Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 24, 2014, 12:21:34 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Atlas Fantasy Elections
| |-+  Atlas Fantasy Government
| | |-+  Constitutional Convention (Moderators: Gustaf, MasterJedi)
| | | |-+  DWTL Region Shrinking Plan
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Print
Author Topic: DWTL Region Shrinking Plan  (Read 14260 times)
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #75 on: March 30, 2009, 11:19:15 pm »
Ignore

Apparently my proposal is too radical to merit discussion, as per usual.

I support it above all others, although I have nothing further to add. But others have a romantic love for regions which cannot be explained by reason. Indeed, no one has yet offered a serious defense for the continuation of regions. If no one does so, I will make a big stink about it.

A good idea.  As my original desire for abolitionism has evidently failed, I am all for the complete and total abolition of regions now.  Honestly, people, they serve no purpose.

(though in this post I was referring more to my really weird-looking maps on the second page, which are "too different", I'm sure)

Determination of regions will happen during the development of the Constitution, as we decide what the Constitution addresses. As you can see in the first Constitution the regions are clearly marked. It is something that could just be left out if the delegates so choose.

I would just warn that if regions are abolished by the Constitution, I will attempt to have a union of states coalesce into a renewed Mideast regional power. I would also expect other regions to do the same and form their own regional Constitutions.

In this post, you're demonstrating exactly the problem with regions. You're being provincialist, but you can't defend the need for regions. "I want them" is not a valid reason for this Convention to approve the continuation of regions--even if most delegates feel the same way. You must provide some reason why it would be better for Atlasia if there were regions than if there weren't; I see no evidence for this.

Regions provide a multi-faceted approach to the game and a new level of excitement when they are active. At the moment there is one incredibly active region (the Mideast) and four pretty much dead ones. My question to you is why give up that one because of the other four? The worst case scenario if we keep regions is that they are inactive and act like they don't exist. The best case is we get thriving regional politics that add a new dimension to everyone's game.

I began this game, and continue to play it, mainly on the regional level. The recent flurry of activity in the Mideast shows how they can be used properly. The regions serve as the best way for new members to become accustomed to and excited about Atlasia. Whether the veteran members choose to ignore them is their own prerogative, but if you ask Devilman, Persepolis, or myself about the value of regional participation you will get a far different response.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

Verily
Cuivienen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16806


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

View Profile
« Reply #76 on: March 30, 2009, 11:47:29 pm »
Ignore

Apparently my proposal is too radical to merit discussion, as per usual.

I support it above all others, although I have nothing further to add. But others have a romantic love for regions which cannot be explained by reason. Indeed, no one has yet offered a serious defense for the continuation of regions. If no one does so, I will make a big stink about it.

A good idea.  As my original desire for abolitionism has evidently failed, I am all for the complete and total abolition of regions now.  Honestly, people, they serve no purpose.

(though in this post I was referring more to my really weird-looking maps on the second page, which are "too different", I'm sure)

Determination of regions will happen during the development of the Constitution, as we decide what the Constitution addresses. As you can see in the first Constitution the regions are clearly marked. It is something that could just be left out if the delegates so choose.

I would just warn that if regions are abolished by the Constitution, I will attempt to have a union of states coalesce into a renewed Mideast regional power. I would also expect other regions to do the same and form their own regional Constitutions.

In this post, you're demonstrating exactly the problem with regions. You're being provincialist, but you can't defend the need for regions. "I want them" is not a valid reason for this Convention to approve the continuation of regions--even if most delegates feel the same way. You must provide some reason why it would be better for Atlasia if there were regions than if there weren't; I see no evidence for this.

Regions provide a multi-faceted approach to the game and a new level of excitement when they are active. At the moment there is one incredibly active region (the Mideast) and four pretty much dead ones. My question to you is why give up that one because of the other four? The worst case scenario if we keep regions is that they are inactive and act like they don't exist. The best case is we get thriving regional politics that add a new dimension to everyone's game.

I began this game, and continue to play it, mainly on the regional level. The recent flurry of activity in the Mideast shows how they can be used properly. The regions serve as the best way for new members to become accustomed to and excited about Atlasia. Whether the veteran members choose to ignore them is their own prerogative, but if you ask Devilman, Persepolis, or myself about the value of regional participation you will get a far different response.

There have certainly been short-term bursts of activity from dormancy. But they don't last; long experience in Atlasia makes this very obvious. During my early years in Atlasia, I attempted to revive the Northeast. This worked for a time, working with a small number of other people. The Northeast was even more active than the Mideast is now. But, once I and Mr. Moderate were no longer driving the engine, it disappeared; the Northeast sank back into inactivity. The same will happen to the Mideast; I can guarantee it. It has happened before. There is nothing beneficial long-term from regional government.

