you WANT to happen. or lack thereof depending on if the situation right now is what one of you had always envisioned the place to be. As for the latter, you can't keep being so closed minded, only a few of you have asked what the others think or want. You can't make an active board unless your active with everyone, no style of government changes that fact. Before you all consider what type of gov or what type of leadership, really look at everything and everyone, before you start disagreements and heavy stuff starts to fill the board(though its a bit too late for that). Everyone has something different they want. But was is truly needed never changes, so you all shouldn't be proposing what you want or don't want for this region, but what this region needs. Haven't you ever heard the expression, "It's not the solution Taijitu wants, it's the solution Taijitu needs.Food for thought, definitely.
I approve of this.
I'm on board with this legislationIt's great to hear from the two of you as well! That said, is there any chance you could share a bit more of your thinking, it could really help understand what we need to do.
So going to the original point we seem to have generated a few camps of thought which we should vote between.As things stand we will be voting on the proposal as written to scrap the system, then come up with something new, starting tomorrow.
- Scrap the system, then make something new
- Constitutional convention to create a new system on top of the old
- Keep the status quo but seek to reconcile concern by ???
- Everything is perfect, people just need to be nicer to each other
If I understand you correctly about what you mean by making people tokens, then I can assure that is not what this kind of board needs. The idea of simply having the new people to be there as placeholders or some such is close to the opposite of what I think the board was aiming for in the first place. Shouldn't this board be a place full of people who are actually interested in the board? I believe that what this place needs isn't just new members, but new, enthusiastic, committed members. In order to get those kind of people I think that all of you need to implement funner, long-standing activities that require commitment. And to probably update all of those wikis and forums. If you make something that people will be interested in and can be involved in for a long time, then people will naturally flock to it.
Yet even this may not be sufficient as you pointed out correctly, but how do we involve those who don't post 1 single thing? as you may understand we cannot rely solely on "new people" if we want to include them. The recent Orri disappearance is a good example, he was elected to a position and then he didn't come to the forums for the rest of his mandate, they may not be as active as these people that have all their faces all over the forum - Well it's true that happens with the old people as well, Eluvatar has been a master of abandonment (hey don't take this personally, it's just a fact that you're a master :poke:).
It's fine throwing abstract concept around, like JOBS WILL FIX EVERYTHING and INVOLVING THE NEW PEOPLE IS PARAMOUNT, but we really shouldn't fake that we involve new people. I guess I consider AwesomeSaucer new but if the governmnet really wants to involve them we can't treat them as tokens, like the token black guy on older series, the token homosexual, the token middle-eastern, the token nerd. Please don't do that, really take the time to allow these people to express their ideas even if they are total crap.
But please, also take the time to explain how you think new people would be more comfortable participating in Taijitu businesses.
I appreciate your contribution to this dialogue. In relating to point 3, I very much doubt myself or many other old timers are capable of giving up mixing silly and serious (it is merely a game after all). How would you bring about greater numbers of new participants within the structures of RP, Community and GP?
Also don't apologize for rambling, all of us do it :)
But you want to know what the biggest problem of all of this is?
NationStates. Yep, the damn game this entire region is founded on. I hate to break it to you guys, but NO ONE KNOWS WHAT NATIONSTATES IS. It is a niche game that I'm playing less and less by the day, and that the vast majority of people never had played. Maybe it was "cool" back in '07 or '08 out something like that (when the majority of you started playing), but the vast majority of people still playing are just that - still playing, as in people that just happened to have not stopped playing NS since 07.
Our lifeline at this point is literally a Reddit post about NS that happens to make it to the front page. And the overwhelming majority of people that register on Taijitu from those Reddit posts never make a single post on the forum. Not even for Citizenship.
This is why we have the environment we do. Taijitu had turned less and less from a government game, and more and more into a secretive club. No new laws have been made in God knows how long, and no new members have joined in months, and not countibg Orri, since I came.
If we want to grow up, we need to actually grow up. NationStates was a great founding point of the forum, but we have moved past it, and there is overwhelming evidence for so.
