 |
|  |
 |
|
AdamTG02
|
 |
Williamsburg, Virginia
Aug 2002 time: 00:21
|
|
As a clarification, I closed the voting on that issue when a majority of the members (2 of 3) had voted. Since we then had a majority of the party who wanted to join the CDC, that was what we did.
On this vote, I've specifically said that the polls are open until everyone has voted, or four (later extended to five) days have passed. The reason is that, rather than being purely a party decision, this is to a large extent an individual decision -- as each member will have the choice not to join the 3D, if the merger goes forward. For that reason, I don't want to announce a conclusion until everone has had the opportunity to say his piece. (Sorry for the gender-biased pronoun, but there are no women in the EDP, sadly enough.)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
The Bloody Baro
|
|
Whos' not to say that the EDP isn't taking over the EDP? Come on guys. Really if the EDP does join [and their still not completely sure on that] then if they don't like it they can break away.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
AdamTG02
|
 |
Williamsburg, Virginia
Aug 2002 time: 00:21
|
|
Some clarification:
Pandemoniak did not decide where to place the first base; Darkness' Edge did, because he wanted to get moving with the game and Pande hadn't given any orders. After that, Pande understandably wanted to give some orders, even if there wasn't time to post a poll. The decisions that have moved our game forward quicker than many would like were made by Commissioner Darkness' Edge, not by Pandemoniak.
I don't want to assign blame. As I posted in Darkness' Edge withdrawal from the CDC thread, we come into this game with varying expectations, and when others with different expectations don't meet ours, we are likely to come into conflict. That doesn't mean those others are wrong, for valuing speedy decision-making more than consensus. It means we have grounds for discussion. And lest someone bring up the Constitution again, I remind you that we did vote for a representative democracy, and this principle is reflected in the Constitution even if not explicily stated.
Sadly enough, Darkness' Edge's withdrawal has removed my uncertainty about whether I want to stick with the CDC. Pandemoniak can't be blamed for the Commissioner's moving ahead before he had the chance to respond, and the CDC certainly can't be blamed for the actions of a single one of its members. I wish this resolution had come another way, though -- it seems petty not to blame the coalition for something that was in effect one man's decision, simply because that man has withdrawn.
I now intend to support the EDP's staying wthin the CDC. That support is not absolute; if the party votes to merge with the P4, I will go with it, both because the merged party would be closer to my beliefs than any other party remaining, and because I wouldn't want the other former EDP members to be marginalized within the new party.
This decision is, like anything, subject to change,. I intend to stick by it, but I've changed my mind before. However, I wanted to give CDC members a heads-up, and tell them that I no longer have the uncertainty I just yesterday had.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
AdamTG02
|
 |
Williamsburg, Virginia
Aug 2002 time: 00:21
|
|
quote: well, if we merged and joined CDC, it would IN THEORY create a 2 party system. but with all of ACE (except TSA) so inactive here as they are, it would really be a 1 party system |
It's a valid point, and P4 members have made it clear that they don't want to be part of the CDC. So, I withdraw that idea. It was a long shot in any case, and born from an attempt to find compromise where perhaps I should have simply stated my position.
quote: Adam, why would you rather stay with CDC? |
There are a few reasons, which I'll try to list here. I like the fact that the CDC is somewhat roleplaying-focused, and that it brings in Old Earth political ideologies. I like the CDC's support for Democracy, including in the initial expansion phase. I like the CDC's focus on peace first, typified in Ade's statements on foreign policy. I like Pandemoninsive colonization policy, because while it may sacrifice a few turns of production now it ensures that we'll secure the territory we'll later need to be a major power.
To some extent, I don't feel justified in leaving the CDC without cause -- and while they may not focus as singularly on science as does the EDP, they recognize its importance. CDC members have supported both EDP candidates in the elections, and the reason isn't simply coalition loyalty: We share a liberal outlook, meaning not ideology but mindset.
If I am going to walk away, I need a sufficient cause -- and after deliberation I've deciided that the proposed new party doesn't fit the bill for me. A new party would be larger and support many ideas in common with my own -- but I would also be expected to make compromises that I would rather not make. The Free Market in return for eternal expansion is an example -- while I'd like to never stop exploring, I don't support that to the extent that I'd back a long-term Free Market economy with its associatedd ecodamage in order to continue expanding. At some point, exploration will be done by our scientists and astronauts, not our pioneers. But if we treat Planet's environment recklessly, "entire species may vanish, without our ever having understood, or even known them."
I haven't been vocal on environmental issues because I haven't wanted the EDP to come across as a Green-only party; I've repeatedly said that Free Market is consistent with the ideals of the EDP. But the fact is that I do feel strongly about it, even if I haven't made my views widely known. Why take Free Market for an energy bonus we could get without the eco-damage, running Wealth and Golden Age? We'd antagonize Deirdre -- the more dangerous of the two pacifists due to her normal Support and population caps, and her enhanced ability to capture mindworms. We'd antagonize the Planetmind, which will send succedingly stronger waves of mindworms to eradicate us, mindworms that we'll be less able to defend against. In my mind, we would be operating on unsound principles -- allowing inefficiency in our economy, and taking the standpoint that it doesn't matter what harm our actions do to Planet's native life. We are newcomers to this world, and we have a duty to ourselves to treat it as we would the home of a friend -- because otherwise it may legitimately treat us as an unwelcome intruder. That applies whether the Planetlife is able to strike back or not.
That concludes my rant. I'd like to clarify, if it wasn't apparent, that what I am saying here is not EDP policy but my own personal opinion. However, it is my opinion, and it guides my vote. As I said before, I am open to being persuaded, but as I also said before, I don't anticipate much chance of being brought over to the other side. P4 members, you're welcome to bring up points you think will change my mind, though. In the end I am only one vote, and my views will not dictate the decision of the EDP. As I've said, I will stay with my party however the vote turns out. Hope that explains my side of things, and I'll now yield the floor.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Voltaire
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Aug 2001 time: 22:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Maniac
I agree with TKG. That's the reason I would personally never ally with the ACE or CDC. Voltaire, P4 is the only party who wants to prevent a two-party system. Your party seeks it instead!
Accusation reversed. |
First of all, how exactly is the CDC in favor of a two party system??? 
I mean it’s not a party, it’s a coalition composed of different parties, which do not agree on every little detail, since if we did we’d all join together to form one party.
Its original purpose was to prevent the P4, the largest party at the start, from getting too power since the current CDC members are opposed to a Free Market economy (or more accurately, we’re not so much opposed as would prefer another economic system over Free Market). As well as to prevent vote splitting between candidates from different parties who share similar viewpoints. I don’t exactly see how the CDC seeks a two party system; when the game progresses and our differing viewpoints on what future societies we should implement chances are the CDC will dissolve itself and other alliances will be formed; or perhaps by that time there will no longer be a party system at all. Also, coalitions in a multiparty democratic system are often inevitable if smaller parties hope to have a majority government.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21. Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|