You should have listened

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Sorry, bore, but you were a bad President in a time we needed an energetic leader.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The problem is that bore simply threw the towel when any sign of activity from the top would be of great importance. He didn't cross the line like Nix, but the fact remains he gave up.

Even before the crisis bore was pretty much a lackluster President. When I was the GM I a had very hard time to get him to react to anything (Lumine was very cooperative).

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Interesting that you've neglected to mention that your time as GM came to an ignominious end as you were forced by the overwhelming weight of public opinion to resign as GM because you nuked atlasia.

Unlike you I took full responsibility for the fiasco.

What is interesting that I've devised that ultimately failed scenario as a way to actually get the likes of you to react. Unsurprisingly to no avail.

So yes, I did mishandle this, but at least I did something.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Wolfentoad is back?? Wow, what wild times those were. I almost miss them!

If it's any conciliation, I find my posts (and overall behavior) from back then to be extremely cringeworthy, to say the least. In retrospect, it's honestly mind-blowing just how seriously the 13 year old version of myself took an online election simulator lmao.

When I was 13 myself I committed the same mistake in other place. This happens.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I note a continued failure to address the actual points Bore made.

I certainly disagree with his pathetic claims he fought for game reform while he actually was missing 90% of the time, dodging his duties, but not having enough decency to step down and let someone else do the job he cared nothing for.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

But this is my point: the responses have been attacking him rather than his arguments. Which is telling.

Can speak only for myself. I haven't addressed his present claims indeed, but I don't see why shouldn't we address other assertions he included in his post.

Having just recently re-registered, I don't feel competent to speak on the election I was ineligible to vote.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Bore, nobody pretended that "everything was OK". The difference was between those who wanted to throw everything away without even trying to lift their fingers, like you, and those who acted.

As of the GM stuff, you seem to believe it's pretty much unimportant and we should stick to electoral simulations only. Valid point, but you can't possibly expect Atlasia to be a real governmental simulation without such mechanism. If such a bland approachment suits you, well, it's your right.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

We've got some delusion of grandeur here. People have been aware and vocal on the need of game reform long before you became President. Suggesting that your actions, or rather lack of action, was a deciding factor here is... interesting.

Restart had been accomplished under Griffin, who unlike you never abdicated his responsibilities as President. It's naive to think "bah, reset, everything's solved now" way was of any use.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps. Although, as I noted, I'm far from alone in that view. I think a GM can be useful, although such a role should be limited. The thing is there's no fun, and actually it's the height of blandness, in dealing with something like a terrorist attack (write a speech saying you condemn the attackers and will support the victims, say we won't be afraid because the terrorists would have won, forget about it in a week), and there's no fun in dealing with an objectively implausible situation like Bushie leading a rebellion against the government.

Well, I've been receiving more positive notes than negative on my overall tenure as GM and a lot of people were getting involved thanks to various developments, so you certainly can't claim Atlasians views it as bland or useless.

OK, forget terrorist stuff for a moment. What about diplomatic problems with other countries? You've ignored it entirely. Whether you like the idea of GM or not, the law provides for the game engine and President can't just ignore it. You're free to push for the abolition of the game engine, but until then it's just immature to be like "oh, this is part of the rules I don't like, let's ignore it."

Last, but not least, I firmly believe that one of the reasons South American experiment had failed is because you have no game engine whatsoever. All you managed was to repeat all of Atlasia's mistakes.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

We've got some delusion of grandeur here. People have been aware and vocal on the need of game reform long before you became President. Suggesting that your actions, or rather lack of action, was a deciding factor here is... interesting.

Restart had been accomplished under Griffin, who unlike you never abdicated his responsibilities as President. It's naive to think "bah, reset, everything's solved now" way was of any use.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps. Although, as I noted, I'm far from alone in that view. I think a GM can be useful, although such a role should be limited. The thing is there's no fun, and actually it's the height of blandness, in dealing with something like a terrorist attack (write a speech saying you condemn the attackers and will support the victims, say we won't be afraid because the terrorists would have won, forget about it in a week), and there's no fun in dealing with an objectively implausible situation like Bushie leading a rebellion against the government.

Well, I've been receiving more positive notes than negative on my overall tenure as GM and a lot of people were getting involved thanks to various developments, so you certainly can't claim Atlasians views it as bland or useless.

OK, forget terrorist stuff for a moment. What about diplomatic problems with other countries? You've ignored it entirely. Whether you like the idea of GM or not, the law provides for the game engine and President can't just ignore it. You're free to push for the abolition of the game engine, but until then it's just immature to be like "oh, this is part of the rules I don't like, let's ignore it."

Last, but not least, I firmly believe that one of the reasons South American experiment had failed is because you have no game engine whatsoever. All you managed was to repeat all of Atlasia's mistakes.

This entire thread is full of the most bizarre attempts at gaslighting the populace that I've ever seen (the craven revisionist history that Bore FAILED TO LEAD or whatever the hell is pretty gross) but this last paragraph is especially egregious. The Mock Parliament game had a far more involved and powerful GM than Atlasia! If anything, you may actually be correct - adopting a "game engine" was a mistake.

Maybe so. I've been hearing some complaints about lack of interesting stimulation in the mock parliament.

If this is incorrect, though, it only shows the game engine is a valuable tool.

As of so-called "revisionist" history, the word "revisionist" doesn't fit here. Bore had been criticized back then for his lack of action. Whether we agree or disagree on his stance, it was a major issue.

If there's any revisionism here it's claiming that aside of few people like bore pretty much everybody else disagrees on a need to reform the game. Not true. There were very few people that claimed nothing should be done.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

OK, it seems the fundamental disagreement we're having on this particular issue is whether Atlasia should be just an electoral simulation with people spending hours of their time talking s**t about each others on IRC, or something more. Literally every discussion shows the public is in favor of having something more. How about instead of sabotaging each other we'll just form two games: one just an electoral simulation and other more complicated governmental simulation, not interacting with each other. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, the electoral one can have this board. Thus everybody have their place.

Seriously, people, let's have Atlasia A and Atlasia B.

By the way, I have devoted a lot of my time and energy into serving this game while GM. Whether you liked it or not, it's was an established part of the game, so I find your particular stance personally insulting. Well, you certainly do like being a sanctimonious fellow.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

OK, it seems the fundamental disagreement we're having on this particular issue is whether Atlasia should be just an electoral simulation with people spending hours of their time talking s**t about each others on IRC, or something more. Literally every discussion shows the public is in favor of having something more.

[citation needed]

Thankfully I have better things to do with my life than going through thousands of posts so I can stick it to my opponent in discussion

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Good comeback.

"Majority of population" was a stretch, yes, since we never had any realiable survey done there. Fact remains that support for the game being something more than simple electoral simulation is significant.