Title: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on May 28, 2011, 05:16:12 PM Anyone willing to revive this... We'll just do it under the old Antilla name. For now, only established parties, no new creations until it can be feasable. Three main parties:
Social Democratic Party (SDP) - Traditional social democrats who advocate third way positions between right and hard left wings. Favor a "welfare state" but also keeping the capitalist mode of economy with partial intervention. Thought of as the centrist party that promotes "big tent" center-leftism. Popular Movement Party (PMP) - The right leaning conservative party in Antilla. They favor major social intervention to protect traditional values that they hold dear and only minor government interference in the economy. Divided between hawks and doves in military spending policy. Antillan Labor Party (ALP) - The far left party. Generally communistic and communitarian, they have poor relations with both other parties and tend to be lone wolves. Social issues are less important to them than maintaining a solid economic platform. Say 500 parliamentary seats. We simulate whatever ones aren't occupied by players. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 28, 2011, 05:36:50 PM I'd be willing to play, but not with this party system. You've essentially created a center-right party that would alienate most of it's potential supporters on here as well as give the country two left wing parties against one right wing party :)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on May 28, 2011, 05:45:51 PM I'd be willing to play, but not with this party system. You've essentially created a center-right party that would alienate most of it's potential supporters on here as well as give the country two left wing parties against one right wing party :) Yes; I'm not sure why there's always been pressure in the Mock Parliament games to have parties imposed on us. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on May 28, 2011, 06:40:46 PM Reviving it for real this time? I don't like to be teased.
I'm willing to play, but I'd like to know a little bit about the country. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on May 28, 2011, 07:52:24 PM I'd be willing to play, but not with this party system. You've essentially created a center-right party that would alienate most of it's potential supporters on here as well as give the country two left wing parties against one right wing party :) I did that only based on what used to be the Atlas memberships. This place is generally center-left, but hey, I mean I'm good with whatever you guys want to do. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on May 28, 2011, 08:38:52 PM I'd be willing to play, but not with this party system. You've essentially created a center-right party that would alienate most of it's potential supporters on here as well as give the country two left wing parties against one right wing party :) I did that only based on what used to be the Atlas memberships. This place is generally center-left, but hey, I mean I'm good with whatever you guys want to do. I'm willing to roleplay as any ideology, so I'm comfortable joining whichever party is shorthanded, regardless of what kind of party system we use. Still, I think it would be cool if players could create their own parties, and then narrow those parties down to at most five. This will allow players some freedom as to how the parties develop, while still maintaining a bit of realism in that not everyone will be a perfect ideological fit for their party. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on May 28, 2011, 10:14:11 PM Sounds fair. I'm not any good at making maps or anything like that, but if anyone wants to draw up a map, we can sketch a rough history of the country.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on May 28, 2011, 10:28:52 PM Just as long as I get to be the figurehead king and get to give my "royal" assent to every passed act.
:) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on May 28, 2011, 10:29:54 PM Just as long as I get to be the figurehead king and get to give my "royal" assent to every passed act. :) Only if the western half of the state may dominate the game as Prime Minister ;) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Hash on May 29, 2011, 06:26:12 PM I won't participate in any re-start which has parties imposed.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on May 30, 2011, 02:00:44 AM I won't participate in any re-start which has parties imposed. Ok, well at least can ya help with map making or something along those lines? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 30, 2011, 11:57:54 AM I won't participate in any re-start which has parties imposed. Ok, well at least can ya help with map making or something along those lines? I'll indulge in some mapmaking... Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 30, 2011, 12:32:23 PM ()
Here we go. This is based on the real, uninhabited island of St Kilda (but alot bigger) The province/state boundaries are in red, capital cities in pink. The national capital is the biggest city. The island to the north west is a potentially cecessionist island. That's for me and Hash :D Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on May 30, 2011, 12:35:15 PM () Here we go. This is based on the real, uninhabited island of St Kilda (but alot bigger) The province/state boundaries are in red, capital cities in pink. The national capital is the biggest city. The island to the north west is a potentially cecessionist island. That's for me and Hash :D Looks good. Can we have labels? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on May 30, 2011, 12:38:12 PM I'm interested to play along, but I'd prefer parties to be more or less consistent. (Doesn't mean they have to be imposed tho)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 30, 2011, 12:59:35 PM Quote from: His Excellency Chancellor Vazdul, Senator of Bedford Parish Looks good. Can we have labels? I'd be keen on having the island settled by the British...but who knows. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on May 30, 2011, 01:39:00 PM Quote from: His Excellency Chancellor Vazdul, Senator of Bedford Parish Looks good. Can we have labels? I'd be keen on having the island settled by the British...but who knows. I meant labels on the map. Names of provinces, cities, etc. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 30, 2011, 03:03:16 PM Quote from: His Excellency Chancellor Vazdul, Senator of Bedford Parish on May 30, 2011, 01:39:00 PM Quote from: His Excellency Chancellor Vazdul, Senator of Bedford Parish Looks good. Can we have labels? I'd be keen on having the island settled by the British...but who knows. I meant labels on the map. Names of provinces, cities, etc. I don't mind naming them. See what people think Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 30, 2011, 03:46:26 PM ()
Okay. So here's the idea. The nation is a big island in the North Sea between Scotland/England and Norway. As such it was settled by Danes/Norwegians, Scots and the English. The place names are all bastardized. Peterford and Lindsay are 'English', Fiskby, Bronseland and Marksland are 'Danish/Norwegian' and the Island of Pitfarris is 'Scottish'. Of course the nation itself has been independent of all these nations since the 1500's. The old language was a mix of Danish and English but has now been mostly replaced by English. Pitfarris is somewhat more isolated and more independently minded. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on May 30, 2011, 08:02:26 PM Works for me. Let's see what the others think.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on May 31, 2011, 12:42:26 PM Possible Parties
Social Democrat/Socialist Christian Democrat/Conservative Liberal Nationalist (SNP/Plaid etc) for Pitfarris Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Mopsus on May 31, 2011, 01:01:25 PM So, could someone give me a general overview of what this whole thing is about? If so, I'd be interested in participating.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 03, 2011, 12:37:45 PM BUMP! Let's not just talk about getting this started, let's actually do it this time!
So, could someone give me a general overview of what this whole thing is about? If so, I'd be interested in participating. You basically roleplay as a member of Parliament in a fictional country. While all of the details haven't actually been ironed out, we do actually have a map and a little bit of the country's history this time, which is a step further than we've gotten in previous incarnatons. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 03, 2011, 12:43:36 PM I might return to the Forum jsut so I can play this! ;)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 03, 2011, 01:26:53 PM Has there been any decision on the type of electoral system we'll be using? If not, I'd quite like to use the Italian model. ;)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 03, 2011, 01:43:08 PM Has there been any decision on the type of electoral system we'll be using? If not, I'd quite like to use the Italian model. ;) I think we should keep things simple. I suggest a simple form of proportional represenation. I found a website online that will quickly apportion seats using the d'Hondt method. It even allows for setting a threshold that is required for a party to gain seats. http://icon.cat/util/elections (http://icon.cat/util/elections) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 03, 2011, 01:47:39 PM Has there been any decision on the type of electoral system we'll be using? If not, I'd quite like to use the Italian model. ;) I think we should keep things simple. I suggest a simple form of proportional represenation. I found a website online that will quickly apportion seats using the d'Hondt method. It even allows for setting a threshold that is required for a party to gain seats. http://icon.cat/util/elections (http://icon.cat/util/elections) That's actually really cool. :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 09, 2011, 12:49:12 PM Bump...
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on June 10, 2011, 04:37:01 PM That works... Instead of talking, let's do this now... I'm going to open the bio and sign in thread. Wish it all luck.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 10, 2011, 04:43:43 PM That works... Instead of talking, let's do this now... I'm going to open the bio and sign in thread. Wish it all luck. What parties are we using? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on June 10, 2011, 04:53:28 PM That works... Instead of talking, let's do this now... I'm going to open the bio and sign in thread. Wish it all luck. What parties are we using? I just used a generic Social Democratic name, but that can be changed later. I also used the old name as well, but if we want, that can be edited. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 11, 2011, 07:12:00 PM SPEAKER Order! Since there are MPs sitting currently, the floor is open. Motions to recognize? I really wouldn't know where to start. What kind of issues does Antilla face at the moment? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on June 11, 2011, 11:17:29 PM SPEAKER Order! Since there are MPs sitting currently, the floor is open. Motions to recognize? I really wouldn't know where to start. What kind of issues does Antilla face at the moment? Well, a maritime nation, so obviously trade, defense, etc. issus... Say unemployment is 6% and the economy is stagnant, experiencing no growth with whatever the previous government was. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 12, 2011, 02:47:14 PM There seems to be some confusion about where to start in the game, and I think the best way to start is for us to actually form a government.
Personally, I think the best way of doing this would be to put a cap on the amount of players who can join* and once that's full, see who can form the most stable coalition (since I doubt one party will have enough by themselves). Now, I know we want this to be different from Altasia, but I think we at least need a PM in the game. Just my two cents! ;D * I didn't suggest a number since I'm not sure what would be the most viable, any ideas? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Hash on June 12, 2011, 02:58:57 PM The most fun would be a constitutional convention/constituent assembly.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 12, 2011, 03:01:11 PM The most fun would be a constitutional convention/constituent assembly. That would be cool! I can already imagine the Pitfarris Nationalists trying to install a Pitfarris Assembly at every amendment! ;D Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 12, 2011, 06:12:38 PM The most fun would be a constitutional convention/constituent assembly. I'll roll with this. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 14, 2011, 03:29:01 PM Since this is rolling how about the create some details about the "New" revamped Antilla:
Union of Antilla Population: 2,671,897 Capital: St. Marks (pop. 511,384) I have an image in my gallery of where Antilla would be located/size? Its a start? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 15, 2011, 11:32:09 AM Going add some more, let me know what you think (used the link proved for simple PR)
Election results: •SocialDemocrats (37.9%): 190 •Liberal (23.5%): 118 •Cooperative (20.2%): 101 •Nationalist(Pf) (10.8%): 54 •PopularMovement (7.6%): 37 Votes 1551242 of 1867102 (16.9% abstention). Last election saw the defeat of the Liberal / Popular Movement coalition which suffered a backlash due to poor economic management including a failed attempt to privatise BankAntilla (state owned bank), and proposed public sector and spending cuts. The Pitfarris Nationalist won a huge vote on the island, earning for the first time over 50% of the vote (reflected in the 10% nationwide). The relatively new Cooperative Party (created 3yrs ago by dissident leftist SD's and the smaller Green Party (primarily urban) and Agrarian Party(mostly rural)) performed better than expected with a popular former governor as leader and more radical platform; The SDP (the traditionally strongest of the parties) will be tasked with governing, being returned to power after 5yrs in opposition. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 15, 2011, 11:56:17 AM Can I still be king?
(tear). Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 15, 2011, 02:36:30 PM Can I still be king? (tear). I'd actually really like to have a monarchy. Ceremonial, of course. ;) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 15, 2011, 02:59:33 PM Can I still be king? (tear). I'd actually really like to have a monarchy. Ceremonial, of course. ;) Ceremonial monarchy seems proper. So, bullmoose, if you don't mind having absolutely no power whatsoever, I see no reason why you can't be king. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 15, 2011, 07:41:48 PM Im interested in this :)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 15, 2011, 07:45:01 PM Can I still be king? (tear). I'd actually really like to have a monarchy. Ceremonial, of course. ;) Ceremonial monarchy seems proper. So, bullmoose, if you don't mind having absolutely no power whatsoever, I see no reason why you can't be king. I'm totally cool with having the throne speech spoon fed to me for "reading," making Phillipesque gaffes "abroad," giving "my royal assent," and doing all the pomp/circumstance. Leave the real legislating for the real legislators. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 15, 2011, 08:33:50 PM Cool! I'm still not sure where we're starting at on this. Dr. Cynic hasn't said anything in a few days.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 15, 2011, 09:27:36 PM Nice to see this starting up - maybe - again. I know just what sort of character is needed as well...
Wrt to the other thing; no progress likely in the near future (lack of time), but vague ambitions of making it work again. Because for the brief time that it did it was quite good. Enough of that for now though. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 15, 2011, 10:39:23 PM If anyone wants to umm...let me know who I should "invite" to form a government in my name...please let me know.
(Name to be determined), Rex. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 15, 2011, 10:42:52 PM If anyone wants to umm...let me know who I should "invite" to form a government in my name...please let me know. (Name to be determined), Rex. Well, first I think we should lower the size of the Parliament. 500 just seems too large for Antillia. Perhaps 300? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 15, 2011, 10:46:15 PM If anyone wants to umm...let me know who I should "invite" to form a government in my name...please let me know. (Name to be determined), Rex. Well, first I think we should lower the size of the Parliament. 500 just seems too large for Antillia. Perhaps 300? Anyone have a suggestion for my royal name...First Name of course is most important, but if someone wants to do a royal history to come up with my surname that would be...fun (i guess). I would fill in the gaps with stories of debauchery, conspiracy, stupidity etc in order to make you (naturally) question why kings and queens are even necessary in the first place. :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 16, 2011, 06:45:31 AM Just to note that Pitfarris should have a functioning (but non playable) Assembly; similar to Scotland/Wales. The hope is that what goes on in Pitfarris can 'parody' the constitutional struggle about to happen in Scotland :)
Blurb; The Island of Pitfarris is geographically to the west of Antilla. The side of the island facing Pitfarris is extemely mountainous, making accessability difficult. The west of Pitfarris, in which Auldurgh is situated is relatively flat. It was here, that Scottish settlers, under mandate of the King of Scots landed and founded the city of Auldburgh in 1470. In 1468 Pitfarris was pledged by Christian I, in his capacity as king of Norway, as security against the payment of the dowry of his daughter Margaret, betrothed to James III of Scotland. As the money was never paid, the island became subject to the Scottish crown. Pitfarris thrived and boomed after the Union of The Crowns in 1603. Apon the Act of Union in 1707, Pitfarris was detached from Scotland and combined with Antilla to the anger of Pitfarris nationalists ever since. Upon Antillan independence, Pitfarris remained part of the new state. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 16, 2011, 11:25:36 AM Marksland (979,331)
Lindsay (600,348) Pifarris (314,677) Peterford (89,471) Fiskby (23,317) Bronseland (664,753): One of the first regions of Antilla to be settled, first by Norse Vikings who were primarily escaping the strong-man rule of Harald; Due to its more favorable climate and location than Iceland, within the North Sea, Bronseland grew rapidly. The Danish Vikings in what would become Marksland, traded and worked collectively with the Norse rather than war to the benefit of both settlements. Bronseland along with Fiskby and Marksland, were the first regions to unify under the flag of Antilla after seeking greater independence from the Denmark-Norway in 1699. English crown was extended over the entire island after concessions were given to the Antillans in the form of an Island Assembly of Nobles from all regions, and the protection of the Nordansk language (which is still spoken by about 15% of the population. After the 1800 Acts of Union which created the UK, Antilla declined to unite and in 1802 the Union of Antilla was born. Bronseland has long been a region of strength for the left, recently the Cooperative Party has rivaled the SDP for superiority, both receiving over 30% last election; pockets of strength for the Liberals remain in the suburbs of major cities, and the far west wealthier valley border areas with Fiskby and Marksland. Kristiana (312,864) – Grew into the Cultural and Educational centre of Antilla, home to Cultural institutes: the National Theatre Company of Antilla, Hage Museum of History and the Nissen MacAdams National Art Gallery. Three University’s: Settlers University, Kings University, University of Bronseland. Kristiana is home to the largest Dutch, Slavic, Jewish and immigrants from Indochina. A longheld stronghold of the left, the city has been governed almost continuously by the Social Democrats from the 1900’s till 2002, with only one break from 1929-1937 where the Workers Party/Agrarian Party governed under the first Marxist government. In 2002 the Greens won then were reelected under the rebranding as the Cooperative party 3yrs ago. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 16, 2011, 11:30:18 AM (FYI, I'm leaning towards...in the absence of other ideas...calling my character King Ralph...and stylizing him like Goodman...any better ideas?)
