NATION

PASSWORD

Embassy of Thalassia

Talk about regional management and politics, raider/defender gameplay, and other game-related matters.
Not a roleplaying forum.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
The Gilded Star
Envoy
 
Posts: 315
Founded: Nov 26, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby The Gilded Star » Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:28 pm

A few scattered comments and observations, based on my time as an old resident of Pacifica, one of the original residents of Thalassia, and someone that has served on and off in both region's governments in some fashion or another, and is currently once again a simple citizen:

A lot of Thalassia's problems aren't stemmed from conspiratorial manipulations or power plays, but largely from... complacency and lethargy, which in part is probably due to Thalassia being a relatively peaceful and happy region, unlike the constant turmoil and chaos that was Pacifica. Bor does sort of get that complacency factor right, but then kinda steers off-course with some embellishments.

For now I won't go here or there on the opinion of the Founder-initiated reform, but I wouldn't agree that the people are being actively suppressed, because as far as I can tell, almost all are neutral at worst and supportive at best of a reform if it means fixing issues with the region and making it come out stronger. While you and Toe oppose it... you two opposing regional changes on ideological grounds is something of an old hat here.

Blind noobs just dogpile whatever sounds negative and anti-government. So I will post my critiques here.


Feels like you're implying that people that disagree with you are either part of the corrupt elite or dumb-dumbs that don't know better. In other words, people can either agree with you or be wrong. Isn't that approach supposed to be what you're allegedly opposing in Thalassia?

Elections are heavily dependent on the "endorsements" of government members. You can see for yourself by searching "endorsement" on the RMB. Thalassians wait patiently for the government to say who they like and then they treat their word as gospel. Candidates actually collect endorsements for this reason (example). This is a remarkably stupid system. It lets the same people re-elect themselves. I have never seen systematic (don't confuse with systemic) circlejerking in a democracy.


The last line makes me raise an eyebrow a bit. Don't... pretty much all RL democracies include endorsements; for instance, the 2020 presidential race in the US?

Overall I think the endorsement bit was supposed to be mostly for the fun of playing out a campaign race, but maybe it does make things one-sided, dunno. I can see it as a reasonable concern if it wasn't drenched in so much venom.

Another way their elections (and in this case, amendments) are undemocratic is how easily they are exposed to the lemming effect. They use the in-game polls, which leads to the lemming effect known in the WA. This doesn't happen in forum-based voting without votestacking.


I would figure as someone touting themselves as the former Ministry of Security, you would understand very well why we keep everything on-site and thus under NS moderator's protective authority as much as possible. It was already a relatively contentious decision to reopen a Discord server, and an off-site forum isn't something that has much support, nor has it ever been historically successful for our region as far as I know. Not to mention, it requires having someone trusted to set it up and manage it and... I don't really know anyone interested in actually doing that.

Sinecure cabinet positions with the sole use of putting certain people in power are maintained. These positions include the Minister of Security and the Minister of Information. I don't know whether these positions are intentionally that way, but they are that way. Another critique I have of sinecures is that, if the government really was inactive, as the coupers claim, they should've been putting their active players to the few important ministries, rather than spreading them out. Imagine if you had some bubble gum, and you stretched it out so much that it started to have holes. That's what Thalassia did in their nepotism.


Doubtfully intentionally sincure, as you put it. MoS was useful when the region was potentially under threat, but it hasn't been that way in quite a long time, thus the Ministry spends most of its time in standby mode... which, considering the alternative, most people are pretty okay with.

Some of these positions stagnating and mostly only sitting pretty is part of the reason for the reform, from what I understand. As for the bit about including new blood... that's pretty much what we've already been doing, as far as I can tell from the regular new faces that are popping up in various ministries. Of course, you don't want to put a trainee in the pilot's seat on day 1, so they work themselves up... but lately a lot fall inactive or go LoA instead. Or they struggle to move up because their bosses are LoA or something. Another element of the stagnation that was becoming systemic in the government. This wasn't the fault of any one person or "oligarch" of folks as you put it, but a team effort from several people, arguably both in and out of the government itself. Not really a simple and easy bandaid to throw on this if you're approaching it with honest intention.

As for certain folks hanging onto bigger positions, it mostly stems from 2 things:
1. No one else wants to do the work, and if they try, they tend to fizzle or burn out very quickly, arguably understandingly so in some cases.
2. The people actually willing the pull the weight are doing a satisfactory enough job that no one sees a reason to fix what isn't broken.

I don't know why they reject it when I call them an anocracy, because they admitted to being undemocratic when they made themselves a monarchy. As the Constitutional Monarchy Amendment's author said, "effectively [constitutional monarchy] simply reflects the situation as is".


Missing important context to miscontrue this situation. We have always actually been a constitutional monarchy since Pacifica. Topid declared himself the ultimate authority in Pacifica, and everything had to have his blessing to be authorized. Thalassia's system was partially based after that, in part due to the troubles Pacifica had that necessitated an active Founder, which Topid was not. This design base was, for the record, well supported by natives.

