Do a WA reset

[Snefaldia]

I hesitated to do a post here but, well, here it is. I am not a very active player these days and I no longer do the WA/GA part of the game, but I used to. For what it is worth (not much) I think this is a good idea. I periodically pop into the GA forum and consider getting active again but have always been put off by the sheer amount of work I would have to do to get caught up on the over five hundred resolutions already passed and the corpus of secretariat rulings and procedures. I also don't like the extinction of most WA RP but that is a separate issue that a reset won't fix.

I grant that the way the game is played may have evolved irretrievably beyond what I used to enjoy in the past, but I still submit that it is really odd to expect players who want to become active in this part of the game beyond gameside voting to approach it like a law student, studying case law and judicial rulings. It doesn't strike me as particularly welcoming or enjoyable for the broadest category of player in this game. What is the situation going to be in five years when there are another few hundred resolutions to go through? I'm not sure the best choice is to have players read the NS equivalent of Coke on Littleton before they can jump in.

[Separatist Peoples]

I hesitated to do a post here but, well, here it is. I am not a very active player these days and I no longer do the WA/GA part of the game, but I used to. For what it is worth (not much) I think this is a good idea. I periodically pop into the GA forum and consider getting active again but have always been put off by the sheer amount of work I would have to do to get caught up on the over five hundred resolutions already passed and the corpus of secretariat rulings and procedures. I also don't like the extinction of most WA RP but that is a separate issue that a reset won't fix.

I grant that the way the game is played may have evolved irretrievably beyond what I used to enjoy in the past, but I still submit that it is really odd to expect players who want to become active in this part of the game beyond gameside voting to approach it like a law student, studying case law and judicial rulings. It doesn't strike me as particularly welcoming or enjoyable for the broadest category of player in this game. What is the situation going to be in five years when there are another few hundred resolutions to go through? I'm not sure the best choice is to have players read the NS equivalent of Coke on Littleton before they can jump in.

You need to know almost nothing about GenSec rulings to draft successfully in the GA. And a huge chunk of those resolutions are repeals and the targets. There's only about 200 active resolutions.

People pretend the GA is this morass but it's not any more complicated than II. You get people who aren't willing to get into it very deep but still manage successfully and you get people who study driven trains on armored vehicles to find a realistic rate of movement. One is better than the other, but both manage fine.

[Snefaldia]

I appreciate that you have a particular position you are trying to defend here but it is unfortunate that I can give my genuine opinion (I find it very hard to get back into the GA because there is just so much to get up to speed with and learn and this makes it not fun for me, and I think others may feel similarly) and you tell me that I'm actually wrong, it's not as complicated as all that. It is in fact a very complicated part of the game, this is what I think about it, and it is a perfectly valid position to have.

Anyway, I came to give my opinion on whether I think a reset would be good because I suspect there are a lot of players like me.

[Holy Marsh]

It seems one solution to this situation would be mightily in-flavor. Why not put this up as any other GA resolution and abide by the results?

[Wallenburg]

It seems one solution to this situation would be mightily in-flavor. Why not put this up as any other GA resolution and abide by the results?

If someone feels strongly about this they should go about writing a repeal for GA #1. If it gets popular support then its clear there is a mandate for such an action. Another avenue could be preparing a resolution to repeal every resolution over say 10 years old to see if the public is interested in changing the long sense decided decisions.

Neither of those are mechanically possible, which is why this matter is being discussed here instead of in the GA drafting chambers.

[Frisbeeteria]

Why not put this up as any other GA resolution and abide by the results?

Neither of those are mechanically possible

The reason it isn't mechanically possible is that we can't abide by the results without changing the game code. The only admin who understands the WA engine well enough to make those changes is [violet] ... and she has made it abundantly clear that she will not be coding based on any votes from players, whether in the WA, Regional polls, or threads in the forums. She codes what she has time for; when she has spare time (not often); and codes things that are well balanced across all player interests.

Furthermore, in 2008, while I can't find the relevant post, she made it clear that her position on this topic was "never again!". I think she could possible be convinced if there was a strong consensus on this subject. I wouldn't take it to here based on the mixed opinions I've seen here.

[Sincluda]

There are always topics to cover, and when you're a new author, it's better to start small.
And to answer the "GA should be doing more than conventions on toilet bowl seats" argument, all legislating bodies cover all topics.

This is a game. People relentlessly comparing the WA to RL legislatures need to remember this is meant to be fun.

