The Future of Government

[Nervous]

On 11/23/2019 at 8:16 AM, Midsummer Night's Dream said:

 

If they lack the time, why aren't they replaced by those who have the time and can be trusted? I'm sure the OP, if given the opportunity, would step up.

Because they're extremely competent and skilled individuals that have done a massive amount of work so far. They are actively recruiting so feel free to join them to help. 

[Flemwad]

I totally agree that parties need to emulate the real-life atmosphere of politics.  IE. Dems don't support loosening restrictions on guns.  Eager to see how this works out. 

[Nervous]

4 minutes ago, Flemwad said:

I totally agree that parties need to emulate the real-life atmosphere of politics.  IE. Dems don't support loosening restrictions on guns.  Eager to see how this works out. 

There are some things that will not change due to how we have set up the economy anyway, and all parties will have to abide by it. Losing restrictions on guns isn't something that will change ICly, it's OOC bound.

[Justitiae]

That may be the case for loosening restrictions on guns, but it certainly isn't for having strict control on gun laws, which can be done IC'ly by passing the laws/bills required to monitor it. You can always influence, or attempt to influence certain factors IC'ly; it has worked, so I don't see why it wouldn't work here.

Edited December 10, 2019 by Justitiae

[Lloydski]

My experience with the GOV faction has been varied. Being part of PD's public relations I figured I would have seen more of them, but bar the odd question here and there I didn't really interact with them. However afterwards I look a bit further into the faction and I realised the immense amount of foundation work they've been putting in. A lot of people are focussing on the pure roleplay side of it, which is great, but a faction this important and controlling needs to have a lot of work put into it from an OOC and non-public perspective.

 

One of the great things I've learnt and hasn't necessarily been publicised massively is that all of our factions now have proper budgets and whatnot, which means we aren't basically given free reign to spend what we want and instead have to manage our resources. Whilst we are a roleplay server, we are still using game scripts, so we need to make sure that's being managed in tandem.

 

On the topic of parties, it's a shame we don't have too much variation between them. but then this is a small population (of players) who all generally want the same things (legalisation, gun restrictions etc) - so if you actually wanted to win you'd have to pander to at least some of those values. The only problem for me is that there seem to be promises put out there that simply wouldn't be doable for a city-level administration (more specifically the death penalty). I'm not 100% on American government organisation but from my understanding, a city can't override state law.

 

In summary, I honestly think we're at a turning point in terms of the government. I've seen more public-orientated activity and engagement than before and based on what I've been told that's only set to increase. I can't speak for their faction because this is all based purely on my observations, but I have the utmost faith in the current government leadership and their handling of politics in the server. Once the time is right, and only then, should we look at expanding the political scene - because if we overreach and it falls apart, it could have devastating consequences for the entire server.

[Mecovy]

5 minutes ago, Lloydski said:

My experience with the GOV faction has been varied. Being part of PD's public relations I figured I would have seen more of them, but bar the odd question here and there I didn't really interact with them. However afterwards I look a bit further into the faction and I realised the immense amount of foundation work they've been putting in. A lot of people are focussing on the pure roleplay side of it, which is great, but a faction this important and controlling needs to have a lot of work put into it from an OOC and non-public perspective.

 

One of the great things I've learnt and hasn't necessarily been publicised massively is that all of our factions now have proper budgets and whatnot, which means we aren't basically given free reign to spend what we want and instead have to manage our resources. Whilst we are a roleplay server, we are still using game scripts, so we need to make sure that's being managed in tandem.

 

On the topic of parties, it's a shame we don't have too much variation between them. but then this is a small population (of players) who all generally want the same things (legalisation, gun restrictions etc) - so if you actually wanted to win you'd have to pander to at least some of those values. The only problem for me is that there seem to be promises put out there that simply wouldn't be doable for a city-level administration (more specifically the death penalty). I'm not 100% on American government organisation but from my understanding, a city can't override state law.

 

In summary, I honestly think we're at a turning point in terms of the government. I've seen more public-orientated activity and engagement than before and based on what I've been told that's only set to increase. I can't speak for their faction because this is all based purely on my observations, but I have the utmost faith in the current government leadership and their handling of politics in the server. Once the time is right, and only then, should we look at expanding the political scene - because if we overreach and it falls apart, it could have devastating consequences for the entire server.

At least in the way I have my party set up, its not just pandering at the idea of mayor and thats it. With more people in the county, I've set up some of my policies to be geared at State Senators when the day comes that a senate is released. But since my party is elective leadership, and each leader can only run for 6 months before an internal election is held, things may well change from me. 

[Trupiano]

Third parties should not be allowed faction threads. Is it unfair? Yes. But so is the real political system. If you want to see change in a party you should have to do it from with in, not just be allowed to start your own faction because you lean farther left or right then your party.

[Justitiae]

I'm just going to put it out there again, if people don't feel the party they're in aligns with their socio-economic views and values, and they have like-minded individuals who feel the same way, then they can feel free to create their own party as long as it is inspired by an American Party that exists. In the case of the Conservatives, we're inspired by the Constitution Party, which is an American political party before anyone starts calling us a clone of the British party. We're not simply going to coup the Republican or the Democratic leadership because we don't agree with how they run it or because we don't feel the party represents us, that encourages more issues than you can imagine.

 

At the end of the day, everyone has the right to run their party how they wish, this isn't a dictatorship. If Nervous and Faction Management believe that the parties which form are not in violation of the standards they've set, and of the U.S. political system, then we encourage and welcome the formation of more political parties should the need arise.

[Trupiano]

18 minutes ago, Justitiae said:

I'm just going to put it out there again, if people don't feel the party they're in aligns with their socio-economic views and values, and they have like-minded individuals who feel the same way, then they can feel free to create their own party as long as it is inspired by an American Party that exists. In the case of the Conservatives, we're inspired by the Constitution Party, which is an American political party before anyone starts calling us a clone of the British party. We're not simply going to coup the Republican or the Democratic leadership because we don't agree with how they run it or because we don't feel the party represents us, that encourages more issues than you can imagine.

 

At the end of the day, everyone has the right to run their party how they wish, this isn't a dictatorship. If Nervous and Faction Management believe that the parties which form are not in violation of the standards they've set, and of the U.S. political system, then we encourage and welcome the formation of more political parties should the need arise.

Anyone should be able to make a party, not everyone should be allowed to make a thread. There are not 15 major parties in the united states, there are 2.

[Justitiae]

The whole point of a thread is to show the party's policies, their views, their vision and their organisation - and most of all, to show roleplay screens, party news, events, etc. Not allowing them to make one is pretty silly, how else would you expect people to find out information about their party? Think of it as a website or a poster if you will, every party has one.

 

As for party majority, that could be established in the City Council or in the State Senate (if we ever have one); the party with the most number of seats becomes the majority, and the party with the least is the minority. So I don't see a problem with it all.

Edited December 14, 2019 by Justitiae