It's you mention this, because I found out about NS because a random guy on a YouTube video's comment section I was watching was talking about it. I joined in NS and just so happened to get your telegram out of hundreds of other telegrams. Though I don't think this board really resembles NS at all. Most of the board has actually nothing to do with NS, the world building says you don't have to use your NS state name and not use NS population or economy. The general feel of the place is completely absent of NS. The only place I ever see NS mentioned is in your militia and older Ecclesia threads. Whether this is appropriate or not is up to speculation, but as I see it, it looks like NS and this board is trying hard to be two seperate things while being bound by the game's rules. Although, if Taijitu breaks off from NS, what will happen to the militia act?Lol, I actually found NS through the same way! Out of curiosity, was it AlternateHistoryHub?
Hello everyone. I know I am new here (and by new I mean this is my third post, my only others being getting citizenship and introductions), but please hear me out and consider what I have to say. I am not sure exactly what order I want to put my thoughts in and I'm not really knowledgable in the specifics of politics, and often it will seem like I am rambling on, but everything I say here has a point to it, which will ultimately lead directly into the core of this topic, and so I really fell that I need to say what is on my mind. Remember that is all the perspective of one guy looking from the outside and taking a quick look at everything.Being new has nothing to do with it, your opinion is just as valid as that of anyone else and is most welcome! One thing to keep in mind is the fact that this region has been around for almost ten years. So of course over that period of time one tends to accumulate a few posts :P Even in times when we have a lot of citizen participation on the forums most conversation has tended to be between those of us who have been around longer. This sort of holds true for most regions though to be honest with you. Most people who "play" NS just don't "do" forums. Those who do will come on, and do their thing and eventually end up being one of the ones you see posting all of the time lol
First, I am making it clear now that when I say "you" I am talking about "all of you here within this thread and those of you who have been actively RPing or GPing for the longest out of all of the citizens(basically long time members). That's right, THIS POST IS FOR ALL OF YOU, ahhh...excuse my caps :P . Since I am new here I can not possibly assume I can tell you how to run your region or your board, I simply wish you take what I have to say into consideration when deciding on whether or not to scrap the government and what to do thereafter. I'll be upfront and honest though, I don't really care about the specifics of what is going to happen or how anything is going to change, but I always hate seeing the destruction of a community and the people within it.
I would like to address that not many people who are active citizens address their thoughts or wants publicly within these comments, you can look at all of posts within the Ecclesia and you won't find more than three people other than you commenting. It's always you who start and end discussions, and its always you with the post counts ranging in the hundreds(and don't think being here longer has much to do with it). Now look outside the Ecclesia: the general discussion page is filled with all of your faces; the rps and world building is inactive and filled with all of your countries, with some of the regular citizens' countries put on the map but not on the board, many of those rps on the board are incomplete. This very thread, the thread that can literally change the region as we know it forever, and yet it's all you, no one from the outside and no newbie with a fresh mind, just you here, as usual. As I write this, I'm the only one new citizen to speak my mind. Now look at the greetings board. There are so many new people being introduced into Taijitu, and yet so many don't post anything, me included of course. Why is it that so many people join in the boards but then rarely participate? I think I see a few reasons:
1. also mentioned by a lot of you, the place used to be a ghost board...perhaps people were scared by the inactivity? No there is a bit of activity recently, enough to look like a regular board, the problem is is that this board has a population of around 400(one of you mentioned some point in time the pop was between 350 and 500 or something like that), and an amount of about 7 who get daily sunlight.Elu addressed this, and I agree with his reply on this part. The disparity between regional population and forum activity is just the nature of the beast. We've tried various initiatives to spur forum activity in the past with varied results.