The regions can't be used properly. Not long-term. They suffer from extremely intermittent interest, something reorganizing the regions won't alleviate in the slightest. Post here in a few months; if the Mideast is still around, it won't be legislating seriously any more.
Logged
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #77 on: March 31, 2009, 08:36:31 am »
Ignore

So what if activity is not long-term? There is no "benefit" to abolishing the regions. Either you have intermittent flashes of regional activity or you abolish them and don't even have that.

If a region allows for even one new member to get excited about the game (and in my short time I can count at leas three already) then they are worthwhile.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #78 on: March 31, 2009, 09:59:02 am »
Ignore

So what if activity is not long-term? There is no "benefit" to abolishing the regions. Either you have intermittent flashes of regional activity or you abolish them and don't even have that.

If a region allows for even one new member to get excited about the game (and in my short time I can count at leas three already) then they are worthwhile.

I would have to agree with Purple State. I am new here, as we all know, and when I first came here if the Mideast didn't have a place where I could get involved I wouldn't have stuck around. Of course, if one of the plans that has a lower house is passed by the delegates then the only reason why regions are needed are for electing Senators and Governors.
Logged

Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: March 31, 2009, 10:21:32 am »
Ignore

So what if activity is not long-term? There is no "benefit" to abolishing the regions. Either you have intermittent flashes of regional activity or you abolish them and don't even have that.

If a region allows for even one new member to get excited about the game (and in my short time I can count at leas three already) then they are worthwhile.

I would have to agree with Purple State. I am new here, as we all know, and when I first came here if the Mideast didn't have a place where I could get involved I wouldn't have stuck around. Of course, if one of the plans that has a lower house is passed by the delegates then the only reason why regions are needed are for electing Senators and Governors.

That could always be done in different ways (by parties or national seats like the Senate has now). Regions aren't really necessary for national elections. But they are a great way to become acquainted with Atlasia.

So I would promote the formation of extra-governmental regional spheres were they not included in the new Constitution.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #80 on: March 31, 2009, 10:52:30 am »
Ignore

We could just split the country in half and have two big regions. Each region would have a head of Government and 3 to 5 Assembly members. The Assembly members would come up with bill and debate the bills, if passed then the bill would go to the head of Government and that person can sign/veto bills.

They would have alot of work to do to start off with, trying to come up with a constitutions for the new regions, name the regions and so on.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2009, 11:05:22 am by Devilman88 »Logged

Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: March 31, 2009, 08:00:04 pm »
Ignore

We could just split the country in half and have two big regions. Each region would have a head of Government and 3 to 5 Assembly members. The Assembly members would come up with bill and debate the bills, if passed then the bill would go to the head of Government and that person can sign/veto bills.

They would have alot of work to do to start off with, trying to come up with a constitutions for the new regions, name the regions and so on.

Haha. East-West. Names done. But, seriously, this isn't a bad idea. However, I would much rather have many regions (10) and have one or two elected members of parliament (judging by the voting) than having only two regions and a bunch of elected officers from each.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: March 31, 2009, 08:38:43 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #83 on: March 31, 2009, 09:17:57 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


The thing is there isn't alot of active members, I believe that the less regions we have the better off we are. It will be very hard to find someone active in all of them regions.

Now, If we had two or three region it would be better for the game. One you will have better elections because more people would be running also it will get parties to have primaries if the have more then one cadidate wanting to run. It would bring the game to a new level that we don't have right now.

Logged

Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: March 31, 2009, 09:58:21 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


The thing is there isn't alot of active members, I believe that the less regions we have the better off we are. It will be very hard to find someone active in all of them regions.

Now, If we had two or three region it would be better for the game. One you will have better elections because more people would be running also it will get parties to have primaries if the have more then one cadidate wanting to run. It would bring the game to a new level that we don't have right now.



However, most active members would get a meaningful say in this system.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
Devilman88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2534


Political Matrix
E: 5.94, S: 2.61

View Profile
« Reply #85 on: April 01, 2009, 07:31:09 am »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


The thing is there isn't alot of active members, I believe that the less regions we have the better off we are. It will be very hard to find someone active in all of them regions.

Now, If we had two or three region it would be better for the game. One you will have better elections because more people would be running also it will get parties to have primaries if the have more then one candidate wanting to run. It would bring the game to a new level that we don't have right now.



However, most active members would get a meaningful say in this system.

If the delegates vote on one of the plans that makes a lower house where every citizen is a member, active member would get a say.
Logged

Hashemite
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31553
South Africa


Political Matrix
E: -1.29, S: -7.30


View Profile WWW
« Reply #86 on: April 01, 2009, 03:29:40 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.
Logged

Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: April 01, 2009, 05:39:45 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.

People would move regions to make it so.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15527
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: April 01, 2009, 05:41:11 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.

People would move regions to make it so.

Trust me, there wouldn't be enough activity.  And you'd still have the problems that "regions don't matter".  Because they don't.
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #89 on: April 01, 2009, 05:43:27 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.

People would move regions to make it so.

Trust me, there wouldn't be enough activity.  And you'd still have the problems that "regions don't matter".  Because they don't.

