Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 01:36:00 -
[1]
I'm putting together a group of people interested in organising some more law and civility within Empire space. This isn't a corporate recruitment, membership is organised by holding shares. Members will determine a framework for a 'civil authority' and draw up a political process. Send me an evemail for additional information or to become a member.
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 01:47:00 -
[2]
Wrong forums Bro.
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 01:52:00 -
[3]
I invite a mod to move this thread to wherever is appropriate. I was hesitant to put it in the recruitment, because I'm not recruiting for a corp or alliance. However, I'd like it to be wherever is most appropriate.
|
Aelisha
Gallente Nisaba Syndicate New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:02:00 -
[4]
How exactly do you suppose you can enact any Law and Civility within empire space?
Not a troll, but I would assume that Concord and the likes would prevent any pre-emption of assault, and Concord deals with assaults/ganks in retrospect, invalidating your post-gank actions by proxy.
I am interested to see more than a 1 paragraph synopsis, as atm this seems half baked and wrongly posted. New banner soon! |
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:09:00 -
[5]
Well, the specifics would be determined by consensus of an elected body. However, my thought is dealing with things not regulated by CONCORD, like can-flipping and scamming. Eventually patrolling low-sec/high-sec borders of specific regions may even allow for the banning of 'criminals' from controlled space. All of this would be supported by a democratic assembly.
|
Aelisha
Gallente Nisaba Syndicate New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:15:00 -
[6]
Mechanically, as in within game mechanics, HOW would your prosposals work - Assume the 'democratic body' was at yoyr feet for these analyses please.
Also, how would a democratically elected body represent all of New Eden. Forinstance if i have 100 pilots in The Forge, and did not subscribe to your interpretation of 'law' - what would you classify me as, even if I didn't partake in criminal actions? How is your democratic body representative of anyone but it's constituents? Do your laws only apply to your constituents (only they 'benefit' from your legislation)?
These are all questions, moral and mechanical, that would need to be addressed before any serious corporation could lend muscle in good faith. New banner soon! |
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:21:00 -
[7]
True, the elected body would only be beholden to their 'citizens' (i.e. shareholders). non-citizens would be free to traverse controlled territory, but would be subjected to those laws. These laws would only be enforced within systems 'claimed' by this civil authority. Attempts would be made to have residents within that system (corps with offices there, frequent visitors, etc.) contacted and on board. If the majority of residents disagree, the authority moves on.
|
Aelisha
Gallente Nisaba Syndicate New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:27:00 -
[8]
Then I fear your plan is doomed to failure, as resistance will be widespread, and likely violent. You seek to impose a vision of order dictated by a democratic body not all will subscribe to, onto residents of unkowable manpower and ability, likely including the subsidiaries of major alliance funding their parent corps from the safety of Empire space.
Good luck, but I can assure you that if I received a mail informing me my home system was under 'civil authority jurisdiction' the reply would likely be a CONCORD mail explaining my views in more polite terms than I would care to, including a 24 hour timer. Scamming and Can flipping is avoidable through intelligence.
The lowest common denominator (aka Victims) should not be pandered to - they have to learn the hardway.
New banner soon! |
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:37:00 -
[9]
The fact that its difficult doesnt mean it should be abandoned. I've purposely not plotted a specific course because thats what I want the assembly to do. My goal here is to get people on board to just talk, not lend muscle, money or anything other than time and thought. The concept I'm thinking of extends beyond physical security, it would cover things like credit, a helping hand to n00bs, even things like cheap regulated transport of goods.
|
Neci Maren
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:37:00 -
[10]
Participating in Government is a social contract. I lay down my rights of anarchy to be protected by you, or your government.
Why should I give up my freedom to live under your rules?
|
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:49:00 -
[11]
They aren't my rules, they are our rules as mutually agreed. Once the assembly has laid down a basic structure (a constitution), elections would be held to determine representatives and a president. To avoid opposition, I'd even propose no 'policing' is done, we'll just focus on affordable hauling, credit determination and maybe even affordable lending. It's literally whatever we all decide.
|
Neci Maren
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:55:00 -
[12]
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx They aren't my rules, they are our rules as mutually agreed. Once the assembly has laid down a basic structure (a constitution), elections would be held to determine representatives and a president. To avoid opposition, I'd even propose no 'policing' is done, we'll just focus on affordable hauling, credit determination and maybe even affordable lending. It's literally whatever we all decide.
