Dissolving Atlasia Act

[Blair]

I'm posting this here, for a fact that this discussion can't be confined to the Senate. As Speaker I'm obliged to introduce the legislation as it was submitted by the public, and has priority. Also its an emergency issue for Atlasia, as legal issues aside it literally has the power to end our nation as we know it.

So thoughts folks?

[/]

I'm kind of against this now.

People are just making a big hubbub because they're bored and want to see something interesting happen.

The reforms that need to be taken care of can easily be taken care of in the Senate. No need for a convention.

[Classic Conservative]

Atlasia shouldn't be dissolved but just reformed.

[Senator Cris]

I'm kind of against this now.

People are just making a big hubbub because they're bored and want to see something interesting happen.

The reforms that need to be taken care of can easily be taken care of in the Senate. No need for a convention.

There are a lot of things that needs to be changed. The Senate tried to change some things, but these changes have not passed the Senate or have not passed the regions. But let's suppose that the Senate is able to pass these reforms and that these reforms are ratified by the regions. It would require a lot of time and, honestly, I don't think that the Senate would come out with ALL of these reforms, so I think that a ConCon would be more appropriate.

[Lumine]

I'm kind of against this now.

People are just making a big hubbub because they're bored and want to see something interesting happen.

The reforms that need to be taken care of can easily be taken care of in the Senate. No need for a convention.

Having served on the Senate for a long time I agree with Cris, there have been many attempts at reform through the Senate and most of them have failed, not to mention that it is an approach that suggests waiting and waiting in the hope that every single issue can be dealt with individually.

There has been some degree of frustration over a very long time which has only increased as reforms have failed, so I wouldn't say that all of this is happening just because some of us are bored.

[/]

Dissolving and restarting Atlasia or a ConCon would take much more time...


Presumably the only reforms that would really need to be passed would be consolidating the regions into 3. What else?

[windjammer]

I'm kind of against this now.

People are just making a big hubbub because they're bored and want to see something interesting happen.

The reforms that need to be taken care of can easily be taken care of in the Senate. No need for a convention.

Having served on the Senate for a long time I agree with Cris, there have been many attempts at reform through the Senate and most of them have failed, not to mention that it is an approach that suggests waiting and waiting in the hope that every single issue can be dealt with individually.

There has been some degree of frustration over a very long time which has only increased as reforms have failed, so I wouldn't say that all of this is happening just because some of us are bored.

The biggest problem is that for any change, you need basically 4/5 of the regions...

[/]

I'm kind of against this now.

People are just making a big hubbub because they're bored and want to see something interesting happen.

The reforms that need to be taken care of can easily be taken care of in the Senate. No need for a convention.

Having served on the Senate for a long time I agree with Cris, there have been many attempts at reform through the Senate and most of them have failed, not to mention that it is an approach that suggests waiting and waiting in the hope that every single issue can be dealt with individually.

There has been some degree of frustration over a very long time which has only increased as reforms have failed, so I wouldn't say that all of this is happening just because some of us are bored.

The biggest problem is that for any change, you need basically 4/5 of the regions...

Well we could change that first.

[Senator Cris]

I'm kind of against this now.

People are just making a big hubbub because they're bored and want to see something interesting happen.

The reforms that need to be taken care of can easily be taken care of in the Senate. No need for a convention.

Having served on the Senate for a long time I agree with Cris, there have been many attempts at reform through the Senate and most of them have failed, not to mention that it is an approach that suggests waiting and waiting in the hope that every single issue can be dealt with individually.

There has been some degree of frustration over a very long time which has only increased as reforms have failed, so I wouldn't say that all of this is happening just because some of us are bored.

The biggest problem is that for any change, you need basically 4/5 of the regions...

Well, it would be "deeply disturbing" if 2 regions vote against a change to the game (ConCon or just Senate reforms).

[bore]

The reason we have never been able to change anything has nothing to do with the senate (and, it has to be said, most of the genuinely active people), it's that any amendments grind to a halt in the regions.

If you look at the list of amendments which failed the regions here it's clear that the senate has passed pretty much every possible reform at least once.

[Boston Bread]

Dissolving and restarting Atlasia or a ConCon would take much more time...


Presumably the only reforms that would really need to be passed would be consolidating the regions into 3. What else?

I'm ok with taking time to make more drastic changes to the game, since it would be more enjoyable than continuing with the current tedious grind. I've been losing my enthusiasm for this game to some extent lately.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

What happens if we do dissolve the constitution? Do we go back to previous ones? Do we start over with a ConCon? No one has proposed any solutions to the current problem.

I assume for this to pass, it still has to have overwhelming support of the regions.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I consider pulling the plug on Atlasia "just like that" as irresponsible and, frankly speaking, pointless, as saying everything's fine. Is there a problem? Yes. Does Atlasia need a serious changes? Yes it does. I've been speaking in favor of a serious changes for a long time, including presenting detailed proposals (unlike some fellows who likes to complain without offering anything constructive).

But no serious change can be accomplished without a serious deliberation and consideration from all points view. Otherwise we may "reset", but we'll inevitably repeat the same mistakes.

Repeating the same mistakes is my major concern. Aside the fact a lot of folks lost interest now (though some obviously did so for unrelated reasons, as Blair pointed out in the other thread), this game isn't institutionally any diffrent from what it was a year, two or three ago. What's the guarantee that after reset we won't just go down this conservative (by which mean afraid of any original ideas and thinking outside the box) path again? We'll never have a diffrent way without actually understanding what went wrong and what could or still can be fixed. This is why it's far too early for unplugging the game.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

What happens if we do dissolve the constitution? Do we go back to previous ones? Do we start over with a ConCon? No one has proposed any solutions to the current problem.

Good point. This is a total grey legal area.