If you're going to be mad at the region declaring itself as a democracy when it's actually a constitutional monarchy, then blame the precedent set by Topid, honestly. I'm not sure if anyone actually noticed the discrepancy until the amendment was proposed to properly and accurately reflect what we had actually collectively been for the past... what, 2-3 years, including our forebear?

And yet, despite the obvious sham and chicanery that Thalassian oligarchs are executing, Thalassians blindly follow them. They talk about how hard the Interim Council works, and how there will be democracy, and how the Interim Council has seen them through dark times. They're parroting exactly what the Interim Council wants them to say. I was certainly right when I said Thalassia was run by dominant personalities. Thalassians have given the Interim Council their voices and minds.


Alternatively, most natives of Thalassia are pretty happy with the people looking over the region and trust them because they haven't had reason to do otherwise. Again, implying that people can either side with you or be blind bleating sheep feels like a bad-faith ultimatum.

---

Lastly, I'm mostly just addressing the heading post here and not following most of the following discussions, but one particular comment stuck in my craw:

The Leftist Assembly is already dissolving their embassy, as they should. Keep burning bridges.


This doesn't sound like a comment coming from someone wishing Thalassia well. This sounds like vindictiveness from someone wanting to see the region suffer. This makes me question your motives here (especially since your assertive denouncement on TLA's behalf drew Kavagrad out to specifically disavow it). And it bothered me enough to create this post to start picking through some of the things being said.

As I said before, I don't have much to comment on the reform itself right now. Are your concerns, at the base level, reasonable? Maybe. But covering them with missing contexts, half-truths, and intellectually dishonest illustrations is pushing me in the opposite direction of wanting to listen or put stock in your concerns because that much embellishment makes it feel drenched in ulterior motive.

User avatar
Devi
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 123
Founded: Nov 09, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Devi » Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:36 am

Bormiar wrote:everyone should be able to write it

haha yes crowdsourcing constitutions is definitely a good idea and never causes bickering and internal strife, ever *hastily sweeps the burnt remnants of the Lazarus ConCon under the rug*
Last edited by Devi on Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
someday we'll find it;
that raidbow connection
the lovers, the dreamers
and meeee~

User avatar
Toerana
Envoy
 
Posts: 210
Founded: Nov 27, 2018
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Toerana » Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:29 am

Devi wrote:
Bormiar wrote:everyone should be able to write it

haha yes crowdsourcing constitutions is definitely a good idea and never causes bickering and internal strife, ever *hastily sweeps the burnt remnants of the Lazarus ConCon under the rug*


The region is supposed to be a democracy, therefore everyone should be able to have an input.
"In a world of Trumps, Le Pens and Putins, we are very firmly on exactly the other side."
- Vince Cable -
| The Rejected Realms' Gameside Officer | Thaecian Senator |
| Former Editor-in-Chief of the Rejected Times |
NPO Delenda Est

User avatar
Grey County
Envoy
 
Posts: 231
Founded: Jun 08, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grey County » Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:34 am

Toerana wrote:
Devi wrote:haha yes crowdsourcing constitutions is definitely a good idea and never causes bickering and internal strife, ever *hastily sweeps the burnt remnants of the Lazarus ConCon under the rug*


The region is supposed to be a democracy, therefore everyone should be able to have an input.

You are able to give ur suggestions to the IC and you can vote yes or no when it's proposed without consequences

User avatar
North Prarie
Diplomat
 
Posts: 932
Founded: Nov 04, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby North Prarie » Sun Aug 23, 2020 8:37 am

Grey County wrote:
Toerana wrote:
The region is supposed to be a democracy, therefore everyone should be able to have an input.

You are able to give ur suggestions to the IC and you can vote yes or no when it's proposed without consequences

Okay, I'm a relative supporter of Thalassia has done here, but this is...dumb. "This is a democracy because you can vote yes or no on the constitution the oligarchy made for you!"
That's...not a democracy.
North Prarie. Prarie. Proud TSPer. DemSoc.
Hosting Experience
Prarie Classic Baseball Tournament
Copa South Pacifica 1
WPIC 5
Sporting Acheivments
Round of 16 at Handball World Cup 20
Women's Hockey Round of 16 at Prescott Winter Olympics 13
Prarie Classic Baseball Tournament Champions

Prariean Airlines-Pompeii Industries Luxury Cars-Phoenix Luxury Hotels (V2 Coming Soon)-Stonebridge Simbacat International Airport-Embassy Program
SBT BottomLine-President Valieant welcomes first child Pax, Social Democrats gain big wins in Parliament elections, Lions win NPBL, Cavaliers win Prarie Hockey Cup, NPFA announces slow move away from world affairs

User avatar
Grey County
Envoy
 
Posts: 231
Founded: Jun 08, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grey County » Sun Aug 23, 2020 8:45 am

North Prarie wrote:
Grey County wrote:You are able to give ur suggestions to the IC and you can vote yes or no when it's proposed without consequences

Okay, I'm a relative supporter of Thalassia has done here, but this is...dumb. "This is a democracy because you can vote yes or no on the constitution the oligarchy made for you!"
That's...not a democracy.

