I'm confused as well. People who didn't comment whatsoever in the process, didn't speak up or voice any dissent before now, are voting against a pretty non-controversial step forward for the game, without explaining their votes.
where was the place to comment in the process? was there a general invitation to the constitutional convention? if so, i didn't receive it. compared to senate and presidential campaigns, this was pretty much beneath the radar.
i voted on the constitution as presented. there were many problems with the constitution as it existed already, and i didn't see any improvement. if there was a marked improvement, no one made that case to me. the change i saw that i did not like was a move to remove citizens from Atlasia within a shorter frame of time. why that would be considered non-controversial i do not know.
should i have voted for it in spite of my reservations? perhaps. but to suggest it is a no-brainer is absurd.
Okay, I'm just going to say it: this is the epitome of a zombie voter. For a member of this game to not notice something that's been going on for months, and that was a key pillar in my campaign, despite open threads in both Atlasia boards, and to rely on a PM to learn about such a thing is pretty ridiculous.
It's one thing in the real world, where the issues are many and participation has an impact on your life, but where time is scarce; however, to willingly join a game and then not participate except when beckoned... what is the purpose of remaining remotely active?
And this isn't targeting any party or group; the draft Constitution has received support from active members across party, ideology and region. But the above response is a serious flaw in this game. Just sayin'.
Poll
