Jump to content

Wow...these forums are dead...where is everyone?


Winnipeg
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think one of the things that made the Meritocracy such a working Democracy for a long time was the fact we had someone (me...not to toot my own horn or anything, because I do not want the Delegacy, just using it as an example) who held the top in game seat (admittedly, it was a Founder not a WA slot) without imposing his will on the players in the region...well...until the whole pebble's "reboot" but that was because we were in an activity lull much like what we have now...

 

Anyway, my point is, the only time Democracy really seem to do well in NationStates is when running the Government is left to the players of the region and the user holding the reins of the region (be that Founder, or WA Delegate) is leaving the region to run itself and just staying by to help should something happen like raiders trying to move in a remove the democratically elected government...hard to do and also hard to truely call it a Democracy as it's more of a Benevolent Dictatorship, but it's the closest you can come in NationStates without just role playing the hole thing and ignore the actual game....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trouble with an uninvolved delegate in a feeder is that they will get bored or frustrated.  Bored or frustrated feeder delegates only have two modes: inactive or rogue.  Tarting in a feeder is sooooo boring and tedious. There has to be some pay off.

 

Interestingly, we have a delegate now that 100% allows the people on the forum to run the off site the way they want (not that he really has any say in it. )  He is content with in-game concerns.  Unfortunately freedom of choice in the forum has lead to inactivity.  I'm not sure how one goes about removing the option of inactivity from the list of choices.  Believe me, its something we have wrestled with since before the Neutral Territory conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We could always treat the Delegate as the British treat the Queen; that of a Head of State that is the signatory to agreements made by the Prime Minister, and treat the Guardians as advisers to the Delegate as The Privy Council advises the Queen, The Queen has no vote in reality, but the Delegate would of-course have a vote. Even Britain cannot be called a true Democracy as the role of the monarch is hereditary and the British public do not have a choice in who reigns, but we can surely involve more people under a sort of Democracy in this game? We'll have to find a role for the Delegate (and the members as a whole) which is hierarchical and involving but not dictatorial if activity is to be improved. Having a system where everyone is equal (no hierarchy/attainment etc.) just doesn't work; equal opportunity to progress in a fair society, does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is democracy it is the endorsement system in game, those that work at achieving endorsements and accumulating influence, from that political power is derived. the guardian system is open to all that invest the time to benefit the region, rogue legislators that wish to impose their will via the tyranny of bureaucracy need not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I accept that democracy in-game is determined on how much time you can spend on-line endorsing others; however, the main thrust of the discussion we're having here is concerned with the activity on this forum and how to encourage the participation of more members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

I shall ask TAO if he can cajole some unsuspecting member to start a forum of her/his own naming to include things of interest. I've put some stuff in The Clubhouse, but I'm sure there are members just itching to start something of their own! :rolleyes:

 

On second thoughts, it might be better to encourage members to put their own stuff in The Clubhouse rather than starting something completely new. We don't want to lose track of what the forum is for.... :unsure:

 

(Just pre-empting any foreseen reaction!)

Edited by Tweedy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[OOC]I'm not opposed to any form of government, but the players should realize that I will oppose the Regional Assembly (or whatever it is named) choosing the Delegate, I think that should be done via the mechanism provided in the game. [/OOC]

 

I believe the Oligarchy is good for the region, good for the players, and good for the NSVerse as a whole. That benevolent leadership we have exhibited should be extended to all the regions of the NSVerse for the good of the world. Bask in the reflected glory of the Guardians and prosper.

 

 

:twpflag:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roque legislators? Where? If I see any, I'll let you know so you "can assume the reigns as Delegate once again and ban" them.

 

Why didn't you voice this opinion before (Delegate opinion), instead choosing to declare it when TWP needs a system like the one proposed most?

 

What I proposed was not perfect and it needs to adapted to make it as good as it can be, if this includes changing how the RA works with the Delegate then that is not a problem. Every system can be improved.

 

I realise that I may have insulted you with my tirade on the Guardians and for that I am sorry but that is not a reason to completely disregard everything I have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The job of the off-site forum is to work with the elected Pope Delegate, and further the identity and character of the Vatican TWP within NS. However, this does not prevent a vibrant and democratic off-site forum functioning with vitality!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in the strange position that I don't have a Delegate that I work for, or with. I suppose I work for myself now. My loyalty to NS is on a par with my loyalty to the Hitler Youth which seems to be thriving with worrying impunity in the not-so-deep recesses of Mr. Barry's game. Conversely the present set-up in TWP is more akin to the Chinese Communist Party - in a much smaller way, of-course!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally i think we should have a constant revolution state. screw stable democracies. maybe every once in a while have a totalitarian government with a democratic revolution following a totalitarian coup and etc etc. have competition to see which govt last the longest. of course theses forums will be the focal point of all govts regardless (just to keep things simple and from people trying to spoil the game) :P

 

the R/D game is getting boring. GCRs are suppose to be the pinnacle of unstable, corrupt politics! if anyone reads The Necessity of Chaos by Todd McCloud, we should embrace chaos! not the other way around! why have a coup/purge every 2 years when you have it ever 5 months??

 

of course i could be a radical

 

with the continuing usage of the game mechanics for controlling the delegacy, one must relied on our heavily populated region to restored order or to assume power

 

the guardians, already accumulating enough influence, can seize the delegacy should things go wrong :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take some umbridge with being labeled as the one who destroyed the RA. The RA was dead well before I took over from the standpoint that it was ineffectual. If anything the NSR system I established was purposefully to create more legislative discussion. Of all the guardians I most legislating friendly, I'd say by a significant margin at that.

 

I think all of the guardians are open to new suggestions, ideas, and whatnot. We're just not going to be the ones driving the bus.

 

Truthfully, I think you have some of the most unassuming folks as guardians in this region. When I sought to make changes, they went along with it. When ED made changes, that was fine too. And Yy has done his thing.

The current state of TWP is stagnant because that is the way I have directed it. The idea was for players to come forth with new ideas, which has not occured. A new "government" is in order to establish some sort of entity from which to "rebuild". I have discussed a possible direction with Westwind and look forward to hearing feedback once I have put this to the guardians in place already. The greatest fear I believe is that TWP will deviate from the "norm" it has enjoyed these past years. The system in place now has served TWP well and should not be abandoned totally. It provides for a more secure and stable region. The current cap is sufficient for any nation to gather influence provided they are active in-game (I am proof of that). I, for one, am open to suggestions on governmental bodies/entities to try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My last major action in the region was to create a generic Constitution that could be adapted to any government type but would keep its main tenets intact.  RL (started second career in Feb this year) has captured the lion share of my time and TAO has so little time.  Hopefully (within the next few months) TAO will find a balance/routine/equilibrium between work and play and then have more time here.  Maybe then TAO will reinstate his master plan for regional domination (and get to use those shiny new Delegate buttons that have been added since I was Delegate.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...