Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Pevvania wrote:Also fair points, but Aux seems dead against restarting offensive military operations, a position I do not share.

Offensive operations aren't practical at our current capabilities. Espionage and defending have greater prospects.

Auxorii, Jadentopian Order

Look Pev, I've always kinda liked you in spite of your mix of British and American arrogance, and I see no reason to reopen old wounds or whatever the expression is, however it would be dishonest of you to refuse to admit that the trial 3 years ago was a political one. You know it, I know it, and everybody who was in the region at that time knows it

Auxorii, Tupolite

Pevvania wrote:The NAP does not apply here lol

That's debatable, since the majority sentiment is that it does and this is what has facilitated by continued presence here.

So yes, I do believe that to some extent a libertarian region should reflect a libertarian ethos, if only so that I don't get auto-banned like I did from the FCN for just posting.

Pevvania wrote:Also, for anyone moralizing about how "un-libertarian" it is to raid Communist regions: this is a free online game, nobody is really losing anything. The NAP does not apply here lol

"Yeah, I play PUBG. I'm really into skydiving and admiring the scenic beauty. Killing other players?.... Well that's un-libertarian, I don't do that."

Kongeriget Island wrote:Look Pev, I've always kinda liked you in spite of your mix of British and American arrogance, and I see no reason to reopen old wounds or whatever the expression is, however it would be dishonest of you to refuse to admit that the trial 3 years ago was a political one. You know it, I know it, and everybody who was in the region at that time knows it

Pevvania is neither British nor American. He's an Australian, which carries its own set of implications that I'm loath to state on this message board.

Pevvania

Auxorii wrote:I actually never defined the WA delegate as executive in my platform-understanding the reason for that.

Except for the part where you say the executive branch is headed by the President, who is the WA Delegate, has veto authority, and who appoints the Prime Minister.

Those are not powers you want in a position that can be taken by raiders. Even if the WA Delegacy itself is non-executive, if any government position is defined as being the WA Delegate, the entire government is vulnerable to attack from the outside.

The New United States

Tupolite wrote:Pevvania is neither British nor American. He's an Australian, which carries its own set of implications that I'm loath to state on this message board.

I'm pretty sure he at least lived in Britain at some point...

Miencraft wrote:Except for the part where you say the executive branch is headed by the President, who is the WA Delegate, has veto authority, and who appoints the Prime Minister.

Those are not powers you want in a position that can be taken by raiders. Even if the WA Delegacy itself is non-executive, if any government position is defined as being the WA Delegate, the entire government is vulnerable to attack from the outside.

I don’t see how we’d be susceptible to raiders if our WA delegate was non-executive but was more active in WA affairs.

Tupolite wrote:That's debatable, since the majority sentiment is that it does and this is what has facilitated by continued presence here.

So yes, I do believe that to some extent a libertarian region should reflect a libertarian ethos, if only so that I don't get auto-banned like I did from the FCN for just posting.

Obviously free speech has always been a big part of our region's culture, and that shouldn't be lost. Back in our glory days, Misley and other commie militants would come engage us freely on our RMB, even as they banned us from their own. It showed their hypocrisy and our willingness to engage in real debate. Free speech is a benefit both domestically and in the realm of the War on Communism.

However, applying the NAP to foreign policy in a game is a joke. This region was founded on taking the fight to the reds, and I'd like to see us re-prioritize that in the Consulate.

Kongeriget Island wrote:Look Pev, I've always kinda liked you in spite of your mix of British and American arrogance, and I see no reason to reopen old wounds or whatever the expression is, however it would be dishonest of you to refuse to admit that the trial 3 years ago was a political one. You know it, I know it, and everybody who was in the region at that time knows it

I read this in Donald Trump's voice.

The New United States, Auxorii

Jadentopian Order wrote:I read this in Donald Trump's voice.

You know it, I know it, and everybody knows it

The New United States wrote:However, applying the NAP to foreign policy in a game is a joke. This region was founded on taking the fight to the reds, and I'd like to see us re-prioritize that in the Consulate.

Why? Why ruin a small region made up of 3 or 4 people just because they’re communist? It’s so pointless, ineffective and just bad sportsmanship. You want to raid little edgy teenager’s regions because we gotta “take the fight to the reds”?

Jadentopian Order, Highway Eighty-Eight

The New United States wrote:Obviously free speech has always been a big part of our region's culture, and that shouldn't be lost. Back in our glory days, Misley and other commie militants would come engage us freely on our RMB, even as they banned us from their own. It showed their hypocrisy and our willingness to engage in real debate. Free speech is a benefit both domestically and in the realm of the War on Communism.