2. The atmosphere around here fells too stuffy/ preppy/ absolutely suffocating while everyone is laughing their butts off. Now don't get me wrong, you all seem like nice people, and the way you all carried out conversations and deal with problems is more civilized than most boards, of course this doesn't apply to everyone but I haven't known you for long. The thing is is that while all of you are having fun and giggling, well, your having fun and giggling because you all have been here so long, you all know each other and you all know the story, but to me and to anyone else who strolls in, all they see is a bunch of laughing people sitting and eating around a moldy table in an abonded Castle(because admit it, your the only ones really here, and your decor is old and unrefined). Also you see all this sillyness, like kittens and such and really silly discussions and then you look at the other posts and you get an array of serious and heavy matters, like "getting activity back", or " changing the entire Taijitu government", and amongst this you still see sarcasm and jokes lying around. I know you all like being funny, but half your threads are serious matters that need to be taken completely seriously. It makes you all look immature, look you don't really care, but perhaps it was because of this next issue.Old and unrefined decor. Heh. You shoudla seen the forums a couple of years ago :P In any event I can really only speak for myself on this one. I don't tend to be the silliest really, but I do tend to be the one to slip in sarcasm into nearly everything I post because that's indeed who I am. Even in RL. This is a game, and I do my damndest to remember that and treat it accordingly. If nothing else I would say that many tend to take this too seriously (myself included at times but I try to catch myself and just.. stop doing that). I tend to feel like the region has largely lost its sense of humour in any real and meaningful way. I mean sure as you said, we've got kittens out the arse (well.. not literally... that would be rather unpleasant for both us and the feline in question) but as you said, it is really "stuffy".
3. being too indulged in this fakery. I mean this in two ways, one of which is the fact that before now you all ignored this issue which was apparent from the start, it was always "Jerry left, we need him back, the place just isn't the same", " hey, Jerry's back, I am so glad", "where is all the other members who don't participate", " what do you mean, this is such an egalitarian region the only people who don't participate are those who left and although that is sad, look, we got Jerry and Tom and Lisa, the whole crew, oh look Timmy has been here half a year isn't that fantastic ". The other fakery was that you all try so hard too be funny within a role that yourself has set to bet a serious duty, people like consistency, either be serious within a serious duty, or be funny within a satirical role, mixing the two don't work, yet you all insist your the great elders of the nation, but you act like the joker while you have a tragic backstory, its uncanny.Well... we dont really try to deliver any specific type of "performance" just as a person has different moods and fluctuating and evolving opinions, so do we. Though there is merit in what you say in regards to sometimes it is definitely best to view the cup as half full.
4. Jerks. It's doesn't need to be said that jerks will make people leave in an instant, we already see Myr leave because of jerks, and the thing is is that when I first looked at some of the posts, they seemed quite jerkish(if that's a word), I could tell the difference because I use dry humour a lot around my friend, but those not expecting it or those not accustomed to it may see it as unfriendly activity, especially if they don't bother to read the names of the posters.
You might ask, what is the relevance in this, well here is the revelance: How does a direct democracy work if no one is being direct? How does a representative democracy work if no one is represented? How does a country work if the people don't exist? It doesn't. And that is because the only ones here are you. You all see yourself, you hear yourself, and you agree with your yourself. Because there is noone but yourself. You all WANT WHAT YOU WANT, but every successful country runs on WHAT THE PEOPLE UNDER YOU WANT, and honestly your not even doing the former correctly. If you want simply what you want then nothing good will come of it. You need to see what you HAVE(which I have showed you in the third paragraph and bullet point of this rant), then you decide what you want the RESULT to look like. Then you decide what NEEDS to happen, and if you CAN FIT IN what you WANT to happen. or lack thereof depending on if the situation right now is what one of you had always envisioned the place to be. As for the latter, you can't keep being so closed minded, only a few of you have asked what the others think or want. You can't make an active board unless your active with everyone, no style of government changes that fact. Before you all consider what type of gov or what type of leadership, really look at everything and everyone, before you start disagreements and heavy stuff starts to fill the board(though its a bit too late for that). Everyone has something different they want. But was is truly needed never changes, so you all shouldn't be proposing what you want or don't want for this region, but what this region needs. Haven't you ever heard the expression, "It's not the solution Taijitu wants, it's the solution Taijitu needs.
And at the end of it all, the result is that the "RPer" side of this argument has gotten exactly what it wants in the form of #taijitu_cabana while the "GPer" side has seen two of its members driven out of the region. This is an absurdly inequitable outcome which I believe is in many ways far more damaging to the region than the the original grievances ever were. How are we supposed to find any sort of meaningful resolution to this division when half of one side is now missing?I'm "crossing this over" in the spirit of friendly debate. I had addressed this post earlier, yet I've been told that Gulliver was unhappy I ignored what he saw as the central argument.