Maybe we should make the game as a coalition of many countries, like the EU, except with an elected leader.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15527
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: April 01, 2009, 05:44:51 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.

People would move regions to make it so.

Trust me, there wouldn't be enough activity.  And you'd still have the problems that "regions don't matter".  Because they don't.

Maybe we should make the game as a coalition of many countries, like the EU, except with an elected leader.

A great idea, but nobody supports abolishing the national government.
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: April 01, 2009, 05:50:11 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.

People would move regions to make it so.

Trust me, there wouldn't be enough activity.  And you'd still have the problems that "regions don't matter".  Because they don't.

Maybe we should make the game as a coalition of many countries, like the EU, except with an elected leader.

A great idea, but nobody supports abolishing the national government.

Who knows? Things change.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15527
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #92 on: April 01, 2009, 09:25:54 pm »
Ignore

OK, I couldn't get the map to be more than 4 colors, but I present a 9 region plan, based on Afleitch's population map. The Northeast is split into 3 regions, which are not shown on the map. Two regions each share the colors blue and red, but they are not one region. Take only the contiguous regions. Alaska is part of Washington's region and Hawaii is part of CA's. The Southern gray area is one region, but can be split in two to make a 10th region if necessary. The Northeast could be split 4 ways instead of 3 to serve the same purpose.


3/4 of those regions would be inactive. There would be a whole lot of trouble to actually get one name on the ballot in every regional election in those regions.

People would move regions to make it so.

Trust me, there wouldn't be enough activity.  And you'd still have the problems that "regions don't matter".  Because they don't.

Maybe we should make the game as a coalition of many countries, like the EU, except with an elected leader.

A great idea, but nobody supports abolishing the national government.

Who knows? Things change.

Not in Atlasia, sir, not in Atlasia Wink
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
Verily
Cuivienen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16806


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

View Profile
« Reply #93 on: April 01, 2009, 09:31:41 pm »
Ignore

So what if activity is not long-term? There is no "benefit" to abolishing the regions. Either you have intermittent flashes of regional activity or you abolish them and don't even have that.

If a region allows for even one new member to get excited about the game (and in my short time I can count at leas three already) then they are worthwhile.

If we abolish the Regions, people focus their activity on the federal government, meaning a more involved citizenry generally and more participation as well as a diversity in debates and opinions that we almost never have in Regions. This is, of course, in tandem with parliamentary (or presidential) universalism, but the convention has already made it clear that universalism is quite popular.
Logged
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: April 01, 2009, 10:52:33 pm »
Ignore

So what if activity is not long-term? There is no "benefit" to abolishing the regions. Either you have intermittent flashes of regional activity or you abolish them and don't even have that.

If a region allows for even one new member to get excited about the game (and in my short time I can count at leas three already) then they are worthwhile.

If we abolish the Regions, people focus their activity on the federal government, meaning a more involved citizenry generally and more participation as well as a diversity in debates and opinions that we almost never have in Regions. This is, of course, in tandem with parliamentary (or presidential) universalism, but the convention has already made it clear that universalism is quite popular.

I don't see removing regions as increasing national activity. People who participate tend to do so on all levels. And those who don't on one level rarely do so on either. The regions are a form of training wheels for new members. You can't expect everyone to just jump right in. It helps people understand what goes on here, you are introduced to other members. And it oftentimes can be more active than the national government, which gives people something to do during the slowdowns.

If there is a universal system we can probably take a look at reforming the regions, but I don't think we should just throw out this great asset.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15527
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #95 on: April 01, 2009, 10:55:31 pm »
Ignore

"Great asset"?!

Look, you said it yourself: the people who are active in the regions are active in the national government.  What's the point in keeping regions, then, if regions have no actual purpose?  As it is right now, there's nothing that regions do that the national government doesn't.
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
Purple State
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6780
United States


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: April 01, 2009, 11:12:16 pm »
Ignore

"Great asset"?!

Look, you said it yourself: the people who are active in the regions are active in the national government.  What's the point in keeping regions, then, if regions have no actual purpose?  As it is right now, there's nothing that regions do that the national government doesn't.

Because that is for veteran members. But new members usually are only active in the regions at first. I'm new enough to appreciate this I guess.
Logged

Marokai/Purple Main Campaign Thread

Thank you to all our supporters!

Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 471


View Profile
« Reply #97 on: April 02, 2009, 12:02:00 am »
Ignore

"Great asset"?!

Look, you said it yourself: the people who are active in the regions are active in the national government.  What's the point in keeping regions, then, if regions have no actual purpose?  As it is right now, there's nothing that regions do that the national government doesn't.

Because that is for veteran members. But new members usually are only active in the regions at first. I'm new enough to appreciate this I guess.

That is true. People like devilman and I are both only active on the regional level because we are new. Taking that away is like taking away the minor league system from baseball.
Logged

Do Americans really need the government to shell out billions of dollars to large corporations, who then go to their sorry-excuses-for-executives and give them bonuses? I think not....
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines