Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Thanks, Elegarth et all for taking a look at my proposals. 

 

On the "Rebellion Clause", my proposal is a codified legal mechanism within the framework of the Charter of the Union of the West Pacific. Yes, I am fully aware of the in-game realities, having used them myself in other GCRs in order to advance my own particular visions/ideology upon the regions I was Delegate. My point is that the Union, in the event that a State of Rebellion is declared, should name a person who is to be the Chief Executive while they refuse to acknowledge the authority of the in-game Delegate over the governance of the Union. 

 

Think of it this way: An in-game Delegate has gone bonkers, and the Union really doesn't like it. It declares a State of Rebellion. Fine. With the proposals, the Union names a preferred Chief Executive to administer its governance while the State of Rebellion is in play. Because as of this draft, the in-game Delegate and off-site Chief Executive are tied. Which I am fine with. But if the two are separable, then they must be somehow codified to be separable.

Posted

I think having a 'recognised Chief Executive' that is not the Delegate in any situation simply perpetuates the current problem. I support leaving the concepts of 'rebellion' to game mechanics and not as part of the offsite government.

This basically. I'd really rather have something ingrained in the in-game to be left out of this proposal, Dali.
Posted

I think having a 'recognised Chief Executive' that is not the Delegate in any situation simply perpetuates the current problem. I support leaving the concepts of 'rebellion' to game mechanics and not as part of the offsite government.

I absolutely agree!

Posted

And they're just a bunch of weirdos....

 

lol

 

Anyway. In my mind, the Delegate is the source of all authority and power, and so any powers should flow from that position.

 

At the same time though, 'legitimacy' involves a certain level of respect for others. Sometimes erroneously called a democratic mandate. I think the Delegate has to balance their own power to a degree with the community.

 

So ideally a system would be cooperative between the Delegate, who holds the power, and some kind of assembly of the nations the Delegate leads.

 

I don't think this needs to be overly formalised. The absolute worst thing I can imagine is us getting bogged down in obsessions over laws and amendments and all that nonsense that makes TNP look so very tedious.

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I was going to apologize for not being active here, due to the fact that I generally little thought for NS anymore... but, due to the fact that it has been 11 days since the last post, and the point of this thread has been about activity in this space (be it on forum or in government, or yadda yadda), I'm not going to.

 

Listen, clearly there is a complete disconnect right now between activity in the off-site and on-site. For myself, after 11 or so years of playing, I just want to pop on here once in a while and say two cents. Others have their own way of playing, and I really hope it's more active than mine but if not, that's cool. I honestly don't believe any constitutional change will fundamentally change that. 

 

I've done frankly all the roles in GCR governance, and frankly, all of them are hard to do if you just don't have people around who care. And right now, yes, that includes me. Personally, I am in favour of the superiority of the Delegate in the role of government, both on and off site. But the supremacy of the Delegacy will not necessarily increase activity if there's just not enough people who care. Trust me, as one who has run both 'democratic' and 'authoritarian' governments, it really doesn't matter what system you use, just so long as you have enough people who give a fuck. 

 

We all need a reason to come here. I'll be frank, and say that right now, I don't have a reason to come to this forum as it stands. I'm not that invested. And being invested is what needs to change. I'm going to look squarely at anyone who wants to hold Executive authority here and say, give an incentive to participate in TWP, be it on or off-site. 

 

The paperwork helps, but does not really make a clear difference. It's the people who do.

Posted

Well if you want to go a bit Orwellian, I've noticed that our forums are only active during scenes of factional fighting or public outrage. You want activity? Make a strawman for people to rally together against. It doesn't matter if it's Eurasia or Eastasia; they both get the job done.

 

On a more serious note, we have two choices. Either disband government and go to an easy to manage delegate and RO system (the de facto government atm), or find a cause that TWP can get behind. Unfortunately, we can't attract passionate, productive people if we're the regional equivalent of a guy in a hammock drinking out of a coconut. But changing our platform would fundamentally change who we are. We have a lot of creative people drawn in by the relaxed environment, and they contribute to our regional culture. Doing something like that would drive out a lot of the natives for places like TEP.

 

In the end, the choice is between losing activity or losing our identity. It's not a fun choice, so I'm going to let the rest of you discuss that.

