Mock General Legislature

[Vittos Ordination]

Alright, we have had the elections in the past and all that nonsense. It appears that the elections have lost their appeal to most.

However, just going through the various health care reform threads, it made me wonder if we could reform the elections to actually attempt to work out policy ideas. I think it would be very interesting to see what concessions and compromises we would see each side make in order to come to some sort of conclusion on the issue. This could be applied to many issues as well, stimulus spending, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.

So could we work up some sort of legislative system that actually negotiated and debated these things to come up with a series of NSG policies?


*************************************************************************************************************************************************

OK, so far about the only condition established is that it will not be US-centric. It may be either a fictional blank-slate nation, or we may examine policy issues from various nations.

I have this list of people who have expressed interest, let me know if you are interested, and we will get the ball rolling.

Vittos Ordination
Czardas
Pevisopolis
WWII History Geeks
United Dependencies
Risottia

[Czardas]

Sounds like a good idea, if we can get more than one person interested in it <.<

[Neesika]

<<

>>

* *




What?

[Kryozerkia]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

[Londim]

Would this turn General into it's own nation?!

*Head asplodes"

[Vittos Ordination]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

[Vittos Ordination]

Sounds like a good idea, if we can get more than one person interested in it <.<

Not lookin very likely. Obviously one of my more popular ideas.

[Pevisopolis]

Sounds like a good idea, if we can get more than one person interested in it <.<

*appears in a puff of oddly-smelling smoke*

Right here.

[Kryozerkia]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

NSG. Obviously. Because people will still find a way to break, bend. maim, contort and otherwise horribly mutilate every rule when given the opportunity?

[Mad hatters in jeans]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

NSG. Obviously. Because people will still find a way to break, bend. maim, contort and otherwise horribly mutilate every rule when given the opportunity?

Actually i think people break rules by accident in the same way a tank would run over a fence to attack it's opponent. Only when it finds out the owner of the fence has an anti-tank gun does it decide not to bother running over fences. It's intention to kill it's opponent will remain.
remember guys farmers have anti-tank guns.

[Vittos Ordination]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

NSG. Obviously. Because people will still find a way to break, bend. maim, contort and otherwise horribly mutilate every rule when given the opportunity?

Non-hierarchical social pressure can be just as effective as top-down law giving, thats all I'm saying.

[Maurepas]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

That sounds alot like Socialism,

[Maurepas]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

NSG. Obviously. Because people will still find a way to break, bend. maim, contort and otherwise horribly mutilate every rule when given the opportunity?

Non-hierarchical social pressure can be just as effective as top-down law giving, thats all I'm saying.

Id say there are several posters who have demonstrated a lack of caring for such things, even myself on occasion...

[Farnhamia]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

That sounds alot like Socialism,

Proposition M! Mobocracy!

[Pevisopolis]

You mean like hiatus periods on certain redundant topics? I'm all for it and would happily sponsor a policy like that.

How about a NSG union that actually attempted to control posting trends by simply coordinating what we respond to?

Who needs moderators?

NSG. Obviously. Because people will still find a way to break, bend. maim, contort and otherwise horribly mutilate every rule when given the opportunity?

Non-hierarchical social pressure can be just as effective as top-down law giving, thats all I'm saying.

My political views summed up.

[Tech-gnosis]

Non-hierarchical social pressure can be just as effective as top-down law giving, thats all I'm saying.

It can be in certain situations, but a place like an internet forum with low cost of entry, low cost of exit, and anonymity isn't one of those, at least not since the 'net became accessible to the public at large.

[Vittos Ordination]

It can be in certain situations, but a place like an internet forum with low cost of entry, low cost of exit, and anonymity isn't one of those, at least not since the 'net became accessible to the public at large.

Yes, there would certainly need to be rules to enforced, but the vast majority of behavior control could be done through a shunning system. It would just need a collusion of the more frequent posters to make it generally accepted to shun posters who display certain behavior.

Mods would be necessary to screen against spammers, but in the ways this forum represents real human social interaction, it could be managed without mods.

[Vittos Ordination]

That sounds alot like Socialism,

Sounds like anarchy.

[Maurepas]

That sounds alot like Socialism,

Sounds like anarchy.

The two are...mutually exclusive?

I was joking, lol

[Maurepas]

It can be in certain situations, but a place like an internet forum with low cost of entry, low cost of exit, and anonymity isn't one of those, at least not since the 'net became accessible to the public at large.

Yes, there would certainly need to be rules to enforced, but the vast majority of behavior control could be done through a shunning system. It would just need a collusion of the more frequent posters to make it generally accepted to shun posters who display certain behavior.

Mods would be necessary to screen against spammers, but in the ways this forum represents real human social interaction, it could be managed without mods.

Idk, Im not sure the more frequent posters actually agree on everything, tbqh...

[WWII History Geeks]

Alright, we have had the elections in the past and all that nonsense. It appears that the elections have lost their appeal to most.

However, just going through the various health care reform threads, it made me wonder if we could reform the elections to actually attempt to work out policy ideas. I think it would be very interesting to see what concessions and compromises we would see each side make in order to come to some sort of conclusion on the issue. This could be applied to many issues as well, stimulus spending, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.

So could we work up some sort of legislative system that actually negotiated and debated these things to come up with a series of NSG policies?

It would be nice to have...I mean, I think that's what the WA is for, but I suppose something more...formal would be better. But then the bickering over what it should do could make an Animal Farm of it and nothing productive would ever happen! Nice idea, but it won't work.

[Tech-gnosis]

Yes, there would certainly need to be rules to enforced, but the vast majority of behavior control could be done through a shunning system. It would just need a collusion of the more frequent posters to make it generally accepted to shun posters who display certain behavior.

Mods would be necessary to screen against spammers, but in the ways this forum represents real human social interaction, it could be managed without mods.

That collusion would take a lot more coordination than such a place like NSG could likely achieve.

[Vittos Ordination]

Yes, there would certainly need to be rules to enforced, but the vast majority of behavior control could be done through a shunning system. It would just need a collusion of the more frequent posters to make it generally accepted to shun posters who display certain behavior.

Mods would be necessary to screen against spammers, but in the ways this forum represents real human social interaction, it could be managed without mods.

That collusion would take a lot more coordination than such a place like NSG could likely achieve.

Then I shall unite the factions and work towards a new and improved NationStates General!

[Tech-gnosis]

Then I shall unite the factions and work towards a new and improved NationStates General!

How?

[United Dependencies]

Actually i think people break rules by accident in the same way a tank would run over a fence to attack it's opponent. Only when it finds out the owner of the fence has an anti-tank gun does it decide not to bother running over fences. It's intention to kill it's opponent will remain.
remember guys farmers have anti-tank guns.

This

also I support what the author is saying (minus the whole moderator part).