How Is it an oligarchy

User avatar
North Prarie
Diplomat
 
Posts: 932
Founded: Nov 04, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby North Prarie » Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:21 am

Grey County wrote:
North Prarie wrote:Okay, I'm a relative supporter of Thalassia has done here, but this is...dumb. "This is a democracy because you can vote yes or no on the constitution the oligarchy made for you!"
That's...not a democracy.

How Is it an oligarchy

For now, 3 people have complete control.
Last edited by North Prarie on Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
North Prarie. Prarie. Proud TSPer. DemSoc.
Hosting Experience
Prarie Classic Baseball Tournament
Copa South Pacifica 1
WPIC 5
Sporting Acheivments
Round of 16 at Handball World Cup 20
Women's Hockey Round of 16 at Prescott Winter Olympics 13
Prarie Classic Baseball Tournament Champions

Prariean Airlines-Pompeii Industries Luxury Cars-Phoenix Luxury Hotels (V2 Coming Soon)-Stonebridge Simbacat International Airport-Embassy Program
SBT BottomLine-President Valieant welcomes first child Pax, Social Democrats gain big wins in Parliament elections, Lions win NPBL, Cavaliers win Prarie Hockey Cup, NPFA announces slow move away from world affairs

User avatar
Grey County
Envoy
 
Posts: 231
Founded: Jun 08, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grey County » Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:54 am

North Prarie wrote:
Grey County wrote:How Is it an oligarchy

For now, 3 people have complete control.

We have 7 members of the IC including our last PM who was democraticlly elected

User avatar
Sail Nation
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 130
Founded: Dec 25, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Sail Nation » Sun Aug 23, 2020 10:04 am

I can't make up my mind on whether this is a good idea to just re-organize the government completely, or whether it is a sudden takeover of control.

Personally, as a PM of a smaller region, I would do what I could through what powers I have, and I would consider what the main objectives of the region are. When I became an MP in Lorania, the constitution was in dire need of amendments. So I just created an amendment that fixed the ones that I knew of, even the ones that weren't related, and then we could start passing laws. The thing is that Thalassia is more RP-focused and currently doesn't have a legislature, so things like that are more difficult. Possibly creating a legislature first might have been useful, so the residents could have a choice on who to fix the constitution, rather than dissolve everything without a vote.

I don't really think either side is right. Yes it is a takeover of power, yes it is undemocratic, yes it (until the new constitution at least) amplifies current problems, but re-organization is needed, and it is easier to do via a council rather than a legislature.
Former WA delegate, MP and Prime Minister in Lorania
MP in Thaecia (as Prussian Sail Nation)
Travelling nationstates (as Sail Nation Travellers), reviewing regions as I go

I'm a Christian and a Liberal. I won't enforce my beliefs on you, so please don't enforce yours on me.

Pro: Leaving things in my sig that I don't like anymore
Anti: Use of pros and antis in sigs

User avatar
Devi
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 123
Founded: Nov 09, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Devi » Sun Aug 23, 2020 10:07 am

Toerana wrote:
Devi wrote:haha yes crowdsourcing constitutions is definitely a good idea and never causes bickering and internal strife, ever *hastily sweeps the burnt remnants of the Lazarus ConCon under the rug*


The region is supposed to be a democracy, therefore everyone should be able to have an input.

lazarus's concon was supposed to be democratically decided too. turns out that's an awful way to decide things sometimes; really who'd have thought? :roll:
the obsession with democratic processes some of y'all have is honestly hilarious to see, especially since a fair number of the people raising a fuss are those with zero stake in the region for one reason or another.
like, literally what reason do you have to care that the constitution's not being hashed together out in the open? outside of a) personal bad blood with the region or b) a pressing need to tell other people how to govern their regions because it doesn't suit you personally.
someday we'll find it;
that raidbow connection
the lovers, the dreamers
and meeee~

User avatar
Bormiar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1145
Founded: Mar 25, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Bormiar » Sun Aug 23, 2020 10:45 am

The Gilded Star wrote:
Blind noobs just dogpile whatever sounds negative and anti-government. So I will post my critiques here.


Feels like you're implying that people that disagree with you are either part of the corrupt elite or dumb-dumbs that don't know better. In other words, people can either agree with you or be wrong. Isn't that approach supposed to be what you're allegedly opposing in Thalassia?


You're taking the most extreme interpretation of my words. I just said that there were "blind noobs... [dogpiling]" Toerana (context). For starters, it had nothing to do with disagreeing with me. And, additionally, just because there are some who do it, doesn't mean all do it. Boston Castle, for example, was reasonable.

