Indeed, What Is To Be Done?
Derphoof
USWP and Feds, two of the best parties in the eUnited States, just held a multiple day in game vote as to whether we should adopt the official policy of denying the legitimacy of eRepublik. The vote was overwhelmingly in support. When in the course of human history pettiness and vindictiveness reigns supreme, it will be left to a few brave souls to uproot the system and start anew. The history of eRepublik hitherto is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations. We do not say these lightly, but do so for the following reasons.
1. eRepublik is not a community-owned and administered platform. It is a private website owned and operated by Plato, for profit, who retains absolute authority over its operations. He has shown extreme bias, banning various members of the years. In the past he has given administration privileges to people such as Glorious Failure, who leaked his moderator account info, resulting in mass bans and newspaper changes; desecrating the game we play. Plato has also targeted members of his choosing, while ignoring serious issues brought up by others. So long as Congress remains subservient to Plato, Congress can never be an independent body. eRep rules, not Congressional rules, dictate decorum. eRep moderators, not Congressional moderators, dictate who can participate and who cannot.
2. Any compromises as to dual in-game and forum Congressional participation can only exist through the deeply flawed and unfair eRep political system. This is the totally wrong mindset, as it is an artificial barrier that creates hurdles to player engagement. As the game shrinks, we should open the door to players not close the door. For players who want Congressional independence, for players who dislike the totalitarian history of the administrative moderators, for people concerned about privacy, for people who want few hurdles to exist for players - eRepublik use cannot be reconciled.
3. eRep will not allow voting "delegates", which shuts the doors to players in a shrinking game, creating hurdles to player engagement.
4. Finally, no good reason exists to allow in game voting. Those who assert forum-voting are shouted down by the plethora of folks who cannot be bothered to login to a website and type “yes” or “no.” How can we trust them to do the same in-game? The burden of forum-voting is non-existent and the reward is everything.
So now we return to our opening salvo, What Is to Be Done?
We shall immediately vote against everything in-game, effective immediately. USWP and Feds stand by the majority of voters in the eUSA, by walking away from Plato’s abusive system. Plato can rule us no more.
Doesn’t that sound ridiculous?
While I understand much of BSP’s age-old complaints, WTP is new on the scene for this. While I would argue that BSP has nothing to fear coming back to the forum, as their old antagonists no longer play, WTP isn’t in this for the same reasons.
WTP has never faced the vitriol that BSP did.
WTP has never faced biased moderation, as BSP did.
WTP also had players participating in bad faith, with regard to in-game voting.
CG even mentioned that his forum ban means he cannot participate, but this is false. We’ve long accepted players acting by proxy. People are more than welcome to post his comments in discussions, and even inform Congress of his votes on various matters. The only thing that stops proxy participation is censure.
For the WTP, this isn’t about the forum causing them injury or harm. It’s about power politics, to benefit the elite in their party. It reeks of frustation with being in the Congressional minority.
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” – Buckminster Fuller
As I have told many people, the USWP is interested and open to various reforms and changes to our system of government. What it will not tolerate is the complete abolition of the current system.
And why?
Nothing has come along to make our current system obsolete. It is still the best way of organizing debate, voting, and keeping records on government business/debate. The USWP is still open to in-game voting, even though we believe forum-voting to be a better organized and safer way of running Congress.
I would even be open to the possibility of delegate reform, but CG said it best. We cannot close the door on engagement. By eliminating the delegate system, we create hurdles to player engagement. As the game shrinks, we should open the door to players not close the door.
However, when it comes to “what must be done” to bring WTP back to the forums, CG already answered his own question. WTP is “establishing in-game votes, effective immediately.” That’s the only remedy they have, and the only one they seek.
As such, if they work with me in good faith to implement in-game voting again, I look forward to their immediate return to forum activity.
Comments
I look forward to the future of Congress and the forum.
Problem is this is factually incorrect.
eRepublik further enforces an outmoded European parliamentary system on us. I hereby declare any deviation from the US constitution to be null and void via Madisonian eNullification.
So your argument is what exactly? You prefer to play eusa forum over erepublik? Everyone knows that already. It's large contributor to why USA are such Uber crap allies.
Plus WTP began existence being PTO'd then promptly abandoned by gnilraps in the first place.
Come on. Do better.
I’m not sure what argument you’re referring to, as I’m not making one. I play plenty of eRepublik, thank you. However, yes, I do rather enjoy the extracurriculars.
WTP began as a PTO by Gnil over Ajay, yes. I don’t know what that has to do with anything, as I didn’t mention any of that in my article.
Okay so you didn't mention WTP or contrast them with BSP, another party with origins of alienation by gnilraps' recklessness and complete disregard of his bystanders
Does this game revolve around Gnil? I'm not sure what he has to do with anything in my article.
I know you are not sure and don't know a lot of things.
I'm sorry if I confused you.
Thank you, that's an accurate statement
I sure hope so, otherwise you were just lying to me. They are your words, not my own.
Et tu, derpus?
"PTO'd by Gnilraps".
Yes. All by myself.
You never did anything all by yourself...
Until you claim credit when it benefits you.
Be less of a dishonest sleazebag.
Predictable bs response.
Predictable lack of accountability.
I had some lulz.
there was much funny in there
Only thing that would have made the story better would have been guitaur solos while skydiving.
Or guitar.... I ♥ my fat fingers
[removed]
Enjoyed this read more than article it was spawned from. o7
"As I have told many people, the USWP is interested and open to various reforms and changes to our system of government. What it will not tolerate is the complete abolition of the current system.
And why?
Nothing has come along to make our current system obsolete."
As of yet; no. While it is true that the eUSA forums should be lauded for its persistent existence V1 a salient truth remains inexorable...
"Change is inevitable."
Exactly, something may come along that is far better. If someone could come up with a system that is demonstrably better for asynchronous debate for a browser game, I'm all ears. For now, I'm interested in reforming the system we have. I'm all for in-game voting, for instance. I abstained from the last vote because it didn't meet my expectations, but did not want to shoot down the legislation.
"Something better" would most likely be similar to Trello in nature; though, a specific alternative has, to my knowledge, yet to be proffered.
Regarding reforming the existing systems; perhaps the previously, and perhaps currently, mindset of maintaining the perhaps previously justifiable concern of enforcing a rigid separation of eCongressional musings from In-game content is no longer warranted based on the ever-shrinking playerbase...
Perhaps, An eUSA org with a newspaper could publish current topics being discussed by eCongress which would promote player activity / interaction as an initial "olive branch" wrt reforms of the current framework?
After all, when it comes to reviewing the current system of eGovernance it would indeed be helpful to review the current tasks and goals of said legislative framework, in order to provide additional context with which to critique the aforementioned. (In keeping with "Focusing on the goal; not the tasks)
An easy example, as a legacy member of the T6 I am completely unfamiliar with the topic of "the last vote" and therefore can offer no substantive comment with respect to its substance due to a simple yet clinical lack of information. A Regularly-Maintained eUSA org's newspaper with such salient information provided to the eUSA's legislative constituency would be a wonderous development towards progressive, representative governance "of, for, and by" eAmerica.
https://www.erepublik.com/en/main/newspaper/the-speaker-s-word-181742/1
https://www.erepublik.com/en/main/newspaper/white-house-press-report-185289/1
Here are two government-owned papers which could do as you suggest and yet the current administration refuses to use either.
There are good solutions at the engineering level. They are just not yet available without some specialized knowledge. In RL, the largest political party in Italy takes all decisions via an on-line block-chain-based voting system called Rousseau. The code was open-sourced 10 days ago. This is the way to do it. It will just take some time -- probably not a lot given the accelerating rate at which technological changes happens these days -- for something like this to be widely available in a more plug-and-play setting. See: https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2019/03/11/code-rousseau-platform-blockchain/
signed
Has forum ownership been transferred yet?
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
Still butthurt i see haha
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]