However, applying the NAP to foreign policy in a game is a joke. This region was founded on taking the fight to the reds, and I'd like to see us re-prioritize that in the Consulate.

Good. I was getting nervous there for a moment.

Auxorii wrote:I don’t see how we’d be susceptible to raiders if our WA delegate was non-executive but was more active in WA affairs.

Because your plan makes the WA Delegate a critical part of the government.

Miencraft wrote:Because your plan makes the WA Delegate a critical part of the government.

No, it doesn’t.

I only made it so that whoever is elected as President, also is endorsed as WA Delegate because I think it be easier to canalize WA proposals. It actually has nothing to do with how the regional government is run; it only places a responsibility on the President to represent our region to the WA. I think it would be improper to have anyone else than our Head and Chief of State be this delegation.

Auxorii wrote:No, it doesn’t.

I only made it so that whoever is elected as President, also is endorsed as WA Delegate because I think it be easier to canalize WA proposals. It actually has nothing to do with how the regional government is run; it only places a responsibility on the President to represent our region to the WA. I think it would be improper to have anyone else than our Head and Chief of State be this delegation.

Ah, that's a different beast then.

But see now the problem with that it removes the right of people to decide whether or not they want to associate with the WA at all. [I]Someone is going to end up being required to endorse whomever ends up as President, and anyone who runs for President is going to be required to join the WA, even if they don't want to.

The WA is and should remain irrelevant to our politics. If people want to join the WA and elect a delegate, then that's our region's representation in the WA. You don't need to mix the guys in charge of the government with that.

Miencraft wrote:Ah, that's a different beast then.

But see now the problem with that it removes the right of people to decide whether or not they want to associate with the WA at all. [I]Someone is going to end up being required to endorse whomever ends up as President, and anyone who runs for President is going to be required to join the WA, even if they don't want to.

The WA is and should remain irrelevant to our politics. If people want to join the WA and elect a delegate, then that's our region's representation in the WA. You don't need to mix the guys in charge of the government with that.

I suppose. It’s not necessarily a hardline thing; do you have any other ideas on bow to canalize WA proposals?

Auxorii wrote:I suppose. It’s not necessarily a hardline thing; do you have any other ideas on bow to canalize WA proposals?

We should establish a department dedicated to assessing WA proposals and putting them up to a public vote for approval. If the majority signs off on it, the Delegate is obligated to vote in the WA in favor. This would also make the WA Delegate a government employee, which makes sense as the very mechanics of NationStates make the Delegate this government's representation in the WA one way or another. If the Delegate represents Libertatem in the game mechanics, then it should also be on paper. This would also be a good means of deciding which proposals from individual citizens should receive the government's endorsement

Auxorii wrote:I suppose. It’s not necessarily a hardline thing; do you have any other ideas on bow to canalize WA proposals?

Do we really need to? I feel like it'd be much more in line with being a libertarian region if we just let people join the WA and vote however they wish, and submit whatever proposals they want if they're eligible to.

Miencraft wrote:Do we really need to? I feel like it'd be much more in line with being a libertarian region if we just let people join the WA and vote however they wish, and submit whatever proposals they want if they're eligible to.

Sure, there’s that- but that’s no fun.

It seems like there’s an interest amongst people to have an official streamline from the regional government to the WA. As Tupolite stated, it’s the only actual function the regional government has in the game mechanics

Tupolite

Kongeriget Island wrote:Look Pev, I've always kinda liked you in spite of your mix of British and American arrogance, and I see no reason to reopen old wounds or whatever the expression is, however it would be dishonest of you to refuse to admit that the trial 3 years ago was a political one. You know it, I know it, and everybody who was in the region at that time knows it

Well, I'll agree with your sentiment that there's no need not to move on. I am no longer an officeholder, so my opinion doesn't really matter that much. Still, Aux is a candidate for office so I just wanted to be enlightened on his current view.

Kongeriget Island wrote:in spite of your mix of British and American arrogance

Tupolite wrote:Pevvania is neither British nor American. He's an Australian, which carries its own set of implications that I'm loath to state on this message board.

Lol I'm a British-Australian dual citizen (lived in both countries) and have lived in America for over two years now. So you're all right to some extent

Technically I have three citizenships but will not confuse anyone with that information

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:I oppose anything involving prime ministers.

Prime ministers suck.

We should remove the First Consul office and establish a senate, with the new legislative presiding officer being called whatever. I think that have two consuls is a good idea. I think that have two executives, running two separate aspects of that branch would solve problems where if one person is no longer active for whatever reason the government ceases working, and also allows for more focused activity. Consuls can always delegate their power to officers as they see fit.

