The Free Spirits

[Furiey]

Sorry, but I have to agree with ravensfire, apathy is more of the reason, it's the same in Civ3 demogame. Questions were asked in the elections and candidates responded. Even if I were unaware of what's going on, if I see someone asking a question I take that as a good example that I can ask my own question and I will do so if I have one.

One thing I have noticed, the Election Office is lost in the Censor's thread, so there is not an obvious place to go (without reading the rules and finding out who is responsible for what) to ask questions about the elections.

 

[Strider]

Our current President is an independent, as is our Minister of Science. I personally voted for both of those individuals, even though they did NOT belong to one of my various POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS.

Yes, but Daveshack and myself have been in this game for a long time. I'm not really worried about losing an election, I honestly don't care one way or the other. Both Daveshack and myself have been here for awhile, we've got pretty large shadows, and it's hard not to notice us, this thread is proof enough of it.

I'm worried about political parties ruining the chance of election for newer players, not for myself. Almost the entire Term 2 election was made up of either DG veterns, or politically-affiliated candidates.

People don't join parties to get elected, they join parties because thats their way of saying "This is what I believe in." This right to assembly is in in of itself one of the most important aspects of any democracy. One vote doesn't make a difference. 50% of the vote makes a difference. Its not that one vote is useless, but that unified votes are what CHOOSE the BEST course in a democracy. And parties are simply a method of unifying ideologies. I personally view voting party for party sake as a very bad thing. And I also believe that in a partyless system, it is more difficult for citizens to join together and enact the will of the people.

So, instead of just coming out and saying what they believe in, people must hide behind a banner? I repeat again, Unity does nothing for us. Uniting together, organizing ourselves, it destroys creative thinking. It makes one mind, one thought. Only through oppisition is our plans and ideas made strong.

But all of this is just one person's view of democracy. What is democracy but a word created and defined by man? Subject to change as different people interpret it since all language and communication varies from one person to another. And all of this coming from a member of the disenfranchised American Libertarian Party. Yes, I feel as though people vote straight dem or rep in elections, and dont even consider my candidates, but without the ability TO ASSEMBLE, I would not have fellow libertarians with which to expand my ideas and work with me to support our ideals. Which is what we vote on. Political Parties to some are defined methods of voting, but I feel that for most demogame players, it is a method of supporting one another with common beliefs because, well, thats who you want to support. You want to support your beliefs, which SOMETIMES manifest in fellow party members. Not always, but more likely then not. Anyway, just one persons rant on the subject, both sides of the fence are ok with me, I would just feel that I naturally have a group of people I agree with and would prefer to work with them and compromise with others than just be thrown into the ring for "Shout the loudest for your cause and hope your heard among 30 voices instead of 4 or 5 distinct voices which can be interpreted"

Coming from someone who is an independent in real life politics also, and will never join any party (much less the two major ones). Shouting usually gets you ignored even more... Real life politics is much of what I don't want to see happen here. The Democrats and Republican parties are just so strong, they can do almost anything they want to.

Wouldn't you prefer having your voice heard, not because of your membership, but because of what your actually saying?

 

[Strider]

Sorry, but I have to agree with ravensfire, apathy is more of the reason, it's the same in Civ3 demogame. Questions were asked in the elections and candidates responded. Even if I were unaware of what's going on, if I see someone asking a question I take that as a good example that I can ask my own question and I will do so if I have one.

One thing I have noticed, the Election Office is lost in the Censor's thread, so there is not an obvious place to go (without reading the rules and finding out who is responsible for what) to ask questions about the elections.

So it's apathy that the large majority of the people who asked questions, were vets carried over from DG3? Why is it mostly the people who's been here for a long time who's asking questions?

Because we've been here for a long time, we know how the process works. So were not overly scared of making a fool of ourselves.

 

[Furiey]

Then carry on asking questions, show by example, maybe they just couldn't think of any questions to ask.

Put a statement in the opening post of the nomination/election thread that says people can ask questions just in case they don't realise.

I really don't think we need yet another law for it, which unless they go and read through the laws they won't find out about anyway.

 

[Strider]

I really don't think we need yet another law for it, which unless they go and read through the laws they won't find out about anyway.

Which goes right back to the citizen group I was planning to open up after the law passed.

