Zentata wrote: Sho, as well as two others have recently unilaterally dissolved the constitution, under the claim of "inactivity" (the RMB is more active than it has been in the majority of Thalassian history
Borm, even though the rmb may seem active, it's all role-playing. Actual government inactivity, which is why the constitution was dissolved, was and is wide-spread and systemic. I should know, considering I was part of the government. Heck, even the amount of nations in Thalassia has been falling dramatically. Also, in the statement by the IC, they admit that regional activity has been driven by 5 or 6 people since the end of 2019. The new constitution is meant to encourage and help a more active and diverse government. I very much hope that it does.
There's certainly a premise for a new constitution. Why should it not be made using the efficient, democratic process already put in place in the government? Why don't they have to vote on having an elected legislature?
Badivermeraed wrote:The Prime Minister shall, upon election, appoint a Cabinet to assist with programs and activities of executive government, and may dismiss Cabinet Ministers from office. In addition to whichever additional ministries the Prime Minister may decide to create, the Prime Minister must fill the following mandatory ministries
No, it was legal for Aren to make MoR and MoAA.
He wasn't saying it was illegal. He was saying Arenado already had re-organization power. I'm not sure whether that holds up. A new constitution may have been necessary, but this "Interim Council" and dissolving the constitution is ridiculous.
Badivermeraed wrote:As for your other points, when Borm calls some of the most dedicated public servants (including the founder) tyrants and dictators, I think people have a right to be angry lol. I've known Sho and Aren for over a year now, they wouldn't do anything that's not aiding thalassia. I mean, Sho helped create the region
This is just proving my point. You guys are supporting their change not because you have any thoughts on their course of action, but because "Sho and Aren are the best!" or "Sho and Aren are the best people to be doing this" or Sho and Aren are "some of the most dedicated public servants" (quote from Bad) or just blatantly: "I like Sho and Arenado". If this were more extreme, it would be a personality cult. If Sho and Arenado's intent were manipulation, it would be Orwellian. Right now, it's just dangerous-- good people can make bad decisions without correction.
A strong defender of Sho who dmed me to talk about this -- props to them -- attempted to debate for the path Thalassia is taking. Eventually, they sort of stopped defending them and said that they will see how it goes. While it's certainly possible that they just wanted me to shut up, they asked me whether I had any other critiques I wanted to talk about, suggesting they weren't frustrated with talking to me. I repeated this for another critique of Thalassia. Again, it ended with "I'll see how it goes" after some debate. So I asked them whether they would be fine with the same actions that Sho were doing if it were a RL political leader in their country (no, not Trump). They say no, stating, "I trust Sho and I dont trust [political leader in their country]". They later change their argument to say that they wouldn't be sitting back and seeing how it goes in RL because "RL has a lot more repercussions on [them]", implying quite a bit of hesitancy that they hadn't expressed before. This is clearly not a matter of players liking Sho's actions. It's a matter of players liking Sho. Thalassians don't think that Sho is wrong because they
won't think that Sho is wrong.
As for "people having a right to get angry", when you play a political simulator or run a region, you invite criticism. When you espouse an opinion, you invite debate. When someone asks you why you're doing something or supporting someone, they are holding you accountable for your words and actions. Thalassians and their cronies did not have a right to throw a temper tantrum where they flamed me over a couple dozen times over the course of several hours. If some moderators weren't heavy participants in it, they would've had to give out warnings per their Rule 3. And I didn't flame anyone. Frankly, I would quit TRR or TNP if I saw the region and its moderation behave that badly in response to criticism (which TRR and TNP often have no shortage of). So you might try to rationalize your and other's actions, Bad, but it only makes you look so much worse.
You guys might think that you can get off with this because people don't want to criticize you and take your slander, but I know for a fact that there are many major regions which will never associate with you guys after seeing this (the coup and the OOC issues). I have good evidence of that (and it's not just regions I'm in). The Leftist Assembly is
already dissolving their embassy, as they should. Keep burning bridges.