As part of the ground floor of our government I vote that we disband. No focuses should be proposed in the future and no constitution drawn up. I believe I speak for the majority, but I imagine a roll call vote should be taken. I vote:
Aye.
|
Nyxster
Gallente Gatecrashers
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:55:00 -
[13]
Nice Plan Bro,
Lookin forward to killin every last man jack of you in the name of chaos and anarchy.
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 02:58:00 -
[14]
The fact that anarchists abound in Eve is hardly unheard of, anyone out there support law and order? You don't even have to do anything with us, just speak up and let everyone know that there are still some good guys out there.
|
Khemul Zula
Amarr Keisen Trade League
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:04:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Neci Maren
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx They aren't my rules, they are our rules as mutually agreed. Once the assembly has laid down a basic structure (a constitution), elections would be held to determine representatives and a president. To avoid opposition, I'd even propose no 'policing' is done, we'll just focus on affordable hauling, credit determination and maybe even affordable lending. It's literally whatever we all decide.
As part of the ground floor of our government I vote that we disband. No focuses should be proposed in the future and no constitution drawn up. I believe I speak for the majority, but I imagine a roll call vote should be taken. I vote:
Aye.
Seconded.
Veal, murder. Baby Carrots, healthy snack. Food hypocrisy at work. |
gnome proper
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:08:00 -
[16]
Edited by: gnome proper on 01/11/2009 03:09:20
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx The fact that anarchists abound in Eve is hardly unheard of, anyone out there support law and order? You don't even have to do anything with us, just speak up and let everyone know that there are still some good guys out there.
Are you somehow able to claim that anarchists aren¦t good people? It¦s a political point of view and philosophy, not a recipe for antisocial behaviour. Please educate yourself a little before attempting to generate a political system.
Anyway, your roleplaying of good old money-grabbing power politics have no purpose or meaning in Empire. You can, however, do it in nullsec. Best of luck!
|
Dagobert Dog
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:10:00 -
[17]
And how will you stop me from can flipping in a system you claimed? How do you want to do that with the current game mechanics?
Dag
|
SULAN BARHIR
Gallente United League of Independents
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:12:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Khemul Zula
Originally by: Neci Maren
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx They aren't my rules, they are our rules as mutually agreed. Once the assembly has laid down a basic structure (a constitution), elections would be held to determine representatives and a president. To avoid opposition, I'd even propose no 'policing' is done, we'll just focus on affordable hauling, credit determination and maybe even affordable lending. It's literally whatever we all decide.
As part of the ground floor of our government I vote that we disband. No focuses should be proposed in the future and no constitution drawn up. I believe I speak for the majority, but I imagine a roll call vote should be taken. I vote:
Aye.
Seconded.
I propose a vote to kick these "members" out of the ECA. I vote aye.
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I'm putting together a group of people interested in organising some more law and civility within Empire space. This isn't a corporate recruitment, membership is organised by holding shares. Members will determine a framework for a 'civil authority' and draw up a political process. Send me an evemail for additional information or to become a member.
I for one, am curious about your idea. I say let's get's some basic ideas organized, and give it a go.
Forget about the naysayes!
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:13:00 -
[19]
Assuming the assembly voted to enforce anti-canflipping laws, I'd probably say the 'police' would lay jetcans upon the request of miners. Were those cans flipped, the police would have kill rights on the flipper. Then its simply a case of paying attention and having more firepower.
As for anarchists being bad people, I'm not saying that per se. However, they aren't good guys. I'm rather well-educated, but that is my opinion regardless.
|
Dagobert Dog
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:19:00 -
[20]
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx Assuming the assembly voted to enforce anti-canflipping laws, I'd probably say the 'police' would lay jetcans upon the request of miners. Were those cans flipped, the police would have kill rights on the flipper. Then its simply a case of paying attention and having more firepower.
Are you really thinking something like that would work under current game mechanics in empire? Im sorry, but under current game mechanics your atempts will fail horrybly. Yes you can try to bait can flippers, but how on earth would you stop scammers?
|
|
SULAN BARHIR
Gallente United League of Independents
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:20:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Dagobert Dog And how will you stop me from can flipping in a system you claimed? How do you want to do that with the current game mechanics?