Carry on. Will this thing have sort of simulated elections or could each joining member alter the government majority, or lack thereof? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 16, 2011, 11:41:51 AM How would that name be pronounced though?
As for background, I think we might be about to run into the problem of differing versions of our artificial reality crashing into each other. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 16, 2011, 12:09:07 PM How would that name be pronounced though? As for background, I think we might be about to run into the problem of differing versions of our artificial reality crashing into each other. We could go plain old ral-ff. We could spice it up and go rol-ff or the confusing ray-ff. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 16, 2011, 12:13:27 PM with the history/bio i put up there for Bronseland... i tried to make sure i was inline to some degree with the Pitfarris bio...
unless one person creates a generic national/regional bio? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 16, 2011, 12:20:43 PM I was mostly thinking in terms of the population figures.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 16, 2011, 12:24:02 PM Oh, how so? I'm not married to them, and I'm one for continuity :)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 16, 2011, 12:27:04 PM Can I be on the record as being in favour of simulated elections? Playing with 4 or 5 parties that are the same size would just make this Euro-Atlasia.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 16, 2011, 12:36:23 PM Can I be on the record as being in favour of simulated elections? Playing with 4 or 5 parties that are the same size would just make this Euro-Atlasia. How would we simulate? I favor a simulation just not sure how we'd do that. Perhaps a royal commission (ahem me...the king) could form to at least come up with an idea or two if not simulate the thing. "your" king plays no favorites with election winners. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 16, 2011, 12:43:12 PM Presumably with a GM and some dice?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 16, 2011, 12:49:34 PM Presumably with a GM and some dice? Well surely you'd want the numbers sort of reflecting actual membership and the political preferences of the constituency area. Or something like that. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 16, 2011, 12:51:24 PM Presumably with a GM and some dice? Some degree of consistency in results would be nice. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 16, 2011, 12:56:44 PM Oh, sure. Absolutely. You would have other stuff as well, to make sure that there was consistency and all that.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 16, 2011, 01:27:48 PM Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So... Social Democrats - 54 Popular Movement Party* - 31 Liberal Party** - 23 Pitfarris Nationalist Party - 22 Cooperative Party - 14 Independents - 4 National Patriot Party - 2 Which gives us a parliament without a natural majority and with significant representation for a very wide range of interests. *I'm assuming that this is Conservative or Christian Democratic in some way. **I'm assuming that these guys will be fairly right-wing as well. Is everyone OK with Al's proposal? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 16, 2011, 01:29:19 PM Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So... Social Democrats - 54 Popular Movement Party* - 31 Liberal Party** - 23 Pitfarris Nationalist Party - 22 Cooperative Party - 14 Independents - 4 National Patriot Party - 2 Which gives us a parliament without a natural majority and with significant representation for a very wide range of interests. *I'm assuming that this is Conservative or Christian Democratic in some way. **I'm assuming that these guys will be fairly right-wing as well. Is everyone OK with Al's proposal? I am. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Mopsus on June 16, 2011, 01:31:24 PM Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So... Social Democrats - 54 Popular Movement Party* - 31 Liberal Party** - 23 Pitfarris Nationalist Party - 22 Cooperative Party - 14 Independents - 4 National Patriot Party - 2 Which gives us a parliament without a natural majority and with significant representation for a very wide range of interests. *I'm assuming that this is Conservative or Christian Democratic in some way. **I'm assuming that these guys will be fairly right-wing as well. Is everyone OK with Al's proposal? I am. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 16, 2011, 01:33:13 PM BTW, I'm under the opinion that we should make the King (a la Bullmoose) the GM. As all monarchs should be, he won't give any kind of partisan leanings.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Mopsus on June 16, 2011, 01:34:43 PM BTW, I'm under the opinion that we should make the King (a la Bullmoose) the GM. As all monarchs should be, he won't give any kind of partisan leanings. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 16, 2011, 01:38:51 PM BTW, I'm under the opinion that we should make the King (a la Bullmoose) the GM. As all monarchs should be, he won't give any kind of partisan leanings. I third it. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 16, 2011, 01:46:09 PM As GM, I will do my utmost to remain impartial, as the King, I will follow the constitution and convention; however, the character of the King might appear less than impartial on certain issues (I won't act upon those)...but the king is the king, for better or (mostly) worse.
If you catch my drift. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 16, 2011, 03:40:15 PM Marksland (979,331) Lindsay (600,348) Pifarris (314,677) Peterford (89,471) Fiskby (23,317) Bronseland (664,753): One of the first regions of Antilla to be settled, first by Norse Vikings who were primarily escaping the strong-man rule of Harald; Due to its more favorable climate and location than Iceland, within the North Sea, Bronseland grew rapidly. The Danish Vikings in what would become Marksland, traded and worked collectively with the Norse rather than war to the benefit of both settlements. Bronseland along with Fiskby and Marksland, were the first regions to unify under the flag of Antilla after seeking greater independence from the Denmark-Norway in 1699. English crown was extended over the entire island after concessions were given to the Antillans in the form of an Island Assembly of Nobles from all regions, and the protection of the Nordansk language (which is still spoken by about 15% of the population. After the 1800 Acts of Union which created the UK, Antilla declined to unite and in 1802 the Union of Antilla was born. Bronseland has long been a region of strength for the left, recently the Cooperative Party has rivaled the SDP for superiority, both receiving over 30% last election; pockets of strength for the Liberals remain in the suburbs of major cities, and the far west wealthier valley border areas with Fiskby and Marksland. Kristiana (312,864) – Grew into the Cultural and Educational centre of Antilla, home to Cultural institutes: the National Theatre Company of Antilla, Hage Museum of History and the Nissen MacAdams National Art Gallery. Three University’s: Settlers University, Kings University, University of Bronseland. Kristiana is home to the largest Dutch, Slavic, Jewish and immigrants from Indochina. A longheld stronghold of the left, the city has been governed almost continuously by the Social Democrats from the 1900’s till 2002, with only one break from 1929-1937 where the Workers Party/Agrarian Party governed under the first Marxist government. In 2002 the Greens won then were reelected under the rebranding as the Cooperative party 3yrs ago. I think that there should be more parity between the provinces, population-wise. Fiskby in particular is underpopulated, although with 150 members, it is still populous enough that it deserves one seat. However, I think it should have a higher population, simply from a game mechanics perspective, in case more people join the game and want to be from Fiskby. With a total population of roughly 2.7 million, the cube root rule would have the size of the Parliament at about 140 seats. I think 150 is a good number. Using the current population figures for each province and a 150-seat Parliament would give the following apportionments, depending on the method used. D'Hondt or Jefferson: Marksland 55, Bronseland 38, Lindsay 34, Pitfarris 17, Peterford 5, Fiskby 1 Hamilton, Webster, or Huntington-Hill: Marksland 55, Bronseland 37, Lindsay 34, Pitfarris 18, Peterford 5, Fiskby 1 Adams: Marksland 54, Bronsland 37, Lindsay 34, Pitfarris 18, Peterford 5, Fiskby 2 Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 16, 2011, 05:28:40 PM Some random numbers for our parliament... let's say a parliament of 150 seats. This isn't a big country, after all. As for parties... I think we have to have an unclear election result, right? At least to start with. So... Social Democrats - 54 Popular Movement Party* - 31 Liberal Party** - 23 Pitfarris Nationalist Party - 22 Cooperative Party - 14 Independents - 4 National Patriot Party - 2 Which gives us a parliament without a natural majority and with significant representation for a very wide range of interests. *I'm assuming that this is Conservative or Christian Democratic in some way. **I'm assuming that these guys will be fairly right-wing as well. Is everyone OK with Al's proposal? I am. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 16, 2011, 05:44:48 PM Marksland (979,331) Lindsay (600,348) Pifarris (314,677) Peterford (89,471) Fiskby (23,317) Bronseland (664,753): One of the first regions of Antilla to be settled, first by Norse Vikings who were primarily escaping the strong-man rule of Harald; Due to its more favorable climate and location than Iceland, within the North Sea, Bronseland grew rapidly. The Danish Vikings in what would become Marksland, traded and worked collectively with the Norse rather than war to the benefit of both settlements. Bronseland along with Fiskby and Marksland, were the first regions to unify under the flag of Antilla after seeking greater independence from the Denmark-Norway in 1699. English crown was extended over the entire island after concessions were given to the Antillans in the form of an Island Assembly of Nobles from all regions, and the protection of the Nordansk language (which is still spoken by about 15% of the population. After the 1800 Acts of Union which created the UK, Antilla declined to unite and in 1802 the Union of Antilla was born. Bronseland has long been a region of strength for the left, recently the Cooperative Party has rivaled the SDP for superiority, both receiving over 30% last election; pockets of strength for the Liberals remain in the suburbs of major cities, and the far west wealthier valley border areas with Fiskby and Marksland. Kristiana (312,864) – Grew into the Cultural and Educational centre of Antilla, home to Cultural institutes: the National Theatre Company of Antilla, Hage Museum of History and the Nissen MacAdams National Art Gallery. Three University’s: Settlers University, Kings University, University of Bronseland. Kristiana is home to the largest Dutch, Slavic, Jewish and immigrants from Indochina. A longheld stronghold of the left, the city has been governed almost continuously by the Social Democrats from the 1900’s till 2002, with only one break from 1929-1937 where the Workers Party/Agrarian Party governed under the first Marxist government. In 2002 the Greens won then were reelected under the rebranding as the Cooperative party 3yrs ago. I think that there should be more parity between the provinces, population-wise. Fiskby in particular is underpopulated, although with 150 members, it is still populous enough that it deserves one seat. However, I think it should have a higher population, simply from a game mechanics perspective, in case more people join the game and want to be from Fiskby. With a total population of roughly 2.7 million, the cube root rule would have the size of the Parliament at about 140 seats. I think 150 is a good number. Using the current population figures for each province and a 150-seat Parliament would give the following apportionments, depending on the method used. D'Hondt or Jefferson: Marksland 55, Bronseland 38, Lindsay 34, Pitfarris 17, Peterford 5, Fiskby 1 Hamilton, Webster, or Huntington-Hill: Marksland 55, Bronseland 37, Lindsay 34, Pitfarris 18, Peterford 5, Fiskby 1 Adams: Marksland 54, Bronsland 37, Lindsay 34, Pitfarris 18, Peterford 5, Fiskby 2 we could re-allocate some of the population... i'd still like some smaller more rural regions like Fiskby but i see your point, if we move about 200000 to peterford and fiskby that should work... plus the Nationalists can only ever get win as many as 18 seats and we already agreed that they would be at 22. For me 18 makes more sense since its a much smaller island Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Elyski on June 16, 2011, 08:22:47 PM I'm just wondering. Is it too late to join up?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 16, 2011, 10:22:14 PM There's really no reason for the regions to be uniform, particularly if we regard them as being ancient divisions.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 16, 2011, 11:09:41 PM I'm not arguing for uniformity. I just think it would be a good idea for the smallest region to be populous enough to have several MPs, so that multiple players can represent that region if they so choose. That region could still be dominated by rural interests, it would just be a bit more populated.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Smid on June 17, 2011, 12:24:04 AM If I may be so rude as to interupt. I'm not trying to thread-jack or anything, and I'm pretty busy with work, so at this stage I'm not even willing to commit to playing, so feel free to just ignore all of this, it's just a few thoughts I've had.