A senate is ridiculous. Legislation should be voted on in a general poll by all citizens. There’s no point in having some select group of people decide what happens for the region when it can be decided by all of us directly.

You say you hate the idea of a prime minister then literally go on to talk about why it’s a good idea to have two members in the executive branch...

Its not like everyone votes anyway so direct democracy in this region wouldnt be too different from a counsel or senate

Miencraft, Rateria, Jadentopian Order

Auxorii wrote:You say you hate the idea of a prime minister then literally go on to talk about why it’s a good idea to have two members in the executive branch...

Probably because the PM is appointed, not elected.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:That'd literally just make it impossible to pass legislation in a timely manner. Polls take at least three hours if I remember right and that means we cannot vote on two two things in less than three hours but actually more than six. That also seems to be a good way to see rapid uninformed changes by a population who's makeup might change just as rapidly. The reason for electing a particular group of people to vote on legislation is because most people really can't be bothered to stay well informed on the situation, or particularly active enough for such a job as voting themselves.

Dunno what your obsession is with direct democracy, but there's a very good reason it tends to be avoided in the world and in nationstates. It doesn't actually increase activity, has a mess of security risks, clogs up the polls, and ends up a mess for everyone.

Got to say, Aux, the man's right this time.

"...main battle tanks stalk the woods of Tupolite in search of lions."

This somehow increased my civil rights.

Narland, Rateria

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

To be fair, we had direct democracy for a period in the IRU ages ago and it worked very well for us. Giving everyone the right to vote on legislature increased activity a fair bit.

Auxorii, Tupolite

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:That'd literally just make it impossible to pass legislation in a timely manner. Polls take at least three hours if I remember right and that means we cannot vote on two two things in less than three hours but actually more than six. That also seems to be a good way to see rapid uninformed changes by a population who's makeup might change just as rapidly. The reason for electing a particular group of people to vote on legislation is because most people really can't be bothered to stay well informed on the situation, or particularly active enough for such a job as voting themselves.

Dunno what your obsession is with direct democracy, but there's a very good reason it tends to be avoided in the world and in nationstates. It doesn't actually increase activity, has a mess of security risks, clogs up the polls, and ends up a mess for everyone.

That’s not even true. Of course you can run multiple polls at the same time; and how often are there two legislations up at once? Rarely.

This is not even true; this is NationStates. The whole “the mass is ignorant” doesn’t really apply. We’re all playing the game and it would only make sense for them to be active in the region, if they choose not to they can simply not vote. As Jaden said, it could actually boost activity and actually give people a reason to be active.

On the issue of security risks, this can be fixed very easily by only tallying votes by citizens.

Jadentopian Order wrote:To be fair, we had direct democracy for a period in the IRU ages ago and it worked very well for us. Giving everyone the right to vote on legislature increased activity a fair bit.

This is literally the only region that I’ve seen that doesn’t do direct democracy, and ever since I got here it seems to just be because everyone agrees with Republicanism over direct democracy... I do too but not in NationStates lol... it doesn’t make sense to have only a select group of 3 or 4 people decide what legislation is passed in a region except that it fits into your ideological box of what you want a government to look like.

Jadentopian Order

Miencraft wrote:Probably because the PM is appointed, not elected.

As is only fair. Obviously, the President should be able to decide who would be replacing them if they were not able to run the office anymore.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:You literally cannot run more than one poll. And no, most regions on NS do not employ direct democracy. Even on NS most people are completely ignorant of foreign and regional affairs.

Ah, you’re right actually. I could have sworn you could have before.

Regardless, if your main beef with direct democracy is that in the rare instance we have two pieces of legislation submitted at the same time, we will have to wait at least 3 hours before voting on the next, then it’s pretty solvable.

There’s the obvious solution of having a fair poll where people are able to debate and discuss legislation while the poll goes on, and then being able to move onto the next legislation in an orderly matter to vote; but I guess this would just take “too much time”, which I always found as a weak argument against democracy. Or you could run the poll on another site.

The second argument to not have direct democracy, that “most people are completely ignorant of foreign and regional affairs”, I think that this is such a nonissue. If people are not active in regional affairs, then they will not participate or vote. It will always be around the same group of people with a few outliers who are active in regional politics- also it’s not like there’s really much to be “informed” on anyways. The region has been struggling with inactivity up until recently, anyways.

Jadentopian Order

Tupolite wrote:"...main battle tanks stalk the woods of Tupolite in search of lions."

This somehow increased my civil rights.

when tanks are outlawed only outlaws will have tanks...

Auxorii, Rateria

Jadentopian Order wrote:To be fair, we had direct democracy for a period in the IRU ages ago and it worked very well for us. Giving everyone the right to vote on legislature increased activity a fair bit.

You make a fair point

Narland wrote:when tanks are outlawed only outlaws will have tanks...

The issue was about hunting regulations.

Auxorii wrote:This is literally the only region that I’ve seen that doesn’t do direct democracy

That's because you don't know how larger regions are operated, where almost all legislative issues are decided on an off-site forum.

While we're having this conversation I might as well bring up Libertatem's history with this. In the 'First Republic', but also even before that was a term, the region had a Delegate, Board of Directors and House of Representatives. The House was composed of every resident of the region and acted as a lower legislative chamber. It worked fine for a while, but we ran into problems when regional activity dipped in 2013. Because the House was composed of all residents/citizens rather than active residents, we couldn't pass any constitutional amendments or laws because they couldn't get a quorum. When I took over we reformed HOR a couple of times, first changing it to active residents and then I think we changed it again I think.

Miencraft, Narland, The New United States, Rateria

Pevvania wrote:While we're having this conversation I might as well bring up Libertatem's history with this. In the 'First Republic', but also even before that was a term, the region had a Delegate, Board of Directors and House of Representatives. The House was composed of every resident of the region and acted as a lower legislative chamber. It worked fine for a while, but we ran into problems when regional activity dipped in 2013. Because the House was composed of all residents/citizens rather than active residents, we couldn't pass any constitutional amendments or laws because they couldn't get a quorum. When I took over we reformed HOR a couple of times, first changing it to active residents and then I think we changed it again I think.

Yeah that does sound like something that would have to be taken into account.

Pevvania wrote:While we're having this conversation I might as well bring up Libertatem's history with this. In the 'First Republic', but also even before that was a term, the region had a Delegate, Board of Directors and House of Representatives. The House was composed of every resident of the region and acted as a lower legislative chamber. It worked fine for a while, but we ran into problems when regional activity dipped in 2013. Because the House was composed of all residents/citizens rather than active residents, we couldn't pass any constitutional amendments or laws because they couldn't get a quorum. When I took over we reformed HOR a couple of times, first changing it to active residents and then I think we changed it again I think.

The solution is to not have a quorum for the lower house because you shouldn’t be forced to vote or even show up

Auxorii

Pevvania wrote:While we're having this conversation I might as well bring up Libertatem's history with this. In the 'First Republic', but also even before that was a term, the region had a Delegate, Board of Directors and House of Representatives. The House was composed of every resident of the region and acted as a lower legislative chamber. It worked fine for a while, but we ran into problems when regional activity dipped in 2013. Because the House was composed of all residents/citizens rather than active residents, we couldn't pass any constitutional amendments or laws because they couldn't get a quorum. When I took over we reformed HOR a couple of times, first changing it to active residents and then I think we changed it again I think.

Giving all residents automatic legislative power is an abysmal idea. I've seen it and I would like to introduce you to someone named Il Corvonero.

Tupolite wrote:Giving all residents automatic legislative power is an abysmal idea. I've seen it and I would like to introduce you to someone named Il Corvonero.

That's why it was citizens, not residents.

Narland, Auxorii, Rateria, Jadentopian Order, Tupolite

Tupolite wrote:

That's because you don't know how larger regions are operated, where almost all legislative issues are decided on an off-site forum.

How many active nations would there have to in Libertatem that would make it impractical to vote on NationStates? Because at the current rate, we’re not even close to that. Barely a dozen people voted in the last elections.

If anything, direct democratic voting could spur activity, as already stated multiple times.

Even if we got to the point where voting on the general poll became impractical, let me ask you this: those larger nations that do it off-site, is it a select group of people or is it the citizenry (such as registered forum members) of the region that’s allowed to vote? I’ve been around NS a long time and have been in a lot of regions- large included- so I do know enough, it’s a matter of opinion.

Clearly, it makes more sense to have a direct democratic vote and even if the general polling on NS became impractical, I see no reason why we couldn’t ourselves then vote off site. Our discord is particularly active.

Pevvania wrote:While we're having this conversation I might as well bring up Libertatem's history with this. In the 'First Republic', but also even before that was a term, the region had a Delegate, Board of Directors and House of Representatives. The House was composed of every resident of the region and acted as a lower legislative chamber. It worked fine for a while, but we ran into problems when regional activity dipped in 2013. Because the House was composed of all residents/citizens rather than active residents, we couldn't pass any constitutional amendments or laws because they couldn't get a quorum. When I took over we reformed HOR a couple of times, first changing it to active residents and then I think we changed it again I think.

This is a pretty easy solution to solve... not have a quorum... as Jaden stated, nobody should be forced to vote either.

I’m not proposing a House of Representatives- just that votes are taken on a direct democratic basis using a first past the post system. Your issue is a nonissue.

Auxorii wrote:How many active nations would there have to in Libertatem that would make it impractical to vote on NationStates? Because at the current rate, we’re not even close to that. Barely a dozen people voted in the last elections.

If anything, direct democratic voting could spur activity, as already stated multiple times.

Even if we got to the point where voting on the general poll became impractical, let me ask you this: those larger nations that do it off-site, is it a select group of people or is it the citizenry (such as registered forum members) of the region that’s allowed to vote? I’ve been around NS a long time and have been in a lot of regions- large included- so I do know enough, it’s a matter of opinion.

Clearly, it makes more sense to have a direct democratic vote and even if the general polling on NS became impractical, I see no reason why we couldn’t ourselves then vote off site. Our discord is particularly active.

I'm just saying that you haven't been to many NS regions.

Tupolite wrote:I'm just saying that you haven't been to many NS regions.

Dude, I’ve been playing this game for almost 6 years now. I’ve been in plenty of regions

Auxorii wrote:Dude, I’ve been playing this game for almost 6 years now. I’ve been in plenty of regions

The majority of regions with large and long-lived communities do not use direct democracy.

Tupolite wrote:The majority of regions with large and long-lived communities do not use direct democracy.

What’s your point? That still provides no reason why direct democracy couldn’t be implemented here:

Auxorii wrote:How many active nations would there have to in Libertatem that would make it impractical to vote on NationStates? Because at the current rate, we’re not even close to that. Barely a dozen people voted in the last elections.

If anything, direct democratic voting could spur activity, as already stated multiple times.

Even if we got to the point where voting on the general poll became impractical, let me ask you this: those larger nations that do it off-site, is it a select group of people or is it the citizenry (such as registered forum members) of the region that’s allowed to vote? I’ve been around NS a long time and have been in a lot of regions- large included- so I do know enough, it’s a matter of opinion.

Clearly, it makes more sense to have a direct democratic vote and even if the general polling on NS became impractical, I see no reason why we couldn’t ourselves then vote off site. Our discord is particularly active.

After some consideration and realization that there are two other candidates for the third consul. I have decided to withdraw my candidacy. It is important that who ever gets elected is elected by a majority. A third candidate would inevitable lead to vote splitting and I think it is best as a region to seek to avoid that when possible.

Pevvania, Narland, The New United States, Auxorii, Rateria, Jadentopian Order, Tupolite, Kongeriget Island

Congratulations to The New United States. Sorry for the delay, the Third Consul election is up. Good luck

Pevvania, Narland, The New United States, Rateria

Tupolite wrote:The issue was about hunting regulations.

What d'ya mean? With a well oiled Abrams (and thermal targeting), Bambi (or any game) can run but it can't hide. American humour. There are bumper stickers in the US that read: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Hence, when tanks...

Rateria

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Auxorii wrote:What’s your point? That still provides no reason why direct democracy couldn’t be implemented here:

It would be highly unstable and inefficient for all the reasons given by Wilhelm.

Narland wrote:What d'ya mean? With a well oiled Abrams (and thermal targeting), Bambi (or any game) can run but it can't hide. American humour. There are bumper stickers in the US that read: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Hence, when tanks...

I understood the joke, but the implication in making said joke is that the issue concerned gun ownership. It did not.

Tupolite wrote:I wasn't trying to make a point. I was just contradicting your implication that the majority of NS regions operate on the basis of direct democracy. Actually, the majority of NS regions are probably puppet storages, jump points, and RP clubs, and the majority of stable democratic regions usually affix greater conditions to the franchise.

I didn’t once claim that most regions used direct democracy; you just kept using that as an argument for why direct democracy wouldn’t work here.

Auxorii wrote:I didn’t once claim that most regions used direct democracy; you just kept using that as an argument for why direct democracy wouldn’t work here.

I edited the post. See above.

Tupolite wrote:It would be highly unstable and inefficient for all the reasons given by Wilhelm.

I responded to all of those points. They’re all mute points.

Auxorii wrote:I responded to all of those points. They’re all mute points.

Well, I don't like the idea on the face of it, and really, I don't need much better reason than that. There are no apparent benefits to it over the current model, and I doubt that it's what the majority in this region wants, though I would be happy to establish a poll on the matter once the elections are over (and a polling authority has been instituted by law) to confirm this preconception.

Tupolite wrote:Well, I don't like the idea on the face of it, and really, I don't need much better reason than that. There are no apparent benefits to it over the current model, and I doubt that it's what the majority in this region wants, though I would be happy to establish a poll on the matter once the elections are over (and a polling authority has been instituted by law) to confirm this preconception.

Of course there are benefits. It would spur activity and actually give the entire population of the region a reason to engage in regional politics.

Auxorii wrote:Of course there are benefits. It would spur activity and actually give the entire population of the region a reason to engage in regional politics.

I can involve the populace more easily in region politics by just polling the entire population on a bill before I open a legislative session to send it to a vote.

Tupolite wrote:I can involve the populace more easily in region politics by just polling the entire population on a bill before I open a legislative session to send it to a vote.

That would be so pointless. Why not involve them in the political process themselves?

Auxorii wrote:If people are not active in regional affairs, then they will not participate or vote.

Also, this is patently untrue, as I can also vouch for from experience. In many regions, less active or aware citizens will just subordinate their votes to the vision of a party boss out of sheer arbitrariness and because he bothered to message them via TG.

Auxorii wrote:That would be so pointless. Why not involve them in the political process themselves?

Because the poll would be used to assess general trends on certain issues, not to make absolute determinations about the law of the land through a majority which may be ill-informed or arbitrary at any rate. The result of the poll is not 100% binding on what the Consulate may do, but will ensure that it does not deviate so wildly from public opinion that it will fall out of favor.

Tupolite wrote:Because the poll would be used to assess general trends on certain issues, not to make absolute determinations about the law of the land through a majority which may be ill-informed or arbitrary at any rate. The result of the poll is not 100% binding on what the Consulate may do, but it will ensure that it does not deviate so wildly from public opinion that it will fall out of favor.

Actually, it doesn’t ensure it at all. It’s just a poll. The whole point of this new model would be to have a more democratic system, in order to have more people involved in the political process.

Tupolite wrote:Also, this is patently untrue, as I can also vouch for from experience. In many regions, less active or aware citizens will just subordinate their votes to the vision of a party boss out of sheer arbitrariness and because he bothered to message them via TG.

Yes, the less active citizens. However, through the system it’ll garner more people to become active in the political process. Also, you’re not really arguing any points or actually making any assertions about what I’ve put forward. You just keep making generalizations about it and it seems like you’re just going along with whatever anecdotes anyone provides:

Jadentopian Order wrote:To be fair, we had direct democracy for a period in the IRU ages ago and it worked very well for us. Giving everyone the right to vote on legislature increased activity a fair bit.

Tupolite wrote:You make a fair point

Auxorii wrote:Actually, it doesn’t ensure it at all. It’s just a poll. The whole point of this new model would be to have a more democratic system, in order to have more people involved in the political process.

Yes, the less active citizens. However, through the system it’ll garner more people to become active in the political process. Also, you’re not really arguing any points or actually making any assertions about what I’ve put forward. You just keep making generalizations about it and it seems like you’re just going along with whatever anecdotes anyone provides:

The newly elected consuls' prospects for re-election are contingent upon accurately assessing and representing the public opinion, so yes, it does ensure that the Consulate will not deviate too wildly. If you don't like what the Consulate does in power, there's always the next election.

What I think you fail to consider is that your proposition will end up with a bunch of voting dupes eating out of other people's hands, so no, you can have people voting without really being active or aware and this is a highly realistic and disastrous outcome. Direct majorities are always unstable due to individual eagerness to endorse concepts without considering the ramifications and due to that tendency to arbitrariness I've been speaking about. After all, what does it cost some chump to log in, do the issues for his nation, then see some TG urging him to support an bill, and cast his vote without thinking because someone bothered to try getting him to do it? This is likely what happens 50% of the time if things went your way.

As for my earlier statements in your program's favor, I was on the wall earlier, but I thought better of it and decided firmly against it. There is no discrepancy.

Miencraft, The New United States

Also, if someone argues that polling the populace on a bill before voting on it will bog the legislature down unnecessarily, I only meant that it could be reserved for exceptional cases of controversial legislation where the consuls are unwilling to decide without consulting the populace. The Constitution already provides for the citizenry to appeal the Court Justice to overturn a law with a 2/3 majority vote anyway.

The New United States

In Auxorii's favor, I think that his ideas on judiciary reorganization are interesting.

Tupolite wrote:Also, if someone argues that polling the populace on a bill before voting on it will bog the legislature down unnecessarily, I only meant that it could be reserved for exceptional cases of controversial legislation where the consuls are unwilling to decide without consulting the populace. The Constitution already provides for the citizenry to appeal the Court Justice to overturn a law with a 2/3 majority vote anyway.

Precisely my point. It’s all up to the Consulate. That’s what all of this is about- legislation passed that effects the entire region should be decided upon by the entire region.

