Game Moderation Abolition Amendment (Passed)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:02:43 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Game Moderation Abolition Amendment (Passed)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: Game Moderation Abolition Amendment (Passed)  (Read 4163 times)
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: November 01, 2014, 02:09:03 PM »

Well, I guess the vote will be scheduled before I swear. In case I would be able to vote, I intend to vote Aye.
The current system isn't working, if we abolish this office, we will be able to create something else in the future.

Do you have any ideas on that "Something else?"
Making the SoIA office stronger for instance?
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: November 01, 2014, 05:10:32 PM »

Get back to me when you find someone with the right combination of expertise in programming, system dynamics, and public policy who's willing to volunteer a few hundred hours of his or her free time.

There's no point in fantasizing about what we could do if we had unlimited resources.

It's things like this that have pushed me closer to just quitting this game altogether. It is part of the reason why I'm leaving in December. It's clear that there is no desire for real change in this game and I'm just tired of going through the same motions we always do.

I'm still going to vote nay because to me, external factors should be an important part of the game.
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: November 01, 2014, 05:29:36 PM »

I am proposing a "real change." Why you would threaten to quit Atlasia in response is beyond my comprehension.

It's not a real change though. And I've been set to quit for some time anyway. I'm leaving after my term ends for outside reasons, but also the fact that painful little is going to really change. It has nothing to do with you.
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: November 01, 2014, 05:39:14 PM »


The real change would be changing the entire face of the game by actually having to react to simulated external events. However, I've accepted that isn't going to happen. Another change I've proposed is changing to a parliamentary simulation, which would change how elections are conducted, but I don't think that's going to happen either.

I suppose this is a change that can be made, but I don't think it'll really make any difference one way or another. We're just abolishing an office. What actually is going to change about this game? Nothing, really. Again, this has nothing to do with you or anything. I'm personally frustrated by the lack of changes that we can accomplish simply because of habit and apathy. Just getting rid of the GM is yet another thing that basically changes this game in a direction that is completely opposite of the one I'd like to go in.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: November 02, 2014, 12:15:47 AM »

I wonder just how many people actually do desire to continue to play this game anymore and who is just pushing it along delaying the inevitable?

Ironically, in spite of how long I have been here, leaving the game has never really been an option I would seriously consider unless something external absolutely forced me to. Yet each real life challenge that has come along, I have gone to excessive lengths just to preserve my ability to continue so there are few real life events that could produce that result.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: November 02, 2014, 12:17:17 AM »

I am proposing a "real change." Why you would threaten to quit Atlasia in response is beyond my comprehension.

It is more of a house cleaning conceding to an unchangeable reality and merely tidying up by making it official. It is thus that nothing will really change because we presently don't have an active GM abolishing the GM will thus yield nothing in terms of gameplay. It is cosmetic.
Logged
Deus Naturae
Deus naturae
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,637
Croatia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: November 02, 2014, 01:16:24 AM »
« Edited: November 02, 2014, 01:21:18 AM by Deus Naturae »

Alright, I have two remaining issues with abolishing the GM:

1) I think the game could function without the GM telling us what events are occurring that we need to respond to, but once we respond, there should be some sort of results for us to evaluate. Will this responsibility be passed onto the SoIA or simply gotten rid of?

2) I agree that we don't need the GM for cost analyses but what about revenue analyses? If we just have to rely on speculation ("I really doubt that would raise enough revenue to finance x program") people will probably just ignore such objections and vote based on their own ideology. More generally, how are we supposed to formulate a budget without a GM to give us revenue figures?

Edit: Just read Yelnoc's post and I think you address both of these but I'm not sure I fully agree. Hmm...
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: November 02, 2014, 02:03:33 AM »
« Edited: November 02, 2014, 02:05:24 AM by Senator Polnut »

I've been thinking long and hard on this one.

Yelnoc's post contains a lot of ideas that certainly have merit. However, how you approach the game will tend to have an impact on how you view this question. As someone who is interested in policy, the idea of removing the external stimuli and not basing what the Senate and nation does on really... anything, is unattractive to me in the extreme.

If we were to get rid of the GM, I would want to see what powers and authority we could transfer to the SoIA and the SoEA. Otherwise, I wouldn't support the overall meta concept contained in Yelnoc's post.
Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,275
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: November 02, 2014, 07:27:17 AM »

It's somewhat surprising to me that people are saying that no one will listen to the GM and whatever after what happened just a month ago.

Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: November 02, 2014, 08:18:02 AM »

Feel free to ignore me since I'm obviously not a Senator.