I think that as the game is focused on the Parliament, the Standing Orders - which dictate the rules by which the Parliament operates - are more important than the actual Constitution. Additionally, as elections will most likely be simulated, the finer details of the electoral method are going to be somewhat less important - so long as the GM knows to make the results somewhat reflective of popular opinion, or create an algorithm that simulates election results. So long as there's sort of an overview to ensure the election results are worked out in a consistent manner, it doesn't particularly matter whether it's FPTP or AV (or PR or anything specifically... I mean, you may want to differentiate between a PR vs Geographic Single Member Electorate model, but if you go with PR, it doesn't really matter if it's PR-STV or D'Hondt, it's more important for the GM to come up with proportionate results that reflect the vote "cast", likewise, if you go with Single Member Electorates, it's more important to look at local areas of political strength for each party, rather than debating the relative virtues of FPTP or AV - unless you do an algorithm to calculate votes in each electorate and then distribute preferences). I've been working a bit on a Parliamentary Electoral Simulation which could probably be adapted. It's a bit different - bicameral, Lower House has single-member electorates using AV, Upper House has multi-member electorates using PR, etc, but I'm happy to try to adapt that if you'd like. Voting intention in that is meant to be a combination of demographic data (using a formula to apportion votes) and a GM possibly nudging the baseline a little, and a slight random element. Anyway, I won't go on about it, since it doesn't relate to this (unless you want me to adapt it). Regarding the matter of Standing Orders and the Procedures of the House: I suggest that each Bill has its own thread. This obviously wouldn't work in Atlasia, where there are numerous regional legislatures, plus a national legislature, plus campaign threads and news threads and all sorts of other things, but with only one Parliament conducting business, Bills will probably not be so numerous as to clutter things up. The Parliament will have to decide rules (Standing Orders) as to how long debate will be open - for example, in many parliaments, debate alternates between Government and Opposition, so two speakers from the Government couldn't speak one after the other. This may not work so well here, as it takes time to type a "speech" and it wouldn't be fair to post, only to find someone from your party has beaten you to it, and your speech needs to be pulled. It probably is reasonable, however, to follow another typical rule in Parliaments, that each MP may only speak once on the Bill (minus questions to the Minister in committee stage, or amendments), as this will mean that people may give greater consideration to what they're typing as their speech. It also would prevent debate raging overly long. Debate could then close and a vote taken on the Bill if no speeches had been made during a 24 hour or 72 hour period. As for votes and things on the floor of the Chamber: Obviously, with 150 seats in Parliament, there will be a fair number of Non-Player Characters. I would suggest that these could be managed by the GM for leadership votes for each party, but when it comes to votes on legislation on Bills, these could be controlled by the Party Leadership (each party could decide exactly how they wish to handle that, but probably the Leader of that party would just control all of them). This would reflect MPs, who, to paraphrase Gilbert and Sullivan "Always voted at their party's call and never thought of thinking for themselves at all..." As the game progresses, some of these NPCs could be broken off from the rest of them, to be controlled by certain MPs within that NPC's party (at the GM's discretion). The GM could favour MPs who make especially good speeches on Bills, who have been involved in the game (sort of as a reward, but really, this shows Parliamentary colleagues over whom they have some degree of influence). This would mean that certain active MPs (players) would have more influence than inactive ones, and that would include leadership ballots. Of course, if a player was a bit of a maverick, who consistently caused headaches for their party leadership and strayed far from the party's ideology, obviously this would be reflected in them losing that influence and the GM would be able to reclaim some of that MP's NPC support (simply being a bit of a maverick probably would more put a cap on how much support/NPCs they could get, but really going against the party is where it could probably start to see their support wane and actually lose NPCs). Simulated elections and rewarding active players by giving them "influence" over a number of NPCs would help prevent the game from heading down the sign-up-friends-so-you-win-the-party-leadership path. Happy to chat about it more, but don't particularly want to get into a firey debate over it, I'm really just floating a couple of ideas to see what people think. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 17, 2011, 12:29:09 AM That's quite generous of you, Smid! You're advice has always been welcome in my book! ;)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 17, 2011, 12:48:56 AM The different voting systems might be beyond my expertise. Perhaps if the King is GM, a special office can be created and filled by a NPC as elections officer. Or we shy away from making the King GM.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Smid on June 17, 2011, 01:04:41 AM The different voting systems might be beyond my expertise. Perhaps if the King is GM, a special office can be created and filled by a NPC as elections officer. Or we shy away from making the King GM. It wouldn't be too difficult for you - we either take the path of setting up a spreadsheet that does the hard work and/or you set the popular vote by party. The d'Hondt website someone posted earlier would apportion the votes using PR once you'd decided on the popular vote. My main point is that we don't have to be overly-scientific with it... I'm more trying to say that we should keep it simple - so I think you'd certainly have no difficulty in GM'ing such a method. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 17, 2011, 06:11:34 AM Oh, now some of those ideas are good.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 17, 2011, 06:13:28 AM I'm not arguing for uniformity. I just think it would be a good idea for the smallest region to be populous enough to have several MPs, so that multiple players can represent that region if they so choose. That region could still be dominated by rural interests, it would just be a bit more populated. I meant uniformity within regions - obviously no one is calling for the regions to be equal in population terms! My point is that if these are ancient divisions of some kind (with the exceptions of the carve-outs for the cities), then there can be significant variation within them. There's also no need for the regions to = the pr constituency boundaries. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 17, 2011, 06:33:51 AM I'm not arguing for uniformity. I just think it would be a good idea for the smallest region to be populous enough to have several MPs, so that multiple players can represent that region if they so choose. That region could still be dominated by rural interests, it would just be a bit more populated. I meant uniformity within regions - obviously no one is calling for the regions to be equal in population terms! My point is that if these are ancient divisions of some kind (with the exceptions of the carve-outs for the cities), then there can be significant variation within them. There's also no need for the regions to = the pr constituency boundaries. I agree. I think at this point, one person or a group of people should 'adopt a region' (preferrably one they are in) and set about creating it's character; it's economy, the sort of people who live there and issues they face. Basically build up each region in order to create a national varied picture. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 17, 2011, 12:00:30 PM If I may butt in without being too late to the party, I think it would be interesting if one party (the Liberals would work best, methinks) were very strong on the outlying island but a clear third on Antillia proper. Presumably in this case it would have a certain nationalist element, which I think would make for an interesting dynamic.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 17, 2011, 01:17:57 PM If I may butt in without being too late to the party, I think it would be interesting if one party (the Liberals would work best, methinks) were very strong on the outlying island but a clear third on Antillia proper. Presumably in this case it would have a certain nationalist element, which I think would make for an interesting dynamic. Pitfarris already has a separate nationalist party. I'm not arguing for uniformity. I just think it would be a good idea for the smallest region to be populous enough to have several MPs, so that multiple players can represent that region if they so choose. That region could still be dominated by rural interests, it would just be a bit more populated. I meant uniformity within regions - obviously no one is calling for the regions to be equal in population terms! My point is that if these are ancient divisions of some kind (with the exceptions of the carve-outs for the cities), then there can be significant variation within them. There's also no need for the regions to = the pr constituency boundaries. I agree. I think at this point, one person or a group of people should 'adopt a region' (preferrably one they are in) and set about creating it's character; it's economy, the sort of people who live there and issues they face. Basically build up each region in order to create a national varied picture. My home region of Bronseland has already been done, but I'm willing to take on another region if that's okay. I'll do Fiskby, since no one is from there yet. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 17, 2011, 01:28:57 PM If I may butt in without being too late to the party, I think it would be interesting if one party (the Liberals would work best, methinks) were very strong on the outlying island but a clear third on Antillia proper. Presumably in this case it would have a certain nationalist element, which I think would make for an interesting dynamic. Pitfarris already has a separate nationalist party. I'm aware. I'm saying it would be more interesting if that nationalist element were instead integrated into one of the main parties. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 17, 2011, 01:42:41 PM If I may butt in without being too late to the party, I think it would be interesting if one party (the Liberals would work best, methinks) were very strong on the outlying island but a clear third on Antillia proper. Presumably in this case it would have a certain nationalist element, which I think would make for an interesting dynamic. Pitfarris already has a separate nationalist party. I'm not arguing for uniformity. I just think it would be a good idea for the smallest region to be populous enough to have several MPs, so that multiple players can represent that region if they so choose. That region could still be dominated by rural interests, it would just be a bit more populated. I meant uniformity within regions - obviously no one is calling for the regions to be equal in population terms! My point is that if these are ancient divisions of some kind (with the exceptions of the carve-outs for the cities), then there can be significant variation within them. There's also no need for the regions to = the pr constituency boundaries. I agree. I think at this point, one person or a group of people should 'adopt a region' (preferrably one they are in) and set about creating it's character; it's economy, the sort of people who live there and issues they face. Basically build up each region in order to create a national varied picture. My home region of Bronseland has already been done, but I'm willing to take on another region if that's okay. I'll do Fiskby, since no one is from there yet. Sent you a message, not sure if it sent? feel free to let me know if you'd like to see anything in the Bronseland details, i'ev already begun to add some deatil to the history and some counties & Cities... your home too so let me know :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on June 17, 2011, 05:16:20 PM Smid, that looks great! ;D
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 17, 2011, 06:26:54 PM Potential Flag
() And one for Pitfarris () Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 17, 2011, 06:50:04 PM Ah, rather pretty. ;)
I like them. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on June 17, 2011, 07:09:08 PM Lovely, afleitch!
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 17, 2011, 07:38:59 PM Potential Flag () And one for Pitfarris () Thats exactly the flag i had planned for Bronseland! esp :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 17, 2011, 08:53:55 PM We need to look at population figures again; the first attempt makes no sense given the map that we have.
Marksland - is on the south of the mainland and contains the largest city by far. But it's not going to dominate. Let's say a population of around 700,000. Of which c. 500,000 is in the Greater St Mark's Area and c. 350,000 within St Mark's city. Which makes it about the same size as Cardiff or Edinburgh, according to measurement chosen. Pitfarris - it's clear that the Pitfarris Question is a big one in terms of the politics of our new nation. Which means that a significant percentage of the population have to live here. Let's say around 450,000, making it the second largest region. Of these around 200,000 are in Auldburgh, making it about the same size as Aberdeen. Bronseland - not sure about this one, but the main city is very close to St Mark's, which would be good for growth. So around 400,000, with about 300,000 in the Greater Kristiana area and about 250,000 in the city itself. Peterford - is an obvious location for a rather grim industrial region with a falling population. Lets say around 350,000 with about 150,000 of these in Fellsands (so roughly the same population as Swansea) and the rest in smaller towns. Lindsay - is an obvious location for our little island's agricultural centre. Again, around 350,000 with about 100,000 of these in Lindsay-on-Sea. Fiskby - the location of Breheim looks industrial, so lets run with that. Similar to Peterford, but a lot smaller. Let's say just 150,000 and only about 30,000 of these in Breheim. This gives us a population of about 2.4 million, of which about 18% would like on an island that has issues with its union and which would almost certainly be significantly over-represented in the Parliament as a result of historic deals. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Control freak and all that. One that can't add up either, probably. But these are only vague proposals. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 17, 2011, 09:03:54 PM Great job, Al!
And I'm on board for anything that increases the size (or representation) of Pitfarris! ;D Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 18, 2011, 09:21:04 AM We need to look at population figures again; the first attempt makes no sense given the map that we have. Marksland - is on the south of the mainland and contains the largest city by far. But it's not going to dominate. Let's say a population of around 700,000. Of which c. 500,000 is in the Greater St Mark's Area and c. 350,000 within St Mark's city. Which makes it about the same size as Cardiff or Edinburgh, according to measurement chosen. Pitfarris - it's clear that the Pitfarris Question is a big one in terms of the politics of our new nation. Which means that a significant percentage of the population have to live here. Let's say around 450,000, making it the second largest region. Of these around 200,000 are in Auldburgh, making it about the same size as Aberdeen. Bronseland - not sure about this one, but the main city is very close to St Mark's, which would be good for growth. So around 400,000, with about 300,000 in the Greater Kristiana area and about 250,000 in the city itself. Peterford - is an obvious location for a rather grim industrial region with a falling population. Lets say around 350,000 with about 150,000 of these in Fellsands (so roughly the same population as Swansea) and the rest in smaller towns. Lindsay - is an obvious location for our little island's agricultural centre. Again, around 350,000 with about 100,000 of these in Lindsay-on-Sea. Fiskby - the location of Breheim looks industrial, so lets run with that. Similar to Peterford, but a lot smaller. Let's say just 150,000 and only about 30,000 of these in Breheim. This gives us a population of about 2.4 million, of which about 18% would like on an island that has issues with its union and which would almost certainly be significantly over-represented in the Parliament as a result of historic deals. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Control freak and all that. One that can't add up either, probably. But these are only vague proposals. I can play with those numbers, im writing up a bio and it only means a few small updates mostly to population figures Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 18, 2011, 09:54:35 AM The issue of the governance of Pitfarris has been mentioned elsewhere; I'm fairly sure that Andrew intended the politics of Pitfarris to be (to an extent) a satire of the politics of contemporary Scotland, so an Assembly of some kind is as a given. Anyway, a proposal for the government structure, more generally:
Island of Pitfarris 1. Island Assembly (ideally a better name that someone else can come up with). 2. The four Counties and the City of Auldburgh. 3. Either very weak municipalities of some kind, or some variant on that weird divisional system Scottish local government used to have. Island of Antillia 1. The five Regions and the five Cities. 2. Districts (in rural areas) and Municipalities (for the towns). Districts would have very little power, municipalities a little bit more. 3. Some form of parish/commune setup. --- All six cities are part of their respective regions for ceremonial and statistical purposes, but for nothing else. They are administratively separate. Pitfarris has its own devolved body because of its separation (culturally, historically and physically) from the mainland. Local power on the island of Antillia would rest at City/Regional level, local power on the island of Pitfarris with its Assembly. This entrenches a sense of divergent political cultures. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 18, 2011, 09:57:29 AM I can play with those numbers, im writing up a bio and it only means a few small updates mostly to population figures What sort of things do you have in mind for the economic base (current and former, if necessary) and settlement structure of Bronseland? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 18, 2011, 10:09:12 AM Should I stylize myself as Ralph, King of Antilla...or Ralph, King of Antilla and Pitfarris?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 18, 2011, 10:13:51 AM So far, counties/towns i have are:
Sorland (North, 50,756) Main Town - Fairhairfjord Vanaheimr (Far North, 50,485) Main Town - Freyjasby - I'm looking at making the topography mountainous in the north here, and thus mining is an old and current industry, fishing is still going to be big, heavily Nordansk speaking. Kystenland (South Coastal east metro, 38,345) Main Town - Kaupangen Aesirheimr (West, west metro, 30,681) Main Town - Godfridham Vikingrlag (Metro, 25,349) Maint Town - Halfdanberg - These will be more like valleys, better farming areas. All southern, metro counties, wealthier, commuter to some degree but farming and sheep hearding are still important but dwindling due to influct of commuter communities. Hvite Dalen (Far West, 11,773) Main Town – St. Olaf - A valley between mountains to the north and south, heavily english, farming. Kristiana - second largest city, royal city, cultural city (3 universities, museums, etc), trying to make it more an opposite of St. Marks which would be the economic and legislative centre of the country. Arts would be huge so i think TV production (home of the state owned network RTA), animation, IT would be new industries thoughts? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 18, 2011, 10:18:16 AM Should I stylize myself as Ralph, King of Antilla...or Ralph, King of Antilla and Pitfarris? Ralph, King of Antilla. Pitfarris is a part of the nation, with only a very limited special statute, I'd say. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 18, 2011, 10:27:24 AM The issue of the governance of Pitfarris has been mentioned elsewhere; I'm fairly sure that Andrew intended the politics of Pitfarris to be (to an extent) a satire of the politics of contemporary Scotland, so an Assembly of some kind is as a given. Anyway, a proposal for the government structure, more generally: Island of Pitfarris 1. Island Assembly (ideally a better name that someone else can come up with). 2. The four Counties and the City of Auldburgh. 3. Either very weak municipalities of some kind, or some variant on that weird divisional system Scottish local government used to have. Island of Antillia 1. The five Regions and the five Cities. 2. Districts (in rural areas) and Municipalities (for the towns). Districts would have very little power, municipalities a little bit more. 3. Some form of parish/commune setup. I was :D I thought it was worth parodying given recent events (though no doubt the Scottish Government will out do it...) and the inability of the UK government (and opposition parties) to deal with the situation. I'm happy with the Island Assembly which would ne unplayable. If people can trust me not to to use it for my advantage, I may assist with annoucing what that Assembly is up to if it affects the Antillian Parliament. The four counties also contain 'burghs'; so yes it's a carryover of the pre-'74 arrangement. Also remember Peterford and Lindsay are essentially 'English' in character. So far, counties/towns i have are: Sorland (North, 50,756) Main Town - Fairhairfjord Vanaheimr (Far North, 50,485) Main Town - Freyjasby - I'm looking at making the topography mountainous in the north here, and thus mining is an old and current industry, fishing is still going to be big, heavily Nordansk speaking. Kystenland (South Coastal east metro, 38,345) Main Town - Kaupangen Aesirheimr (West, west metro, 30,681) Main Town - Godfridham Vikingrlag (Metro, 25,349) Maint Town - Halfdanberg - These will be more like valleys, better farming areas. All southern, metro counties, wealthier, commuter to some degree but farming and sheep hearding are still important but dwindling due to influct of commuter communities. Hvite Dalen (Far West, 11,773) Main Town – St. Olaf - A valley between mountains to the north and south, heavily english, farming. Kristiana - second largest city, royal city, cultural city (3 universities, museums, etc), trying to make it more an opposite of St. Marks which would be the economic and legislative centre of the country. Arts would be huge so i think TV production (home of the state owned network RTA), animation, IT would be new industries thoughts? I quite like that :) It may be helpful for you to 'bastardise' the placenames a bit to make them sound Anglified. So Aesirheimr could be Ashirhammer and Kaupangen could be Copangham etc. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 18, 2011, 11:44:34 AM ()