[Blair]

I mean without a Constitution then the we'd have no legal power to establish a con con, heck I could declare the Senate a branch of Mollosia

[DemPGH]

Well, a couple of court cases in my time alone have established that everything (including names of departments) is/are derived from the Constitution, so if it were dissolved I would think that nothing would exist. We'd just be free to start over from square one. Also, the current Constitution explicitly replaces the older ones, so I don't think we would revert back to an earlier version. The earlier versions are archived just to be on record. We would not revert back to any of them. My opinion, at any rate.

Says VIII.1.1:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, if the goal is cosmetic repairs, reducing regions, consolidating, etc., then the way to go is a ConCon or worst, and amendment. If the desire is to start totally over, or just end the game for now, then dissolving the Constitution is, IMO, the way to go.

---

When multiple regional legislatures cannot fill seats or else cease to function, I think some hard choices need to be made. Continuing for the sake of continuing is not wise.

[Leinad]

Dissolving Atlasia without making any reforms is like not knowing how to drive and trying to solve the problem by buying a new car.

It's drastic action for the sake of drastic action. I don't even think there's a constitutional mechanism to even legally dissolve Atlasia.

I encourage all Senators to vote against this silly bill, for many of the reasons that have already been said in this thread. Dissolving Atlasia is the equivalent of a 4-year-old pitching a fit and throwing his food off the table. It's not how government needs to act. We need real solutions, this is frankly a waste of time.

Continuing for the sake of continuing is not wise.

I suppose not, but it's better than dissolution for the sake of dissolution.

[Leinad]

Here's an interesting exchange from the Senate floor:

Speaking not as a legal expert, it seems to me if the constitution was completely wiped the whole country would be dissolved, seeing as the constitution is what gives various positions their legitimacy.

I wonder if the regions would be dissolved as well, or they would become de facto separate and independent entities.

I want clarification on this matter. I would support this amendment if that is the case, because that paradigm would be awesome.

So, does anyone have clarification? Independent regions might be fun. We could all do our own thing, put different controls on immigration, make different governments, sign treaties with each other, perhaps create an EU-like agreement between us, and if we like it better the old way, unite again as Atlasia.

However, for the same reason I don't think a parliamentary system would work, I don't think this would work, either. We need to keep it similar enough to the US to hold interest on the US Election Atlas forum.

[Associate Justice PiT]

i

Here's an interesting exchange from the Senate floor:

Speaking not as a legal expert, it seems to me if the constitution was completely wiped the whole country would be dissolved, seeing as the constitution is what gives various positions their legitimacy.

I wonder if the regions would be dissolved as well, or they would become de facto separate and independent entities.

I want clarification on this matter. I would support this amendment if that is the case, because that paradigm would be awesome.

So, does anyone have clarification? Independent regions might be fun. We could all do our own thing, put different controls on immigration, make different governments, sign treaties with each other, perhaps create an EU-like agreement between us, and if we like it better the old way, unite again as Atlasia.

However, for the same reason I don't think a parliamentary system would work, I don't think this would work, either. We need to keep it similar enough to the US to hold interest on the US Election Atlas forum.

     The more I think about it, the more I think this could be the shot in the arm we need. It would free up lots of people to staff regional governments while allowing regions to tackle issues that they could never touch before and offering a partial reboot.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

However, for the same reason I don't think a parliamentary system would work, I don't think this would work, either. We need to keep it similar enough to the US to hold interest on the US Election Atlas forum.

I like nothing more than a functional parliamentary system. I don't think that keeping this game modeled on the U.S., just because it's the "U.S. Election Atlas" is a right approach. We need to have an ability to develop our unique identity, instead of following one template.

However (I believe it was Oakvale that pointed this out one day on IRC), we're not big enough to adopt a functional parliamentarism, that is we're not large enough to be able to crave out working parliamentary constituencies.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

However, for the same reason I don't think a parliamentary system would work, I don't think this would work, either. We need to keep it similar enough to the US to hold interest on the US Election Atlas forum.

I like nothing more than a functional parliamentary system. I don't think that keeping this game modeled on the U.S., just because it's the "U.S. Election Atlas" is a right approach. We need to have an ability to develop our unique identity, instead of following one template.

However (I believe it was Oakvale that pointed this out one day on IRC), we're not big enough to adopt a functional parliamentarism, that is we're not large enough to be able to crave out working parliamentary constituencies.

The inherent problem with a parliamentary system, as I have pointed out, is lack of interest. Remember Lumine starting one of his own and it dying in less than 6 months?

We are a predominantly American forum, and I think I speak for many of us when I say if this game were converted to a parliamentary system, I would have absolutely no interest in playing the game. If people want a scaled down Atlasia where we have maybe half or less registered voters, then that's the way to go. It would be incredibly wrong to believe such a change would actually grow the player base.

[Leinad]

However, for the same reason I don't think a parliamentary system would work, I don't think this would work, either. We need to keep it similar enough to the US to hold interest on the US Election Atlas forum.

I like nothing more than a functional parliamentary system. I don't think that keeping this game modeled on the U.S., just because it's the "U.S. Election Atlas" is a right approach. We need to have an ability to develop our unique identity, instead of following one template.

However (I believe it was Oakvale that pointed this out one day on IRC), we're not big enough to adopt a functional parliamentarism, that is we're not large enough to be able to crave out working parliamentary constituencies.

For better or worse, we are a US-centered site. I'd actually probably be the only American interested in a parliamentary game. There are lots of international members, such as the President, Blair, yourself, and, really, countless others, but I still think a majority (or at least plurality) of the members and potential members are American, and most of that group wouldn't be interested in an elections/government game not based on the US.

Even if we were to implement a parliamentary system, dissolution is NOT the way to do that. In fact, it won't accomplish anything of any good whatsoever.