Where are the Conservatives and GMs?

[Provolution]

Where are the Conservatives and GMs?

Have all of them left? We really need to shape up this game, or we will see this game die this term. The GMs have a major role to play here, and yet they are not posting in one of the most important parts of the game. Also, where are all the Conservatives? I think that this game may have so many libertarians, that it is virtually impossible to pass non-libertarian measures.

Please bring any thoughts on how to solve this massive problem, without mud-throwing.

 

[Smidgey]

There are a few Conservatives, but they have seemed to have died a little since JohnHSOG left. As for the GM's, I thought they were going to start bringing scenarios before the parliament and the supreme court soon?

 

[Provolution]

More than that, they need to flesh out a minimum of background, I even posted a series of questions. We cannot make a budget out of the blind. If I do not see any activity tomorrow, I will call for a vote for new GMs. Anything is better than non-activity.

 

[The Ninja]

As for the cons, I just checked their forum, and it looks like they are falling apart. Gaius Octavus (I think he quit a while back), is calling for all cons to quit the game to become more involved in such issues in real life. Of course, this is just one person calling for this, but that is the reason why bigdog quit. (If you don't believe me, go view the forum)

The Ninja

 

[downtown]

They pulled the same crap with the last MP...they lost an election, they whined, and they all left. After a few weeks with a bunch of socialists and libtarians agreeing on social issues, the game fell apart.

We have to be really careful, we're at high risk here.

 

[Provolution]

Well, all they see is Road Rules, Marijuana, Alcohol and other minor social issues, vacations, for example. If we had GMs, they could have made such minor issues assumptions, as these issues would not impact the gameworld very much.

For Gaius Octavius, he is just a "grief player", who rather sabotage the game by arguing against it, instead of simply leaving smoothly like John HSOG, which was much more a worthy exit. Then again, if this game should survive, we need more authoritarians on board, and more right-wingers, or this will be a wishy washy sweet Nelson Mandela/Daiai Llama party with free drugs and furry animals.

 

[Zarn]

It is CFC, so the left-wing will eventually join and create a budget that would require 90% of everyone's incomes. This cannot be avoided. I thought for a second, it could. The Right-wing cannot even have a joint candidate, let alone two separate ones for each party. That went out the window, when the ION moved to the left.

The nationalists left well beforehand. The remaining conservatives are disorganized (if there really are any). So, the 1st Quadrant is fairly screwed. The LRP is small, because people who should be in it are in other parties, greatly diminishing the power of the 4th Quadrant. The 2nd Quadrant seems to be non-existent.

This leaves the 3rd Quadrant. Youth often find the 3rd Quadrant ideal, because political parties of this quadrant often try to pretend they support youth in their endeavors. CFC is rather young, so this quadrant will be stuffed with young idealists. There are some more learned people in this quadrant; however, they are easily out numbered.

 

[The Ninja]

First of all, the ION never really, "moved", to the left. The ION is a broad coalition of MPs, and while I personally am center-right, at least one member of my party is leftist. So the ION doesn't really have a single position, but rather a group of people who have a few things in common and banded together so they could have a party with a really cool name.

The Ninja

 

[Smidgey]

Well, all they see is Road Rules, Marijuana, Alcohol and other minor social issues, vacations, for example. If we had GMs, they could have made such minor issues assumptions, as these issues would not impact the gameworld very much.

I don't assume these things to be minor. Alcohol is a huge issue in Western nations and we all are going to have a big debate about how to combat it - my opinion is that liberalisation is the key. Just because you don't find it interesting doesn't mean it is not important.

 

[The Ninja]

Perhaps they are not minor to you, smidgey, but they are minor to people like John HSOG. The cons seemed to want the main in-game issue to be foreign affairs. So to them, we have only done very small scale stuff and are not likely to do anything much bigger in the near future.

Just trying to help everyone understand each other.

The Ninja

 

[Smidgey]

We need the GM's for that. We can't suddenly start doing internation things without really having many international things to respond to.

EDIT: I also find it rather strange to leave before the game has even really gotten into full swing. I also don't see as many bill proposals as I was expecting.

 

[Provolution]

I think the GMs should have followed proactively, not just waiting for everything to be done. They have said several times they would handle this, but almost every single time, nothing has happened. Abgar has done something occasionally, and I am getting to the point that I feel we all are hostages in this.

The game will be in full swing, if the GMs just did their work.

 

[Ball Lightning]

I agree, but the reason why i haven't posted 2 bills is that i need TIME to work them out, and when i had no computer over the weekend as it exploded, it isn't to great, but there'll be more important ones.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Ha ha... I seem to have made a name for myself.

As for the cons, I just checked their forum, and it looks like they are falling apart. Gaius Octavus (I think he quit a while back), is calling for all cons to quit the game to become more involved in such issues in real life. Of course, this is just one person calling for this, but that is the reason why bigdog quit. (If you don't believe me, go view the forum)

The Ninja

For Gaius Octavius, he is just a "grief player", who rather sabotage the game by arguing against it, instead of simply leaving smoothly like John HSOG, which was much more a worthy exit. Then again, if this game should survive, we need more authoritarians on board, and more right-wingers, or this will be a wishy washy sweet Nelson Mandela/Daiai Llama party with free drugs and furry animals.

No, sir, that is an unfair characterization. What I said was limited to the Conservative Party, and I did not spam the board here with pleas for everyone to leave. I left as smoothly as John HSOG, perhaps even with less pomp and publicity. I have not tried to "sabotage" the game for anybody. If I wanted to do that, I could've fabricated some sort of evidence against high-ranking members, as I was a member of the CBI.

What I said was that many players in the game are behaving far too immaturely for my taste, and the game itself has grown too complex. Normally I like complexity, but in this case, there is too much effort for too little gain. If this is to your liking, then I wish you well. I simply don't have the time for anything but casual membership, and that does not appear to be possible anymore.

When I first started this game I, too, wanted to spice it up a bit--you'll recall I proposed a spoof fascist "Nasty" party just to make things funny and interesting. That, IMO, is what is missing: the game has lost a lot of flavor and possibilities. It's become too bogged down with procedure and mundane regulations, and with the departure of most conservatives and certain other factions it is heading in the direction you describe--toward "a wishy washy sweet Nelson Mandela/Daiai Llama party with free drugs and furry animals." I can already get that in OT (and at least there is division there, sometimes); why would I want to continue in a parliament game with the same style?

 

[Provolution]

We actually arranged for a casual game now, with 2 events plus a court case per week. Have a look at the event "Foreign Bases", and you will see some political dilemma you would like. We had a shift of administration here.

 

[The Ninja]

Point taken, I did mispeak in my first post in this thread. I had did not mean that you had done any such thing here at CFC and if you took it to mean that then I sincerly apologize. If I sounded at all accusatory in my post in was because I was conserned that the right wing was dissolving, which would soon spell the end of Civilitas. I too, would like more diversity, why else would I start a ninja party, despite avid critizizms from several people. (Who refered to it as a 'joke party' and called for it's dissolution.) I just wish more people felt the same willingness to start their own party just for the heck of it.

The Ninja

 

[Captain2]

I personally left because there was far too much democracy, I know this is a democracy game but when it gets to the point when we are voting about things like our nations name and population it has gone waaay too far

one post from Equuleus when he was proposing the idea could have fixed all of this democratic bull, our nations name is _____ our population is _____ the ridings are ______, that could have saved us weeks

if we went straight to something interesting I would have kept myself in the game but instead I've seen the downside to too much democratic freedom, some basic things should be dictated

 

[Provolution]

To some extent I agree, if we had a GM that set up the gameworld, there would have been no name polls, population polls and so on. Since the players were left to their own devices, we had to do it all. Even in a NES, the GM has the courtesy to make his own maps and world data.

This did not happen here, which explains why it started out like it did.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Well, if I decide to rejoin, I don't see what party I could join. There are basically no Conservatives anymore.

 

[Provolution]

Well, if I decide to rejoin, I don't see what party I could join. There are basically no Conservatives anymore.

I think you could work something out with Ninja and a few others. You can also PM the Conservative members who are active, and get these aboard. Our goal is to make this game interesting and stimulating to all parties. I would also like some other players to chime in on the choice of Time Pacing (1 term = 1 game years vs 1 term = abstract time).