Dag
Intelligence will be our advantage. |
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:22:00 -
[22]
Again, I dont have all the answers. However, I think some kind of credit rating system could assist in preventing scams. The idea has been tossed about unsuccessfully on MD for awhile. The inability to judge creditworthiness or trustworthiness of individuals stifles financial development in Eve, this is evident. Finding some method of establishing trust would aid economic development.
|
Dagobert Dog
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:26:00 -
[23]
Originally by: SULAN BARHIR
Originally by: Dagobert Dog And how will you stop me from can flipping in a system you claimed? How do you want to do that with the current game mechanics?
Dag
Intelligence will be our advantage.
And how exectly do you plan to bring intelligence to all those carebear brains?
Dag
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:31:00 -
[24]
I know from extensive mining experience that jet-can mining is many times more efficient than any other form of mining. The ability to discourage or prevent flipping would have huge benefits for miners.
By arranging for kill-rights on flippers, it should be possible to reduce the incidence of flipping in controlled space.
Why exactly wouldn't this work within the game's mechanics, as you intimated earlier?
|
Khemul Zula
Amarr Keisen Trade League
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:36:00 -
[25]
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I know from extensive mining experience that jet-can mining is many times more efficient than any other form of mining. The ability to discourage or prevent flipping would have huge benefits for miners.
By arranging for kill-rights on flippers, it should be possible to reduce the incidence of flipping in controlled space.
Why exactly wouldn't this work within the game's mechanics, as you intimated earlier?
Can flipper comes in in a shuttle. Flips can. You kill shuttle. Can flipper comes back in a battleship and kills you and happily goes on can flipping.
Veal, murder. Baby Carrots, healthy snack. Food hypocrisy at work. |
Fuuijin
Minmatar Khan Raiders
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:39:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Fuuijin on 01/11/2009 03:40:59 nvm google saved my brain
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:45:00 -
[27]
Well, assuming we'd be patrolling in this fashion, we'd have the firepower to handle such things. I'm hardly talking of a couple of frigs hanging out, handling all the flippers.
I dont want to focus on the policing actions though, there are so many other things that could potentially occur. Policing may not even be something the assembly elects to do.
|
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:46:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Khemul Zula
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I know from extensive mining experience that jet-can mining is many times more efficient than any other form of mining. The ability to discourage or prevent flipping would have huge benefits for miners.
By arranging for kill-rights on flippers, it should be possible to reduce the incidence of flipping in controlled space.
Why exactly wouldn't this work within the game's mechanics, as you intimated earlier?
Can flipper comes in in a shuttle. Flips can. You kill shuttle. Can flipper comes back in a battleship and kills you and happily goes on can flipping.
Defender swaps ships with other pilot at safe spot in space. Defender now has battleship! Defender also has a fleet of remote reppers standing by in case things get ugly.
Profit?
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
Khemul Zula
Amarr Keisen Trade League
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:47:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Cadde Profit?
Not when using a small fleet to defend a simple mining operation in hi-sec.
Veal, murder. Baby Carrots, healthy snack. Food hypocrisy at work. |
Cadde
Gallente 221st Century Warfare
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:51:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Khemul Zula
Originally by: Cadde Profit?
Not when using a small fleet to defend a simple mining operation in hi-sec.
Mining fleet is grateful for assistance, sends iskies? Stuff fitted to aggressors battleship worth something? E-Peen growth?
Profit?
My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
|
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 03:54:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 01/11/2009 04:00:59
Originally by: Khemul Zula Can flipper comes in in a shuttle. Flips can. You kill shuttle. Can flipper comes back in a battleship and kills you and happily goes on can flipping.
This is the problem at the heart of it all, and also why you don't see many people trying to police hisec. The way it currently works all security measures in those systems are easily manipulated by the very criminals they're meant to control, and even used against the law abiding victims they're supposed to protect.
If CONCORD were a real security/police outfit they would have been replaced long ago due to constantly blowing up innocent people, or protecting criminals. I imagine if you looked at the logs of people attacked by CONCORD over the average month there would be very few, if any, criminals.
My deepest sympathies. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Galan Amarias
Amarr The Drekla Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 06:02:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 01/11/2009 04:00:59
Originally by: Khemul Zula Can flipper comes in in a shuttle. Flips can. You kill shuttle. Can flipper comes back in a battleship and kills you and happily goes on can flipping.
This is the problem at the heart of it all, and also why you don't see many people trying to police hisec. The way it currently works all security measures in those systems are easily manipulated by the very criminals they're meant to control, and even used against the law abiding victims they're supposed to protect.
