Question from a citizen to the delegates

[Vepres]

It is my understanding that this convention was called for by the President because he believed that the entire system of government in Atlasia needed to be looked at because of the low activity. Perhaps activity was a problem in the past, but look at the turnout for the special election. Look at the regional senatorial races, 3 out of 5 of the races are contested. Yes, all regions but the Mideast are dead, but regional reform is needed, not a new national constitution.

I would also like to express my uneasiness about the new constitution. I mean really, parliament? Ministers? Dissolution of congress? This all sounds more like a European style of democracy, not a US style.

So my question is, do we really need such a radical overhaul of the system? For reasons I stated above, wouldn't it be quicker, easier, and better for Atlasia as a whole if some constitutional amendments were passed? For example, minimum GM activity levels, or shorter senatorial terms.

[bgwah]

So my question is, do we really need such a radical overhaul of the system?

No.

The collapse of parties within Atlasia and the lack of Presidential elections with distinct ideological differences between the major candidates are what can really hurt Atlasia. Neither of those seem to be a problem lately, but they could arise again in the future.

[Vepres]

So my question is, do we really need such a radical overhaul of the system?

No.

The collapse of parties within Atlasia and the lack of Presidential elections with distinct ideological differences between the major candidates are what can really hurt Atlasia. Neither of those seem to be a problem lately, but they could arise again in the future.

Ok then, how would a new constitution prevent the collapse of parties in the future? Seems to me that the RPP and JCP are here to stay, and the DA isn't looking too bad either.

[ilikeverin]

It is my understanding that this convention was called for by the President because he believed that the entire system of government in Atlasia needed to be looked at because of the low activity. Perhaps activity was a problem in the past, but look at the turnout for the special election. Look at the regional senatorial races, 3 out of 5 of the races are contested. Yes, all regions but the Mideast are dead, but regional reform is needed, not a new national constitution.

In order to have proper regional reform (e.g. their abolition) we need a Convention.

So my question is, do we really need such a radical overhaul of the system? For reasons I stated above, wouldn't it be quicker, easier, and better for Atlasia as a whole if some constitutional amendments were passed? For example, minimum GM activity levels, or shorter senatorial terms.

The Constitutional Convention was called because the problems with Atlasia are systemic; a bunch of Constitutional Amendments won't do, because they would essentially only enact cosmetic changes.  In order to get at the actual problems with Atlasia, we need to change the core.

[bgwah]

I still fail to see what benefit abolishing the regions will bring.

[Vepres]

I still fail to see what benefit abolishing the regions will bring.

It might hurt activity because newbies will have no offices to enter into. Their only choice would be a congressional race, most likely against a well known member of Atlasia.

[Vepres]

The Constitutional Convention was called because the problems with Atlasia are systemic; a bunch of Constitutional Amendments won't do, because they would essentially only enact cosmetic changes.  In order to get at the actual problems with Atlasia, we need to change the core.

What are these systemic problems? Can you give a few examples? And what do you mean by change the core? I don't think abolishing regions or switching to a parliamentarian system *shudder* would solve any problems, they may even worsen some.

[ilikeverin]

I still fail to see what benefit abolishing the regions will bring.

And I still fail to see what benefits the regions have.

They don't encourage activity any more than it would be encouraged under other proposals, and they don't help newbies participate any more than they they would be helped under other proposals.  They are dead weight, pure and simple.  When has anything useful come of Regions, besides petty rivalries (which is why I supported abolishing the national government at first, because those petty rivalries would make an interesting game as well)?

The Constitutional Convention was called because the problems with Atlasia are systemic; a bunch of Constitutional Amendments won't do, because they would essentially only enact cosmetic changes.  In order to get at the actual problems with Atlasia, we need to change the core.

What are these systemic problems? Can you give a few examples? And what do you mean by change the core? I don't think abolishing regions or switching to a parliamentarian system *shudder* would solve any problems, they may even worsen some.

Sure, we have:

1) Inactive, moribund regions.
2) A Senate that is entirely disconnected from the workings of normal Atlasians. (I stopped caring about Senate elections when I realized that none of their debates had anything to do with what happens in the Atlas Fantasy Elections board)
3) A weak party system with little accountability to one's party or reason to be in a party at all.

1 is fixed with abolishing the regions; 2 with universalism; and 3 with parliamentarianism.  Now, I'm not entirely keen on all aspects of parliamentarianism myself, but I'm committed to the first two options, and, as those have gotten tied to parliamentarianism here (despite my protests to allow people to support universalism and a presidential system; anyway, that was a long and painful argument, and I don't want to revisit it) and to the reform movement in general, I suppose I support it too.

[Purple State]

Considering every new member clamors for the maintenance of the regions, I don't understand why you continue to deny their ability to help orient people to the game.