The Gilded Star wrote:
Elections are heavily dependent on the "endorsements" of government members. You can see for yourself by searching "endorsement" on the RMB. Thalassians wait patiently for the government to say who they like and then they treat their word as gospel. Candidates actually collect endorsements for this reason (example). This is a remarkably stupid system. It lets the same people re-elect themselves. I have never seen systematic (don't confuse with systemic) circlejerking in a democracy.


The last line makes me raise an eyebrow a bit. Don't... pretty much all RL democracies include endorsements; for instance, the 2020 presidential race in the US?

Overall I think the endorsement bit was supposed to be mostly for the fun of playing out a campaign race, but maybe it does make things one-sided, dunno. I can see it as a reasonable concern if it wasn't drenched in so much venom.


Even if I did agree with endorsements in real life, the citizenry is small enough and the campaigns short enough that you don't need endorsements. You get the negative effects for no reason.

The Gilded Star wrote:
Another way their elections (and in this case, amendments) are undemocratic is how easily they are exposed to the lemming effect. They use the in-game polls, which leads to the lemming effect known in the WA. This doesn't happen in forum-based voting without votestacking.


I would figure as someone touting themselves as the former Ministry of Security, you would understand very well why we keep everything on-site and thus under NS moderator's protective authority as much as possible. It was already a relatively contentious decision to reopen a Discord server, and an off-site forum isn't something that has much support, nor has it ever been historically successful for our region as far as I know. Not to mention, it requires having someone trusted to set it up and manage it and... I don't really know anyone interested in actually doing that.


I never blamed anyone for it. I just said it existed. But if you do want to fix it, how about telegramming the founder your vote (I trust that Sho would count them correctly) or posting them on a dedicated RMB (new region + embassy)?

The Gilded Star wrote:
Sinecure cabinet positions with the sole use of putting certain people in power are maintained. These positions include the Minister of Security and the Minister of Information. I don't know whether these positions are intentionally that way, but they are that way. Another critique I have of sinecures is that, if the government really was inactive, as the coupers claim, they should've been putting their active players to the few important ministries, rather than spreading them out. Imagine if you had some bubble gum, and you stretched it out so much that it started to have holes. That's what Thalassia did in their nepotism.


Doubtfully intentionally sincure, as you put it. MoS was useful when the region was potentially under threat, but it hasn't been that way in quite a long time, thus the Ministry spends most of its time in standby mode... which, considering the alternative, most people are pretty okay with.

I know what it was for, but it was a job better suited for the pres/founder.

As for "intentionally", I never said it was intentional. "I don't know whether these positions are intentionally that way". And I don't foresee a possibility of a group sitting down and scheming to create sinecures. But if you have the opportunity to put more people in the cabinet, most people would rather take that option than just dissolve an unnecessary ministry. Hence, "sole use of putting certain people in power" (I was going to say 'purpose' instead of 'use', but that makes it sound intentional / by design).

The main problem with these positions is that they could be -- knowingly or not -- used to maintain influence while lowering activity. And if there is an active player, you don't want to put them in an unused ministry. These positions are not part of a conspiracy.

The Gilded Star wrote:Some of these positions stagnating and mostly only sitting pretty is part of the reason for the reform, from what I understand. As for the bit about including new blood... that's pretty much what we've already been doing, as far as I can tell from the regular new faces that are popping up in various ministries. Of course, you don't want to put a trainee in the pilot's seat on day 1, so they work themselves up... but lately a lot fall inactive or go LoA instead. Or they struggle to move up because their bosses are LoA or something. Another element of the stagnation that was becoming systemic in the government. This wasn't the fault of any one person or "oligarch" of folks as you put it, but a team effort from several people, arguably both in and out of the government itself. Not really a simple and easy bandaid to throw on this if you're approaching it with honest intention.


Very reasonable.

The Gilded Star wrote:As for certain folks hanging onto bigger positions, it mostly stems from 2 things:
1. No one else wants to do the work, and if they try, they tend to fizzle or burn out very quickly, arguably understandingly so in some cases.
2. The people actually willing the pull the weight are doing a satisfactory enough job that no one sees a reason to fix what isn't broken.

I don't really think there's a problem with certain people hanging on to powerful positions, so long as they continue to be the most capable and active candidate. So where did you get that from?

The Gilded Star wrote:
I don't know why they reject it when I call them an anocracy, because they admitted to being undemocratic when they made themselves a monarchy. As the Constitutional Monarchy Amendment's author said, "effectively [constitutional monarchy] simply reflects the situation as is".


Missing important context to miscontrue this situation. We have always actually been a constitutional monarchy since Pacifica. Topid declared himself the ultimate authority in Pacifica, and everything had to have his blessing to be authorized. Thalassia's system was partially based after that, in part due to the troubles Pacifica had that necessitated an active Founder, which Topid was not. This design base was, for the record, well supported by natives.

If you're going to be mad at the region declaring itself as a democracy when it's actually a constitutional monarchy, then blame the precedent set by Topid, honestly. I'm not sure if anyone actually noticed the discrepancy until the amendment was proposed to properly and accurately reflect what we had actually collectively been for the past... what, 2-3 years, including our forebear?