I think there's a lot of truth to the idea that the GM position is in serious trouble. The present state of Atlasia is that we elect people to debate things, and the outcome of the debate shapes the results of future elections - not because of any simulated impact of legislation that passes or fails, but because of the merit and tenor of the debate. I think removing the GM would work just fine in that, domestic sense. And I absolutely agree that cost analyses are largely irrelevant and it's telling that recent GMs have abolished them entirely.

The problem with transferring GM powers to the SoEA or SoIA is that you end up with a a situation where an active office holder writes their own story - SoEA Superique solving the Israel-Palestine conflict springs to mind.

If we want to keep the GM position it's clear that we would have to institute penalties for people ignoring the GM's 'reality'. The problem with that is that it will be virtually impossible to manufacture any penalties that can be objectively applied in clear circumstances and not provoke massive outrage when implemented.

I disagree to some extent with the premise of Yelnoc's otherwise excellent post - the game is about elections, but the difference is that the 'governance' element is, as I mentioned, based around debate rather than on 'results'. And that's fine - I think us analysing and discussing the costs and merits of legislation is a lot more entertaining and actually healthy for the game than someone handing down the gospel by fiat.

The fundamental problem that needs to be addressed, and is not being addressed by the GM position for an array of myriad reasons, is that policy is ephemeral. This applies particularly in foreign policy. Look at it this way -

1. ISIS arises in real life.
2. Players naturally want to react to this event - to the extent that it would seem absurd to attempt to ignore it because it may not be happening in our virtual reality - and our imaginary far more hawkish Senate passes, say, a resolution to allow the President to deploy ground troops.
3. The President deploys ground troops in our hypothetical reality.
4. Atlasia reality and real life diverge - the U.S. does not deploy ground troops.
5. As a result of this, ISIS becomes more powerful in reality and, say, continues to push into Iraq.
6. Players naturally want to react to this event - to the extent that it would seem absurd to attempt to ignore it because it may not be happening in our virtual reality...



e: There's also the slightly crass point that 'real life' writes a far better 'plot' than any GM could.
Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,275
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: November 02, 2014, 09:58:20 AM »

It's somewhat surprising to me that people are saying that no one will listen to the GM and whatever after what happened just a month ago.

The crisis that we dealt with a month ago was entirely about the politics of the situation - that is, the President dismissing a traditionally neutral official for blatantly political reasons -  and not at all about the actual story that set it off. Sure, there were a couple of speeches, but most of us in government continued along as if nothing had happened, and the public showed even less interest.

The public rarely shows much interest in things that don't either change the game like consolidation or completely unpredictable, normally social issues like dog meat, incest or whatever else, so I'm not sure that's a great metric. Similarly the nature of the event wasn't really policy provoking, it was IIRC a terrorist attack to stop atlasia attacking ISIS. No one was going to be cowed by that type of attack (though they might have been in RL) and we were already attacking ISIS so I'm not sure what policy change was to be expected. To me it's enough that there was a backlash to show that the GM still is, or at the very least can be, relevant. If no one cared about the position then no one would have cared if the GM was sacked. It's also worth pointing out that no one at the time said "well the president was right because he has no obligation to follow the storyline".



Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: November 02, 2014, 02:18:47 PM »

It's somewhat surprising to me that people are saying that no one will listen to the GM and whatever after what happened just a month ago.

The crisis that we dealt with a month ago was entirely about the politics of the situation - that is, the President dismissing a traditionally neutral official for blatantly political reasons -  and not at all about the actual story that set it off. Sure, there were a couple of speeches, but most of us in government continued along as if nothing had happened, and the public showed even less interest.

The public rarely shows much interest in things that don't either change the game like consolidation or completely unpredictable, normally social issues like dog meat, incest or whatever else, so I'm not sure that's a great metric. Similarly the nature of the event wasn't really policy provoking, it was IIRC a terrorist attack to stop atlasia attacking ISIS. No one was going to be cowed by that type of attack (though they might have been in RL) and we were already attacking ISIS so I'm not sure what policy change was to be expected. To me it's enough that there was a backlash to show that the GM still is, or at the very least can be, relevant. If no one cared about the position then no one would have cared if the GM was sacked. It's also worth pointing out that no one at the time said "well the president was right because he has no obligation to follow the storyline".



