Regional Executives: Don't Look Now, You Got Another One.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote and Text


Abolishes the practice of giving life terms without the possibility of parole.

[PJ]

Will be taken care of in the Pacific once the legal ramifications of my duties as Acting Governor are sorted out. I can't really do anything because of it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Which of course our soon to be GM will use to justify the adoption of a weaker amendment standard, even though such is kind of what caused this mess in the first place.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     How disappointing. I expected better out of the Senate.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

     How disappointing. I expected better out of the Senate.

Indeed, I fear the majority is becoming dangerously out of touch.

[DemPGH]

Yeah, I've had a couple glasses of Cabernet Sauvignon, but I'm really wondering in all honesty, how many of you social conservatives would support bringing back lettres de cachet? In current context replace "king" with some other, more modern body.

You guys do realize that parole is arbitrary?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Yeah, I've had a couple glasses of Cabernet Sauvignon, but I'm really wondering in all honesty, how many of you social conservatives would support bringing back lettres de cachet? In current context replace "king" with some other, more modern body.

You guys do realize that parole is arbitrary?

I certainly hope this wasn't addressed to me

[Associate Justice PiT]

Life imprisonment has been abolished in dozens of countries, ranging from Brazil to Nepal to Norway. I can understand why some might object to eliminating it altogether, but this amendment would merely eliminate life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Is there any indication that allowing this achieves anything worthwhile?

     Once the amendment is defeated, I will consider spurring a debate on the matter in my own region. You may want to think about doing the same.

[DemPGH]

Yeah, I've had a couple glasses of Cabernet Sauvignon, but I'm really wondering in all honesty, how many of you social conservatives would support bringing back lettres de cachet? In current context replace "king" with some other, more modern body.

You guys do realize that parole is arbitrary?

I certainly hope this wasn't addressed to me

Haha. No, I've had drink plus I was reacting to the general direction of the vote and the fact that many of the no voters are like, "OMG!" You're cool, Mr. X.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yeah, I've had a couple glasses of Cabernet Sauvignon, but I'm really wondering in all honesty, how many of you social conservatives would support bringing back lettres de cachet? In current context replace "king" with some other, more modern body.

You guys do realize that parole is arbitrary?

What exactly are you responding to?

Which of course our soon to be GM will use to justify the adoption of a weaker amendment standard, even though such is kind of what caused this mess in the first place.

After compiling data on amendment votes, I'm confident that we're rejecting and approving about as many amendments as we should be. Despite my petition in support of the Fair Amendment Procedure Amendment, I think it's important that we adopt a minimum required threshold of support of well over 50% for ratification. My objection to the current ratification process has always been that it is poorly administered and unfair to voters in regions with larger populations and higher turnout.

So you like launched a petition pledging not just support, but "firm" support for something you think is a bad idea?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yeah, I've had a couple glasses of Cabernet Sauvignon, but I'm really wondering in all honesty, how many of you social conservatives would support bringing back lettres de cachet? In current context replace "king" with some other, more modern body.

You guys do realize that parole is arbitrary?

I certainly hope this wasn't addressed to me

Haha. No, I've had drink plus I was reacting to the general direction of the vote and the fact that many of the no voters are like, "OMG!" You're cool, Mr. X.

Yea, so I seem to recall a rather long piece about the downside (from a game perspective) in assuming that people one disagrees with as being evil or stupid. So in that context, wondering how many Conservatives would support the introduction of a process riddled with inconsistency, arbitrary in nature and rooted in the rule of dictatorial fiat as opposed rule of laws made by consent of the governed, seems in your opinion a little... ah...excessive by chance?

[Dereich]

I know about it. I plan to put it up a bit later in the afternoon when real life stops interfering with  me letting everyone in the region know that its up.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So you like launched a petition pledging not just support, but "firm" support for something you think is a bad idea?

Of course not. Amendments can be adjusted. As you and others had cast opposition to the amendment primarily as an issue of "regional rights," the essence of the Fair Amendment Procedure Amendment seemed to be contained in moving to a nationwide vote on ratification. At the time I saw setting an appropriate threshold as a detail (albeit a very important one) that needed to be sorted out. Now that I've compiled data on past amendment votes, I firmly support a minimum threshold of at least three-fifths and preferably two-thirds. Does that make sense to you?

Yes, if the faulty assumption upon which it is based is correct. I never defined the petition as being just on regional rights or frankly just anything. I would also point out that TCMFS has launched a petition before at the Regional level where the sole basis was ensuring the appropriate level of difficulty in passing amendments so as to prevent a Rimjob in IDS. I actually posted in said thread just before posting the new one even.

The fact that you saw such as a "detail" illustrates that you missed most of the point, man.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem with your approach Nix, is that you are behind the curve in terms of Regionalism and how it relates to the game mechanics. It is thus impossible for you to interpret it and thus my actions as anything else in terms of such, because you are still stuck in July.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem with your approach Nix, is that you are behind the curve in terms of Regionalism and how it relates to the game mechanics. It is thus impossible for you to interpret it and thus my actions as anything else in terms of such, because you are still stuck in July.

How do you mean that?

How has Regionalism impacted the game mechanics in your view? In your view how has the approach taken by those who promote it been with regards to the game mechanics?

Your actions have already answered these questions a certain way, but of course your words might be having a fight with you again so I will let them speak for themselves.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem with your approach Nix, is that you are behind the curve in terms of Regionalism and how it relates to the game mechanics. It is thus impossible for you to interpret it and thus my actions as anything else in terms of such, because you are still stuck in July.

How do you mean that?

How has Regionalism impacted the game mechanics in your view? In your view how has the approach taken by those who promote it been with regards to the game mechanics?

Your actions have already answered these questions a certain way, but of course your words might be having a fight with you again so I will let them speak for themselves.

I continue to have no idea what you're getting at.

We are trying to solve that problem.

Has the push for Regionalism been done in a way detrimental to the game mechanics in your view?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The problem with your approach Nix, is that you are behind the curve in terms of Regionalism and how it relates to the game mechanics. It is thus impossible for you to interpret it and thus my actions as anything else in terms of such, because you are still stuck in July.

How do you mean that?

How has Regionalism impacted the game mechanics in your view? In your view how has the approach taken by those who promote it been with regards to the game mechanics?

Your actions have already answered these questions a certain way, but of course your words might be having a fight with you again so I will let them speak for themselves.

I continue to have no idea what you're getting at.

We are trying to solve that problem.

Has the push for Regionalism been done in a way detrimental to the game mechanics in your view?

The problem with the regions is that they cannot be trusted to follow through on their responsibilities with consistency.

As long as the federal government isn't forced to rely on the regions to function, this isn't a problem. A region can go dormant for months without ruining anyone's fun. But when we rely on the regions to open voting booths, for example, we assume that every region will be active all of the time. Our history shows that this is not a reasonable assumption.

In your view thus, Regions are only a nuisance in terms of the game mechanics, correct?