Poor Topid. :P

Yeah, Thalassia had a bad position, but that doesn't make the region completely blameless. What about the Executive Reform? That certainly contributed.

The Gilded Star wrote:
And yet, despite the obvious sham and chicanery that Thalassian oligarchs are executing, Thalassians blindly follow them. They talk about how hard the Interim Council works, and how there will be democracy, and how the Interim Council has seen them through dark times. They're parroting exactly what the Interim Council wants them to say. I was certainly right when I said Thalassia was run by dominant personalities. Thalassians have given the Interim Council their voices and minds.


Alternatively, most natives of Thalassia are pretty happy with the people looking over the region and trust them because they haven't had reason to do otherwise. Again, implying that people can either side with you or be blind bleating sheep feels like a bad-faith ultimatum.

'Chicanery' was definitely the wrong word. If they are acting in good faith, the oligarchs -- and they are oligarchs because they hold most of the power -- are making a mistake in forming a culture where laws don't apply in some situations (This sounds cliched, but I have a really good book on Ancient Rome that might shed some light on the effects of that :P). And many members of the region (not you) are making a big mistake in not listening to critique because of who Sho and Arenado and Owl and Wym are. I think I gave a sufficient example of that above.

---

The Gilded Star wrote:I think you assumed the worst, most conspiratorial, interpretation of my words consistently.

Lastly, I'm mostly just addressing the heading post here and not following most of the following discussions, but one particular comment stuck in my craw:

The Leftist Assembly is already dissolving their embassy, as they should. Keep burning bridges.


This doesn't sound like a comment coming from someone wishing Thalassia well. This sounds like vindictiveness from someone wanting to see the region suffer. This makes me question your motives here (especially since your assertive denouncement on TLA's behalf drew Kavagrad out to specifically disavow it). And it bothered me enough to create this post to start picking through some of the things being said.


That's just a very stupid, angry comment. There are regions (not just TRR/TNP) who I know will be hesitant or completely opposed to working with Thalassia after this debacle, and that's definitely Thalassia's fault, but I should not have used TLA as an example. I didn't blame Thalassians for overreacting until I realized that the flaming was not out of anger. So don't blame me too much for an angry comment after I was flamed 30 times and someone attempted to gaslight me in dms.




Devi wrote:
Toerana wrote:
The region is supposed to be a democracy, therefore everyone should be able to have an input.

lazarus's concon was supposed to be democratically decided too. turns out that's an awful way to decide things sometimes; really who'd have thought? :roll:
the obsession with democratic processes some of y'all have is honestly hilarious to see, especially since a fair number of the people raising a fuss are those with zero stake in the region for one reason or another.
like, literally what reason do you have to care that the constitution's not being hashed together out in the open? outside of a) personal bad blood with the region or b) a pressing need to tell other people how to govern their regions because it doesn't suit you personally.


This is actually rather insulting to Thalassians. They're trying to be democratic, and you're citing a handpicked example of a ConCon gone wrong to tell them that they'll be too immature and toxic to have democracy. I don't know the context of that ConCon, but Lazarus is definitely more unstable than Thalassia. They're not comparable regions.

Obviously, I don't think think they're very democratic. But when they're trying to be democratic (Thalassians want democracy-- they just seem to think the IC is democratic because it has a vote at the end), and you tell them that they're wrong to be trying democracy, it shows that you're prioritizing anti-democracy rhetoric over the region. You're right, I don't really care whether what happens to Thalassia is good (though I'm curious how the region ends up), but you sure as hell don't care either.

User avatar
North Prarie
Diplomat
 
Posts: 932
Founded: Nov 04, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby North Prarie » Sun Aug 23, 2020 10:56 am

Grey County wrote:
North Prarie wrote:For now, 3 people have complete control.

We have 7 members of the IC including our last PM who was democraticlly elected

Ok, so....a 7 member oligarchy.
North Prarie. Prarie. Proud TSPer. DemSoc.
Hosting Experience
Prarie Classic Baseball Tournament
Copa South Pacifica 1
WPIC 5
Sporting Acheivments
Round of 16 at Handball World Cup 20
Women's Hockey Round of 16 at Prescott Winter Olympics 13
Prarie Classic Baseball Tournament Champions

Prariean Airlines-Pompeii Industries Luxury Cars-Phoenix Luxury Hotels (V2 Coming Soon)-Stonebridge Simbacat International Airport-Embassy Program
SBT BottomLine-President Valieant welcomes first child Pax, Social Democrats gain big wins in Parliament elections, Lions win NPBL, Cavaliers win Prarie Hockey Cup, NPFA announces slow move away from world affairs

User avatar
Grey County
Envoy
 
Posts: 231
Founded: Jun 08, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grey County » Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:12 am

North Prarie wrote:
Grey County wrote:We have 7 members of the IC including our last PM who was democraticlly elected

Ok, so....a 7 member oligarchy.

Ok if thats what u want to call it

User avatar
Aynia Moreaux
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 186
Founded: Nov 27, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Aynia Moreaux » Sun Aug 23, 2020 1:14 pm

o.o

I was going to drop by and leave something like a 'good luck on your restructuring!' or something, and then saw like, word vomit upon word vomit. Jeesh.


As someone who's been on both sides of the fence, regional inactivity and regional apathy suck, and both are region killers if you let them fester. However you have to go about it smart and responsibly.

That being said you're talking to the girl who like a yearish? ago ripped up CS's constitution, fired the entire admin team and transitioned the region to a totally different form of government because drastic action needed to be taken, so I totally get it.

That that being said, while yes, founders are pretty much like, all powerful and meritocracies really are better and yada yada, we need to remember that when we open our regions up to others, they aren't just our babies anymore. They become a community collective. Other people begin to form an emotional attachment and put little pieces of themselves into it and that's how regions really grow and become great places to be. So it does make me a little bit sad when I see citizens immediately disregarded, if that is the case here.

Clearly there is more than one citizen of the region here who doesn't feel the process is fair, and to me if there's one voice speaking up, it's worth listening to. I'd encourage Thalassia to do it's best to work with it's citizens and keep them as involved as possible during the restructuring process. Getting them involved during the process and keeping them familiar and active with whats going on is going to keep them interested in the future. Begin as you mean to go on.

Those cits who aren't happy, I encourage you to calmly and respectfully try and work with the government and administration and keep yourself informed and involved. Let them know you want to help and see what you can do to help out. And if you aren't feeling fulfilled or you aren't finding it fun anymore, then don't get stuck in a sunk cost fallacy.
Aynia Moreaux, Wifey of Captain Carrot
Seasonal Queen of Caer Sidi



User avatar
Nationific
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 10
Founded: Feb 19, 2019
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Nationific » Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:01 pm

I see both sides of the argument quite clearly now, and I hope ya guys don't throw virtual rocks at me just because I stick to my convictions.
That's pretty much the case here.
Live and let die.

User avatar
Sancta Romana Ecclesia
Envoy
 
Posts: 294
Founded: Aug 04, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Sancta Romana Ecclesia » Mon Aug 24, 2020 12:38 pm

As it is the case with all discussions of this type, I'm late to give my two cents. But at the risk of adding even more words, I will still do it. akhem

If your major gripe with this is "oh noes, they did not follow the procedures", then I believe you are approaching the issue from a completely wrong perspective. If you are concerned about the law being followed, you should also remember about the old maxim Summum ius, summa iniuria ("the strictest obedience to the law may become the strictest injustice"). Ultimately law should serve the region, not the other way around. If the current system becomes a burden rather than an asset, you should get rid of it, not be its blind follower.

From a more formal legal perspective, the power that established the constitution can also abolish it without being held to any procedure provided for that. These procedures for changing the constitution are actually created for the organs posterior to it (established by the consti), not those that gave country its fundamental law. This is what Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyes and Georges Burdeau (XVIII and XIX French constitutionalists) thought on the issue. Actually, that is the only logical system where a constitution could even be given in the first place, if they needed a constitutional provision to establish a constitution, the first one would be illegal too. Therefore, since Thalassia established its own governing law, Thalassia may also abolish it. If the founder does it and people are behind it, and it benefits the region - then where is the problem?

Though I agree with Aynia, if such a move leads to your people feeling disgruntled and alienated, then something needs to be fixed. That being said, searching through this thread, I only really see Borm.
Paulus Asteorra

User avatar
Bormiar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1145
Founded: Mar 25, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Bormiar » Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:26 pm

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:If your major gripe with this is "oh noes, they did not follow the procedures", then I believe you are approaching the issue from a completely wrong perspective. If you are concerned about the law being followed, you should also remember about the old maxim Summum ius, summa iniuria ("the strictest obedience to the law may become the strictest injustice"). Ultimately law should serve the region, not the other way around. If the current system becomes a burden rather than an asset, you should get rid of it, not be its blind follower.

I agree with the premise behind that maxim, however, I don't see how it's applicable. They're not obeying a simple process for amending the constitution: write the amendment and vote. If something so basic was unjust, I think they'd have to provide a strong case -- or at least a rational case -- for why. And for why their method is better. Your argument assumes that they bypassed it because it was unjust.

Seriously, though, Latin?

Sancta Romana Ecclesia wrote:From a more formal legal perspective, the power that established the constitution can also abolish it without being held to any procedure provided for that. These procedures for changing the constitution are actually created for the organs posterior to it (established by the consti), not those that gave country its fundamental law. This is what Emmanuel-Joseph Sieyes and Georges Burdeau (XVIII and XIX French constitutionalists) thought on the issue. Actually, that is the only logical system where a constitution could even be given in the first place, if they needed a constitutional provision to establish a constitution, the first one would be illegal too. Therefore, since Thalassia established its own governing law, Thalassia may also abolish it. If the founder does it and people are behind it, and it benefits the region - then where is the problem?


https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=147701

Therefore, that's also not an applicable comment. Sho did not decide on the constitution, therefore your argument doesn't justify Sho dissolving the constitution. Had the constitution been dissolved the same way it were made -- by equal vote (no Interim Council, as that is unequal vote) -- I would've had no problem with it.

