Constitutional Convention - Commentary thread.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We may have been a little excited to get on with this.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I totally agree--my argument is that conventional definitions of ideology in real-world terms (libertarian, conservative, liberal, moderate, socialist, etc.) is about as important as what people's favorite ice cream flavor is.

In other words, it should be balanced by ideology, but the issues aren't traditional ones such as economics or social matters, but issues as far as the game is concerned, so looking at conventional ideological terms does us no good to balance it by ideology, because that isn't the "ideology" that is important here.

I think that makes sense...

Well, if you had been around when the debate over whether to reform the game or not occurred two years ago, then you'd understand that the fundamental reactions based on what to do (or whether to do anything at all) were based in basic ideological viewpoints (predominantly, conservativism and regionalism with regards to obstructing reform, and the lack of concern for regionalism with regards to enacting reform). In addition, there were deep and obvious roots of partisanship involved in the process as well.   

     Partisanship and typical ideological splits inform a lot of what goes on here in Atlasia, but not all. The rise of the Mock Parliament has shown us that there are splits that are less apparent than party registration. Also, I thought the public vote was pretty well split between my allies and my opponents.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Maybe that's because the current batch of senators have been among the foremost advocates for game reform?

hahahhha what

All Senators have supported and signed petition for Constitutional Convention. You can say all things that you want about the Senators, but you can't say that they were not advocates for game reform. That's not true.

     Some folks are concerned that they might not get exactly what they want. As you might imagine, that makes us horrible people for holding different views.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'd actually argue that, by and large and with obvious exceptions like Yankee, it's the newer players that are far more conservative in terms of reform than those of us who've been around a disgustingly long time and know Atlasia's played itself out.

Then perhaps those are tired should move on and let the newbies have their fun rather than ruin the game for everyone. Or at the very least come forth with new proposals.

     The problem with that suggestion is that it would require them to realize there are other people in the world, not all of whom are exactly the same as them.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I agree, settling on the CARCA map because it is the CARCA map is unfair to a great many people who either are unenthusiastic about consolidation or were simply not there. My hope is that it will only be used as a starting point and we will branch out from there.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The most frustrating thing is, we've had a plan in place to revitalize the game in place for 2 years and we're still arguing over making some very basic changes.

The game has degraded to a point where it's hard to get many people to play it. You'd think that would be a wake up call to most people but to my amazement some still don't get it, and I'm too old and too tired to keep pounding my head against a wall.

     I don't like consolidation, but I've accepted that it is part of the plan to revitalize Atlasia. Realistically, I'm prepared to accept what the Convention produces and to make sacrifices for the future of Atlasia. While we may have spirited arguments, I hope that everyone else is at the same place, or else this Convention will likely fail.

     The United States Constitution was ultimately described as a "bundle of compromises". Making everyone happy isn't happening. That is why we all have to compromise.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I agree, though at the same time we need to also not change for the sake of change. If bicameralism is to succeed, it must do so on its own merits. The people voting for it should do so because they are confident that it will succeed rather than because it is different.

     I don't mean to suggest that they are doing that, but such is the danger of fearing that we won't change enough.

[Associate Justice PiT]

But I still have a problem with replacement Representatives being chosen by "party bosses" as Poirot calls them.

     What would you suggest? Griffin is right that at-large special elections are not really an ideal solution.