Posted

Truth be told, I like the laid-back atmosphere of TWP as it is now. I personally did not come to TWP to try to force it to be something it isn't, and I have seen TWP through most of its formations, from one of the most defenderist of defender regions to complete inactivity to trying to figure out how it wants to be itself in the world.

 

Frankly, TWP has been on this path since the ZetaOne incident back in 2005 or so. Before then, TWP was frankly the stronghold of the defendersphere of the ADN, and for a year or so it tried to maintain that position with bumps and bruises along the way. I guess, when I say incentive and activity, I'm traditionalist in wanting TWP to occupy some sort of space in that game, but even then, I'm not sure we even need to. 

 

Thing is, and some of you have said it, do we even need a formal structure? None of us were impressed with what URAP did when he became petulant and invited DEN to do his dirty-work. So, my question is, how do we, as a community, address those scenarios? Do we want to have anything lay down in a code beyond that? If so, what?

Posted

Also, pardon me for the double-post, but I want to say this: We as a community did the best in the GCRs when it came to the Zombie Halloween event. During the event and afterward, I experienced a bit of glee when members of TNP and some of our other sister regions said nasty comments about our supposed 'authoritarian' attitude simply because we achieved our goal of 0% zombies. We did it, together. It is through the sheer strength and determination of our community that we turned a mini-game like which, frankly, is rigged against us in the GCRs, into a success.

 

Now, how do we improve on that, not just for mini-games, but for the region itself?

 

EDIT: I will note right now that I am not going to be an active member here, because I frankly do not want to be a driving force in these discussions. TWP needs to act as a community, and not one person. Not simply the Delegate. Not simply the Guardians. Not one ideological member here. We do need input here to move things forward. I will go for a good week or two on end from doing anything in NS, because frankly, I've had mostly enough of it. But, I do want to help in any way that I can.

Posted

Personally, I don't think we need these formal structures. All it's done in the time I've been here is cause frustration, inactive officials, and foreigners deriding us for being “authoritarian”. Not to mention the Unibotian speculation. (We're hardly authoritarian, we just have a dysfunctional democratic system)

 

We should focus on what we're good at, which is providing an interesting community for visitors and new residents.

 

How to improve the region (IMO):

 

Dissolve the on-site government. Yeah, yeah, just hold your thoughts while I finish mine. We can dissolve the government without having to go Pacifican on the region. All we really have been expecting out of our leadership lately is border control. What the game provides is more than enough to take care of our needs. Beyond that, we don't need anything formal. So an unnecessarily complex bureaucracy that requires more people than we have to offer is a waste of time just to please other regions who do that kind of stuff.

 

When it comes to activity outside of government, we should encourage people to make little groups, almost like clubs, where they can create content and share it with the rest of the region. I know that there are people in the region that like Polandball, Hetalia, image editing, etc, and they could be doing all that, adding to the regional culture. Right now they're just on the RMB. Not that there's anything wrong with having fun on the RMB; it's quite fun and a place for the region to bond...but there's all that potential there not being used.

 

For example, I have this Teikei thing where me and a few of the other teenage West Pacificans are part of this EU-like group. We roleplay and give each other ideas to contribute to our factbooks. On top of that we also use our region as a safe place to store puppets and a place to go when one of their nations doesn't have any region to go to. Also, during the zombie apocalypse, we worked together as a team to cure ourselves of zombies, and then several other TWP nations as well.

 

There could be groups that discuss political ideologies, RP groups, story writers, conlangers, poets, and people that are into WorldVision contests, to name a few. Wouldn't it be nice to see someone representing TWP in interregional events? We don't need to awkwardly and forcefully try to stimulate activity with government officials.

 

If TNP is known for its democracy, TEP its RP, and OBI for its beer-guzzling mercenaries, then why can't we play on our strengths and make a name for ourselves using culture?

 

Sure, militaries can fight wars and conquer, but their influence only goes so far as those they rule. A region that uses soft power has a much broader reach, and generates goodwill towards itself.

 

So, do you think I'm on to something, or that I'm deluded?

Posted

My thoughts about the current situation, in a personal level:

To quote a friend of mine(who I leave anonymous for the moment),

Honestly, we just do as we please here. The government is here to ensure its residents comfort and their enjoyment. Plus, it's holiday season. Inactivity is bound to happen.