You say "Thalassia established its own governing law, Thalassia may also abolish it". What is 'Thalassia' supposed to mean? Thalassia's WA residents were the authority that established the constitution, not Sho, not this Interim Council.

As for "Thalassia's residents seem to support it": benevolent dictatorships ≠ democracy.
Last edited by Bormiar on Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Zentata
Attaché
 
Posts: 77
Founded: Nov 10, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Zentata » Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:54 pm

A thought:

Why is everyone complaining about something that has already happened? There is no point arguing about the decision to dissolve the constitution because it happened. There may be issues with the way that this happened out of the blue, and maybe people have problems with the way Thalassia seems like an Oligarchy. Right now, rather then arguing, why don't we come together and give suggestions and talk about the future of Thalassia and how to fix the systemic problems, not get upset about the past. If everyone has Thalassia's best interests at heart here, everyone should make sure that those best interests are taken into account and made into law.
Semper Thalassia!

User avatar
Daytime to Night
Envoy
 
Posts: 230
Founded: Dec 04, 2007
Father Knows Best State

Postby Daytime to Night » Mon Aug 24, 2020 3:12 pm

Zentata wrote:A thought:

Why is everyone complaining about something that has already happened? There is no point arguing about the decision to dissolve the constitution because it happened. There may be issues with the way that this happened out of the blue, and maybe people have problems with the way Thalassia seems like an Oligarchy. Right now, rather then arguing, why don't we come together and give suggestions and talk about the future of Thalassia and how to fix the systemic problems, not get upset about the past. If everyone has Thalassia's best interests at heart here, everyone should make sure that those best interests are taken into account and made into law.


Because the actions taken by a group who were not the elected leader of the government were unlawful. If the international community were not to question and scrutinise that then it creates opportunity for others to do likewise, and sets a worrying precedent that can be exploited by those with ill-intentions.

I am sure that this will work out just fine for Thalassia from the sounds of things, but it is absolutely right for these kinds of decisions to be put under a microscope. The international community has an important role in keeping leaders honest, just as their citizens do.
Former Minister of Security and Minister for Justice - the South Pacific

Potato General Numero Capatata

User avatar
Grey County
Envoy
 
Posts: 231
Founded: Jun 08, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grey County » Mon Aug 24, 2020 3:19 pm

Daytime to Night wrote:
Zentata wrote:A thought:

Why is everyone complaining about something that has already happened? There is no point arguing about the decision to dissolve the constitution because it happened. There may be issues with the way that this happened out of the blue, and maybe people have problems with the way Thalassia seems like an Oligarchy. Right now, rather then arguing, why don't we come together and give suggestions and talk about the future of Thalassia and how to fix the systemic problems, not get upset about the past. If everyone has Thalassia's best interests at heart here, everyone should make sure that those best interests are taken into account and made into law.


Because the actions taken by a group who were not the elected leader of the government were unlawful. If the international community were not to question and scrutinise that then it creates opportunity for others to do likewise, and sets a worrying precedent that can be exploited by those with ill-intentions.

I am sure that this will work out just fine for Thalassia from the sounds of things, but it is absolutely right for these kinds of decisions to be put under a microscope. The international community has an important role in keeping leaders honest, just as their citizens do.

I understand and you have scrutinized but do we need to learn 100 different ways to say "thats bad"

User avatar
Jar Wattinree
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1306
Founded: Dec 14, 2016
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Jar Wattinree » Mon Aug 24, 2020 5:29 pm

Grey County wrote:
Daytime to Night wrote:
Because the actions taken by a group who were not the elected leader of the government were unlawful. If the international community were not to question and scrutinise that then it creates opportunity for others to do likewise, and sets a worrying precedent that can be exploited by those with ill-intentions.

I am sure that this will work out just fine for Thalassia from the sounds of things, but it is absolutely right for these kinds of decisions to be put under a microscope. The international community has an important role in keeping leaders honest, just as their citizens do.

I understand and you have scrutinized but do we need to learn 100 different ways to say "thats bad"

Yep.

User avatar
Sancta Romana Ecclesia
Envoy
 
Posts: 294
Founded: Aug 04, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Sancta Romana Ecclesia » Tue Aug 25, 2020 12:26 am

Bormiar wrote:If something so basic was unjust, I think they'd have to provide a strong case -- or at least a rational case -- for why. And for why their method is better. Your argument assumes that they bypassed it because it was unjust.

Oh but they did.

As explained above, the problems are systemic and thus cannot be resolved via a simple amendment to the Constitution. While the established methods for altering the Constitution would lead to further instability and place the region in limbo for an indefinite period. Furthermore, Arenado and Wymondham, who have been the most prominent authors of legislation in Thalassia since the beginning of the year as well as possessing extensive external legislative experience, have both concluded that the current system in place for repealing and replacing the Constitution would be unworkable for the purpose for implementing a new Constitution to resolve the difficulties outlined above.