If CONCORD were a real security/police outfit they would have been replaced long ago due to constantly blowing up innocent people, or protecting criminals. I imagine if you looked at the logs of people attacked by CONCORD over the average month there would be very few, if any, criminals.
You do realize that Concord respond to exactly one thing and one thing only right? Global Criminal Countdown. If you have one they kill you, if you don't have one they do nothing. Since you can't be innocent and GCC, how do you suppose Concord has innocent blood on their hands?
Now as for this elected nonsense, the OP needs to do something to gain some level of notoriety and clout. Might has well have an exclamation point saying, hey guys lets all play nice, we can take a vote! I would opposed this idea further but 1st I'd have to get my sec up.
I vote the members of this noble cause come to my low sec system and police us. We are totally out of hand.
-Galan
|
xxxThe Doctorxxx
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 06:17:00 -
[33]
Keep in mind we are talking about 'policing' only a system or so. Not trying to create a New Eden Order. The policing of can-flipping and scamming is only one of several ideas that could be implemented.
|
Galan Amarias
Amarr The Drekla Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 06:59:00 -
[34]
All you need to watch a single system is a corp. You will have very little effect anywhere else in the EVE cluster, one or two systems in high sec are fairly meaningless.
I stand by my earlier statement, if you want people to sign on, make a name for yourself.
-Galan
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 07:01:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Galan Amarias You do realize that Concord respond to exactly one thing and one thing only right? Global Criminal Countdown. If you have one they kill you, if you don't have one they do nothing. Since you can't be innocent and GCC, how do you suppose Concord has innocent blood on their hands?
I was thinking more of 'carebears' who make mistakes in sec space. They likely make up most of CONCORDs victims. As a deterrent for actual criminal activity they fail because they're just as much of a threat to the law abiding trying to repel the people with long criminal histories.
My deepest sympathies. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 07:31:00 -
[36]
You are trying to create a force and impose laws in high security space? Jesus Christ, talk about doing it wrong, I don't think you could be doing it any more wrong.
Nonetheless, I highly encourage you to try this, just make sure you keep us updated on the forums because I looooove reading stories of fail.
Originally by: CCP Whisper So you're going to have to do some actual thinking with regards to hull components and their capabilities instead of copying some cookie-cutter setup. Cry some more.
|
D3F4ULT
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 08:23:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Vaal Erit You are trying to create a force and impose laws in high security space? Jesus Christ, talk about doing it wrong, I don't think you could be doing it any more wrong.
Nonetheless, I highly encourage you to try this, just make sure you keep us updated on the forums because I looooove reading stories of fail.
ditto. So much fail.
|
Higgs Foton
Scoopex Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 08:42:00 -
[38]
xxxTheDoctorxxx, your plan is stupid. You will be the laughing stock of hisec with your stupid police and patrol ideas. All it takes is one wardec from an evil alliance (and there are LOTS of them around in Empire) and your cunning plan is twarthed.
We do have stuff like you want in EVE though. Thats in 0.0. Are your ready and willing to cut out a piece for yourself and fight for it, or do you want to stay safe in Empire and feel all inportant with your police and elections? Because whatever you do, if you do it in Empire, nobody will notice. And nobody will care. And people with a sense of humor will grief the **** out of you. And they have every right to do so, because EVE only rewards those who thrive on chaos.
I actually have some doubts about that last sentence, but i included it because it is cool to say something like that. :) ___________________________________
Ich auch, bin schwul
Please resize sig to a maximum file size no greater than 24000 bytes - Mitnal |
Shroomer
Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 09:52:00 -
[39]
I fully support this. Send this character 50 mil, and I will pledge my allegiance, and promise to uphold civility with all my honour.
Edit: Actually, could you make it 100 mil?
|
Jessica Lorelei
Minmatar Decimus Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 11:02:00 -
[40]
the op is a mentally ill megalomaniac, really he belongs in 0.0 with all the other mentally ill megalomaniacs
|
|
Winters Chill
Amarr Sinister Purpose
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 11:17:00 -
[41]
I applaud this initiative.
Only because when you seek to impose order you create chaos and destruction.
Destruction... ohhh yeah... *rubs nipples*
|
Ifly Uwalk
Caldari Somali Coastguard Authority
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 16:27:00 -
[42]
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I'm putting together a group of people interested in organising some more law and civility within Empire space.
The Somali Coastguard Authority is proud to bring Traditional Somali Coastguard Services to the citizens of New Eden.