While Yelnoc's analysis is thought provoking, I fundamentally disagree that this game should only be about elections. There should be a news element in this game and there should even be simulated scandal for players to answer to rather than only real ones where it usually just whittles down to someone saying something that somebody else didn't like. There are still a great many things that could be done to reform the office even if you want to throw cost projection out the window (which maybe we should because no one cares what a bill costs or about budgeting). Why can't we have simulated news like other political simulations do that are an important part of the game. Honestly, if we're not going to find someone who remotely wants to do that stuff, then I guess we can go ahead and abolish the position.

However, the game has been shifting in my own view, in the wrong direction of where it should be going. I'm still going to vote nay on this. It's just so far removed from my own beliefs of what the game should be. I cannot support it.
Logged
Yelnoc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,149
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: November 03, 2014, 12:37:32 PM »
« Edited: November 03, 2014, 12:41:05 PM by Yelnoc »

I disagree to some extent with the premise of Yelnoc's otherwise excellent post - the game is about elections, but the difference is that the 'governance' element is, as I mentioned, based around debate rather than on 'results'. And that's fine - I think us analysing and discussing the costs and merits of legislation is a lot more entertaining and actually healthy for the game than someone handing down the gospel by fiat.

I don't think we disagree. The 'governance' element functions as an arena for ideological debate, the performance of which forms a component of the elections game. However, those who envision this game to simultaneously be a government simulation pine for a system in which the results of the 'decisions' made by governments have tangible consequences, as opposed to the current set up where activity of the moderator staff, consistency of story lines, differing understandings of game history, and unwillingness of elected officials to cooperate with moderation staff make all attempts at story-telling and game moderation futile.

I cannot imagine a set of reforms which would fix all of the above problems. Let's take them one-by-one.
  • GM Activity: When the GM is inactive, the system collapses. There are very few people willing to take on the position of GM to begin with, considering what a thankless job it is. Of that very small pool, few (if any) have the time, energy, and imagination to produce the various plot points needed to give the game it's "story" and worry about cost estimation and legislation consequences. That's a huge amount of drudgery to ask a person to do, which is why some of that work was farmed out to the SoEA and SoIA. But the same problems apply to those positions- no respect, no real ability to influence the game. Why bother with it?
  • Story Consistency: Apparently we annexed Canada while I was gone? Under what circumstances, I don't know. I'm sure there are some helpful mod posts somewhere from that time, outlining how that happened and what the initial reactions were. Whether annexing Canada could possibly have been made to sound like a logical and not Germany-in-the-Sudetenland aggression I don't know. Has that plot point resurfaced to influence future 'foreign policy' story lines? I doubt it. This sort of one-off plot vomit is the stuff of nightmares for a dedicated GM who wants to figure out the 'in-game' or simulated situation in which Atlasia resides.
  • Historical Understanding: Related to plot consistency is our understanding as players of plot. The lack of consistent story telling, coupled with the immense age of this game, makes it easy for confusion to arise as to what kind of debates should be taking place in government. To use an example from my time in the IDS, when creating the budget I found that past governments had passed various contradictory tax plans many many times without understanding that the previous governments had already covered that ground. This may be less a problem at the Federal level, due to the presence of players which preserve a very long institutional memory (looking at you North Carolina Yankee), but it is still a problem inherent to this system, which becomes particularly difficult when people refuse to acknowledge a shared understanding.
  • Non-Cooperation: Oakvale's example of ephemeral policy fits here. Ultimately, we take our cues from the real world. When something interesting happens outside, we like to react to it, even if it contradicts the Atlasian version of history preserved by the GM. Another, particularly egregious form of non-cooperation is when elected officials refuse to interact with the story points created by GM's, either because they don't find them interesting, or they feel the plot does not fit with the (their understanding of) the game.

Because of the above issues with the GM system, it really doesn't matter what the GM does (or doesn't do). The game grinds on. "Fixing" the issues presented, so that policy makers had to interact with the GM in good faith, and so that their decisions actually had consequences, would require an intense overhaul of the game, reworking Atlasia to become an actual simulator of both public policy and a living game world, rather than just an elections game on a political geography forum. I am not convinced that is achievable, at least, not without a dedicated programmer and an external website. There are some reforms which may move the game in that direction, though ultimately will change very little. First, however, I want to address a proposed change which would just make things worse.

If you're going to eliminate the GM position, DO NOT simply transfer all GM power to the SoIA and SoEA. Please! Bad, bad idea. Oakvale put his finger on one problem, that of the cabinet member who can use his moderation powers to hand himself victories, is a real problem. Without a GM to crack down, BS like that will likely become more common. Just as pressing, without a leader on the moderation staff, the SoIA and SoEA will be free to act independently, which will only worsen the problems of continuity and plot vomit. On the contrary, if you eliminate the GM, you have to eliminate the entire moderation staff. Doing otherwise will simply make the system even more broken.