We can of course challenge whether this is a good reason or a bad one (sigh this is why we are here), but they did make a "rational" case. Their argument is properly constructed, there are two premises (1. "we have fundamental problems that can only be solved by a new Constitution", 2. "it would be unworkable to gain a new Constitution via normal means") and a conclusion logically flowing from these two. If the premises are true, then keeping it would be unjust for the region. Again, you may argue with the premises, but saying that no reasoning at all was given is not accurate.

Bormiar wrote:Seriously, though, Latin?

You clearly don't know me enough. Besides if we are just going to repeat talking points, like you did in this thread, may as well spice things up with resolving to a foreign dictionary.

Bormiar wrote:https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=147701

Therefore, that's also not an applicable comment. Sho did not decide on the constitution, therefore your argument doesn't justify Sho dissolving the constitution. Had the constitution been dissolved the same way it were made -- by equal vote (no Interim Council, as that is unequal vote) -- I would've had no problem with it.

You say "Thalassia established its own governing law, Thalassia may also abolish it". What is 'Thalassia' supposed to mean?

You have an awful low opinion of my intelligence. Of course that the people voted on the constitution, you think I would gather that much from this whole "Thalassia is no longer a democracy" drama. But the last time I checked, the current one is temporary means for getting a proper new one. That will be subject to referendum approval. You could fear that this temporary will in reality be a permanent one, but since as long as they don't get a new Constitution they are locked down, I can't imagine anybody on the IC intentionally delaying the process.

You can also complain about that it's the IC submitting new document for people's approval, but since you claimed somewhere in the beginning of this thread that the people will just accept anything that the key players draft, then yeah, I don't see how you can raise this complaint genuinely.

Thalassia means the founder, the most active and involved players, and the general populace of the residents. Same is true for every other UCR. All three were involved in making the previous constitution and all three are involved in it now. The accents may be placed differently now and you may make your own inferences as for what that means for future Thalassian system (democracy, oligarchy, autocracy?), but you don't really have grounds for making a claim of illegitimacy.

Bormiar wrote:As for "Thalassia's residents seem to support it": benevolent dictatorships ≠ democracy.

We are discussing the legitimacy of this action, not whether it is emblematic of a democracy. I said nothing one way or the other about the former issue.

And I don't think it's a bad idea, because we don't know what Thalassia will be exactly under the new constitution. I think that Honeydewistania has it right and we will back here when IC publishes it anyway.
Last edited by Sancta Romana Ecclesia on Tue Aug 25, 2020 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Paulus Asteorra

User avatar
Honeydewistania
Minister
 
Posts: 3031
Founded: Jun 09, 2017
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Honeydewistania » Tue Aug 25, 2020 12:36 am

I think that Honeydewistania has it right


As usual
she/her

Radiohead wrote:ICE AGE COMING ICE AGE COMING


The Clash wrote:The ice age is coming

User avatar
Daytime to Night
Envoy
 
Posts: 230
Founded: Dec 04, 2007
Father Knows Best State

Postby Daytime to Night » Tue Aug 25, 2020 1:05 am

Grey County wrote:I understand and you have scrutinized but do we need to learn 100 different ways to say "thats bad"


What is more concerning is the absolute lack of response from any of the interim Council to these concerns here (as far as I can tell) and the apparently lack of progress on their reforms. Why didn't they have those prepared before taking action?

Instead they have wiped the region clean (including removing its fundamental values from the WFE) and there is absolutely no sense that the message has got through to them that this is bad - only to the few citizens who are defending them vociferously on here. I hope the citizens of the region are holding them to account for their actions and demanding better (no matter how much you like them), but from what I've seen on here - I doubt it.

Letting those who have zero regard for your laws write the new ones is... an interesting move at best
Former Minister of Security and Minister for Justice - the South Pacific

Potato General Numero Capatata

User avatar
Grey County
Envoy
 
Posts: 231
Founded: Jun 08, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grey County » Tue Aug 25, 2020 3:50 am

Daytime to Night wrote:
Grey County wrote:I understand and you have scrutinized but do we need to learn 100 different ways to say "thats bad"


What is more concerning is the absolute lack of response from any of the interim Council to these concerns here (as far as I can tell) and the apparently lack of progress on their reforms. Why didn't they have those prepared before taking action?

Instead they have wiped the region clean (including removing its fundamental values from the WFE) and there is absolutely no sense that the message has got through to them that this is bad - only to the few citizens who are defending them vociferously on here. I hope the citizens of the region are holding them to account for their actions and demanding better (no matter how much you like them), but from what I've seen on here - I doubt it.

Letting those who have zero regard for your laws write the new ones is... an interesting move at best

On discord they have responded to concerns and It appears it will be done in a couple of days hopefuly

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Gameplay

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads