Join the new world

Already have an account? Login



What is this?

You are reading an article written by a citizen of eRepublik, an immersive multiplayer strategy game based on real life countries. Create your own character and help your country achieve its glory while establishing yourself as a war hero, renowned publisher or finance guru.

Congressional Report #6

Day 2,164, 11:38 • Published in Canada Serbia

• by Sally Willis

In which we see how the old guard prop up their flimsy redoubts.

From my last article: Congressional Report #5, I share a comment and my reply.

crisfire said on day 2,163, 12:28
the only thing I saw you propose that made sense was taking the small "o" out of CRoO

everything else complicated the shit out of a very very very basic and easily understandable set of rules and guildlines

good luck to the CPF

I replie😛

I disagree. The rules ARE simple. But I was told there was no need to incorporate the punishment thing; that was in the Speaker's purview.

And yet ... in the dying days of the current congress you old farts have gerrymandered a punishment "rule" through a rapid travesty of a debate before putting it to the vote. Shame.

Shame for gerrymandering.

Shame for claiming there were no punishment rules.

Shame for hiding punishment rules away from the CRO, which is where they properly belong.

Kudos to you though, because I do remember your sympathy for the small o removal.

I quit the MDP because I had little faith of keeping my place and even if I did, I would have been unhappy supporting a party whose in-Congress policies are so far removed from its ideological orientation. I don't expect any you to understand that.

Comments

crisfire Day 2,164, 13:20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8LOLswfTkQ

Sally Willis Day 2,164, 14:04

Tedious.

Wilfie Day 2,164, 16:03

"And yet ... in the dying days of the current congress you old farts have gerrymandered a punishment "rule" through a rapid travesty of a debate before putting it to the vote. Shame."

Hmmm, a new set of rules governing Congress and Party Presidents (if I am to base my assumptions on Muglack's No Fly List idea) yet nothing mentioned about it in the game itself. Then again, I suppose that gathering input from the forum illiterate would be a waste of effort, and why bother informing them of these new rules.

I don't understand why eCanadians are complicating their political process by adding more forum-based rules. Isn't the main problem that not enough people are involving themselves in debates to generate new ideas, develop a community, have fun together, etc?

Is there something to be afraid of that the doors to open discussions need to be shut...or maybe just guarded with a series of passwords, log-ins, and Speaker/Admin doorkeepers? Only fear makes a community shut itself away...or perhaps hogging the debate is the purpose of cloistering Congress.

TheSmoke Day 2,164, 17:00

Could you recall and incident that happened 6 months ago by looking through random dead players articles? No, however you can go back to articles and information from 2009 on the forums. Erebuglik is not an efficient means of communicating and storing information, forums are.

Wilfie Day 2,164, 17:21

I have done a lot of back-reading through articles in the game. Did it every day while I was active in order to get up to speed. It's fascinating what a person can stumble on.

Perhaps others enjoy similar pleasure doing the same in the forum. Can't say I was ever one of them. It'd be interesting to conduct a poll to see how many others regularly read through old forum posts.

I admit my ignorance on the joys of forum reminiscing and will have to learn to cope with living in the eMoment in-game.

Chochi Day 2,164, 19:20

If you read Muglack's idea about a No Fly List then how can you claim that there was no mention of it in game?

Wilfie Day 2,164, 20:15

Well, you got me there, Chochi.

Muglack did say he had an idea that he would propose in Congress, so technically that is something rather than nothing.

Drat, I should have requested the actual proposal and related rules be posted in the game. Foiled again!

Joshur Day 2,164, 16:15

I'm mostly confused as to why this is an article... I mean, for those who read your articles, we've seen exactly this already.

That being said, you're allowed to leave a party without making a big hullabaloo about it. It's probably better that way, and you just look like somebody whose ideas have changed, and not somebody who's bitter they didn't get their way.

Wilfie Day 2,164, 16:21

I think this article is designed to highlight that sharp reply to crisfire in Sally's previous article. Think of it as a 'bump' in a forum thread. (see, the media section ain't all so different from the forum, eh?)

Joshur Day 2,164, 16:23

I'd definitely agree that it's a bump, I just think that anybody who genuinely cared about the Sally Willis - crisfire exchange would have already seen it, or would go check it out themselves.

Wilfie Day 2,164, 16:25

I think I missed the other Sally-crisfire exchanges in the forum, despite my genuine interest. Would anyone care to post screenshots of it? Or better yet, post the images in a new article, plz.

crisfire Day 2,164, 17:42

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6K0XfSlcKk

Wilfie Day 2,164, 17:43

A running Moss gathers no moos. : (

Muglack Day 2,165, 19:46

"I disagree. The rules ARE simple. But I was told there was no need to incorporate the punishment thing; that was in the Speaker's purview.

And yet ... in the dying days of the current congress you old farts have gerrymandered a punishment "rule" through a rapid travesty of a debate before putting it to the vote. Shame."

The ironic part about this is that your "idea" was to give the Speaker 100% control over every aspect of the list making them the God-King of the Congressional forums.

You claim we went to far, and yet when compared with what you say you would of proposed we clearly didn't go far enough.

Post your comment