This is an administrative map. It's been done (a little unrealistically but aesthetically nice) to create either districts/burghs/wards of approx 10,000 people within the county divisions (wards for the cities) The Red and Blue map is a varying map of left v right economics; right wing rural areas, left wing urban areas, middle class bits to the west of cities etc. The Red, Blue and Green map is a 'parity' map'; where if the left block, right block and nationalists would 'win' if they got a third of the vote share each. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Hash on June 18, 2011, 01:05:54 PM It might be more fun and worthwhile for the game if Pitfarris had no assembly yet, and was instead working to get a special devolved arrangement/statute of autonomy.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Barnes on June 18, 2011, 01:23:44 PM It might be more fun and worthwhile for the game if Pitfarris had no assembly yet, and was instead working to get a special devolved arrangement/statute of autonomy. I'd be on board with that. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 18, 2011, 01:59:23 PM The Red, Blue and Green map is a 'parity' map'; where if the left block, right block and nationalists would 'win' if they got a third of the vote share each. Are the liberals to be counted with the right block? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 18, 2011, 02:58:47 PM The Red, Blue and Green map is a 'parity' map'; where if the left block, right block and nationalists would 'win' if they got a third of the vote share each. Are the liberals to be counted with the right block? In all honesty, it's simply hypothetical. The party situation isn't too clear. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 18, 2011, 03:02:47 PM It might be more fun and worthwhile for the game if Pitfarris had no assembly yet, and was instead working to get a special devolved arrangement/statute of autonomy. I'd be concerned that would be bogged down with laws concerning the creation of an assembly that ends up unplayable anyway. I'd be happy with an Assembly with limited powers to start off with; probably even slightly less than Wales was given in 1999. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 18, 2011, 05:56:31 PM Kristiana - second largest city, royal city, cultural city (3 universities, museums, etc), trying to make it more an opposite of St. Marks which would be the economic and legislative centre of the country. Arts would be huge so i think TV production (home of the state owned network RTA), animation, IT would be new industries thoughts? Yeah, I think that works, especially if its supposed to be the place where a New Left party is strongest. Without wanting to change the overall picture, a couple of suggested details; you could make it the former capital (with the switch to St Marks happening because... er... Colonial associations with Kristiana? That kind of thing), say. It's also an obvious location for a resort and there would have been some kind of port there at some point, even if its no longer working. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 18, 2011, 06:53:26 PM () These are traditional divisions and have no relationship whatsover with current population patterns. They will, though, be used as the basis for local government areas within the region. The names are all Marches dialect words, fwiw. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 18, 2011, 06:55:51 PM What are the fonts you've used there?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 18, 2011, 06:59:46 PM The main one is Bell MT. The little bit in the bottom right corner is Cantzley AD1600.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 19, 2011, 01:47:50 PM Kristiana - second largest city, royal city, cultural city (3 universities, museums, etc), trying to make it more an opposite of St. Marks which would be the economic and legislative centre of the country. Arts would be huge so i think TV production (home of the state owned network RTA), animation, IT would be new industries thoughts? Yeah, I think that works, especially if its supposed to be the place where a New Left party is strongest. Without wanting to change the overall picture, a couple of suggested details; you could make it the former capital (with the switch to St Marks happening because... er... Colonial associations with Kristiana? That kind of thing), say. It's also an obvious location for a resort and there would have been some kind of port there at some point, even if its no longer working. Exactly my thoughts... i should stop trying to be a perfectionist and post already... but yes i thought kristiana would have been the first capital of all the more Nordan regions before becoming a more english island... Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 19, 2011, 02:36:27 PM ... trying to post images... i have a topography map in my pictures, just its not posting? can anyone help? :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 19, 2011, 02:38:20 PM Where are you trying to upload it to?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 19, 2011, 03:02:29 PM trying to post it here... from my pictures in my profile... ya still new :P
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 19, 2011, 05:09:49 PM The Red, Blue and Green map is a 'parity' map'; where if the left block, right block and nationalists would 'win' if they got a third of the vote share each. Are the liberals to be counted with the right block? In all honesty, it's simply hypothetical. The party situation isn't too clear. I can try and clear it, let me know if everyone agrees Social Democrats - Third way, centre-left similar to UK Labour party Popular Movement Party - Christian Democratic, centre-right Liberal Party - Europe Liberal, similer to German Free Democrats or Italy s old radicals Pitfarris Nationalist Party - Nationalist, but not sure leaning, probably secondary anyway Cooperative Party - New left-green-left, like Dutch Green Left adn Danish Socialist peoples Independents - 4 National Patriot Party - Like UKIP, right wing, anti-immigrant, pro-business Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 19, 2011, 07:31:47 PM How can I be part of this without being an MP? News Paper? Other function? If we're doing some sort of PR I have a great D'Hondt calculater in Excell, I'd be happy to help with that in some way. ;D
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 19, 2011, 07:32:50 PM How can I be part of this without being an MP? News Paper? Other function? If we're doing some sort of PR I have a great D'Hondt calculater in Excell, I'd be happy to help with that in some way. ;D The man behind the man? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 19, 2011, 07:37:43 PM Local government areas in Peterford:
() Based on the structure of local government in England and Wales before 1974, as hinted at already. Most of the RDs have hardly any inhabitants; the principle exception would be those bordering Fellsands. Dark green areas are detached parts of other RDs. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 19, 2011, 07:39:04 PM How can I be part of this without being an MP? News Paper? Other function? If we're doing some sort of PR I have a great D'Hondt calculater in Excell, I'd be happy to help with that in some way. ;D The man behind the man? You mean Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister's Office? :P () Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 19, 2011, 07:39:38 PM How can I be part of this without being an MP? News Paper? Other function? If we're doing some sort of PR I have a great D'Hondt calculater in Excell, I'd be happy to help with that in some way. ;D I'd be more than happy to have you assist the royal family and assist me should I be given GM responsibilities. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 19, 2011, 07:47:19 PM How can I be part of this without being an MP? News Paper? Other function? If we're doing some sort of PR I have a great D'Hondt calculater in Excell, I'd be happy to help with that in some way. ;D I'd be more than happy to have you assist the royal family and assist me should I be given GM responsibilities. Hmm if you don't feel like being responsible for generating elections, I could be some sort of Indipendant Administrative Election Agency/Pollster. But I'm willing to assist the Crown and the GM in any way his majesty wishes. :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 19, 2011, 08:03:09 PM If someone would like to help me figure out Marksland, it'd be much appreciated.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 19, 2011, 08:13:08 PM You mean Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister's Office? :P () Possibly. That kind of thing though. If someone would like to help me figure out Marksland, it'd be much appreciated. What kind of things would you like... er... figuring out? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 19, 2011, 08:17:14 PM If someone would like to help me figure out Marksland, it'd be much appreciated. Let me help you get started, i would think that Marksland is some what similar to Bronseland but not as Nordic... ive started to write up Bronseland and made note "...The Danish Vikings in what would become Marksland..." So its location being more southerly facing i'd assume the danish to be the first settlers. But since it borders Lindsay, it would be a very mixed Region, where the English and Nordan (name of the scandianavian peoples of Antilla, they speak Nordanks) are pretty even, if not the edge to the english. I put a topographic map in my images, gave it one large mountain, but its mostly coastal good for farming ang fishing... St. Marks, is the Largest city, national capital... i would then assume the centre of business and politics as well, probably more friendly to the Liberals and Popular Movement but would have strong areas for the Social Democrats to do well, maybe one area where the Cooperatives could win.... I'm modelling it as an opposite to Kristiana (being the Royal capital, heavy on the cuture) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 19, 2011, 08:22:11 PM St Marks is almost certainly our main port. With all that that entails.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 19, 2011, 08:35:27 PM How can I be part of this without being an MP? News Paper? Other function? If we're doing some sort of PR I have a great D'Hondt calculater in Excell, I'd be happy to help with that in some way. ;D I'd be more than happy to have you assist the royal family and assist me should I be given GM responsibilities. Hmm if you don't feel like being responsible for generating elections, I could be some sort of Indipendant Administrative Election Agency/Pollster. But I'm willing to assist the Crown and the GM in any way his majesty wishes. :) If the King is also the GM, I would estatic to have someone assist me with elections. You'd be the main guy running them but I'd like to help outside the realm of voting system number crunching. If the GM is a person independent of the crown, I'd still be happy to have you assist me in my "royal duties." Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 20, 2011, 01:26:33 AM If someone would like to help me figure out Marksland, it'd be much appreciated. What kind of things would you like... er... figuring out? Oh, all sorts of things. History, perhaps, or demographics, or the like. Perhaps some of those pretty maps you've made, too. Tommy's had a nice start. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 07:25:11 AM Hope this works...Couple maps, let me know what you think of this topographic map:
() Bronselands Counties, took teh advice and tried to anglo-them up some, but they are mostly old norse based names: () Bronseland Counties (black) and Councils (grey) and which party controls or is the largest party/ Then followed the Pitfarris example and made one which showed which is controlled by the left or right: () Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 20, 2011, 07:40:58 AM Very, very good work. The topography for Pitfarris is spot on too. Really like the political maps too.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 07:59:15 AM Very, very good work. The topography for Pitfarris is spot on too. Really like the political maps too. Thanks! i remember, think it was you Al, that mentioned Pitfarris was mountainous on the eastern coast. Also, it leads me to why Fisky as a small population, since most of the south is very mountainous, i would say Antillas largest mountain perhaps lies there. Bronseland comes across very Nordic feeling, Heavily left in the mountains (mining and isolation breads comunalism at times) area and strong for the right on the coasts Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 20, 2011, 09:57:33 AM Yeah, I love the topographic map. More or less what I would have done as well.
Question about the political map: which parts of Vanaheimr are mining/ex-mining? (I'm presuming metal mining from the description, fwiw). Because if the (presumably sparsely population) western area is, then some justification for the strength of a e new left party with green associations would have to be thought up. Possibly you could make it old Communist territory and make it so that the remains of the old Communist Party (because there would have been one) folded into one of the predecessor parties of the Cooperative Party at some point. Though if that area is just remote and a little odd (perhaps still majority non-English speaking?) then there'd be no need for something as complicated. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 20, 2011, 09:58:05 AM If someone would like to help me figure out Marksland, it'd be much appreciated. What kind of things would you like... er... figuring out? Oh, all sorts of things. History, perhaps, or demographics, or the like. Perhaps some of those pretty maps you've made, too. Tommy's had a nice start. Yeah, I can do that. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 20, 2011, 10:32:03 AM ()
As you can see, a large majority of the population live in the Middling hundred. Which has been spelt incorrectly on the map, but, hey. No. It has two spellings. There. I said so, so it is. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 10:33:53 AM Yeah, I love the topographic map. More or less what I would have done as well. Question about the political map: which parts of Vanaheimr are mining/ex-mining? (I'm presuming metal mining from the description, fwiw). Because if the (presumably sparsely population) western area is, then some justification for the strength of a e new left party with green associations would have to be thought up. Possibly you could make it old Communist territory and make it so that the remains of the old Communist Party (because there would have been one) folded into one of the predecessor parties of the Cooperative Party at some point. Though if that area is just remote and a little odd (perhaps still majority non-English speaking?) then there'd be no need for something as complicated. Thats exactly the idea i was going for, I am looking at copper if that makes sense to everyone, mining and becoming a new base for the oil industry too... The Cooperatives are really this tent for the older, smaller left and green left in the country. Thats why they do best in the far west, more mountainous old commie base... and the closer to the coast you get the more the Social Democrats grow in strength and even Popular Movement.... details coming... soon :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 10:36:05 AM () As you can see, a large majority of the population live in the Middling hundred. Which has been spelt incorrectly on the map, but, hey. No. It has two spellings. There. I said so, so it is. Great map! look forward to hearing more about industries, history and all about Fellsands. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on June 20, 2011, 10:59:21 AM I don't know about you guys, but I'm feeling rather intimidated by the prettiness of the maps generated so far, and thus feel like any contribution on my part would be inferior to what has already been presented :P
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 20, 2011, 11:08:22 AM ()
Decided to take the idea of anglicised Norse words literally. So Wapentakes for what were Hundreds in Peterford, and area names based on Yorkshire dialect words. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 11:10:45 AM I don't know about you guys, but I'm feeling rather intimidated by the prettiness of the maps generated so far, and thus feel like any contribution on my part would be inferior to what has already been presented :P Ilikeverin... i wouldn't worry about it at all! i thought the same thing too and i'm pretty happy how mine turned out and i had a blast making them... go crazy! i'm sure your maps will be great. What region are you working on? Attention to all!! here is my thoughts on where Antilla lies in the North sea (yes now i'm map crazy)So its rather large, Almost the size of scotland, i think the location makes sense for the amount of Nordic influence as its in the middle of their historical shipping and colonizing (or raiding routes). And English/Scottish influence. Thoughts? () Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 20, 2011, 11:25:43 AM I have taken the liberty of composing a list of Atlasian governments so far, introducing 1947 as the date of Independence:
Prime Ministers of Antillia 1947-1948: Stephen Hammsveld (Provisional Unity Government) 1948-1952: Stephen Hammveld (SPP Majority) 1952-1955: Christian Svensson (Liberal-PMP-supported by Independents) 1955-1959: Stephen Hammveld (SPP- Cooperative) 1959-1968: Ian Hollis (Liberal-PMP-NPP) 1968-1977: Duncan MacAdams (SPP Majority, SPP-Cooperative after 1972) 1977-1978: John Ayles (Liberal-PMP-NPP- tolerated by Independents) 1978-1978: Duncan MacAdams (SPP-Cooperative-tolerated by PNP) 1978-1979: Sven Hareveld (Liberal -PMP -tolerated by PNP) 1979-1983: Graham De Soete (Liberal-PMP-NPP) 1983-1985: John Ayles (Liberal-PMP-NPP) 1985-1988: Robert MacDougal (SPP-Cooperative) 1988-1996: James Houtsman (SPP-Cooperative) 1996-2003: Herbert Wanbeck (Liberal-PMP-NPP) 2003-2007: Sven Hareveld (SPP-Liberal) 2007-…: Present government Total (1947-2007): SPP prime minister: 30 years ‘Rightwing’ prime ministers: 30 years Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 11:54:24 AM Nice job, one note:
1985-1988: Robert MacDougal (SPP-Cooperative) 1988-1996: James Houtsman (SPP-Cooperative) - i've made the Cooperatives a newer party then that, formed basically post-2000. BUT they were built by smaller left wing/green parties (merger between Greens, Agrarians, Socialist & Radical and Workers). So maybe this works as a substitute: 1985-1988: Robert MacDougal (SPP-Agrarian-Workers) 1988-1996: James Houtsman (SPP-Green-Agrarian) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on June 20, 2011, 01:41:28 PM I don't know about you guys, but I'm feeling rather intimidated by the prettiness of the maps generated so far, and thus feel like any contribution on my part would be inferior to what has already been presented :P Ilikeverin... i wouldn't worry about it at all! i thought the same thing too and i'm pretty happy how mine turned out and i had a blast making them... go crazy! i'm sure your maps will be great. What region are you working on? None of them; I am too intimidated ;) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on June 20, 2011, 04:36:40 PM I don't know about you guys, but I'm feeling rather intimidated by the prettiness of the maps generated so far, and thus feel like any contribution on my part would be inferior to what has already been presented :P Ilikeverin... i wouldn't worry about it at all! i thought the same thing too and i'm pretty happy how mine turned out and i had a blast making them... go crazy! i'm sure your maps will be great. What region are you working on? None of them; I am too intimidated ;) I know just how you feel. And I offered to do Fiskby! Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 20, 2011, 04:52:34 PM I don't know about you guys, but I'm feeling rather intimidated by the prettiness of the maps generated so far, and thus feel like any contribution on my part would be inferior to what has already been presented :P Ilikeverin... i wouldn't worry about it at all! i thought the same thing too and i'm pretty happy how mine turned out and i had a blast making them... go crazy! i'm sure your maps will be great. What region are you working on? Attention to all!! here is my thoughts on where Antilla lies in the North sea (yes now i'm map crazy)So its rather large, Almost the size of scotland, i think the location makes sense for the amount of Nordic influence as its in the middle of their historical shipping and colonizing (or raiding routes). And English/Scottish influence. Thoughts? () YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, YES :) Thank you. Pitfarris is at the right place to have been gifted to Scotland. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 20, 2011, 06:44:21 PM Hope this works...Couple maps, let me know what you think of this topographic map: () Bronselands Counties, took teh advice and tried to anglo-them up some, but they are mostly old norse based names: () Bronseland Counties (black) and Councils (grey) and which party controls or is the largest party/ Then followed the Pitfarris example and made one which showed which is controlled by the left or right: () Another map, Bronseland has about 20% of the region as a whole who speak Nordansk, mostly in Vanaheimr and Sorland in the north, but pockets in the south and coast. Hvite Dalen in the west and Ashirhammer are heavy english speaking areas. () Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on June 22, 2011, 07:40:49 AM Come on people :) We're almost there. Keep it going.
What else needs to be done? Let's get government structure sorted, but keep the debate going in the Parliament trhead as a taster for the game. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 22, 2011, 11:49:10 AM Another recommendation, a non-partisan commission of you guys (I could help too) could come together and decide what stuff is in effect (our own version of the Magna Carta, any bills regarding an upper chamber/the church if any...things limiting my power, succession acts etc....all that sort of fun stuff) at the start.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 23, 2011, 08:14:33 AM Anyone working on Lindsay? If yes I'd be happy to help, if no I'd love to take it on. I have a special love for agricultural regions.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 23, 2011, 08:44:57 AM GO for it! I've been looking forward to seeing how the most heavily english of Antilla's region is going to turn out.
Also hoping to see some more details about Marksland and Fiskby, my Nordic-brothers-from-another-country so to speak :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 23, 2011, 08:48:28 AM Was going to post some stuff later today, maybe.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 23, 2011, 12:12:38 PM Started making a map of Lindsay. Hope that's alright.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 23, 2011, 12:21:13 PM What sort of names would you be using?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 23, 2011, 12:25:46 PM What sort of names would you be using? More English sounding ones, as Lindsay is the region least influenced by Scandinavia. So far I have: Stagfordshire, New Cumbria, Barleyshire for Counties/Hundreds Stagford, Slatcliff, Eldon, Ralphsburg for settlements Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: bullmoose88 on June 23, 2011, 12:35:57 PM What sort of names would you be using? More English sounding ones, as Lindsay is the region least influenced by Scandinavia. So far I have: Stagfordshire, New Cumbria, Barleyshire for Counties/Hundreds Stagford, Slatcliff, Eldon, Ralphsburg for settlements I am Ralph the First (unfortunate). Dunno how new a settlement Ralphsburg would be. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 23, 2011, 12:37:51 PM Stagfordshire, Like it. Quote New Cumbria Cumbria was only created in 1974. New Cumberland, maybe? Quote Barleyshire Not so bad. Quote for Counties/Haralds Our regions are county equivalents so you want something lower; the traditional subdivision in most of England were called Hundreds (Wards in the far north of England, Wapentakes in much of the Danelaw. In some places there were also Liberties. In Sussex they had... er... Rapes). I actually like the idea of having one of them not given a shire-like name; fits in with the idea of their being multiple Plantations. Although if you're only having three, you could call them Ridings. Quote Stagford, Like. Quote Slatcliff, Would work better with an 'e' on the end: Slatcliffe. Quote Eldon, Like. Quote Ralphsburg for settlements English for burg is bury, so that would be Ralphsbury. If the ralph is based off the name, you could also call it Rafesbury. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 23, 2011, 01:28:28 PM Ah very good, thanks Al :)
Alright, I've made a map of Lindsay with 7 Hundreds besides Lindsay-on-Sea, with one settlement for each. Not sure about all the names yet though. Critisism and suggestions are welcome. 1 Stagfordshire (120 563) - Stagford (41 568) 2 Summerton (102 506) - Aurora (24 340) 3 Barleyshire (89 385) - Rafesbury (33 612) 4 Casterly (52 366) - Eldon (16 202) 5 New Cumberland (50 132) - Not sure, but something with Hill in it (15 607) 6 Not sure (25 214) - Saltcliffe (9 361) 7 Vale of Arn (18 912) - Arnhall (10 512) Lindsay-on-Sea (141 270) I'll post the map once I've got all the names on it. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 23, 2011, 01:38:26 PM Dinhill?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 23, 2011, 01:46:31 PM That would work. What do you think of the other names? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 23, 2011, 01:50:52 PM That would work. What do you think of the other names? They seem fine. You'd have to work out a backstory for 'Aurora' I think, but that wouldn't be hard. For the last Hundred name, one old English (though not Old English) word for salt springs is Wich (or Wych). You could work something around that, maybe? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 23, 2011, 02:24:25 PM ()
Quote You'd have to work out a backstory for 'Aurora' I think, but that wouldn't be hard. I was thinking it might have been a former Queen, or other noble woman who was important for the area. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 25, 2011, 01:57:48 PM ()
Alright, alright. Some of that is seriously cheap. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 25, 2011, 02:07:12 PM Where in St.Marks would the national institutions and Parliament or the University be located?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Хahar 🤔 on June 25, 2011, 02:07:54 PM Parliament is in Castle; it says so on the map.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Insula Dei on June 25, 2011, 02:19:18 PM Parliament is in Castle; it says so on the map. Didn't read the funny letters, sorry. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Hash on June 25, 2011, 02:30:44 PM Any region or something I could do?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 27, 2011, 08:47:37 AM () Alright, alright. Some of that is seriously cheap. Fantastic Map! where would the main port be? are you working on a detailed description of the neighbouhoods/districts you listed for St. Marks? OH and How is St. Marks governed? it said it was typically split between the different warpentahas (sp?)... does that mean the city is divided in how its goverend? which would be a very unique system indeed, could make for good battles and very distictive districts within one city. Or governed as a city united? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 27, 2011, 09:02:20 AM The port would originally have been in Castle borough, but is now in Darside and Northcoates (it would have had to expand as the size of ships increased in the late twentieth century, though it might have done so earlier).
St Marks is governed by a two-tier system. Most local government functions are controlled by the City Council, but there are also be individual Borough Councils that control things like waste disposal and rates (property taxes). The Wapentakes have no local government function anywhere; they're just historical regions that locals have a degree of attachment to. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 27, 2011, 09:03:02 AM Any region or something I could do? Loads to do still. What sort of thing would you like to do? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 27, 2011, 09:08:53 AM Short introductions to Lindsay's hundreds:
Stagfordshire – (120 563) Stagfordshire is located around the river Greenstream. The fertile and rich soil around the river is ideal for agriculture and for centuries English settlers have used the area for farming. Next to farming, the military and the military industry is the most important part of the hundred’s economy, and several military bases are located all over the area. Stagfordshire is also famed for its horse breeding, and horse related sports are very popular among the inhabitants, even if polo especially holds a special place in the heart of many of the residents. Fox-hunting is also popular, and the question over its legality is an important political issue. Inheritance- and property-tax are other important issues as Stagfordshire has a lot of grand old houses and estates and family farms. The population is concentrated to the suburbs and exurbs of Lindsay-on-Sea, as well as the area around the Greenstream. The largest and oldest city is Stagford. Historically it’s been an important military city. The weapon industry is the most prominent one of the city, and the city’s military base employ a lot of people. The city unfortunately was heavily bombed by the Germans during WW2, but most of the city’s old historical buildings have been restored. Stagford is beautifully situated right at the shore of the Greenstream. Summerton – (102 506) Summerton is the second most populous hundred in the region, and the fastest growing one. The beaches and coastal areas of Southern Summerton are considered very beautiful, and have proved to be a popular place to go on vacation, and for rich Antillians to buy summer and retirement houses. This has caused the once small coastal towns to grow at a huge speed and caused property taxes to sky-rocketed. Tourism is understandably the main industry. The Northern parts of the hundred are much more rural, and similar to the rest of the region, being dominated by agriculture. Strawberries are the most popular crop, but a lot of the island’s vegetable production comes from here. Aurora is the largest settlement. The old seaside resort is home of 24 340 people and like most of Southern Summerton it is quickly growing. It was named after Aurora Montgomery-Blackwood, the beloved wife of the city’s founder, Charles Montgomery-Blackwood, the 6th Baron of Lindsay. Barleyshire – (89 385) Barleyshire is often called the little brother of Stagfordshire, and the two hundreds share a lot of similarities. Barleyshire is however much more rural than Stagfordshire, and agriculture is an even more dominating part of the economy. The shire also lacks the military history of its neighbor. Outside of its own boarders it’s mostly famous for the roses which are grown in huge numbers, especially the Lindsay Blue Rose. The city of Rafesbury was once Lindsay’s largest city, and the capital. In the late 18th century however it was overtaken by Lindsay-on-Sea (and then later also by Stagford) something Rafesbury has never been able to accept, and until this day they still have a rivalry with Lindsay-on-Sea. The city is surprisingly industrial for Lindsay and it’s one of the left’s few strong-holds in the entire region. The city centre is dominated by a huge castle which is rumored to be haunted, and many ghost hunters visit yearly. Casterly – (52 366) Casterly is located in the Northern part of Lindsay. It has by far the most religious and conservative population of the region, and probably the whole country. It’s a PMP and PNP strong-hold and social-conservative and Christian values are important. The economy is almost entirely based on agriculture, and as in much of the region farm-subsides is an important issue. The major settlement is Eldon, which is the only place in the hundred where you can find some sort of industry not based on agriculture. According to the latest census it has 16 202 inhabitants. New Cumberland – (50 132) New Cumberland is the hilly and forest covered northern parts of Lindsay. Although farming is an important part of the area, especially the breeding of highland cattle and sheep, the dominant industry has been forestry, and the area export lots of timber the United Kingdom and Southern Europe. The forest industry has made the area more left-wing than the rest of the region, and forest unions were once very strong. Hunting is by far the most popular hobby thanks to the rich wild-life and gun and environmental issues are very important to the population. The largest settlement is Dinhill with 15 607 inhabitants. The city’s church is very old, and is located at the very top of the hill, and the tower can been seen from a very far distance. The main employer in town is a pulp and paper factory, Walton’s Paper INC. But there is also a factory which produces wheels to trains, and a screwdriver factory. Wychingshore – (25 214) Wychingshore differs from most of Lindsay in that the area isn’t very good for farming due to the very salt-rich soil. Historically the main industries of Wychingshore have instead been salt and limestone mining, as well as fishing. The importance of salt and limestone has however decreased greatly in the last hundred years, and few mines still remain open. Instead tourism has become a growing percentage of the hundred’s economy. The area is thought to have some very beautiful nature, and one of the country’s largest national parks can be found in the Northern part of the hundred. Most of the population lives in small towns along the coastline. The biggest settlement is Saltcliffe, which only has 9361 inhabitants. Vale of Arn – (18 912) The Vale of Arn has a bit of a bad reputation. A majority of the hundred’s inhabitants lives in Arnhall, which has little to offer in itself, and is mostly considered a big, boring commuter town to the nearly located Eldon. Arnhall also has the region’s largest unemployment. Outside of the city, the hundred contains mostly small villages, which has a reputation for being very inbreed, isolated and intolerant. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 27, 2011, 09:11:27 AM A summury of Lindsay-on-Sea will be next up. I'm thinking sort of a mix between Norfolk, Virginia and Brighton, England.