It is my understanding that this convention was called for by the President because he believed that the entire system of government in Atlasia needed to be looked at because of the low activity. Perhaps activity was a problem in the past, but look at the turnout for the special election. Look at the regional senatorial races, 3 out of 5 of the races are contested. Yes, all regions but the Mideast are dead, but regional reform is needed, not a new national constitution.

I would also like to express my uneasiness about the new constitution. I mean really, parliament? Ministers? Dissolution of congress? This all sounds more like a European style of democracy, not a US style.

So my question is, do we really need such a radical overhaul of the system? For reasons I stated above, wouldn't it be quicker, easier, and better for Atlasia as a whole if some constitutional amendments were passed? For example, minimum GM activity levels, or shorter senatorial terms.

The recent activity is heartening to see, I will admit. However, the issues in Atlasia, from inactive members to delinquent officers to dead regions and everything in between, require more than just new members. It takes an overhaul.

As for European vs. US, I urge you to read through the proposals themselves. The Parliamentary Bicameralism, although it has the world parliament in its title, is actually much closer to the American bicameral legislature than what we have now, including conference, joint sessions, etc. It proposal takes from both systems and makes a suitable combination for this game.

[ilikeverin]

Considering every new member clamors for the maintenance of the regions, I don't understand why you continue to deny their ability to help orient people to the game.

Because it's easy to imagine new members orienting to the game anyway.  You'll notice that the vast majority of replies to Vepres's Senatorial declaration were from either non-Midwesterners or me/Lewis trying to educate him on the culture of the Midwest (efforts entirely rebuffed ).  Very little input was given from Midwestern citizens.  In fact, the response to his PM campaign to Midwesterners-only was apparently so negative that he quit the campaign rather than keep running.  The fact that he stayed in the race for so long and remains active despite what he considers his cool reception from Midwesterners testifies to the fact that it is Vepres—emphatically not the Midwestern Region—that is the reason that Vepres is so active.

[Purple State]

Considering every new member clamors for the maintenance of the regions, I don't understand why you continue to deny their ability to help orient people to the game.

Because it's easy to imagine new members orienting to the game anyway.  You'll notice that the vast majority of replies to Vepres's Senatorial declaration were from either non-Midwesterners or me/Lewis trying to educate him on the culture of the Midwest (efforts entirely rebuffed ).  Very little input was given from Midwestern citizens.  In fact, the response to his PM campaign to Midwesterners-only was apparently so negative that he quit the campaign rather than keep running.  The fact that he stayed in the race for so long and remains active despite what he considers his cool reception from Midwesterners testifies to the fact that it is Vepres—emphatically not the Midwestern Region—that is the reason that Vepres is so active.

Because the Mideast Senate seat is more of a federal office than a regional one. Which is why Vepres should have first sought to join a regional legislature (although that is sorely lacking in most of the regions) in order to gain the confidence of Midwestern voters and some experience. Why not try regional reform before simply throwing them away?

[ilikeverin]

Considering every new member clamors for the maintenance of the regions, I don't understand why you continue to deny their ability to help orient people to the game.

Because it's easy to imagine new members orienting to the game anyway.  You'll notice that the vast majority of replies to Vepres's Senatorial declaration were from either non-Midwesterners or me/Lewis trying to educate him on the culture of the Midwest (efforts entirely rebuffed ).  Very little input was given from Midwestern citizens.  In fact, the response to his PM campaign to Midwesterners-only was apparently so negative that he quit the campaign rather than keep running.  The fact that he stayed in the race for so long and remains active despite what he considers his cool reception from Midwesterners testifies to the fact that it is Vepres—emphatically not the Midwestern Region—that is the reason that Vepres is so active.

Because the Mideast Senate seat is more of a federal office than a regional one. Which is why Vepres should have first sought to join a regional legislature (although that is sorely lacking in most of the regions) in order to gain the confidence of Midwestern voters and some experience. Why not try regional reform before simply throwing them away?

Why keep regions just to keep regional legislatures if we can accomplish similar goals on the national level?

Look, we can just keep rebutting each other endlessly, because whether regions or the national government is the best safeguard of activity is a scientific question that could only be answered if we looked beyond anecdotal evidence (which neither of us is obviously going to do).  But the fact remains that, even if the two systems are entirely equal at keeping activity up, a system that eliminates the regions is more simple.  And I think simplicity is something we need.

[Purple State]

I'm not talking activity. I'm talking introduction and orientation to the game. Without that you have new members running for federal office before they are ready.

[Vepres]

Considering every new member clamors for the maintenance of the regions, I don't understand why you continue to deny their ability to help orient people to the game.

