Revolutionary WA Thread

[Panageadom]

There is, as you may have noticed, a moderately successful thread forming a "revolution" against the WA. As infantile as it sounds, there are real issues at its core, and I post my suggestions to the problems here:

[quote]Look, my objection to the WA lies not in some dogmatic assertion that one's national identity is being eroded - if it is, pull a North Korea and leave the WA.

I simply feel that the mob rule element creates a centrism that doesn't make for a good gameplay element. Or rather, one that is good, but has the potential for much better. In light of this, I propose the following (and I apologise if this should stray into the technical forum, but the debate is happening here and now, so that's how things work):

1) That the mechanism behind WA legislation be seriously scrutinised. Fundamentally, the mechanism for deciding the merits/losses due to economic interventionism should be made more penal - if this cannot be done, and I admit the small amount I know about logical programming and the NS-economy ideology makes this next to impossible, I implore all WA nations to vet their programs for neccesary costs, and to learn when to let laissez-faire (in all aspects, not just the economy) rule the roost. Ask yourself, "Have I thought about the costs in my new plan to (taking an example I remember from the ol' style, pre-WA, that none of us can speak about due to copyright reasons, =D) establish a traffic system for international shipping lanes? And secondarily, do normal "backbencher" WA nations actually care?"

2) My ideal solution is to have some form of regional parliaments. This seems to me to be dastardly simple: simply transpose next-to all the current WA coding into a regional format (replace the constant "WA" with the variable @@REGION@@, of course), write a weekend's worth of code to determine how nations can determine voting priveliges, et voila. You have a system that cannot be dominated by the thousands of unknown nations you don't agree with. Not only this, but it would create competition between regions - imagine, close votes, needing to appease the nations who feel they might leave (who traditionally get ignored), socialist regions establishing international cooperatives and future tech RPing regions writing resolutions about issues they feel are appropriate to them (time travel traffic codes, antimatter industry deregulation, etc. etc.). I think that would be a good thing./quote]

[Naivetry]

2) My ideal solution is to have some form of regional parliaments. *snip*

This is one of the functions of hosting regional governments on offsite forums.

[Wandering Argonians]

This might, however, streamline things a bit more. Besides, one flavor of global decision-making body is pretty dull. Shouldn't there be a second option?

[Kalibarr]

^to be honest, I've thought about proposing this myself. However I expected the response to be "if you don't like the WA then fix it" or something like that.

[Enn]

I sincerely hope this isn't being proposed as a replacement of WA play, since it would completely, utterly destroy every part of WA play in the game thus far. It is called the World Assembly - it is meant to affect every nation in its membership.

[Panageadom]

It is not a "replacement" idea. It is an addition idea. It's something that I and I think many feel could be an interesting feature. If we have a World Assembly, why do we not have a Regional Assembly? The logic is inconclusive.

[Wandering Argonians]

There was no proposal to replace anything, but simply to add something. Again, a single political party equates to a fascisum, so why have a single option for a global decision-making body for those who don't wish to join the World Assembly?

[Flibbleites]

There was no proposal to replace anything, but simply to add something. Again, a single political party equates to a fascisum, so why have a single option for a global decision-making body for those who don't wish to join the World Assembly?

But the members of the WA aren't homogenious, so there is no "single political party" just only one forum for making international laws.

[Wandering Argonians]

I realize that, but perhaps there should be a second option for those who prefer something more region-centric in terms of law-making.

A sub-WA if you will. Resolutions affect only the residents of that region, so forth and so on. As it sits now, we have a game with around two million players (according to the heading on the homepage). The UN, which the WA is in all but name (I remember that debacle well), was designed to preside over a much smaller number of nations. Those who remain 'rogue' do so out of disinterest in global law-making, or do so because they seek something a bit different.

I myself would enjoy a smaller-scale variation of what the WA offers. I'm sure there are others out there who would enjoy it as well. Think of it as a court to the WA's supreme court.

[Panageadom]

I feel that the essentially discomfiture some of us find in the way, is that it aggressively seeks a middle ground (not through fascism, but precisely through the fantastically wide spread of political opinion) - by nature, due to the sheer number of voters, rather than any fault of politik. I personally, would love to have some democratic law-making system between nations, where some form of political homogenuity could be assured - and thus, I support regional parliaments (/regional assemblies, etc. etc.) that mean that regions must compete in terms of appeal in one new way. Socialist regions would vote for socialist measures, capitalist the opposite, and people who'd really rather not have another dictate their politics would join regions that didn't pass much legislation.