EDIT: Contructive critisim on my the above post is very welcome, btw. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on June 27, 2011, 09:17:40 AM You should have some militant agricultural labourers (even if back in the past) somewhere, because they're so much fun :)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 27, 2011, 09:30:20 AM The port would originally have been in Castle borough, but is now in Darside and Northcoates (it would have had to expand as the size of ships increased in the late twentieth century, though it might have done so earlier). St Marks is governed by a two-tier system. Most local government functions are controlled by the City Council, but there are also be individual Borough Councils that control things like waste disposal and rates (property taxes). The Wapentakes have no local government function anywhere; they're just historical regions that locals have a degree of attachment to. Perfect!, i would have choosen Darside and Northcoates too since for some reason i always feel the east side of cities tend to be more industrial and working class. Great, i made Kristiana similar, a city/county council and dividided into 4 Boroughs which have little power. Warpentakes (thank you) again i think might be good national electoral districts, say minimum size of 50,000 people? So for The big 4 (Marksland, Lindsay, Bronseland and Pitfarris) you will have multiple electoral regions that would elect say 7 or 11 members each (might need to look again at those figures back a couple pages). Thoughts? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on June 27, 2011, 09:34:06 AM Short introductions to Lindsay's hundreds: Stagfordshire – (120 563) Stagfordshire is located around the river Greenstream. The fertile and rich soil around the river is ideal for agriculture and for centuries English settlers have used the area for farming. Next to farming, the military and the military industry is the most important part of the hundred’s economy, and several military bases are located all over the area. Stagfordshire is also famed for its horse breeding, and horse related sports are very popular among the inhabitants, even if polo especially holds a special place in the heart of many of the residents. Fox-hunting is also popular, and the question over its legality is an important political issue. Inheritance- and property-tax are other important issues as Stagfordshire has a lot of grand old houses and estates and family farms. The population is concentrated to the suburbs and exurbs of Lindsay-on-Sea, as well as the area around the Greenstream. The largest and oldest city is Stagford. Historically it’s been an important military city. The weapon industry is the most prominent one of the city, and the city’s military base employ a lot of people. The city unfortunately was heavily bombed by the Germans during WW2, but most of the city’s old historical buildings have been restored. Stagford is beautifully situated right at the shore of the Greenstream. Summerton – (102 506) Summerton is the second most populous hundred in the region, and the fastest growing one. The beaches and coastal areas of Southern Summerton are considered very beautiful, and have proved to be a popular place to go on vacation, and for rich Antillians to buy summer and retirement houses. This has caused the once small coastal towns to grow at a huge speed and caused property taxes to sky-rocketed. Tourism is understandably the main industry. The Northern parts of the hundred are much more rural, and similar to the rest of the region, being dominated by agriculture. Strawberries are the most popular crop, but a lot of the island’s vegetable production comes from here. Aurora is the largest settlement. The old seaside resort is home of 24 340 people and like most of Southern Summerton it is quickly growing. It was named after Aurora Montgomery-Blackwood, the beloved wife of the city’s founder, Charles Montgomery-Blackwood, the 6th Baron of Lindsay. Barleyshire – (89 385) Barleyshire is often called the little brother of Stagfordshire, and the two hundreds share a lot of similarities. Barleyshire is however much more rural than Stagfordshire, and agriculture is an even more dominating part of the economy. The shire also lacks the military history of its neighbor. Outside of its own boarders it’s mostly famous for the roses which are grown in huge numbers, especially the Lindsay Blue Rose. The city of Rafesbury was once Lindsay’s largest city, and the capital. In the late 18th century however it was overtaken by Lindsay-on-Sea (and then later also by Stagford) something Rafesbury has never been able to accept, and until this day they still have a rivalry with Lindsay-on-Sea. The city is surprisingly industrial for Lindsay and it’s one of the left’s few strong-holds in the entire region. The city centre is dominated by a huge castle which is rumored to be haunted, and many ghost hunters visit yearly. Casterly – (52 366) Casterly is located in the Northern part of Lindsay. It has by far the most religious and conservative population of the region, and probably the whole country. It’s a PMP and PNP strong-hold and social-conservative and Christian values are important. The economy is almost entirely based on agriculture, and as in much of the region farm-subsides is an important issue. The major settlement is Eldon, which is the only place in the hundred where you can find some sort of industry not based on agriculture. According to the latest census it has 16 202 inhabitants. New Cumberland – (50 132) New Cumberland is the hilly and forest covered northern parts of Lindsay. Although farming is an important part of the area, especially the breeding of highland cattle and sheep, the dominant industry has been forestry, and the area export lots of timber the United Kingdom and Southern Europe. The forest industry has made the area more left-wing than the rest of the region, and forest unions were once very strong. Hunting is by far the most popular hobby thanks to the rich wild-life and gun and environmental issues are very important to the population. The largest settlement is Dinhill with 15 607 inhabitants. The city’s church is very old, and is located at the very top of the hill, and the tower can been seen from a very far distance. The main employer in town is a pulp and paper factory, Walton’s Paper INC. But there is also a factory which produces wheels to trains, and a screwdriver factory. Wychingshore – (25 214) Wychingshore differs from most of Lindsay in that the area isn’t very good for farming due to the very salt-rich soil. Historically the main industries of Wychingshore have instead been salt and limestone mining, as well as fishing. The importance of salt and limestone has however decreased greatly in the last hundred years, and few mines still remain open. Instead tourism has become a growing percentage of the hundred’s economy. The area is thought to have some very beautiful nature, and one of the country’s largest national parks can be found in the Northern part of the hundred. Most of the population lives in small towns along the coastline. The biggest settlement is Saltcliffe, which only has 9361 inhabitants. Vale of Arn – (18 912) The Vale of Arn has a bit of a bad reputation. A majority of the hundred’s inhabitants lives in Arnhall, which has little to offer in itself, and is mostly considered a big, boring commuter town to the nearly located Eldon. Arnhall also has the region’s largest unemployment. Outside of the city, the hundred contains mostly small villages, which has a reputation for being very inbreed, isolated and intolerant. I think that turned out really well, Lindsay has a very english feel to it and i look forward to reading about Lindsay-the-sea. I loved the inbreed area too... every countires needs its "Southern states in the US" or "Nfld in canada"... i can see many a jokes come from that. I do think these region bios should be in the Region Profiles page eh? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 27, 2011, 04:43:29 PM Quote I think that turned out really well, Lindsay has a very english feel to it and i look forward to reading about Lindsay-the-sea. I loved the inbreed area too... every countires needs its "Southern states in the US" or "Nfld in canada"... i can see many a jokes come from that. I do think these region bios should be in the Region Profiles page eh? Thank you Yes we have those inbreed areas in Sweden as well. Rural Blekinge, as well as Västerbotten are big time offenders. There's even an villiage in Blekinge not too far from where my grandparents used to live where they have devoloped their own dialect which is completly different from all other accents in Southern Sweden, because as my grandma used to say: "No one ever moves in and no one ever moves out, they stay there and marry their cousins (and screw their sisters) and it has made them all a little bit strange. I'll post it there right now. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Hash on June 27, 2011, 05:48:21 PM Any region or something I could do? Loads to do still. What sort of thing would you like to do? I wouldn't mind doing profiles, or in lack thereof, some work on electoral sociology. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on July 08, 2011, 07:44:00 PM I went ahead and built a Cooperative Party logo:
() Pink is the party's new official colour, but to pay omage to history of older parties those colours were incorporated into the tree. Orange for the Agrarians and pacifists; Red for the Workers party and the Socialist & Radical; Bright green for the Greens. The Tree was choosen becasue it represents both strength and history but also the environmental aspect of the parties policies. Nordan translation is also encorporated since the parties base is Bronseland and the party is a heavy advocate for its use/preservation. Comments? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Smid on July 08, 2011, 10:25:15 PM Any region or something I could do? Loads to do still. What sort of thing would you like to do? I wouldn't mind doing profiles, or in lack thereof, some work on electoral sociology. I've been doing some work comparing industry and occupation to primary and 2PP votes over here (real life), so happy to assist you with that if you wish. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on October 04, 2012, 05:16:02 PM ... Hey guys, its been over a year... we sure had a falling out :P
who wants to get back into this... we were starting to get some pretty good depth to Antilla :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on October 04, 2012, 07:51:28 PM I'd be all for joining up if it could get organized. I'm not confidant it can be done after the last time it was tried, but I'll help however possible.
I'd suggest carrying over whatever had been accomplished to the new game. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vote UKIP! on October 05, 2012, 09:57:13 AM I would be game if we saw a revival.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on October 05, 2012, 04:21:47 PM I'd certainly be interested in a revival of this.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on October 05, 2012, 05:22:34 PM Glad to see people are up for it...
how abouts do we go reviving from last "parliament session" and committees? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on October 05, 2012, 06:39:38 PM What we could really use is an "event mod," someone to give us issues and stuff to react to. I'm not really good at that sort of thing.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on October 05, 2012, 08:58:03 PM If BK could maybe go through and put a X in the title of all the old threads, to separate them out, it could be helpful.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on October 05, 2012, 09:07:22 PM This one did have potential, so...
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on October 06, 2012, 04:01:13 PM I'd be up for it :)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on October 06, 2012, 04:38:37 PM What we could really use is an "event mod," someone to give us issues and stuff to react to. I'm not really good at that sort of thing. I'd be willing to do that if you guys would all rather be MPs. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario) on October 08, 2012, 12:36:34 AM What we could really use is an "event mod," someone to give us issues and stuff to react to. I'm not really good at that sort of thing. I'd be willing to do that if you guys would all rather be MPs. That works for me, as long as you're willing. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on October 08, 2012, 01:02:11 AM Sure, I'm willing.
Of course we could cycle the job every once in awhile. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on October 08, 2012, 07:06:34 AM sounds fair to me
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: lilTommy on October 31, 2012, 04:21:35 PM Any "event mod" types of issues we could throw out there?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 28, 2013, 07:02:14 AM I'm sad this didn't live longer than it did. :/
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on June 28, 2013, 11:18:25 AM It's just never been able to get off the ground.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Del Tachi on June 28, 2013, 12:55:50 PM Too much competition with Atlasia.
There are some good virtual parliaments located other places on the Interwebs though. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 28, 2013, 03:11:24 PM I am up for a restart.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Del Tachi on June 28, 2013, 03:30:25 PM I am up for a restart. Same here. But I don't really see why this time would be any different. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on June 28, 2013, 03:43:50 PM I would be too, but I'm not going to organize it because I failed at it last time.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 28, 2013, 04:04:25 PM I am up for a restart. Same here. But I don't really see why this time would be any different. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Del Tachi on June 28, 2013, 06:54:06 PM http://www.angelfire.com/oh/qpawn/ (http://www.angelfire.com/oh/qpawn/)
Here's the best active online parliament in town, IMHO. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on June 28, 2013, 10:42:26 PM I wasn't around for the previous attempts to start this game up, but it seems like a really novel idea; one which people took care to think out beforehand. If there is enough interest, I'd love to help get this thing running again.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 28, 2013, 10:45:42 PM I wasn't around for the previous attempts to start this game up, but it seems like a really novel idea; one which people took care to think out beforehand. If there is enough interest, I'd love to help get this thing running again. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on June 28, 2013, 10:55:39 PM I wasn't around for the previous attempts to start this game up, but it seems like a really novel idea; one which people took care to think out beforehand. If there is enough interest, I'd love to help get this thing running again. I'd be open to that. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on June 29, 2013, 02:25:22 AM I wasn't around for the previous attempts to start this game up, but it seems like a really novel idea; one which people took care to think out beforehand. If there is enough interest, I'd love to help get this thing running again. Why, we already have an almost done fictional country for this game? If we want to play in America 2.0 we have Atlasia. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on June 29, 2013, 07:50:02 PM I wasn't around for the previous attempts to start this game up, but it seems like a really novel idea; one which people took care to think out beforehand. If there is enough interest, I'd love to help get this thing running again. Why, we already have an almost done fictional country for this game? If we want to play in America 2.0 we have Atlasia. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Del Tachi on June 29, 2013, 10:43:13 PM Or...we could do a simulation of the Her Royal Majesty's Parliament of the Confederate States of America in the present-day operating under the assumption that the CSA becomes a British dominion shortly after achieving its independence in the American Civil war. Just an idea... :P
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on June 30, 2013, 10:19:10 AM Or...we could do a simulation of the Her Royal Majesty's Parliament of the Confederate States of America in the present-day operating under the assumption that the CSA becomes a British dominion shortly after achieving its independence in the American Civil war. Just an idea... :P This isn't a bad idea either. I am open to any sort of setting, whether it's the U.S.A., hypothetical Confederate States, or the entirely fictional island (Antillia). What we need is something that would be both engaging and bring in enough active players to keep it going. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 02, 2013, 02:12:21 PM So I move we create a Mock Parliament Revival Committee of Correspondence to help bring in new players and get this ball rolling.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Del Tachi on July 02, 2013, 11:14:25 PM So I move we create a Mock Parliament Revival Committee of Correspondence to help bring in new players and get this ball rolling. Good. But what are we doing exactly? A strict re-launch, or are we creating something new? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on July 03, 2013, 11:48:24 AM If there's a desire to do this I'll help out again. I suggest you don't go for a US setting. Indeed it may be better to aim small and perhaps emulate the political system of a small European nation or of the UK/Canada/Australia etc.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 03, 2013, 01:17:30 PM If there's a desire to do this I'll help out again. I suggest you don't go for a US setting. Indeed it may be better to aim small and perhaps emulate the political system of a small European nation or of the UK/Canada/Australia etc. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Sec. of State Superique on July 03, 2013, 03:54:11 PM What about UKatlasia? :P
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 03, 2013, 09:35:50 PM What about UKatlasia? :P Works fine by me. It's a small enough island that we could get enough players to stick with it. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 03, 2013, 10:03:03 PM I'd prefer Australia, as it's a smaller system than the UK, and easier to understand, although either would be fine. We just need something with a preexisting framework that won't be too difficult to follow through with.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on July 03, 2013, 10:31:01 PM I'd prefer Australia, as it's a smaller system than the UK, and easier to understand, although either would be fine. We just need something with a preexisting framework that won't be too difficult to follow through with. Honestly, after signing up for every single reboot of Antillia, building off the template of a pre-existing country sounds great. Sure! Australia might work. Or New Zealand? Or maybe we could pick some obscure country with an interesting history. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 04, 2013, 01:11:35 AM I wasn't around for the earlier attempts at revival, but it sounds as though creating a fictional country from scratch is a little difficult. I'm obviously a bit biased, but I think a mock Australian Parliament could work well, potentially responding to real-time, real world events impacting Australia. The country's political landscape is pretty simple and for easier management we could hold elections with PR rather than a Westminster System. How many people would be interested in an Australian reboot?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 04, 2013, 02:51:34 AM I wasn't around for the earlier attempts at revival, but it sounds as though creating a fictional country from scratch is a little difficult. I'm obviously a bit biased, but I think a mock Australian Parliament could work well, potentially responding to real-time, real world events impacting Australia. The country's political landscape is pretty simple and for easier management we could hold elections with PR rather than a Westminster System. How many people would be interested in an Australian reboot? Probably won't be elections. There never were in Mock Parliament, it was more a government simulation than an electoral one. We also never really had enough people to do elections anyway and when someone is out, what could they do in Parliament? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 04, 2013, 04:36:53 AM I wasn't around for the earlier attempts at revival, but it sounds as though creating a fictional country from scratch is a little difficult. I'm obviously a bit biased, but I think a mock Australian Parliament could work well, potentially responding to real-time, real world events impacting Australia. The country's political landscape is pretty simple and for easier management we could hold elections with PR. How many people would be interested in an Australian reboot? Probably won't be elections. There never were in Mock Parliament, it was more a government simulation than an electoral one. We also never really had enough people to do elections anyway and when someone is out, what could they do in Parliament? That's fair enough, it's probably something worth discussing though if we can get this off the ground and more people are involved. If we did do elections, they'd presumably be quite regular (every three/six months?), and would be roughly simulated rather than entirely based on raw voting. If they were close together people wouldn't have to wait that long if they lost their seats. And if we are using a Westminster system, time outside of parliament could be spent campaigning for their party's pre-selection for seats, lobbying parliament or even assisting the GM in managing the elections on the side. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 04, 2013, 12:31:11 PM I'd start it based on Australia, with 15 fully committed original players given specific roles to choose from, and then add more in as necessary.