Having the hard work of many individuals undone just because you wanted to ban slavery is dumb.

That is fairly obviously not the motivation for my suggestion.

1. One of the points of the WA is to simulate RL legislatures. And whether or not it's "fun" is subjective. It wouldn't be fun for me or countless others if the WA was reset.

2.

Arguments in favour:

1. It is unfair that newer players have limited opportunities to discuss the big issues because they've already all been legislated on, in some cases 12+ years ago. We will soon be reaching a point where legal forum users (13) were not even born when the WA closed off forever the ability to discuss slavery and torture. They are stuck legislating on fairly narrow topics and dealing with the weight of hundreds of past resolutions duplicating/contradicting their best efforts to play a game.

[Old Hope]

Most of the big problems of the WA cannot be solved with a reset.
Because they are not of a technical nature.

If you do not conform to a specific format your proposal has little chance to pass.
If you are not very versed in writing drafts(e.g a new or newish player) then drafting will probably take months.
Recently, some bad attitudes came in again. I saw an uptick in responses like "its your draft, its not our job to point out what the issues with your draft are, you need to convince us/find them yourself". Typically these players only give them when the draft is eventually submitted...
New players understandably hate these attitudes(and not only them).

NONE of these issues would be solved with a reset(except maybe the second for a short term).

The only problem left is saturation but we have not reached that yet. We will know when we reached it - there will be no more proposals going to vote for many weeks. If we reach that, then it is time for a reset.

[Quintessence of Dust]

I appreciate that you have a particular position you are trying to defend here but it is unfortunate that I can give my genuine opinion (I find it very hard to get back into the GA because there is just so much to get up to speed with and learn and this makes it not fun for me, and I think others may feel similarly) and you tell me that I'm actually wrong, it's not as complicated as all that. It is in fact a very complicated part of the game, this is what I think about it, and it is a perfectly valid position to have.

Anyway, I came to give my opinion on whether I think a reset would be good because I suspect there are a lot of players like me.

um no ur wrong sweetie

1. One of the points of the WA is to simulate RL legislatures.

I'm curious on a source for that, but if it were, it does an atrocious job of it. As has been pointed out, no RL legislature could operate under the duplication/contradiction (for example) rules of the WA. Anyway many RL legislatures have sunset provisions.

2.

Not sure what you're getting at by quoting my words with zero commentary. Are you suggesting that the author of the current ban on slavery would be opposed to having said ban reset?

[Meretica]

Why not put this up as any other GA resolution and abide by the results?

Neither of those are mechanically possible

The reason it isn't mechanically possible is that we can't abide by the results without changing the game code. The only admin who understands the WA engine well enough to make those changes is [violet] ... and she has made it abundantly clear that she will not be coding based on any votes from players, whether in the WA, Regional polls, or threads in the forums. She codes what she has time for; when she has spare time (not often); and codes things that are well balanced across all player interests.

Furthermore, in 2008, while I can't find the relevant post, she made it clear that her position on this topic was "never again!". I think she could be convinced if there was a strong consensus on this subject. I wouldn't take it to here based on the mixed opinions I've seen here.

I'd like to gently point out that we may never know how strong the consensus would be without polling the community. Silent majorities/minorities do exist, IRL and online.

[Lord Dominator]

The reason it isn't mechanically possible is that we can't abide by the results without changing the game code. The only admin who understands the WA engine well enough to make those changes is [violet] ... and she has made it abundantly clear that she will not be coding based on any votes from players, whether in the WA, Regional polls, or threads in the forums. She codes what she has time for; when she has spare time (not often); and codes things that are well balanced across all player interests.

Furthermore, in 2008, while I can't find the relevant post, she made it clear that her position on this topic was "never again!". I think she could be convinced if there was a strong consensus on this subject. I wouldn't take it to here based on the mixed opinions I've seen here.

I'd like to gently point out that we may never know how strong the consensus would be without polling the community. Silent majorities/minorities do exist, IRL and online.

We also have, by my knowledge, no way to poll said community (incidentally, which one?) that is both widespread and puppetspam proof.

[Galiantus III]

I'd like to gently point out that we may never know how strong the consensus would be without polling the community. Silent majorities/minorities do exist, IRL and online.

We also have, by my knowledge, no way to poll said community (incidentally, which one?) that is both widespread and puppetspam proof.

I'm against the idea, but you could have a vote with all WA membership. That's widespread and puppetspam proof.

[Sincluda]

1. One of the points of the WA is to simulate RL legislatures.

I'm curious on a source for that, but if it were, it does an atrocious job of it. As has been pointed out, no RL legislature could operate under the duplication/contradiction (for example) rules of the WA. Anyway many RL legislatures have sunset provisions.

2.

Not sure what you're getting at by quoting my words with zero commentary. Are you suggesting that the author of the current ban on slavery would be opposed to having said ban reset?

1. You yourself mentioned that doing a sunset would be complicated and threads discussing it died. The duplication rule exists to avoid clutter and having to repeal multiple resolutions to avoid contradiction. Contradiction rules absolutely exist because you can't have one law declaring one thing and another in the same place declaring the opposite, doi.

2. Hm, you may have misunderstood me. The ban on slavery was just an example. I mean just because people aren't getting to write generally agreed upon big-ticket issues, resetting the GA wouldn't make sense. In fact, trying to get the duplication rule undone is probably a good goal for you, it may not be what you entirely want, but you could argue through with it.

[Imperium Anglorum]

1. You yourself mentioned that doing a sunset would be complicated and threads discussing it died. The duplication rule exists to avoid clutter and having to repeal multiple resolutions to avoid contradiction. Contradiction rules absolutely exist because you can't have one law declaring one thing and another in the same place declaring the opposite, doi.

That's just patently untrue at two levels. First, the GA contradiction rule doesn't work like that, applying against contradictions "in the same place". In fact, internal contradictions are not illegal under the GA rules. Instead, contradictions with prior legislation is illegal. Second, laws regularly contradict prior legislation in the real world. Even if contradiction rules are applied, they are normally brushed aside in terms of parliamentary sovereignty or a broad grant of legislative power. The only 'legislature' I can think of which operated similar to the GA is that of the Athenian ecclesia, with the graphe paranomon, justified not in similar terms, but rather, in terms that Athenians do not repeal laws.

If you do not conform to a specific format your proposal has little chance to pass.

Lmao.

... I have a fundamental problem with having a meta "charter" passed as an ordinary resolution. In 08 it was explained as a special use of moderator powers; treating as an ordinary resolution is a post-facto untruth. If such a charter is even needed (I don't understand why it as, as Bears says) then it should be an unrepealable Bookkeeping thing.

I agree somewhat. People ought to be able to replace the charter. Definitely not sunsettable. And perhaps also immune from contradiction/duplication rules might be interesting as well, with a supermajority passage requirement?

[Sincluda]

1. You yourself mentioned that doing a sunset would be complicated and threads discussing it died. The duplication rule exists to avoid clutter and having to repeal multiple resolutions to avoid contradiction. Contradiction rules absolutely exist because you can't have one law declaring one thing and another in the same place declaring the opposite, doi.

That's just patently untrue at two levels. First, the GA contradiction rule doesn't work like that, applying against contradictions "in the same place". In fact, internal contradictions are not illegal under the GA rules. Instead, contradictions with prior legislation is illegal. Second, laws regularly contradict prior legislation in the real world. Even if contradiction rules are applied, they are normally brushed aside in terms of parliamentary sovereignty or a broad grant of legislative power. The only 'legislature' I can think of which operated similar to the GA is that of the Athenian ecclesia, with the graphe paranomon, justified not in similar terms, but rather, in terms that Athenians do not repeal laws.

Ah, I see, thank you.

[Vivolkha]

There are always topics to cover, and when you're a new author, it's better to start small.
And to answer the "GA should be doing more than conventions on toilet bowl seats" argument, all legislating bodies cover all topics.

This is a game. People relentlessly comparing the WA to RL legislatures need to remember this is meant to be fun.

"Fun" is way too subjective. You could argue for any WA change with your definition and perception of fun, yet it wouldn't coincide with other player's opinions and experiences of the game.

Having the hard work of many individuals undone just because you wanted to ban slavery is dumb.

That is fairly obviously not the motivation for my suggestion.

Yes it is.

um no ur wrong sweetie

With that condescending attitude you're convincing absolutely no one.

[Quintessence of Dust]

That is fairly obviously not the motivation for my suggestion.

Yes it is.

Take a look at who wrote the current ban on slavery, and try again.

With that condescending attitude you're convincing absolutely no one.

Given Snefaldia was agreeing with me and we've known each other for over a decade I think it's possible I was joking.

[Sincluda]

Yes it is.

Take a look at who wrote the current ban on slavery, and try again.

That. Was. An. Example.