Another potential "solution" I want to address is wiki modernization. The problems of 'story consistency' and 'historical understanding' may appear to fixable by updating the wiki and making everyone read it. Because we have made it an expectation for GM's to maintain an internally consistent game world for the rest of us to interact with, an up-to-date wiki would certainly help them. But how do you force every elected official to know Atlasian history before engaging in debates or reacting to plot? The biggest problems are the first and last bullets; the middle two are more the result of inactivity and non-cooperation than problems in their own right (yes, this is a poorly structured post, I'm sorry).

If you want to create a GM-driven game where external stimuli, to borrow Polnut's term, matter, I see two options.
  • Kill Continuity: Our difficulty maintaining continuity is only a problem so long as we care about continuity. A hard reset after every GM leaves office, or perhaps after every presidential term, makes worrying about making policy and story fit with Atlasia's long history irrelevant. It will also hopefully boost cooperation by making all story lines similar to our real world, thereby eliminating the problem Oakvale identified.
  • Kill Elections: This tackles non-cooperation head-on by creating a system of reward and punishment, forcing players to cooperate with the GM and actually respond to stimuli. Nobody is going to go for this of course because it kills off player-driven elections, and this is, of course, an elections game

I am unable to think of any other 'reforms' that actually change the structure of the game in a positive way, while preserving relevance of the GM. Both suggestions have serious problems of their own, which I'd be happy to get into if anyone is actually interested in either. Of course, my preferred option is to completely eliminate the role of game moderation. For me, that is the most honest course of action, which acknowledges our capacities as a group without imposing unrealistic expectations on our GM staff or each other. I truly believe that debating bills without any larger context (then, implicitly of course, the state of the debate around said issue in the US/wider Atlas forum) would make this all a whole lot more fun for everyone involved.

To Cynic, Polnut, and everyone else who wants to see the Atlas change so that the GM is in fact relevant, what do you propose? Perhaps I am overlooking something. Please sketch out how the game could be altered so that players respond to stimuli and GM's stay active.
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: November 03, 2014, 04:10:37 PM »

Well, I wouldn't propose killing elections, that's a given.

I've thought for a long while that perhaps the GM news cycle of legislation should "reward" or "punish" players with positive and negative news stories about certain big pieces of legislation and perhaps that can affect elections. Ideally for me, the spot really should be occupied by more than one person who no longer has anything to gain or lose politically in the game (People who effectively want to say they're "retired" from electioneering for a period of time). It probably should be a few people because the GM position should be able to analyze and simulate public reaction to bills, foreign news, wiki updating, interacting with the cabinet members (Badger and I had quite a lot of interaction as GM and SOIA respectively), etc. I also don't think the GM's should be allowed to vote because they're essentially a Game Admin. Also, Atlasians who ignore GM decisions should be punished somehow. Suspension from office holding or voting for a period of time. People who break rules have to understand those consequences.

My basic feeling is that in order for a GM to be active, they have to willingly give up political ambitions for a period of time, there should be more than one (in fact a group of 3 might be best) and players who ignore GM decisions are punished by the loss of the ability to hold office or vote for a period of time, which can be decided by the Supreme Court, maybe.

Those ideas are simply speculative, but I think it would be a massive negative to get rid of the position, because a game like this really should have an admin.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: November 03, 2014, 06:05:32 PM »

I don't see why the only option is the nuclear one.

You aren't going to get a perfect scenario. The way I look at it is this.

1. Yes, we need consistency, which is why I suggested clear consequences for those officials who actively ignored the GM. We do need to be influenced, if anything, this place is TOO driven by relationships, but considering the nature of this place and its size, it's unrealistic to see it change.

2. There are those who want to treat Atlasia as their little wish-kingdom, where reality and boundaries don't exist. I'm personally not one of them. We've seen some very problematic moves recently that, yes, undermine the purpose of the GM and the SoIA and SoEA to guide events. I mean... the Middle-East Peace that just happened?

I would support a premise where Atlasia basically follows the US and overall international affairs and only shifts when the GM finds cause to do so (inconsistency with previous decisions and actions for example).

I will not support a system that is just about elections and doesn't have some kind of direction. Now, the point that Senator Nix and others have raised about essentially no one paying attention to the GM or the Secretaries. They're completely correct. But is the answer to just do away with the position and leave us without any guidance?

If anything this path just leads to the wish-fulfillment gold mine and pushes other participants out.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: November 03, 2014, 08:32:06 PM »

A voice from the gallery would like to make a comment...