Speaker, also gamerunner PM OL DPM, plus ministry SOL, plus ministry Treasurer STres FA, Defence and Trade SFA, Defence and Trade AG + Immigration SAG +Immi Health and Community Services SHealth and CS "Infrastructure" (Comms, Transport, Housing etc.) SInf Enviro, Resources, Water etc. SEnviro The DOL and DPM choose one of the ministries in addition to their role. Anyone else is a backbencher, and can be promoted to a ministry if someone steps out. Once we have fifteen committed players and the game has been running for a while, we can broaden the frontbenches and the process a bit, and maybe bring in the Greens, and separate the coalition into Libs and Nats, etc. The Speaker is basically the GM. I'd also suggest people take on a specific electorate, and then the Speaker runs a mock election in which our players win their seats but people don't know who'll end up governing until the game starts. So, say, I signed up for the seat of Jagajaga, I could reasonably assume I'd be Labor and win my seat, but have no idea if I'd be governing or not. If I wanted to be flexible about the party I was representing but definitely wanted to be in government, I'd likely choose Eden-Monaro. If I wanted to be coalition, maybe something like Durack or Berowra. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 04, 2013, 01:04:22 PM We could always form our own parties and place summaries into a thread with a poll in the individual politics section to attract more players and get more votes, and award seats based on PR from the results.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 04, 2013, 02:14:22 PM I'd rather we formed our own parties rather than something so grounded in real life. I have no problem with being realistic, but I think it being so realistic will put people off who can't see themselves in the Labor or Liberal Parties of Australia.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Donerail on July 04, 2013, 02:55:35 PM I'd be interested in doing this.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 04, 2013, 02:57:00 PM The thing is, we've tried that many times now. I think giving people a firm starting point and then going from there is better tan trying to create everything from scratch. People can and will and should act independently from exactly how the parties act, but if they want to be themselves they should go to Atlasia. In this concept, the focus should, I believe, be on playing a character in a parliament.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on July 04, 2013, 03:34:28 PM If we base this on Australia, does that mean we can change Prime Minister every week. ;)
The thing is, we've tried that many times now. I think giving people a firm starting point and then going from there is better tan trying to create everything from scratch. People can and will and should act independently from exactly how the parties act, but if they want to be themselves they should go to Atlasia. In this concept, the focus should, I believe, be on playing a character in a parliament. I agree with you that this should be more of a RPG where you play a character, not yourself, but it'd still be more fun (in my mind) with different parties, and if we're going to use real life parties, we should really go for a country with a bit more political diversity, and preferably PR. In that case I think New Zealand would be preferable. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on July 04, 2013, 04:02:15 PM How about Luxembourg? Seriously.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 04, 2013, 07:59:03 PM I'd start it based on Australia, with 15 fully committed original players given specific roles to choose from, and then add more in as necessary. Speaker, also gamerunner PM OL DPM, plus ministry SOL, plus ministry Treasurer STres FA, Defence and Trade SFA, Defence and Trade AG + Immigration SAG +Immi Health and Community Services SHealth and CS "Infrastructure" (Comms, Transport, Housing etc.) SInf Enviro, Resources, Water etc. SEnviro The DOL and DPM choose one of the ministries in addition to their role. Anyone else is a backbencher, and can be promoted to a ministry if someone steps out. Once we have fifteen committed players and the game has been running for a while, we can broaden the frontbenches and the process a bit, and maybe bring in the Greens, and separate the coalition into Libs and Nats, etc. The Speaker is basically the GM. I'd also suggest people take on a specific electorate, and then the Speaker runs a mock election in which our players win their seats but people don't know who'll end up governing until the game starts. So, say, I signed up for the seat of Jagajaga, I could reasonably assume I'd be Labor and win my seat, but have no idea if I'd be governing or not. If I wanted to be flexible about the party I was representing but definitely wanted to be in government, I'd likely choose Eden-Monaro. If I wanted to be coalition, maybe something like Durack or Berowra. It all depends on whether we had enough players or not, but why not have players (who have been specifically pre-selected by a party) run against eachother in each individual seat (obviously not all 150, maybe 20-25 to start with?) and the Speaker/GM can simulate the election on a seat-to-seat basis with swing etc. It adds the whole pre-selection dynamic to the game as Party members compete for pre-selection in safer seats and so on, and so long as we held elections reasonably close together, people who lose an individual seat contest wouldn't be out for long and could potentially contribute as a lobbyist or in assisting the Speaker. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 04, 2013, 08:17:07 PM See, I don't like the idea of an RPG knocking a player's character out after they'd already established one and then forcing them to wait around to make a comeback. If I created a character, putting time and effort into that character, I wouldn't want to lose that character on someone else's whim....
I'd rather have NPC elections and then we can simulate as a government or opposition party until the next elections and let individual players decide (privately consulting with the Speaker\GM) if they want to lose and start over... I don't want it to end up like Atlasia where you're just sitting around doing nothing if you're not in office or anything... Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 04, 2013, 09:01:52 PM I'm far from wedded to the idea of it being Australia, I suspect I'd have more fun if it was a country I knew less about. But with so many Aussies interested, Australia does afford us a strong base start in terms of understanding the system.
Perhaps if we start with everyone being guaranteed to win their seat, but still have an election campaign, so people will be able to choose their party and seat but not know if they'll be governing or not? I really do think having specific roles at the start is necessary though. I've been around for each reboot, and the things that kills the game are this: 1. Complexity - nobody understands the system except Xahar ;D 2. Lack of things to do. 3. Everyone creating their own party and/or faction. I think, to start off with, choosing an existing country and system lessens the complexity around set-up. As much fun as I have had previously with creating the constitution and the history etc., it takes up the whole start and by the time it's done, interest has waned. I also think making sure everyone has a responsibility and they know what it is is a necessary move first up, so having 15 defined roles (possibly too many, because we need to have basically every one of them be an active and engaged person) to start us off with is probably a good thing. These roles can change over time, and others can be created or folded out, but we should aim to have the game established before too much tinkering. To do a parliament realistically that follows the Westminster model, people can't go running around creating parties and swapping across the floor etc. Strict adherence to the party whip is necessary, I believe. In all these reboots, the thing that has done the most damage to keeping the game going is everyone creating a new party, or splintering from one, or crossing to the other side, etc.; something which very, very rarely happens in real life. We shouldn't be aiming to look like Italy. Obviously if the idea doesn't have support, it won't go ahead, but I really do think we should aim to adopt the simple, clear, two-party westminster-inspired model of the Australian HoR, with 7 frontbenchers on each side, a speaker, and then backbenchers. Maybe there's a Green or an independent, but there shouldn't be more than one crossbencher, and they shouldn't have the balance of power unless parliament is hung. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 04, 2013, 09:11:21 PM See, I think that would be a fair compromise. Everyone gets a seat, we have a campaign and then an election where we find out who is the government and who is opposition, keeping the changes between NPCs (unless a player wishes)...
I'd also support a two or three party system at least to start before we pick up more players. Obviously if a player defies a whip in the Westminster system, they are punished for it and I think this should also be the case here. If everyone is set on Australia, I won't object to that. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 04, 2013, 10:22:04 PM That sounds good Platypus. In order to keep things in line with a Westminster System, with strict adherence to party whips, we could just adopt the real life measures used by the ALP and Coalition if a party member defies a vote: in the ALP, expulsion from the party (and in this game's format, that'd essentially make a return to parliament at the next simulated election impossible, at least as a Labor candidate) and for the Coalition people can vote against their party but must resign from the ministry (obviously this means backbenchers can vote against their party with limited consequences).
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Del Tachi on July 04, 2013, 10:38:03 PM I just wanted to reconfirm my interest and make known that I would be a committed player of mock parliament.
I do like the way the discussion is heading, a more RPG-style game would be appreciated and there should be strict penalties for crossing the party line as there are in actual Westminster systems. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 05, 2013, 01:24:28 AM Australia sounds good to me. I think a two-three party system is also good to me, and when we get more players, we can always have more parties.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on July 05, 2013, 09:07:12 AM Problem with Australia (and the UK for that matter) is that the party choices are like choosing between sh-t and sh-te ;) I think it would be fair to adopt that Australian model but not necessarily their party system having a left of center Labour or Social Democratic party, a centre-right Conservative party and a centrist Liberal Party and a few others.
The reson why small parties and party 'blocs' are beneficial in a simulation game rather than in an election game (like Atlasia) is that if Party A defeats Party B with a majority, then all the Party A players vote yes and all the Party B players vote no because if they don't do either, they are whipped. That's essentially all that will happen; almost every piece of legislation proposed by the party in power will pass in some form. A multi party system with voting blocs makes things more interesting (and more stable) in a government sim. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 05, 2013, 09:51:54 AM That's very true, Afleitch. How about a three party system, with two large parties- the ALP and the Coalition- but also a slightly smaller, fictional centrist party with lax voting restrictions on their members.
And simulated elections could always be made to result in a hung parliament, where one of the ALP/Coalition has to negotiate to form a minority government, and has to convince the centrists in order to pass legislation. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 05, 2013, 09:59:57 AM We could take Afleitch's idea of having a multi-party system into account by further differentiating the current parties of Australia (right now, as he pointed out, it's a boring two party system in which both options are not too dissimilar from each other).
Here's my proposal- Major Parties Australian Labor Party- Social Democracy Liberal Party of Australia- Classical Liberalism National Party of Australia- Conservatism Minor Party Australian Greens- Environmentalism Any others The permanent Coalition wouldn't need to exist here, as the Liberals and Nationals would be very different organizations under the system. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 05, 2013, 10:03:07 AM Hmm, atm I think three parties, keeping it simple, would work best. How about:
Labor- Essentially the same as the real-life ALP, centre-left but with the Catholic Right Faction still prevalent. In this mock parliament typically holding around 40% of the seats (though this fluctuates around simulated elections). Strict voting restrictions where MPs are expelled from the party for not voting along party lines. Liberal/National Coalition- Larhely socially and fiscally conservative, but influenced by the agrarian socialist policies of the Nationals, just like in real life. Again holding somewhere around 40% of seats in the mock parliament, fluctuating around election results. Strict voting restrictions by the ALP, but backbenchers are allowed to cross the floor, like in the real-life coalition. Moderate- Fictional, obviously. Economic pragmatists, social progressives (somewhat like the Lib Dems in the UK, or the old Australian Democrats). Typically holding around 20% of mock parliament's seats. Less restricted voting for MPs. Basically, this mean all bills require actual debate and compromise, and a minority government will always be in power. It also adds the potential for votes of no confidence in the government etc. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 05, 2013, 10:23:05 AM But it also ensures the moderates basically govern.
If not two parties, then 5, two with about 30-35% support, 3 with between 10-15% support. Labor, Liberals, Nationals, Greens, Moderates. I still prefer two parties for the opening stages. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 05, 2013, 10:28:47 AM But it also ensures the moderates basically govern. If not two parties, then 5, two with about 30-35% support, 3 with between 10-15% support. Labor, Liberals, Nationals, Greens, Moderates. I still prefer two parties for the opening stages. I'd be happy with that, though I'd say (if interest is high enough) start with all 5 parties. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 05, 2013, 02:45:02 PM But it also ensures the moderates basically govern. If not two parties, then 5, two with about 30-35% support, 3 with between 10-15% support. Labor, Liberals, Nationals, Greens, Moderates. I still prefer two parties for the opening stages. I'd be happy with that, though I'd say (if interest is high enough) start with all 5 parties. Moderate is a terrible name for a party though. Why not just use the generic Democrats term like the old Aussie Democrats? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on July 05, 2013, 04:21:35 PM Seems fair. Though are we playing Australia or an Australia clone? We could have a fantasy southern hemisphere island or something that's basically Australia in everything but name.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 05, 2013, 07:38:12 PM Seems fair. Though are we playing Australia or an Australia clone? We could have a fantasy southern hemisphere island or something that's basically Australia in everything but name. Whatever anyone wants. Personally, maybe we should play as an Australia clone so we don't get too hemmed into particular aspects of Aussie politics... Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 05, 2013, 10:18:03 PM "Australasia", perhaps, with everything like Australia systemically, but over the two nations, and with seven parties:
PRP - Progressive Reform Party (Aus. and NZ Labo(u)r parties) 40% ACA - Australasian Conservative Alliance (Aus. Libs, NZ Nats) 35% AG - Australasian Greens (Aus and NZ Greens) 5% AP - Agrarian Party (Aus Nats, also support in rural NZ) 5% NZIP - NZ Independence Party (Centrist NZ separatists) 5% LP - Labour Party (Populist, Australia focused, anti-immigration One Nation clone) 5% TP - Tasmania Party (Work with anyone, vaguely left, control all Tassie seats with huge margins, kind of like PQ on steroids) 5% But I still prefer two parties :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 06, 2013, 12:57:38 AM That seven party system actually sounds really cool, with NZ and Tassie spicing things up. As long as there are people willing to play as Tasmanian separatists, or as One Nation crazies, then that could be really good. Not sure about how many people are interested, but maybe we could start with a twenty-person parliament or something (obviously we can expand at every election sim) so we'd only need one person representing each of the minor parties. Anyway, I threw together some logos for those parties for fun:
() Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 06, 2013, 01:28:43 AM I like them, but I'd switch Agrarian to a triangle and maybe ochre-coloured, add the fifth star for Labour, and do something quite different for the Progs, maybe something like this:
() ...but nicer :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on July 06, 2013, 12:34:08 PM What would make most sense would be two parties to start with, but to allow for the possibility of party splits and new political forces, etc.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: afleitch on July 06, 2013, 12:48:12 PM Ironically I'd end up in Labor.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 08, 2013, 09:46:00 PM OK, I think I've made my hidden point. The second we get too creative and detailed, people tune out.
Two parties, existing system, set roles, move on from there :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 09, 2013, 12:55:40 PM So how do we get this started then? Is there anyone willing to play Speaker (Game Moderator?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 09, 2013, 01:52:39 PM I think first we should open up a register thread where we claim our parties and constituencies and character names. Then we have party leadership elections before we can actually start a parliament.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 09, 2013, 09:33:12 PM Yeah it seems as thought it might be best to start with just two parties, but in the future I really think we should try and expand towards a multi-party system.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 10, 2013, 12:34:55 AM So should we set up the party room threads etc?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 10, 2013, 01:01:59 AM Yes, do so.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on July 10, 2013, 07:11:19 AM So if the ALP is one of the parties, the other should be the Liberal National Party of Australia. (To keep things simple the Coalition should have merged just as in Queensland, creating a single united party.)
