Christ Triumphant wrote:My understanding of the World Assembly is that it is a roleplaying forum for an international organization like the EU or UN, nominally composed of "ambassadors" or "diplomats" representing the many and varied NationStates, working to construct a framework of laws and committees around the general chaos of the NS universe, as well as settle disputes among member states.
The complaints I have been reading about how the WA functions, practically, are precisely the standard and accepted manner in which intergovernmental bodies function in the real world.
In other words, these are features, not bugs.
I can't help but notice that some of the nations complaining the loudest are younger than even my brief tenure on this website observing the goings-on in the WA -- and I wouldn't presume to have a full grasp on the protocols and practices.
A novice ambassador would not walk into the assembly hall of the UN and start upturning tables and tossing about accusations of corruption if his initial attempts are thwarted by the practices of more seasoned members. Bodies like this are all about experience and networking, getting to know the etiquette and "grammar," and how to get things done. Coalition-building is the norm. This only adds to the realism of the roleplay going on here.
"Elitism" is often just a skewed way of looking at expertise.
I think there's a meaningful consideration here; to what extent is the World Assembly a game, or a simulator? I suspect everyone has their own answer to that question.