Tupolite wrote:The newly elected consuls' prospects for re-election are contingent upon accurately assessing and representing the public opinion, so yes, it does ensure that the Consulate will not deviate too wildly. If you don't like what the Consulate does in power, there's always the next election.

What I think you fail to consider is that your proposition will end up with a bunch of voting dupes eating out of other people's hands, so no, you can have people voting without really being active or aware and this is a highly realistic and disastrous outcome. Direct majorities are always unstable due to individual eagerness to endorse concepts without considering the ramifications and due to that tendency to arbitrariness I've been speaking about. After all, what does it cost some chump to log in, do the issues for his nation, then see some TG urging him to support an bill, and cast his vote without thinking because someone bothered to try getting him to do it? This is likely what happens 50% of the time if things went your way.

As for my earlier statements in your program's favor, I was on the wall earlier, but I thought better of it and decided firmly against it. There is no discrepancy.

These are all generalizations and assumptions; an easy solution is to only count votes by citizens, this ensures that it’s not just those ‘chumps’ you’re talking about. It’s nations who have taken the time to become citizens.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:Direct democracy in nationstates is also good for corruption. I remember back in my commie years, infiltrating regions and using puppets to control or influence direct votes.

Again, this nonissue is completely solved by only tallying the votes of citizens.

Auxorii wrote:Again, this nonissue is completely solved by only tallying the votes of citizens.

To me, the whole direct democracy question seems like a non-issue. Let's worry about really re-activating the government we have before we start fiddling with the constitution again.

Pevvania, Tupolite

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:Direct democracy in nationstates is also good for corruption. I remember back in my commie years, infiltrating regions and using puppets to control or influence direct votes.

Having a non-direct legislative body would require that someone infiltrating (or trying to illegally increase their voting power) to at least put in enough effort to convince the citizenry to elect them.

The New United States wrote:To me, the whole direct democracy question seems like a non-issue. Let's worry about really re-activating the government we have before we start fiddling with the constitution again.

Yes to both of these

Auxorii wrote:Again, this nonissue is completely solved by only tallying the votes of citizens.

I don't understand how you could not see how precarious that precedent is. If anyone put in the effort to become or control the regional immigration officer, and were careful about the rate of infiltration, he could fraudulently add a swath of puppets to the citizenship list and rig the entire system.

This has happened before, in regions I was a part of. And it was stupidly obvious but others were too inept to do anything about it.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Tupolite wrote:I don't understand how you could not see how precarious that precedent is. If anyone put in the effort to become or control the regional immigration officer, and were careful about the rate of infiltration, he could fraudulently add a swath of puppets to the citizenship list and rig the entire system.

This has happened before, in regions I was a part of. And it was stupidly obvious but others were too inept to do anything about it.

Any government official can be corrupted and could use their position for treason; again, this isn’t an issue with the model of direct democracy.

In fact, I’d argue that it’s way more easy to put a cog in a system where power is held in a small minority. Evidence being my time in the Senate and literally organizing with others on how to vote to screw the system. If you’re really worried about some inside job, why the hell would you concentrate power even more? The obvious solution would be to expand power to more people- they actually can act as a safety net. As in my platform, all impeachments must be approved by a 2/3 democratic majority- meaning the region has to be behind it, not just those in power. The same theory applies to legislation; it should be as many people as possible in the region inputting their say on whether they want to see it implemented for our region or not.

Jadentopian Order

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:You didn't understand what I said. Read again.

I understand completely. The solution is to have a competent citizenship roll.

I am officially supporting the National Liberty Party

Pevvania, The New United States, Skaveria, Tupolite

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Agreement signed with the Taliban, US out within 14 months if conditions are kept. MAGA

Auxorii

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:Such hypocrites.

Who's that, and what do you mean?

The New United States wrote:Agreement signed with the Taliban, US out within 14 months if conditions are kept. MAGA

KAG

Pevvania, The New United States

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

The New United States wrote:Agreement signed with the Taliban, US out within 14 months if conditions are kept. MAGA

Good news... but if I'm being honest, I'm pretty sceptical that the Taliban will stick to this deal. I'm getting 1972 Vietnam peace agreement vibes from this. But if it works out, then fantastic.

However, the point that the US will determine whether to withdraw the rest of its troops in 14 months if the Taliban sticks to the deal is a very good clause and works in our favor.

Miencraft, The New United States

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:The people supporting this today, are mostly the same people who were pissed whenever any of the Democrats proposed something similar. The whole "OMG, Obama talks with terrorists! Traitor!"

No, he didn't talk with terrorists, he just let them free in exchange for deserters

The New United States

Auxorii wrote:This is a pretty easy solution to solve... not have a quorum... as Jaden stated, nobody should be forced to vote either.

I’m not proposing a House of Representatives- just that votes are taken on a direct democratic basis using a first past the post system. Your issue is a nonissue.

I wasn't arguing for or against, I was just relaying our past experience with DD...

That being said, I agree with TNUS that we should have this discussion once we actually get activity up to a decent level.

The New United States

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:The people supporting this today, are mostly the same people who were pissed whenever any of the Democrats proposed something similar. The whole "OMG, Obama talks with terrorists! Traitor!"

This is true; at the same time, the Democratic Party was the anti-war party and now they’re the ones who want to keep the U.S in a perpetual state of war.

Pevvania wrote:I wasn't arguing for or against, I was just relaying our past experience with DD...

That being said, I agree with TNUS that we should have this discussion once we actually get activity up to a decent level.

I think that direct democracy would be a fantastic way to actually increase activity.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Auxorii wrote:This is true; at the same time, the Democratic Party was the anti-war party and now they’re the ones who want to keep the U.S in a perpetual state of war.

I could comment here, but I'm certain that others here can already guess what I would say.

Tupolite wrote:I could comment here, but I'm certain that others here can already guess what I would say.

Well, you did comment, so...

Congratulations to Miri Islands. The consulate elections are now concluded. I am resigning now.

Rateria, Tupolite, Miri Islands

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

To the great people of Libertatem:

I humbly address you to thank you all for putting your faith in my abilities as a leader to guide this region for the next 4 months. Rest assured that I shall be resolute in pursuing the planks of my campaign and will see those goals fulfilled in their entirety, and then some, by the time that my duration is up. I have made many lasting friendships during my time in Libertatem and have come to know many exceptional individuals of high integrity, character, and intelligence. Although I rarely see eye-to-eye with the majority of this regions' populace, due to the diametric opposition of the ideologies of total and minimal government among other issues of nationality, military, culture, economics, gender politics, etc., I will aim to embody not my personally held ideals but those of the majority for the purposes of ordering a more vibrant, dynamic, lively community than the one we have had for the past few years. Let this be a cause for the Bolsheviks to shudder, that a new dawn is upon us, a new age that will call upon every active citizen for his greatest contribution to this fine community!

steps down from the podium

Pevvania, The New United States, Rateria, Skaveria, Kongeriget Island

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

[I]Steps up to podium[/I]

I, too, would like to thank you all for putting your trust and confidence in me to serve in the Consulate. I take this victory as a people's mandate to implement those policies that I have proposed to you all. As Second Consul, I will work tirelessly to re-establish partnerships with our must trusted allies, develop and maintain friendships with new regions, establish a lasting and effective framework for military activity, and re-focus our diplomatic and military policy on prosecuting the War on Communism.

I aim to do my best in carrying out this mandate, alongside Tupolite and Miri, and I ask you all for your support in doing so. Let us all remember the millions upon millions of victims of the communist scourge. Let us all reflect upon those whose blood cries from the ground for vengeance, and let us all set ourselves upon the cause of avenging them of their wicked and perverse butcherers. Let us challenge the red plague wherever it is found and by whatever means available.

Let us lay up in our hearts the memories of the fallen and the principles of anti-communism. Let us bind them upon our hands and set them as a frontlet between the eyes, as did the Children of Israel with the words of their God. May we never forget and may we never falter.

[I]Steps down from podium

Pevvania, Republic Of Minerva, Rateria

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

The New United States wrote:Let us all remember the millions upon millions of victims of the communist scourge. Let us all reflect upon those whose blood cries from the ground for vengeance, and let us all set ourselves upon the cause of avenging them of their wicked and perverse butcherers. Let us challenge the red plague wherever it is found and by whatever means available.

Let us lay up in our hearts the memories of the fallen and the principles of anti-communism. Let us bind them upon our hands and set them as a frontlet between the eyes, as did the Children of Israel with the words of their God. May we never forget and may we never falter.

I support free markets- but it’s ridiculous to wage war on an ideology. Millions upon millions of people have also been enslaved under capitalism and have had their nations pillaged and destroyed by capitalists. Sure, it’s a perversion of what we think of as free market capitalism today, but there’s no denial that in history millions have been enslaved and have died due to capitalism and the greed that inevitably is found within the system.

Even if you’re gonna claim that that wasn’t a pure capitalist system, that’s just the equivalent of what the commies say about their system.

Instead of “waging war on communism” like it’s 1952, why don’t we live the libertarian principles we claim to espouse like freedom of thought?

Rateria, Jadentopian Order, Highway Eighty-Eight

Auxorii wrote:Instead of “waging war on communism” like it’s 1952

Wage war on communism like its 1953!

:dance:

The New United States, Auxorii, Rateria

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.