 

[Furiey]

But you can have the citizen group without the law, therefore keep it simple, post the group, ask for questions, no need for a law.

 

[Strider]

But you can have the citizen group without the law, therefore keep it simple, post the group, ask for questions, no need for a law.

Yes, but with the law.. it gives us a general guideline for people to look at. It allows us something to cite as a reference, instead of just sounding like your saying "Well, this is an idea I had when I was drunk last night!"

 

[BCLG100]

People new to the game who are going to have the common sense to read the rules and understand them are also going to understand that they can ask questions etc therefore the law is pretty pointless.

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

Why is it mostly the people who's been here for a long time who's asking questions?

Because we've been here for a long time, we know how the process works. So were not overly scared of making a fool of ourselves.

Lots of new people are intimidated by post count; "if they have that many they must be smart". And thus they defer to the old timers. Need to shuck that attitude.

It allows us something to cite as a reference, instead of just sounding like your saying "Well, this is an idea I had when I was drunk last night!"

I do that all the time. It will be nice to have an actual source.

IMHO, I don't think we should get too caught up in the form over function debate. Regardless of whether a law is passed, those who have read this thread should be emboldened to ask questions by the very nature of the discourse here.

The smart candidate will note a comment made by someone and ask "what did you mean by that? thus drawing more info and possibly more support

 

[Strider]

I do that all the time. It will be nice to have an actual source.

Then you understand the purpose of an actual related source to cite. Hell, I could use my DVD manual, but I think people may catch on after awhile.

 

[Nomad Bryce]

So, instead of just coming out and saying what they believe in, people must hide behind a banner? I repeat again, Unity does nothing for us. Uniting together, organizing ourselves, it destroys creative thinking. It makes one mind, one thought. Only through oppisition is our plans and ideas made strong.

That is quite unfair. Joining a party is not hiding behind a banner. I personally consider my political parties as a badge of honor, a shining example of what I believe in. We don't have the time to read EACH AND EVERY persons political ideals. Well at least not all of us. With political parties, people can understand BASIC beliefs at a glance. You may not know what JOJO's political ideas are, but you do know what the Party for Ultimate JOJO stands for, assuming you've read all the parties platforms. And when you do want to know a persons politcal specifics, all you have to do is ask =]. Imagine if you had to explain your basic principles EVERY TIME you met someone new. But with a few simple words Member of the POOPOO Party, people get your gist. Its a way of communicating ideals more efficiently, and acts almost as an introduction to a deeper political discussion. I personally feel that it gives order and momentum to the political scene that stimulates debate and differences, not similarities. No parties just breeds confusion.

As for unification as worthless, I beg to differ. Its not like by parties we mean "THE 1984 PARTY" unification. The one thought one mind state with a super-race. We mean assemblies with a mission. Imagine if Martin Luther King Jr. had not been able to get a unified front. America dissunifed would much rather have remained segregated. Imagine if Mahatma Ghandi had not used unification. Imagine if he tried to change India by himself as an independent. It took millions of indians united in a cause to CHANGE India. Change takes a new idea, and a following to back it. That is the way of democracy in my eyes.

With freedom of speech and freedom to assemble, people are BOUND to dissagree. Its just human nature. So opposition will remain, and therefor continue to breed creative solutions. Creativity will not die with parties.

We can have Unity and Disunity and gain the benfits of both. Perhaps you have heard the famous zen question "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" Each hand represents self and other. When they are seperate, that is when we view the world as myself, and that other person. When we bring the hands together and clap, that is when we make a sound. That is unity of self and other. But if we leave the hands together, the sound ceases. So Self and Other are both different and one. This is the wisest way to have the government. Unity and Disunity. Then our nation will clap.

 

[Strider]

That is quite unfair. Joining a party is not hiding behind a banner. I personally consider my political parties as a badge of honor, a shining example of what I believe in. We don't have the time to read EACH AND EVERY persons political ideals. Well at least not all of us. With political parties, people can understand BASIC beliefs at a glance. You may not know what JOJO's political ideas are, but you do know what the Party for Ultimate JOJO stands for, assuming you've read all the parties platforms. And when you do want to know a persons politcal specifics, all you have to do is ask =]. Imagine if you had to explain your basic principles EVERY TIME you met someone new. But with a few simple words Member of the POOPOO Party, people get your gist. Its a way of communicating ideals more efficiently, and acts almost as an introduction to a deeper political discussion. I personally feel that it gives order and momentum to the political scene that stimulates debate and differences, not similarities. No parties just breeds confusion.