I have been GM before. My experience leads me to believe that it is a worthless post that needs to be abolished.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: November 04, 2014, 01:17:12 AM »

A voice from the gallery would like to make a comment...

I have been GM before. My experience leads me to believe that it is a worthless post that needs to be abolished.

Yes, Afleitch appointed you. I even voted for your confirmation in spite of our long and bad history. I hoped your experience would both avoid the "continuity problem" and also provide a perspective that could do something with the post that was more radical and not constained by the limits ("do anything somewhat interesting and I'll bitch and moan" basically was the meme at the time) implaced on the position by the general public. Therefore, someone who was both ancient and has never gave a damn what about others thought was a good choice for the position.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: November 04, 2014, 01:18:22 AM »

I have seen both Polnut and Dr. Cynic discuss penalties for ignoring the GM. One of you suggested a ban from office I believe. wHat would the mechanics of this entail, how could you implement  and satisfy the doubters?
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: November 04, 2014, 01:54:22 AM »

Not this again. Penalizing politicians for "ignoring" the GM (whatever that means) is the single worst proposal that I've ever heard in Atlasia, and anyone who supports it ought to be dropped down an elevator shaft.

Will you calm the hell down man? Forgive me, but I got the impression that we were suppose to debate sh**t here five years ago, not just suppress what the almighty Nix thinks is a bad idea. Two other respected Senators have expressed interest in the proposal and so have I, we should at least discuss how they view doing it and stuff.

You really don't seem to enjoy doing this anymore man.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: November 04, 2014, 02:16:14 AM »

On the flip side, it is perfectyl reasonable to expect those who play a game, to adhere to its set rules like any other though.

That is why we have debates, to discuss logistics and find answers to such questions, or at least try to. Tongue
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: November 04, 2014, 03:31:49 AM »

Where's your sense of humor?

Any penalty that is strong enough to achieve anything would have chilling effects. There's no way to distinguish between a person who ignores the GM and one who simply believes that no action is an appropriate response.

I must say, dropping my big fat ass down an elevator shaft would prove far more trouble than it's worth, I assure you, Nix.

Perhaps the penalties for ignoring and flagrantly telling a GM off should be separate. Ignoring could result in negative news stories and hopefully electoral penalties.

Flagrantly telling the GM to basically go suck a railroad spike when it comes to their storylines should be dealt with the same way any admin deals with a player who gets out of line. Potentially a ban on participation. A Supreme Court lawsuit, perhaps if a ban on office would be considered necessary... I'm more inclined toward a voting ban for a period of time. If these ideas are too extreme, we should at least discuss some sort of compromise rather than head straight for the nuclear option. Maybe even scrapping the role and creating an entirely new Admin style role... I'd prefer to exhaust all options before we dismantle the job entirely...

Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,275
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: November 04, 2014, 07:52:33 AM »

One point I'd like to make is without some sort of God figure we run the risk of people doing whatever they like ( Without a GM, everything is permissible Tongue). Without someone to tell us what's actually happened it's entirely subjective, and I can see that going badly wrong, just look at the recent fiasco after tyrion left. Having someone who's appointed to be a minor correcting figure makes sense to me.
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: November 04, 2014, 04:34:32 PM »

Please do not give us the impossible task of judging whether someone has "ignored the GM's storyline" or whatever.
Logged
rpryor03
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,825
Bahamas


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: November 04, 2014, 04:42:51 PM »

No person who votes for abolishing the GM position will ever have my support for anything as long as I live.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: November 04, 2014, 05:52:53 PM »

This debate is getting a little too fraught.

I understand the passion, but we seem to coming to this issue from quite different views. We have "the GM is useless and powerless, so lets get rid of it" and "we can't just be about elections and be completely without guidance, even taking into account the weakness of the GM position".

I suppose the question I would ask Senator Nix, who is clearly extremely passionate about this is, how do we put legislation and activities into context when it essentially turns into a free-for-all. Each person determines what their realities and situations are? And if enough people agree that Atlasia becomes part of the EU... then it happens?

I acknowledge that there are problems, serious ones with the GM, but it is down to the characters who inhabit the role. I am just fundamentally concerned about the consequences of saying "sod it, we'll just carry on" and again, this place is already over-ridden by personalities and relationships and turning it into purely an election sim would pretty much mean a whack of posters would just leave.

So, my key question is, even if I acknowledge the GM position is increasingly untenable, what kind of mechanism do you replace it with?   
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 12 queries.