Referendum Dictator
Day 2,662, 13:57
•
Published in Netherlands 
•
by
•
by konnes
Dear readers,
as you may have heard, there will probably come a referendum about the dictator update with the following options:
1. CP as dictator
2. A neutral player as dictator (with possible circulation for the position)
3. A dictator that replaces Congress and CP (with possible circulation for the position)
4. Abolish the dictator position with a revolution
in this article I will explain every options, and give some pro's and con's
IF YOU THINK I FORGOT A PRO OR CON, LEAVE A COMMENT OR CONTACT ME
option 1, CP as dictator
this options says that the dictatorship will be handed over each month to the new CP
pro's:
- You can choose your own dictator like you always do with the CP
con's:
- If the 'wrong type of persons' succeed in winning the elections once, they have all power and they can decide to ruin the whole plan to change the dictator every month.
- The CP is not dependent on the congress, and can take decisions all by himself (some people might see this as a pro)
- No gold for CP and congress trophy's
option 2, A neutral player as dictator
This options says that we choose a neutral player from the game, and make him the dictator, we can either choose to make him dictator permanently, or replace him/her after a certain period of time
pro's:
- There is no threat of others who want to take over the country and steal everything.
- The CP and congress keep there power, the only thing that changes is that we have someone who 'pushes the buttons' in game
con's:
- No gold for CP and congress trophy's
- If the dictator is in a bad mood, he/she can mess up the whole system, because in game it all depends on him/her
- The power of the CP is symbolic
option 3, A dictator that replaces congress and CP
this options says that the dictator has all power. There is no need for a CP or congress anymore. we can either choose to make him/her dictator permanently, or to replace him/her after a certain period of time.
pro's:
- The dictator can do everything he wants without permission of the congress. this is only a pro if you like the dictator's plans.
con's:
- The dictator can do everything he wants without permission of the congress. this is only a con if you don't agree with his plans.
- There is less motivation to do your best for a place in the congress or to win the election, because they bassicly don't exist :/
- If we choose the 'wrong dictator', he doesn't have to listen to his advisers, he can ruin everything by himself.
- There is no democracy left (some people might see this as a pro
😃)
option 4, Abolish the dictator position with a revolution
we abandon the dictator, and just go on like we have always done it
Pro's:
- It is the same system like we always had
- The CP and congress keep their power
- nobody can make decisions without debating with the rest of the government and the congress
Con's:
- someone else can pay 200.000 NLG to start a war, and if he or she succeeds in winning that war, they can steal all the money and gold. if this happens, he or she won't listen to ANYBODY.
I hoped this cleared some things up so you can make the right decision
by
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
4.
- The person you choose for as CP, can realize the plans he promised easier
not really a pro he/she can do that under option 1 and 2.
to be honest i'd put it more as a con of option 1, since if it is a person that is willing to ignore congress he/she can do that.
biggest con for option 4 is that not having a dictator we will be taken over. If a foreigners gets hand on a MU he will start a coup and asked his buddies to fight and we'll have lost the country as has already happen in many countries. Having a benevolent dictator is also for our own security.
just what i said as a con 🙂
Good job Konnes.
Nice and clear.
Nicely written with good points for each, both pro and con. I personally believe option two to be the best option to go with. Option four is extremely dangerous just by looking at what has happened to eSwitzerland, eAustralia, and eMalaysia already. Option three is totally undemocratic and will stifle any interest a player would have in participating in politics. Option one is simply dangerous as we have seen from former CPs (everyone remember Lord Jale?).
Voted! Nicely written article!
I think option 2 is the best. Have a neutral player execute the decisions in-game for the time being. Pretty much like we have forum admins and other civil servants. I realise this takes most of the charm away from the dictator title, but In fact thats what we want. Rather a neutral dictator that is one of our own, than a foreign take over or a Lord-Jale scenario.
And as soon as the game allows we should abolish this ofcourse. But that requires a game-changer currently.
well said
But where to find such a neutral player?
well i think there are quite a bunch that would qualify
@Walhallah:
But some people keep requiring that that person is very active on IRC etc...
I find highly active in-game enough as far as activity is concerned.
Another issue is that the person will become an eDutch citizen. So some trusted people outside of our politics cannot do it, because they are abroad for good reason, e.g. communes.
Personally, I think epix would be great, but if IRC activity is truly required I guess he cannot be the one.
@djirtsdew:
I do actually agree with people who say that there should be some more activity then just on eRepublik, you will not be able to be a community without showing some effort to be a community, eNetherlands need to be able to talk with each other, that is not possible by only using eRepublik system.
I do think there should be thought about a different solution if people dislike IRC, but they should suggest it themselves, rather then just saying they don't want to be on IRC.
This game is based on social interactions, I don't get the big problem with IRC and the Forum, it's not like they are highly active, just checking forum once a day is mostly enough and IRC can be run on almost every device that people use nowadays, I use IRC on my laptop, iPad and my telephone, all of them work without any problem, might not respond on IRC a lot when using telephone, but I can actually talk with people if I want.
Also, a neutral player doesn't have to be someone from a different ecountry, I guess most people would agree with that, I believe there will be neutral players in eNetherlands even, I actually wouldn't think someone from another ecountry would count as neutral player without any other reasoning, I would rather count them as not being neutral if you would only tell that they are from another ecountry, as neutrality does mean they wouldn't do something for their own ecountry, I guess most actually would eventually, meaning their neutral position is gone...
I dont think IRC activity is required. It seems like a cheap argument to disqualify anyone else but a few people that frequent that place.
All that is required is that somebody presses a button in game on request at the earliest possibility, and defenitely within 24 hours.
Oh the alluminium hat is talking again?
Totally agreed!
Agreed.
Well written article, thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention!
v+s
Note: most of the CP's power also was symbolic in the old situation. In-game any vote he started could be countered by congress. If he did something congress didn't like he could be impeached.
Note2: having a dictator means 1 person is responsible for immigration, namely that dictator. That reduces the risk of inexperienced congress members accepting dangerous foreigners.
That is something that sometimes happened in the past, luckily only in small amounts.
To me the 2 most important aspects should be someone that can be accepted by the eNL community as a whole, and possibly more important the active political players as a whole ,since most players of the community don't seem to particularly care unless they are politically active. And most important someone that is one of our own someone that can be trusted with out a doubt to have the best interests of eNL at heart.
If availability encase of emergency is important either use skype, or leave once phone number. Short of that Forum and/or PMs ingame should work just fine.
>(I PERSONALLY FEEL) That the people saying things like must be on IRC do this cause they want to limit the people who would than be able to take the role so they have more chance to push in someone that they want in that position, rather than it being about communication or availability in a emergency. their are plenty of alternatives for that, something ignored by the people demanding IRC be part of the requirement.
I agree with you. There are indeed other means of communication besides IRC and I personally feel it is preferred that the dictator at least be very active on the forum and in-game of course, since they should have a good understanding and care about the interests of eNL just as you said.
Yes and no, If you only want a neutral "button pusher", he don't have to know all the ins and outs of everything.
I agree with you to, there are other ways to communicate and the DC should find out with CP and congress what for them the best way is to send there messages.
I find it strange how 2 or three people calling for an IRC active dictator has such an impact. Clearly they want someone who is quickly available around the day. Something an irc active player already does. As you say, there are many more options, why then falling so hard over a few people calling for one of em? It isn't like they have the power to veto the other options.
Wouldn't be possible to create kind of a mix between 2 and 3? I mean, someone who is a button pusher, but voting for him and being dictator for 2 or 3 months, then, voting for someone else (or reelect him if the community thinks it is the best option) in that way more people will have the opportunity and we put less responsability on one man (or woman) shoulders.