Please message me ingame with a full member list of your corp so we know whom to Guard. Please also tell me the location of your POS(es) so we may base our ships there. We don't necessarily need the password(s), we can just orbit the tower(s).
Although having the password(s) usually makes Guarding a lot easier.
Ifly Uwalk
|
RasTrent
Minmatar Somali Coastguard Authority
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 17:36:00 -
[43]
Edited by: RasTrent on 01/11/2009 17:36:45 i will second ifly, we are very interested in assisting you in any way possible. i think this is a very noble action for you to take. might i suggest the Lonetrek region be looked at for your main focal point of empire space, there are a few starter systems there where a lot of people tend to pick on new guys who are just trying to make some start up money.
xxxTheDoctorxxx you have the Somali support please contact us in game for anything that we could be of assistance to.
(i am the US Timezone Diplomat so feel free to contact me at any point)
Thanks RasT
|
Mytzso
Somali Coastguard Authority
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 17:57:00 -
[44]
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I'm putting together a group of people interested in organising some more law and civility within Empire space..
Finally someone who possesses courage and chivalry, you are exactly what New Eden needs. Lead us and we will help you in any way we can. Our blasters are at your disposal noble Sir.
|
Charcul
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 22:41:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Aelisha Good luck, but I can assure you that if I received a mail informing me my home system was under 'civil authority jurisdiction' the reply would likely be a CONCORD mail explaining my views in more polite terms than I would care to, including a 24 hour timer.
This.
|
Li Fengxian
Gallente Butterfly Effect Corp.
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 23:26:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Li Fengxian on 01/11/2009 23:27:21 I can see what you want to accomplish, and while I won't get in I applaud any and all attempts to create more political and institutional developments (Parliaments, Senates, etc) in Empire coming from players.
One day, perhaps Empire will stop being runned by NPCs and be an inamovible part of the background, and instead be thoroughly run by PCs to become dynamic, organic factions.
|
Saju Somtaaw
Gallente Diiamond Heavy Industries MagiTech Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 23:41:00 -
[47]
Time to fire up the production lines to take advantage of all the vic...customers. ---- --- ---
|
Aurora Nyx
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 23:52:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Aurora Nyx on 01/11/2009 23:52:16 My cats breath smells like cat food.
|
James Tritanius
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 19:44:00 -
[49]
I fully support this movement. I shall be the first one to sin up for your glorious endeavor. Please contact me via in game mail.
|
Ard UnjiiGo
The Bastards The Bastards.
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:17:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Ard UnjiiGo on 02/11/2009 20:18:30 I'm in low sec Metro now and need your help urgently!
I'm surrounded and persecuted by pirates on all sides!
There is no Concord here and we need the noble citizens of EVE to exterminate this infestation.
Please help!!
|
|
Aphoticus
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:27:00 -
[51]
Doc,
Send me a mail in game.
I will give you an idea for a foundation that can lead to success in this idea of yours.
|
tyroney
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 21:57:00 -
[52]
Just one thing for the moment:
"without vision, the people perish" - You want to bring... whoever together in order to agree on... stuff and then do... something.
I think the number and general focus of the posts in this thread so far are evidence that you need to reevaluate what you're doing and how you want to do it. Why aren't you starting a corporation or trying to form an alliance? What are you doing?
|
Vinsurith Morteth
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 22:15:00 -
[53]
The OP's idea isn't a horrible one. Citizens can band together to protect eachother. Unfortunately, the game mechanics holds some of it back. But, eve was (atleast I would hope) built to think outside the box. Which means the excuse that "the game mechanics" don't allow a "neighborhood watch" isn't a good excuse. In reality the game mechanics benefit griefers. The only way for true carebears to beat them is to petition the player. Some people look at that like they are snitches or p***ies. CCP could allow a form of sanctioned neighborhood watch. It will be difficult though...one persons idea of civility is another persons oppression.
|
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 22:32:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Neci Maren Participating in Government is a social contract. I lay down my rights of anarchy to be protected by you, or your government.
Why should I give up my freedom to live under your rules?
This is exactly the question. And it's a question you have no answer for. Behold:
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I've purposely not plotted a specific course because thats what I want the assembly to do. My goal here is to get people on board to just talk, not lend muscle, money or anything other than time and thought. The concept I'm thinking of extends beyond physical security, it would cover things like credit, a helping hand to n00bs, even things like cheap regulated transport of goods.
When governments vote, they vote on yes/no measures. Somebody proposes something, and the representatives vote on that person's idea. They don't hold open-ended, free-form votes to do "whatever you guys want".