I don't mean drastic in the sense that the region is in dire straights numbers-wise. I meant drastic in the sense that it seemed as if reform on the surface would be rejected by those who seemed to have an interest in the status quo. Will the piece of legislation pass? I don't know. If it doesn't though? Well more on that below...Quote from: PrydaniaDrastic times call for drastic measures. Sometimes you need to shock the establishment into acting via extreme action.I hardly see how times are "drastic". We have 373 nations and are ranked 27th in the world.
The current system is imperfect, but it has accomplished enough that I would have hoped it bore building upon rather than discarding. Indeed, initially that's what it sounded like you wanted to do, and we seemed to be off to a good start (e.g. your brainstorming in the Centre Party, the recruitment gains, a prospect of new life in the Militia). All in all this seems like throwing things out without any replacement plan just for the sake of stirring things up, and past experience has shown that's not an effective solution.Um, Gulliver? I'm not stirring this up. I didn't even propose the legislation being discussed here. Neither did SD. It came from someone who has joined the Centre Party, yes. What is a political party though? Aside from a collection of like-minded people?
Myro left in response to Delfos trolling him. And I stepped up and condemned Delfos for that in the very thread. (...) a rational discussing raising valid arguments turned into a means to attack people.Let's make one thing clear, if you participated in the taijitu_tavern channel fiasco and it brings you pain and or makes you regret your actions, good - that means you have some sort of spinal cord, congratulations, you're not a psychopath - but that's not my doing, it's yours alone.
I've always been wary of proposal for reform that oppose the current system, without declaring a replacement for it.This is why we should at least start using the Google Doc and convention thread. We still vote tomorrow, but for something that's at least a little baked.
The people who bring it forward either don't have the foresight to suggest a workable system of government, or are too caught up in the moment to think it through.
It's usually resulted in wrecking. I've opposed it in many places, most recently in the FRA, where there was an argument to dismantle prior to positive reforms occurring. Eventually, all of us came together, and reached a framework for reform.
I would be all for considering actual reform proposals. Ones that bring forward something new, not just oppose what exist. Until then, I will be opposing this proposal.
I've always been wary of proposal for reform that oppose the current system, without declaring a replacement for it.That is a fair belief however I will state that I do not wish to construct a new system alone or even with only my own party, hence I am more than willing to call for the destruction of the old system before knowing the shape we will collectively choose. You may call it half baked, I call it cooking.
The people who bring it forward either don't have the foresight to suggest a workable system of government, or are too caught up in the moment to think it through.
It's usually resulted in wrecking. I've opposed it in many places, most recently in the FRA, where there was an argument to dismantle prior to positive reforms occurring. Eventually, all of us came together, and reached a framework for reform.
I would be all for considering actual reform proposals. Ones that bring forward something new, not just oppose what exist. Until then, I will be opposing this proposal.
The people who bring it forward either don't have the foresight to suggest a workable system of government, or are too caught up in the moment to think it through.How very nice of you to take the varied concerns and desires of a group of people and boil them down to one of two insulting options. That's not going to increase tensions at all.
I would be all for considering actual reform proposals. Ones that bring forward something new, not just oppose what exist. Until then, I will be opposing this proposal.The proposal calls for a constitutional convention where we would all put forward proposals for a new government. Where everyone here would have a say.
I've always been wary of proposal for reform that oppose the current system, without declaring a replacement for it.That is a fair belief however I will state that I do not wish to construct a new system alone or even with only my own party, hence I am more than willing to call for the destruction of the old system before knowing the shape we will collectively choose. You may call it half baked, I call it cooking.
The people who bring it forward either don't have the foresight to suggest a workable system of government, or are too caught up in the moment to think it through.
It's usually resulted in wrecking. I've opposed it in many places, most recently in the FRA, where there was an argument to dismantle prior to positive reforms occurring. Eventually, all of us came together, and reached a framework for reform.
I would be all for considering actual reform proposals. Ones that bring forward something new, not just oppose what exist. Until then, I will be opposing this proposal.
Sovereigntism. And the idea that we ought to go on the offensive against folks who have never threatened Taijitu.It is entirely possible to make a proposal to change our alignment without dissolving the Militia first.
Good point!I've always been wary of proposal for reform that oppose the current system, without declaring a replacement for it.That is a fair belief however I will state that I do not wish to construct a new system alone or even with only my own party, hence I am more than willing to call for the destruction of the old system before knowing the shape we will collectively choose. You may call it half baked, I call it cooking.
The people who bring it forward either don't have the foresight to suggest a workable system of government, or are too caught up in the moment to think it through.
It's usually resulted in wrecking. I've opposed it in many places, most recently in the FRA, where there was an argument to dismantle prior to positive reforms occurring. Eventually, all of us came together, and reached a framework for reform.
I would be all for considering actual reform proposals. Ones that bring forward something new, not just oppose what exist. Until then, I will be opposing this proposal.
It's not the intention of those "across the aisle" that I seek to impugn, rather the wisdom of dismantling without having anything to replace the current system.You know, I quite like your aptitude for metaphor sir. I will say I am willing to hold a convention while holding the current government intact until the new constitution is hammered out by the collective. Honestly my goal is accomplished in the mass of people willing to admit what has been going on isn't working for the best. Those who had left poked back in for a minute. We're getting honest criticism from new folks. All of this for me is a good start.
At the very least, the current system of government should be retained until the successful conclusion of the convention, and the implementation of a new system.
When you're looking for a new house, you don't become homeless in the interim.
Quote from: PrydaniaSovereigntism. And the idea that we ought to go on the offensive against folks who have never threatened Taijitu.It is entirely possible to make a proposal to change our alignment without dissolving the Militia first.
This is the running theme in this debate that is not clicking me, that we have to destroy everything to rebuild. As someone who has participated in numerous constitutional discussions and debates, this is simply not true.
Right now, people could be discussing particular problems they see, starting discussions on alternatives on them, and then having a consultative vote to pick the best course of action to include in a final omnibus bill.
Nothing is preventing that from happening. Nothing is stopping us from having a constitutional convention or whatever you want to call it right now. Repealing everything and leaving us in limbo won't make it any easier (if anything, in the absence of formal structures it'll just give more power to the influential "oligarchy" that people love to complain about). And from what I've heard, the fundamentals that people want are largely the same.
Yet despite this there is continued insistence on going about this in the most confrontational way possible. Instead of seeking common ground on the failings of the current system and how to fix them, people are demanding that its successes be thrown out with it faults just to make a point.
It's a huge slap in the face to the people who helped to build it and not at all conducive to the bridge-building people say they want to do.
I have latched onto pretty much every single suggestion offered in this thread with which I could agree. I did this in the spirit of finding common ground and compromise where possible. I admit in frustration I may have let my irritation get the better of me but I utterly hate having every single word picked apart and dissected.I am sorry that my previous post got a bit pointed at the end. And I agree, just coming up with a proposal and putting it out wholesale would have been the wrong way to do and I am glad that you have been trying to find common ground.
This mentality of it for some reason being desirable or necessary to have some kind of proposal available to vote on before dissolving the current set up is something I just don't seem to be able to wrap my head around.
For one thing, when we (Myself, OT, Prydania, and Khem) agreed to put forth this proposal we deliberately did it in this matter because we seen it as the more bi-partisian route. We deliberately did it in this manner as opposed to simply saying "HERE IS NEW CONSITUTION! VOTE!" or alternatively a sudden out of no where "OMFG CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION YO!" because that made little sense to us and we felt it would only ruffle more feathers than were already going to end up being ruffled.
And yet for reasons that I do not fathom it seems to have had the exact opposite effect.
Besides the Militia... taking that off the table because I dont think anyone really is going ot pitch a fit if it keeps operating while we do this. So.. taking that out of the equation let me ask this.
What "essential" government function is it that is so imperative as to have created this massive sticking point? The Ecclesia? What is going on there that is so important that it couldn't wait or something? Help us understand this. All I keep hearing is that you guys have an objection to it on some grounds of seeming to think that something undesireable will happen if we just shut it all down and begin discussing a new constitution.
I have latched onto pretty much every single suggestion offered in this thread with which I could agree. I did this in the spirit of finding common ground and compromise where possible. I admit in frustration I may have let my irritation get the better of me but I utterly hate having every single word picked apart and dissected.I am sorry that my previous post got a bit pointed at the end. And I agree, just coming up with a proposal and putting it out wholesale would have been the wrong way to do and I am glad that you have been trying to find common ground.
This mentality of it for some reason being desirable or necessary to have some kind of proposal available to vote on before dissolving the current set up is something I just don't seem to be able to wrap my head around.
For one thing, when we (Myself, OT, Prydania, and Khem) agreed to put forth this proposal we deliberately did it in this matter because we seen it as the more bi-partisian route. We deliberately did it in this manner as opposed to simply saying "HERE IS NEW CONSITUTION! VOTE!" or alternatively a sudden out of no where "OMFG CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION YO!" because that made little sense to us and we felt it would only ruffle more feathers than were already going to end up being ruffled.
And yet for reasons that I do not fathom it seems to have had the exact opposite effect.
Besides the Militia... taking that off the table because I dont think anyone really is going ot pitch a fit if it keeps operating while we do this. So.. taking that out of the equation let me ask this.
What "essential" government function is it that is so imperative as to have created this massive sticking point? The Ecclesia? What is going on there that is so important that it couldn't wait or something? Help us understand this. All I keep hearing is that you guys have an objection to it on some grounds of seeming to think that something undesireable will happen if we just shut it all down and begin discussing a new constitution.
But what we remove is just as important as what we add. By proposing to first repeal everything before you begin a constitutional discussion, you are saying that none of what we currently have should be in the new system we adopt. In this sense, by pursuing this route you are proposing a half-constitution from the get go, which you rightly said yourself was undesirable.
By repealing everything and starting from scratch, you are limiting the opportunity to retain elements of the old system that may be desirable, and there are things which I believe are worth keeping. This is doubly frustrating when a lot of what you seem to want is what we already have, so it can feel like it's not the system itself that's the problem, but that it's someone else's version of the system, and you need to replace it with a near identical one of your own.
I think this is a good idea.It's not the intention of those "across the aisle" that I seek to impugn, rather the wisdom of dismantling without having anything to replace the current system.You know, I quite like your aptitude for metaphor sir. I will say I am willing to hold a convention while holding the current government intact until the new constitution is hammered out by the collective. Honestly my goal is accomplished in the mass of people willing to admit what has been going on isn't working for the best. Those who had left poked back in for a minute. We're getting honest criticism from new folks. All of this for me is a good start.
At the very least, the current system of government should be retained until the successful conclusion of the convention, and the implementation of a new system.
When you're looking for a new house, you don't become homeless in the interim.
To me if the existing laws were left in place it would place an emphasis on working around what's already in place as opposed to having that sense of freedom to restructure as we agreed would be beneficial. I didn't want existing structure to hamper "creativity" or muddy up the waters by changing the thinking from "What would be fun/beneficial/functional" to "what needs to be done to alter the existing documents".Yea pretty much summarizes the reasons for starting from scratch. Though if these issues can be side-stepped sans dismantling I am open to such.
In my line of thinking, anything that already was in place that we agreed upon could simply be re-added into the new document(s) as it would take very little time to do so.
By repealing everything and starting from scratch, you are limiting the opportunity to retain elements of the old system that may be desirable, and there are things which I believe are worth keeping. This is doubly frustrating when a lot of what you seem to want is what we already have, so it can feel like it's not the system itself that's the problem, but that it's someone else's version of the system, and you need to replace it with a near identical one of your own.This is a fair point, there may be aspects of the old system which should be maintained through transition (embassies, military, infrastructure). Which aspects are most important to you to keep? Honestly I consider the old system to be our system, which I aim to replace with an alternate collectively devised system. I'd rather such a new system were not created piecemeal via amendments but be birthed as a whole entity by our creative will. I am willing to table outright dissolution should we have your aid in construction, I want the new structure to inherently give each element of interaction (i.e. GP, RP, Sillyness, Legislation, etc.) within the region a legal right to being and avenue of expression.
Thank you :) :heart:I think this is a good idea.It's not the intention of those "across the aisle" that I seek to impugn, rather the wisdom of dismantling without having anything to replace the current system.You know, I quite like your aptitude for metaphor sir. I will say I am willing to hold a convention while holding the current government intact until the new constitution is hammered out by the collective. Honestly my goal is accomplished in the mass of people willing to admit what has been going on isn't working for the best. Those who had left poked back in for a minute. We're getting honest criticism from new folks. All of this for me is a good start.
At the very least, the current system of government should be retained until the successful conclusion of the convention, and the implementation of a new system.
When you're looking for a new house, you don't become homeless in the interim.
:guillotine:
Well, I've played for over a year now and 3 of my friends are on here as well, 1 a nation in Taijitu and 2 others in the NWP. We've discussed leaving our regions and starting our own, this decision to begin proceedings to disband Taijitu has brought me to the decision to begin building my own region, a region not held to the chains and bonds of the WA, a region where the nations answer for themselves. I will be withdrawing my membership in the WA and withdrawing any and all WA endorsements.
I'd be perfectly happy with a convention or similar, so long as our government does not lapse until the newly decided upon set up is voted in.It's not the intention of those "across the aisle" that I seek to impugn, rather the wisdom of dismantling without having anything to replace the current system.You know, I quite like your aptitude for metaphor sir. I will say I am willing to hold a convention while holding the current government intact until the new constitution is hammered out by the collective. Honestly my goal is accomplished in the mass of people willing to admit what has been going on isn't working for the best. Those who had left poked back in for a minute. We're getting honest criticism from new folks. All of this for me is a good start.
At the very least, the current system of government should be retained until the successful conclusion of the convention, and the implementation of a new system.
When you're looking for a new house, you don't become homeless in the interim.
I'd be perfectly happy with a convention or similar, so long as our government does not lapse until the newly decided upon set up is voted in.It's not the intention of those "across the aisle" that I seek to impugn, rather the wisdom of dismantling without having anything to replace the current system.You know, I quite like your aptitude for metaphor sir. I will say I am willing to hold a convention while holding the current government intact until the new constitution is hammered out by the collective. Honestly my goal is accomplished in the mass of people willing to admit what has been going on isn't working for the best. Those who had left poked back in for a minute. We're getting honest criticism from new folks. All of this for me is a good start.
At the very least, the current system of government should be retained until the successful conclusion of the convention, and the implementation of a new system.
When you're looking for a new house, you don't become homeless in the interim.
I still do not know why it matters so damn much? I don't say that to be confrontational, I just legitimately don't get it.Because it's creating political uncertainty and limbo that doesn't make it any easier to hold a constitutional convention. If anything, it makes it harder since there's no institutions or offices who clearly have the authority to organize that discussion like the Ecclesia and Citizen-Initiator do now. As noted before, it could also be harmful to our treaty obligations. All in all, the risks aren't huge, as you say, but they're greater than zero and not necessary to take when we can easily formulate and enact a replacement system without taking them.
Quote from: Sovereign DixieI still do not know why it matters so damn much? I don't say that to be confrontational, I just legitimately don't get it.Because it's creating political uncertainty and limbo that doesn't make it any easier to hold a constitutional convention. If anything, it makes it harder since there's no institutions or offices who clearly have the authority to organize that discussion like the Ecclesia and Citizen-Initiator do now. As noted before, it could also be harmful to our treaty obligations. All in all, the risks aren't huge, as you say, but they're greater than zero and not necessary to take when we can easily formulate and enact a replacement system without taking them.
Oh God, we're relying on nostalgia now to get where we need to be?!I back the below stance.
Also, that is not the CP's official stance. While opinions differ between members, our official stance is simply implementing done form of a guild system, in one way or another.
I realize I'm going against all you're saying in that post, SD, but I need to clarify that for other members.
To be clear. I (nor any other member of the Centre Party) am not advocating removing anyone's freedom of speech, anyone's ability to participate, or anything of the sort. We are advocating a multi tiered centrist government with actual checks and balances. Crazy, huh?
Oh God, we're relying on nostalgia now to get where we need to be?!
