Naivetry wrote:Bears Armed wrote:[violet] wrote:As you said earlier, if you want complete control over your region, then create one and make yourself Founder. If, however, you want to exist in a region run by other people, you have to accept it might be, well, run by other people.
Don't you see any difference between being willing to live in a constitutional democracy, where those other people will come to power via agreed rules & respect your rights, and being willing to live in a situation where mobs of strangers can come along, seize power, and evict you at their will?!?
How does living in a Founded region prevent you from creating a constitutional democracy?
Granted that all democracy is granted by the Founder, likewise all continuation of democracy is granted by the Delegate. The success of any democracy depends upon the willingness of citizens to respect the rules. It can't be coded. You can only dictate who is allowed to become a citizen in your democracy, by restricting admittance via the WA Delegate, the Founder, or a password.
I wasn't talking about regions with Founders: In the post on which I was commenting [Violet] seemed to be suggesting that the only alternative to being in a Founded region should consist of being subject to mob-rule, and I wanted to know whether she really didn't see a possibility of anybody in a Founderless region wanting something better & more stable than that...
"tough shit"? Now that is helpful... NOT.Erastide wrote:Yes, if you can't agree on 1 person to be founder of the new region or can't all agree to refound, then you get to have smaller regions or go join a different one. If you bond together as a region and take action then you can have regional action and protection. If your region isn't able to get its act together and form a new region, then frankly, tough shit. You don't really agree enough to be together in one region.
So if a few members of a region that loses its Founder are too inert (or at odds with the majority) to cooperate in a re-founding, and the majority for one reason or another can't chose a Delegate who has enough Influence to eject that minority's members very quickly, the majority have to choose between founding a region under a different name -- and so losing any "heritage" value that might have become associated with the old one -- or remaining open to raiders?
Can you really not see how unpleasant people who've successfully managed to form a regional community would find either of those options? Or how likely the members of such a community would be to respond to a successful invasion of their "home" by giving up on NS altogether?