We've had no parties for the 3 to 4 years. This communication of ideals, does little, your introduction starts in the middle of a greater text. This order and momentum creates debate and differences how? It aids the spread of ideas, how? Instead of 30 differant ideas, we have what now? 3 ideas, one for each party?

As for unification as worthless, I beg to differ. Its not like by parties we mean "THE 1984 PARTY" unification. The one thought one mind state with a super-race. We mean assemblies with a mission. Imagine if Martin Luther King Jr. had not been able to get a unified front. America dissunifed would much rather have remained segregated. Imagine if Mahatma Ghandi had not used unification. Imagine if he tried to change India by himself as an independent. It took millions of indians united in a cause to CHANGE India. Change takes a new idea, and a following to back it. That is the way of democracy in my eyes.

Your using real life examples for a game. This is a government of 30, not a government of 200 million. It is possible to be heard without support in a government of 30, it's not possible in a government of 200 million. You do not need a political party in this climate.

With freedom of speech and freedom to assemble, people are BOUND to dissagree. Its just human nature. So opposition will remain, and therefor continue to breed creative solutions. Creativity will not die with parties.

It already has, I opened the science discussion 3 days ago. The only opposition I get is from my own deputy, and thats only because I asked for the opposition. I made my own plan, merely to get discussion started, the goal of the thread is for others to make differant plans (or to modify my own), and to discuss all of them. 3 days.... unopposed.

We can have Unity and Disunity and gain the benfits of both. Perhaps you have heard the famous zen question "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" Each hand represents self and other. When they are seperate, that is when we view the world as myself, and that other person. When we bring the hands together and clap, that is when we make a sound. That is unity of self and other. But if we leave the hands together, the sound ceases. So Self and Other are both different and one. This is the wisest way to have the government. Unity and Disunity. Then our nation will clap.

"Independent liberty creates independent power, and as a nation is just a collection of independents, the nation with the most political independence is the most powerful."

The word liberty means political independence, the act of being free from restraints. It means the right and power to express ones beliefs. By forming political parties, you deny others the power to express themselves.

 

[ravensfire]

It already has, I opened the science discussion 3 days ago. The only opposition I get is from my own deputy, and thats only because I asked for the opposition. I made my own plan, merely to get discussion started, the goal of the thread is for others to make differant plans (or to modify my own), and to discuss all of them. 3 days.... unopposed.

Oh no! One discussion that everyone pretty much agreed upon! Terrible, just terrible. But, ahhh, try reading up on the concept of "Hasty Generalization" - you just fell into that trap.

Please note the city 2 discussion - disagreement there. Shocking, I know, people sometimes are in general agreement, sometimes they aren't.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Strider]

Oh no! One discussion that everyone pretty much agreed upon! Terrible, just terrible. But, ahhh, try reading up on the concept of "Hasty Generalization" - you just fell into that trap.

Please note the city 2 discussion - disagreement there. Shocking, I know, people sometimes are in general agreement, sometimes they aren't.

-- Ravensfire

Wow, it's a disagreement that everyone agreed with. Simply amazing... your logic is just stunning.

 

[ravensfire]

Wow, it's a disagreement that everyone agreed with. Simply amazing... your logic is just stunning.

No, no they didn't. Good try though.

-- Ravensfire

 

[BCLG100]

Wow, it's a disagreement that everyone agreed with. Simply amazing... your logic is just stunning.

Well they didnt-Check the poll.

 

[Strider]

Well they didnt-Check the poll.

Yes... the poll is 22-2. My point still stands.

 

[ravensfire]

And just exactly why was that poll posted again?

Oh yeah, some disagreement ...

Thanks for proving my point, Strider.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Strider]

And just exactly why was that poll posted again?

Oh yeah, some disagreement ...

Thanks for proving my point, Strider.

-- Ravensfire

Systemic defamation

One person disagreed, but everyone (well.. everyone except two people) agreed with that disagreement. If they're making it, then they're pushing it, and they're leading us along.

 

[BCLG100]

Yes... the poll is 22-2. My point still stands.

That still isnt everyone, it is a majority.