Also, that is not the CP's official stance. While opinions differ between members, our official stance is simply implementing done form of a guild system, in one way or another.
I realize I'm going against all you're saying in that post, SD, but I need to clarify that for other members.
I back the below stance.That still works with the CP's current stance. I just wanted to make it clear that that specific model is not the only model.QuoteTo be clear. I (nor any other member of the Centre Party) am not advocating removing anyone's freedom of speech, anyone's ability to participate, or anything of the sort. We are advocating a multi tiered centrist government with actual checks and balances. Crazy, huh?
We're relying on the one thing that will work, the one thing that has worked, the fact that everyone here has been, and(mostly) will still be friends at the end of this. We've been exclusionary, and we've been inclusive, at one point almost all of the old guard here has been disliked by the rest of us for some reason, we don't come back here because of government, we come back here because we're all friends. The point I tried making before this whole "Glorious Revolution" was that Taijitu should be a community and branch out of just Nationstates, I still believe that to be true. Every argument that we've ever had has been over some imagined slight in NS, and while we all continue in it, we've recently lost several members because of it. The government type doesn't matter, in your case you are horribly wrong about the Centre Party. What does matter is juts getting something done.I think we agree on a lot of things, especially how community should be the #1 focus of Taijitu. I believe you and I to be working together on many issues. :)
From what I am reading, the proposal has changed somewhat. Are we going to keep the government intact while the Convention is ongoing? I imagine the proposal can be worded so that the current government expires automatically and the result of the Convention will replace it.This is a sensible compromise.
So, uhh what in the actual fuck is this guild thing?Khem, Pyradania, and I will explain in much detail tomorrow! :)
So, uhh what in the actual fuck is this guild thing?Khem, Pyradania, and I will explain in much detail tomorrow! :)
Did you just say...Skype?So, uhh what in the actual fuck is this guild thing?Khem, Pyradania, and I will explain in much detail tomorrow! :)
OT Knows. It was explained to him on Skype, he just wasn't paying attention because: FO4.
If we're not going to tear down the government without a replacement, is a vote even necessary? We could begin discussing and polling opinions on specific grievances and alternatives right now.I see no reason for it to not go to a vote. In fact the vote should have started over 12 hours ago.
I see no reason for it to not go to a vote. In fact the vote should have started over 12 hours ago.It will just delay making actual concrete proposals (instead of some unnamed people being vaguely concerned) by another week. We already have the full power to discussion legal and constitutional changes.
We should at least delay it until the weekend, so we all can be at the convention on our own time. A vote may not be necessary, but why not? :)QuoteI see no reason for it to not go to a vote. In fact the vote should have started over 12 hours ago.It will just delay making actual concrete proposals (instead of some unnamed people being vaguely concerned) by another week. We already have the full power to discussion legal and constitutional changes.
In the meantime I see no reason why we can not discuss our ideas for going forward as this is voted on.I agree. If it is okay with people, I'd like to do what I've done in other successful constitutional debates and solicit proposals for specific things to change, followed by brief consultation polls of them, with the winning specific proposals then combined into a complete one.
Should we create multiple frameworks from which to vote on building upon?Quote from: Sovereign DixieIn the meantime I see no reason why we can not discuss our ideas for going forward as this is voted on.I agree. If it is okay with people, I'd like to do what I've done in other successful constitutional debates and solicit proposals for specific things to change, followed by brief consultation polls of them, with the winning specific proposals then combined into a complete one.
EDIT: Changed "proposals" to "proposals for specific things to change" for clarity.
Should we create multiple frameworks from which to vote on building upon?I don't understand, could you explain in more detail?
Have individuals and groups propose new legal architecture of a large spanning variety such as Republic/Democracy, executive structure, judicial structures, etc. Voting between multiple basic framework constitutions on which to add the votes for minutia. Is this making more sense? Sorry if my communication skills are off today, my brain feels like porridge after a long day of caring for a toddler.Quote from: KhemShould we create multiple frameworks from which to vote on building upon?I don't understand, could you explain in more detail?
What I was thinking was having discussion threads and polls for particular points people want to change, e.g. how long should the delegate's term be, and combining the consensus from each thread. That's what worked well in TNP and Lazarus.