A government exists to ensure its residents comfort and their enjoyment. Sure, democracy and negotiations and wild mad rebellion clauses are fine too, but let's face it; the majority of TWPers tend to stay at the RMB and chat out; just like Hari said, what our Westerners want at the government right now is pretty much controlling the noobs.
Posted

Dissolve the on-site government. Yeah, yeah, just hold your thoughts while I finish mine. We can dissolve the government without having to go Pacifican on the region. All we really have been expecting out of our leadership lately is border control. What the game provides is more than enough to take care of our needs. Beyond that, we don't need anything formal. So an unnecessarily complex bureaucracy that requires more people than we have to offer is a waste of time just to please other regions who do that kind of stuff.

The on-site government is the Delegate and his Guardians... Did you perhaps meant dissolve the OFF-SITE government?? And in any case, neither is not even remotely similar to The Pacific that has not only a very strong on-site government and a very strong off-site structure as well, based on regions and very active departments... Make sure you fact-check the stuff you say about other regions, our forums are fairly open for everyone to read and I dislike offending other regions due to lack of care when speaking....

When it comes to activity outside of government, we should encourage people to make little groups, almost like clubs, where they can create content and share it with the rest of the region. I know that there are people in the region that like Polandball, Hetalia, image editing, etc, and they could be doing all that, adding to the regional culture. Right now they're just on the RMB. Not that there's anything wrong with having fun on the RMB; it's quite fun and a place for the region to bond...but there's all that potential there not being used.

Those can exist in the off-site (forum) without any issue. They actually exist already in the form of threads that people follows. This CAN'T be taken to the on-site cuz in the on-site there are 3 simple categories: Delegates and ROs, WA nations that are neither of those, and non WA Nations.

 

For example, I have this Teikei thing where me and a few of the other teenage West Pacificans are part of this EU-like group. We roleplay and give each other ideas to contribute to our factbooks. On top of that we also use our region as a safe place to store puppets and a place to go when one of their nations doesn't have any region to go to. Also, during the zombie apocalypse, we worked together as a team to cure ourselves of zombies, and then several other TWP nations as well.

 

And how are you proposing that is implemented?

There could be groups that discuss political ideologies, RP groups, story writers, conlangers, poets, and people that are into WorldVision contests, to name a few. Wouldn't it be nice to see someone representing TWP in interregional events? We don't need to awkwardly and forcefully try to stimulate activity with government officials.

 

What stops them from existing now? This is no change tbh...

If TNP is known for its democracy, TEP its RP, and OBI for its beer-guzzling mercenaries, then why can't we play on our strengths and make a name for ourselves using culture?

 

Again, what prevents this from happening now and how is it different to the current status?

I don't think the base of your idea is bad, but again, the off-site is already free enough for this to happen and is NOT happening, can you identify the root cause of why is not and how would you make it happen?

I do think that dissolving the off-site government, if we are not really using it, is a good first step and simply run on the on-site government.

Posted

No, you are actually TOTALLY WRONG. I'm asking for ACTION PLANS to implement ideas... Many of the ideas Hari mentiones I've also had them. But an idea is just a puff of smoke unless we can design a way to TURN IT INTO REALITY.

See the groups idea for example: is there anything BLOCKING or PREVENTING it from happening? No. Then why does it not happens naturally? Several possibilities: people is uninterested, or a driving individual is needed, or perhaps they just don't feel like doing it here. This are JUST three options. Can you provide a solution to each possible scenario? Or an approach on how to identify which of them really is preventing this from occurring?

What I'm saying is: Don't just mention ideas: turn them into plans, executable actions that can actually be TRIED instead of just words that can only be discussed.

See my point? Also, drop the attitude please Malv. I don't hate you or dislike you, so is getting boring mate.

Posted

Afterthought: Perhaps we could make round robins on HOW to ENACT ideas???? it may not be that one can do it, but a team could come up with it? With the actual way to MAKE things HAPPEN?

Posted

Perhaps instead of an Internal Affairs branch of government, just a voluntary rotating committee to get things done?

 

That way people can participate without worrying about the obligations of an official position.

Posted

That makes sense... hmmm... Is not a bad idea... Perhaps if guy A is interested in group A, he could volunteer to help ONLY on that

  • 3 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...