Because it's easy to imagine new members orienting to the game anyway.  You'll notice that the vast majority of replies to Vepres's Senatorial declaration were from either non-Midwesterners or me/Lewis trying to educate him on the culture of the Midwest (efforts entirely rebuffed ).  Very little input was given from Midwestern citizens.  In fact, the response to his PM campaign to Midwesterners-only was apparently so negative that he quit the campaign rather than keep running.  The fact that he stayed in the race for so long and remains active despite what he considers his cool reception from Midwesterners testifies to the fact that it is Vepres—emphatically not the Midwestern Region—that is the reason that Vepres is so active.

I understand and support the Midwestern culture now. In fact, I entirely support the state names I was once opposed to.

You should've seen the results of my PM polling. It was 7 to 9 "I won't vote for you" and 1 undecided.

I'm not talking activity. I'm talking introduction and orientation to the game. Without that you have new members running for federal office before they are ready.

This would help significantly. I think a lot of newbies would be more active if they understood what it took to run for national office, and how to run for any office, national or otherwise.

[ilikeverin]

I'm not talking activity. I'm talking introduction and orientation to the game. Without that you have new members running for federal office before they are ready.

Well, that's partly addressed by universalism; new players would have the chance to immediately gain experience in the legislature because they would be considered a part of it right away.

But even without that, if there are no regional offices, than the default will become to run for national office immediately.  People won't be seen as "too inexperienced for national office" because it would be understood that the only office they would have a chance to run for is the national one.  If a non-universalist bicameral unitary system were passed, perhaps it would be considered the proper thing to do to run for the lower house before the upper one or something.

[Purple State]

I'm not talking activity. I'm talking introduction and orientation to the game. Without that you have new members running for federal office before they are ready.

Well, that's partly addressed by universalism; new players would have the chance to immediately gain experience in the legislature because they would be considered a part of it right away.

But even without that, if there are no regional offices, than the default will become to run for national office immediately.  People won't be seen as "too inexperienced for national office" because it would be understood that the only office they would have a chance to run for is the national one.  If a non-universalist bicameral unitary system were passed, perhaps it would be considered the proper thing to do to run for the lower house before the upper one or something.

And in such a system I understand it. However, that isn't to say I agree with any proposal disregarding the regions. And the fact is, some people are just not familiar enough with Atlasia to hold federal office. Whether that's the only office they can run for or not, you should be more familiar with the game before taking positions like that. I think it denigrates the higher offices.

[Vepres]

I think universalism is a bad choice. Atlasia is about elections first, then government. Universalism would essentially flip that, which most Atlasians would not support.

Oh, and the regions aren't totally dead. The Mideast is always active, and the Pacific region has its periods of activity every few weeks.

[ilikeverin]

I'm not talking activity. I'm talking introduction and orientation to the game. Without that you have new members running for federal office before they are ready.

Well, that's partly addressed by universalism; new players would have the chance to immediately gain experience in the legislature because they would be considered a part of it right away.

But even without that, if there are no regional offices, than the default will become to run for national office immediately.  People won't be seen as "too inexperienced for national office" because it would be understood that the only office they would have a chance to run for is the national one.  If a non-universalist bicameral unitary system were passed, perhaps it would be considered the proper thing to do to run for the lower house before the upper one or something.

And in such a system I understand it. However, that isn't to say I agree with any proposal disregarding the regions. And the fact is, some people are just not familiar enough with Atlasia to hold federal office. Whether that's the only office they can run for or not, you should be more familiar with the game before taking positions like that. I think it denigrates the higher offices.

But they wouldn't be "higher offices" anymore, they would be offices.  Shouldn't we be discouraging elitism?

I think universalism is a bad choice. Atlasia is about elections first, then government. Universalism would essentially flip that, which most Atlasians would not support.

That's a good talking point, but elections would still happen in a universalist system—it wouldn't even be hard to equalize the number of elected positions to the number in other proposals (regions and all), just increase the size of the Senate.  Now, giving people the incentive to run in a universalist system is a completely legitimate problem, and one I've tried to solicit ideas on in the universalist thread, but nobody listens.  At the moment the best idea I came up with was to make it so that the Prime-Minister-equivalent-candidates would have to be proposed and sent to the House of Representatives for their approval, so being elected to the Senate would mean you would be in charge of deciding who the executive officer would be.

Oh, and the regions aren't totally dead. The Mideast is always active, and the Pacific region has its periods of activity every few weeks.

Yes, the Mideast citizenry is active; yes, the Pacific citizenry is sporadically active.  But why waste their energy on improving the activity in their own regions, when we can make it so they devote it to things that affect every Atlasian, instead of just a privileged segment?  I certainly don't pay a single bit of attention to affairs outside my own Region, so the fact that Mideasterners are active doesn't make my Atlasian experience one jot more enjoyable.