Page 22 of 25

PostPosted:18 May 2009 07:01
by Falx
Why do I need to prove that it should become a problem, do I need to prove that I will get Hepatitis before I get a vaccination for it?

Also I don't get why you're so upty about this. If the PNL isn't racist then you shouldn't worry about THP denouncing something you are not :?:

PostPosted:18 May 2009 08:10
by Andres
Falx wrote:The more reasonable thing would be to vote on an official party stance on racialism "We hold racialism to be no different to the racism of the past. It is an ideology masquerading as science, preventing meaningful action on the failure of education system to teach basic reasoning skills to the low income segments of the population."
Racialism or scientific racism, or whatever other new monicker is used, as presented by the posts I have read on this board, is indeed to simple racism what intelligent design is to creationism. However, I don't see a reason why this party should be making a stand on this issue at this point. The racists in the PNL decided to strike that from their current role in the simulation, and therefore it just has not been an issue in the sim. The THP making a stand on this would simply result in the issue being introduced into the simulation.

PostPosted:18 May 2009 12:06
by Falx
The issue has already entered the sim thanks to the PNL's intern leader, their permanent one being red carded for more of the same.

I think using something innate to the sim for us to debate over, decide it's merits, legality and so on is much more realistic and ultimately much closer to what the political process looks like than letting a GM make up some crisis that no one particularly cares about: "You rolled a 3, the new labour legislation causes firms to move out of Fyordenfyord and reduces wages there by 5%". No one will gain or loose votes (really) on how that is handled, a party having to change leadership because of a scandal, or being split internally over the issue will. And what's more from our own history we know that these sorts of debates really do happen in the wider world and have immense repercussions for the countries that they happen in.

At any rate we took a stand on copyrights just because it happened to be in the News at the time (motion 7) even though no one in the sim was talking about it.

PostPosted:19 May 2009 13:30
by Falx
Dear Party,
Please vote on the bill for parliament (18) as soon as possible.

PostPosted:19 May 2009 14:01
by Falx
Thread appears to have diverged. Is this vote still applicable and active?


Yes, essentially we aren't voting for some minimum labour laws, we are voting to let the SN-RF take power, the details are largely unimportant.

PostPosted:20 May 2009 16:36
by Falx
Seeing that for motion 18(SN-RF initial legislation/confidence vote) voting has started in parliament and only mp's have voted on it in our thread I'm letting everyone vote which every way they see fit, party discipline is suspended for this vote.

PostPosted:23 May 2009 03:08
by Falx
Parliament has been seated and it is the SN-RF that have managed to form it.

PostPosted:29 May 2009 16:05
by Falx
Dear party,
This simulation is now officially boring as hell. Like I thought once we moved away from playing with things that are intrinsic to the game to things that are made up by the parties in power the game has ground to a halt. The budget discussion is all so fun that even a tangent on how to best outfit our navy didn't interest more than three people, two of them from this party (telling me I'm full of shit :lol:).

As such I'd like to see suggestions for the most divisive, outrageous and inflammatory legislation that we can come up with to be our first piece of legislation.

Ideas that will stroke more than a few nerves in game:
1). Banning copyrights/patents/intellectual property outright.
2). Bringing up the problems of racism in to the game, specifically the closet racists on the right not being given the lenient treatment in parliament that they are given on the rest of the site. Possibly by offering amnesty to all Palestinians or some such we can get a nice long debate about this going.
Things that are interesting to play around with but haven't been mentioned here yet:
3) Banning all numbers longer than lets say 400,000 digits because with the right mapping from base ten to base 2 you can use those to transmit terrorist information/child porn/copyright violations etc.
4) Legalizing all drugs and creating a state run monopoly on the drug trade primarily as a revenue generator.
5) Scrapping all the conventional arms budget proposed by the government in favour of space exploration/sea floor coloniastion/claims on the poles where most farming land will be in the next few centuries.
6) Perusing a WMD programme with weapons that do not fall foul of any treaties such as particle accelerators that if pointed in the right direction and the right target matter could conceivably fry entire cities on the other side of the planet, space born capabilities, ie nudging asteroids into the planet etc.

Personally I think all of these would be awesome but 5 and 6 hold particular favour in my heart.

Rolled into one I think the best idea I can come up with is:

Building a controlled hot fusion capability, as fas as I know this is does not require monitoring by international bodies, using the vast amount of energy released by this to produce antimatter in a large particle accelerator for a new generation of portable WMD. Using the knowhow from our reactors, which due to technical reason too long to list here will make excellent space propulsion systems, into creating a next generation of space craft capable of interplanetary flight on scales that are actually useful, ie months rather than decades, and using those to lay our claim on the asteroid belts, outer solar system bodies and possible Oort Cloud.

PostPosted:29 May 2009 19:25
by Doomhammer
he budget discussion is all so fun that even a tangent on how to best outfit our navy didn't interest more than three people, two of them from this party (telling me I'm full of shit

You're not full of shit. We just need big ass ships with big ass guns and jets on 'em.

The other suggestions: Awesome :up:

PostPosted:29 May 2009 19:43
by MB.
We just need big ass ships with big ass guns and jets on 'em.


Falx, being a pussy, supports the Juene Ecole.

PostPosted:29 May 2009 19:56
by Doomhammer
Falx, being a pussy, supports the Juene Ecole.

Who would ever want to copy the French? They're French, FFS.

PostPosted:29 May 2009 20:05
by MB.
Napoleon was a badass.

in b4 Corsican

PostPosted:29 May 2009 20:12
by Doomhammer
This game is really boring now. I knew the commies would be buzz-kills but da-amn. :|

PostPosted:29 May 2009 20:56
by MB.
This game was really boring the second it was decided to create parties that would actaully govern.

PostPosted:29 May 2009 21:47
by ingliz
Two votes tomorrow, a revenue bill and a 94 page bill promoting labour institutions, that should give everyone a frisson of excitement, briefly, well for 72 hours at least, oops I forgot clause 1(d), maybe not. :|

PostPosted:30 May 2009 03:39
by Falx
94 page bill promoting labour institutions


The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of an expanding bureaucracy.


:knife:

Mind you endless talk is what I would expect from the communist party and since this simulation will never actually do anything that the ruling parties don't want it to do we're in the clear.

Which gives me an idea for our first piece of legislation: We limit all government bills to no more than 1000 words (4 pages in real terms). If you can't say what you mean in that much space you probably don't mean anything.

PostPosted:30 May 2009 09:24
by Doomhammer
94 page bill

I tried to read. I even drank whiskey to aid me. Alas, tl;dr.


Which gives me an idea for our first piece of legislation: We limit all government bills to no more than 1000 words (4 pages in real terms). If you can't say what you mean in that much space you probably don't mean anything.

:lol: Aye.

PostPosted:30 May 2009 16:29
by Thunderhawk
Which gives me an idea for our first piece of legislation: We limit all government bills to no more than 1000 words (4 pages in real terms). If you can't say what you mean in that much space you probably don't mean anything.


Aye.
Lets get this qoing quickly.

PostPosted:02 Jun 2009 15:12
by Falx
Seeing as the site being down has caused a fair bit of disruption I'll just assume that support for our first bill:
We limit all government bills to no more than 1000 words (4 pages in real terms).

Is unanimous, or at least over 2/3, and make that our official first parliamentary proposed legislation.

I've gone ahead and done it, if you have any complains about this show them as soon as possible and we will divide voting by MP's to reflect the inner party break down of the vote.

PostPosted:04 Jun 2009 15:04
by Vanasalus
I am back.

Sorry guys. I was unexpectedly assigned a lab work elsewhere. It was quite busy two weeks. But, I am back.

Yet, I might be required to do the same in near future. Hence, in case you guys demand, I am willing to relinquish my MP seat to someone else in the party.