Anyone against? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 10, 2013, 08:05:30 AM I think that's the best idea, Swedish Cheese, since there's no need for separate National, Liberal, LNP, and Country Liberal parties this early in the game.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 10, 2013, 08:52:40 AM Yep sounds good Swedish Cheese; are there any conservatives willing to start up the LNP Caucus then?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on July 10, 2013, 05:08:15 PM Yep sounds good Swedish Cheese; are there any conservatives willing to start up the LNP Caucus then? I will. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 10, 2013, 11:50:43 PM OK, I'm thinking this is a go, but just backtracking a bit ;)
Two major parties, one left, one right. Name ideas? I'm thinking Reformist Labour Party and Australian Conservative Alliance, but it doesn't particularly matter to me. Proposed seats: Left (68) WA (3) Brand Fremantle Perth SA (6) Adelaide Hindmarsh Kingston Makin Port Adelaide Wakefield QLD (8) Blair Capricornia Griffith Lilley Moreton Oxley Petrie Rankin NSW (23) Banks Barton Blaxland Charlton Chifley Cunningham Dobell Eden-Monaro Fowler Grayndler Hunter Kingsford Smith McMahon Newcastle Page Parramatta Reid Richmond Shortland Sydney Throsby Watson Werriwa ACT (2) Canberra Fraser VIC (21) Ballarat Batman Bendigo Bruce Calwell Chisholm Corio Gellibrand Gorton Holt Hotham Isaacs Jagajaga LaTrobe Lalor Maribyrnong McEwen Melbourne Melbourne Ports Scullin Wills TAS (4) Braddon Denison Franklin Lyons NT (1) Lingiari Right (68) WA (11) Canning Cowan Curtin Durack Forrest Moore O'Connor Pearce Stirling Swan Tangney SA (4) Barker Grey Mayo Sturt QLD (20) Bonner Bowman Dawson Dickson Fadden Fairfax Fisher Flynn Forde Groom Herbert Hinkler Leichhardt Longman Maranoa McPherson Moncreiff Ryan Wide Bay Wright NSW (21) Bennelong Berowra Bradfield Calare Cook Cowper Farrer Gilmore Hughes Hume Lyne Macarthur Mackellar Mitchell New England North Sydney Parkes Paterson Riverina Warringah Wentworth ACT (0) - VIC (12) Casey Flinders Gippsland Goldstein Higgins Indi Kooyong Mallee McMillan Menzies Murray Wannon TAS (0) - NT (0) - 'Swing' (Please don't choose these seats, they'll be assigned to the side that ends up governing. (14) WA (1) Hasluck SA (1) Boothby QLD (2) Brisbane Kennedy NSW (4) Macquarie Greenway Lindsay Robertson ACT (0) - VIC (4) Aston Corangamite Deakin Dunkley TAS (1) Bass NT (1) Solomon Both sides will be guaranteed at least these 68 for the set-up election, but after that anything's possible :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 11, 2013, 12:27:27 AM Isn't that going to mean a whole lot of NPCs?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 11, 2013, 01:58:52 AM They won't be characterised, just assigned as the left party or the right party.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: morgieb on July 11, 2013, 07:56:29 AM What makes Kennedy a swing district?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 11, 2013, 08:19:46 AM I wanted a second Queensland seat, and Kennedy (and Leichhardt, for that matter) are most certainly NOT your traditional conservative seats. Unless the ALP absolutely decimates the coalition and or/ has a real protectionist kick, it's probably the first of the swing seats to fall to the right, but it was a necessary number and I think not all that crazy :P
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: ilikeverin on July 11, 2013, 09:31:45 AM Aww, I was hoping I could be a Tazzie independence supporter, but since everyone is signing up for the Left I guess that won't be possible :-\
...but I guess we're not doing the Anzac Commonwealth idea that was mooted earlier? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 11, 2013, 11:12:57 AM I think Swedish Cheese already called the Division of Solomon before you posted, so maybe that could be moved back into the Right column and replaced in the swing seats by Forde/Longman/La Trobe?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on July 11, 2013, 09:01:08 PM I will claim Gilmore.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 12, 2013, 04:53:55 AM His write-up for Solomon is impossible though :P
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends on July 13, 2013, 11:54:41 AM I'll claim Sturt!
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Hifly on July 13, 2013, 01:39:39 PM Now that both parties have 7 members, are we going to elect a speaker?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on July 13, 2013, 04:06:23 PM His write-up for Solomon is impossible though :P Do Australian MPs always live in the Division they represent (as in USA) or can they be selected for some completley different place and just get a "home" in that Division (as in the UK) cause if it's the later my character can just represent any rural seat, otherwise I'll just change my bio so that my character moved somewhere in QLD. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 13, 2013, 04:16:40 PM His write-up for Solomon is impossible though :P Do Australian MPs always live in the Division they represent (as in USA) or can they be selected for some completley different place and just get a "home" in that Division (as in the UK) cause if it's the later my character can just represent any rural seat, otherwise I'll just change my bio so that my character moved somewhere in QLD. It's a little bit of both, although it probably leans more to the USA side of things, as most MPs have some sort of personal connection to the Division they represent or at least the area around it. Candidates can be parachuted into other Divisions, but usually these are near to a place they may have resided in in the past (an example would be Campbell Newman, the Premier of Queensland, who ran for the seat of Ashgrove despite actually living in nearby Brisbane Central). Most MPs have a home in their constituency or a neighboring constituency. I think it would definitely make sense if your character moved to somewhere like rural QLD, WA, or SA after graduating from University. Maranoa (QLD), O'Connor/Durack (WA), and Grey (SA) seem like seats which would fit well. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on July 13, 2013, 07:50:24 PM It's a bit like Britain where there's a tradition of having an address in the constituency, even if it's only used (as is often the case) as a base for constituency casework and for election campaigning.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 13, 2013, 09:15:39 PM For that particular seat as well, a swing seat based on Darwin, you would need to be unequivocally Darwinian ;D
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 13, 2013, 09:17:12 PM I was going to suggest that I be the speaker until after the election, at which point the winning party will elect the new speaker and I'll create a player with one of the parties.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on July 13, 2013, 09:42:10 PM Would the Speaker be the presiding officer of the House of Representatives or more of a GM figure? If the latter, it might be slightly unfair to have the winning party elect the position (for obvious reasons).
How would the election work? Are you flipping a coin and awarding all seats to the winning party or might we have an interesting, slightly drawn out election night with various swings and such? ;) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 13, 2013, 11:51:14 PM I'll basically be putting an effect of each public action during the election on each seat. So, for example, if you have a policy relating to forestry, it would only have a small effect in Solomon, but a huge effect in Bass.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on July 14, 2013, 06:31:58 AM Left (68) WA (3) Brand Fremantle Perth SA (6) Adelaide Hindmarsh Kingston Makin Port Adelaide Wakefield QLD (8) Blair Capricornia Griffith Lilley Moreton Oxley Petrie Rankin NSW (23) Banks Barton - Tom Henry (ALP) Blaxland Charlton Chifley Cunningham Dobell Eden-Monaro Fowler Grayndler - Dave Astuzia (ALP) Hunter Kingsford Smith - Kevan Jahanshahi (ALP) McMahon Newcastle Page Parramatta Reid Richmond Shortland Sydney Throsby Watson - Colin Elliott (ALP) Werriwa ACT (2) Canberra Fraser - Andrew Lawson (ALP) VIC (21) Ballarat Batman Bendigo Bruce Calwell Chisholm - Willow Wong-Jones (ALP) Corio Gellibrand Gorton Holt Hotham Isaacs Jagajaga LaTrobe Lalor Maribyrnong McEwen Melbourne Melbourne Ports Scullin Wills TAS (4) Braddon Denison Franklin Lyons NT (1) Lingiari Right (68) WA (11) Canning Cowan Curtin - Martin Oakleigh (LNP) Durack Forrest Moore O'Connor - Francis Jordan (LNP) Pearce Stirling Swan Tangney SA (4) Barker Grey Mayo Sturt - Donald Richards (LNP) QLD (20) Bonner Bowman - Maxine Bartlett (LNP) Dawson Dickson Fadden Fairfax Fisher Flynn Forde Groom Herbert Hinkler Leichhardt Longman Maranoa - Roger Erenford (LNP) McPherson Moncreiff Ryan Wide Bay Wright NSW (21) Bennelong Berowra Bradfield Calare Cook Cowper Farrer Gilmore - Ian Alexander Harlow (LNP) Hughes Hume Lyne Macarthur Mackellar Mitchell New England North Sydney - Edward Lloyd (LNP) Parkes Paterson Riverina Warringah Wentworth - Matthew Collins (LNP) ACT (0) - VIC (12) Casey Flinders Gippsland Goldstein Higgins Indi Kooyong Mallee McMillan Menzies Murray Wannon TAS (0) - NT (0) - 'Swing' (Please don't choose these seats, they'll be assigned to the side that ends up governing. (14) WA (1) Hasluck SA (1) Boothby QLD (2) Brisbane Kennedy NSW (4) Macquarie Greenway Lindsay Robertson ACT (0) - VIC (4) Aston Corangamite Deakin Dunkley TAS (1) Bass NT (1) Solomon Hugh, I tried to be a bit helpful and added characters to the divisions they've claimed for themselves. Claimed divisions are bolded. Andrew still hasn't specified a seat for Gordon Menzies. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 14, 2013, 08:37:18 PM Get your cards in order, because in a few days we'll start the election! I'll be looking for each party to have one unique policy on every topic, plus a policy on seven areas:
1. The Environment 2. Primary Schools 3. Live Animal Exports 4. Asylum Seekers 5. An infrastructure project 6. Automotive Manufacturing 7. Aged Care Any further policies are welcome, too. I'll also be asking for a budgetary philosophy, so to speak. Sometime around about next weekend we'll kick into gear, maybe a bit later if you're struggling to formulate policies. The election will involve the parties making press releases and speeches etc., doing 'interviews', a leader's debate, and various other bits and pieces, including reacting to two news items. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 15, 2013, 12:34:48 AM *One unique policy on ANY topic, sorry.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on July 15, 2013, 03:33:47 AM I'm assuming that for the purposes of this election the ALP is the incumbent? Just to differentiate between shadow ministers/ministers and PM/Opposition Leader.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 15, 2013, 09:22:02 AM Yeah, but don't stand too much on your record and the LNP shouldn't focus too much on it either.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Smid on July 15, 2013, 11:56:01 PM OK, I'm thinking this is a go, but just backtracking a bit ;) Two major parties, one left, one right. Name ideas? I'm thinking Reformist Labour Party and Australian Conservative Alliance, but it doesn't particularly matter to me. I suggested something similar last time. You could possibly reward activity levels by making more active "faction leaders" who control the votes of some of the NPCs. Such votes would be useful in leadership ballots, or if there is a backbench revolt on a policy issue? Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 16, 2013, 05:52:04 AM Perhaps too complex for the very start of the game, but a good idea for whoever becomes the speaker after the election to consider.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 19, 2013, 11:35:14 PM I'll start the election tomorrow if both parties are happy with that?
Also, could you please post the game name, username, and ministry/role of your parties here. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: tpfkaw on July 19, 2013, 11:36:56 PM I'll start the election tomorrow if both parties are happy with that? Also, could you please post the game name, username, and ministry/role of your parties here. Can we wait one more day so that we can agree on a platform? (I think Labor also needs to do that, if I'm not mistaken). Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Dr. Cynic on July 19, 2013, 11:39:22 PM We don't even have ministry roles yet.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 19, 2013, 11:55:19 PM Whenever you are ready. The plan was always for tomorrow, but I have no real objection to delaying for as long as you need.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 27, 2013, 02:07:57 AM Are both parties nearing readiness for the election?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on July 27, 2013, 02:36:32 PM No, but I think the only way to get that done is to just fire the starting gun regardless.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Smid on July 28, 2013, 01:46:12 AM No, but I think the only way to get that done is to just fire the starting gun regardless. That would be rather like real life, actually... Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on July 28, 2013, 04:40:35 AM OK, I'll start it off on Friday night Aussie time, which is still 5 days away, but it'll be started regardless of the readiness of the parties.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on August 02, 2013, 09:52:51 PM Sorry all, been busy. Will get this sorted as soon as possible, But just reminding you that the election is imminent.
You need to have three things for me asap: 1. Full list of members and their seats, with ministries if they have them, posted in this thread. 2. Policies on the issues outlined earlier. They don't have to be 20 pages, just make sure they exist in some way. You can post them here too. 3. A list of the swing seats in order of how much your party is spending on them. You can PM that order to me. I'll post daily news, occasional polls, and questions from journalists. I expect the election to last a week or so, but when you PM me the list of seats targeted, also include how long you'd like the campaign to last, and I'll take it into consideration. Thanks :) Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on August 04, 2013, 03:26:26 AM Mr. Speaker, here is the Australian Labor Party cabinet:
Tom Henry Prime Minister Dave Astuzia Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Foreign Affairs Andrew Lawson Treasurer Colin Elliott Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations Frank Connor Minister for Education Gordon Menzies Minister for the Environment, Minister for Immigration Willow Wong-Jones Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister for the Status of Women Kevan Jahanshahi Attorney-General Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese on August 07, 2013, 06:40:33 AM May I suggest a seperate campaign thread for the election. :)
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on August 07, 2013, 09:41:03 AM Absolutely, there'll be one for each day of the election, which will loosely align with real days.
I'm currently in the final 7 of an online survivor game, which is taking up A LOT of time. But the 'good' news is that I'm likely to be voted out tomorrow so I'll be more available from then :P Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on August 08, 2013, 09:24:09 AM Idolled out :(
I had the f'ing numbers, gah. 4-3. Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on August 10, 2013, 12:11:14 PM So we're starting the campaign later today?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Cappuccino on August 19, 2013, 03:04:52 AM Please can we get this started...
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Fmr President & Senator Polnut on August 19, 2013, 09:16:14 PM I echo this... we either start within the next couple of days, or abandon it.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on August 21, 2013, 04:14:30 PM I echo this... we either start within the next couple of days, or abandon it. That would be preferable, although I'm willing to wait until after the RL election in Australia wraps up in a couple of weeks if Hughento will be too busy until then (he mentioned he's out of Victoria until the 8th or so in another thread). Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Platypus on August 24, 2013, 10:59:33 PM Yeah, real election has pushed this back for me. Also neither party sent me their list of seats to target.
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: GAworth on September 08, 2013, 11:06:15 PM So are we still doing this?
Title: Re: Revival Proposal Post by: Talleyrand on September 09, 2013, 05:56:08 PM I think it can probably be rebooted now the RL election is done, although it's up to Hugh (or someone else if he doesn't want to moderate it) to decide when to begin, I suppose.
|