Look at the US Declaration of Independence to see what you're doing wrong. That document explicitly states what the purpose of a government is -- to secure certain unalienable rights -- and by what authority a people can reject a government and establish a new one.
Your proposal is in stark contrast. You seek to impose authority (tyranny) on the people of New Eden and you won't even state clearly what you're offering in return. Why should anybody follow you, unless they're a power-worshipping liberal for whom tyranny alone is enticement enough?
The Fighting Republicans vote no.
... The Fighting Republicans now recruiting for a 2010 comeback campaign! |
Vinsurith Morteth
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 23:04:00 -
[55]
Quote: Look at the US Declaration of Independence to see what you're doing wrong. That document explicitly states what the purpose of a government is -- to secure certain unalienable rights -- and by what authority a people can reject a government and establish a new one.
Your proposal is in stark contrast. You seek to impose authority (tyranny) on the people of New Eden and you won't even state clearly what you're offering in return. Why should anybody follow you, unless they're a power-worshipping liberal for whom tyranny alone is enticement enough?
The Fighting Republicans vote no.
Agreed. If you're trying to form an organization to defend against griefers (or whatever) then that's one thing. But, there needs to be some sort of give and take. If you are a "government" then it would need to be decided what powers it holds and what limits keep it in check. You've said there is no true plan yet so I would go back and refine the details first before offering the idea. Something like this would require bylaws and a voting system and an opt-out for corps that aren't interested. There are plenty of corps that could and would use the protection but what will it cost them and what can they offer? What system of government would govern this alliance? Unitary, Federal, Oligarchy...the free-form method would cause problems depending on the scale and numbers of said alliance. This is an interesting predicament.
|
Neci Maren
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 00:06:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Neci Maren on 03/11/2009 00:12:14 Edited by: Neci Maren on 03/11/2009 00:06:58
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker
Originally by: Neci Maren Participating in Government is a social contract. I lay down my rights of anarchy to be protected by you, or your government.
Why should I give up my freedom to live under your rules?
This is exactly the question. And it's a question you have no answer for. Behold:
Originally by: xxxThe Doctorxxx I've purposely not plotted a specific course because thats what I want the assembly to do. My goal here is to get people on board to just talk, not lend muscle, money or anything other than time and thought. The concept I'm thinking of extends beyond physical security, it would cover things like credit, a helping hand to n00bs, even things like cheap regulated transport of goods.
When governments vote, they vote on yes/no measures. Somebody proposes something, and the representatives vote on that person's idea. They don't hold open-ended, free-form votes to do "whatever you guys want".
Look at the US Declaration of Independence to see what you're doing wrong. That document explicitly states what the purpose of a government is -- to secure certain unalienable rights -- and by what authority a people can reject a government and establish a new one.
Your proposal is in stark contrast. You seek to impose authority (tyranny) on the people of New Eden and you won't even state clearly what you're offering in return. Why should anybody follow you, unless they're a power-worshipping liberal for whom tyranny alone is enticement enough?
The Fighting Republicans vote no.
You know you were all good til the "power-worshipping liberal for whom tyranny alone is enticement enough?"
American republicans and liberals, at least the rational ones, seem to be on the same side when it comes to tyranny, we just disagree on several aspects of government like "social Democracy" and "civil rights."
If someone decided to suppress the voice of the people, and install them self as Emporer, we'd be side by side to topple such a fool.
It is nice of you to attempt to spread the hate, that's very republican of you :).
Believe me though, if they shut down Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, I would be protesting.
|
Novantco
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 00:38:00 -
[57]
I AM THE LAW.
|
Joe Starbreaker
The Fighting Republicans
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 01:18:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Neci Maren You know you were all good til the "power-worshipping liberal for whom tyranny alone is enticement enough?"
American republicans and liberals, at least the rational ones, seem to be on the same side when it comes to tyranny, we just disagree on several aspects of government like "social Democracy" and "civil rights."
What is "social democracy" if not the latest jargon term for seizure of wealth and forced dependence on government? Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny. Liberals would gladly sacrifice your civil rights for a benevolent dictator who claims to represent "the people".
Quote: Believe me though, if they shut down Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, I would be protesting.
Is that all you'd do? Those who aren't willing to fight for their freedom (in game) deserve to lose it (in game).
... The Fighting Republicans now recruiting for a 2010 comeback campaign! |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |