+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html)
+----- Thread: Activity Problems (/thread-3543.html)
RE: Activity Problems - Punchwood - 01-05-2016
Guys don't the place. This was a thread made to discuss the activity problem not a place for GR and Hile to once again suggest radical change that we don't want or need. I'll try to create a survey within the next few days to find out why people aren't interested in the forums. So could we instead of talking about constitutional change start talking about the real change we need and that is small change.
RE: Activity Problems - Ryccia - 01-05-2016
(01-05-2016, 12:38 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote:I actually decreased my activity midway through voting, when I was tied with Hileville, so that had nothing to do with it. I can see why people might think it was related, but I am happy to clarify that it did not. I decreased my activity because I realised I was spending an excessive amount of time in this game, sometimes at the expense of my real life, and this coincided with other events that allowed me to turn my attention away from the game.
I have also been abroad on vacations for the past two weeks, so opportunities for participation were not as abundant. I still check the forum every once in a while, but I just don't think I should be as involved as I once was. I hope people can respect that decision.
We understand.
However, Punch, as your friend, dial the tone down(but your proposal of starting with small change is good).
RE: Activity Problems - Zak6858 - 01-05-2016
There isn't really a need for any radical change. It was Christmas and New Year's. Nothing unusual happened. The forum's been at the same activity level it's been at for a while. Yes, there is the poll, but that is what Punch is trying to get at here. Not some weird 'CHANGE TSP' rant.
Plus Punch maybe don't rush to conclusions about Kris as well.
RE: Activity Problems - Siberian - 01-05-2016
We need something new to breathe life in to TSP- preferably something RA related so new nations have something to look to.
How about we actually move forward with that TSP radio thing instead of bringing it up every election then not doing a thing?
RE: Activity Problems - Hileville - 01-05-2016
(01-05-2016, 05:19 PM)Siberian Wrote: We need something new to breathe life in to TSP- preferably something RA related so new nations have something to look to.
How about we actually move forward with that TSP radio thing instead of bringing it up every election then not doing a thing?
I've never put it aside. The groundwork is already laid. My schedule during holidays was a little more hectic than I had anticipated. We will have something very soon on that front.
RE: Activity Problems - Sam111 - 01-05-2016
As I said before, more volunteers will never hurt.
RE: Activity Problems - sandaoguo - 01-05-2016
I would support a Constitutional Convention, and I would hope that it is premised upon abandoning the Charter. In other words, not having anything to fall back on, forcing a bottom-to-top rewrite of everything. That's what I wanted with the last Great Council. I don't know why we should be so attached to the Charter.
To people saying this holiday hasn't been anything unusual, you're right. But I'm arguing that the *past two years* have been stunted, with random activity spurts largely coinciding with controversies and a systematic "Cold War" in Gameplay.
@Tsu: why not have everything changeable by majority vote alone?
RE: Activity Problems - Sam111 - 01-05-2016
I don't recall the increased activity in the MoRA coming on the back of controversy, nor the RP spike. I don't see the need to completely abandon the charter. By all means, let's have the Consitutional Convention, but let's not go into it with no intention than to annihilate the charter. I'm still far from convinced that massive changes will have any more effect on activity than little changes.
RE: Activity Problems - Tsunamy - 01-05-2016
(01-05-2016, 10:04 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: I would support a Constitutional Convention, and I would hope that it is premised upon abandoning the Charter. In other words, not having anything to fall back on, forcing a bottom-to-top rewrite of everything. That's what I wanted with the last Great Council. I don't know why we should be so attached to the Charter.
To people saying this holiday hasn't been anything unusual, you're right. But I'm arguing that the *past two years* have been stunted, with random activity spurts largely coinciding with controversies and a systematic "Cold War" in Gameplay.
@Tsu: why not have everything changeable by majority vote alone?
Flat out this is a non-starter. Any movement in this direction is blantantly against the government and the region. You don't get to throw out the government everyone voted in because you find it inconvenient.
We have a means for governmental change. Use it.
And if we have everything changeable by a majority vote, why have a distinction between the charter and regular laws?
RE: Activity Problems - sandaoguo - 01-05-2016
It's not "against" anything. It's how constitutional conventions work. The purpose is to start anew, otherwise you should just amend. I we hold a convention and have the same old Charter and laws to fall back on, all that's going to happen is people like you (and don't take that offensively) -- moderates, I guess -- setting the terms as all we need to do is "tweak" the Charter. And suddenly an event where we're supposed to think outside of the box becomes limited by existing conventions and traditions. A constitutional convention simply becomes a plain old omnibus amendment. That's exactly what happened with the last GC.
The difference between the Charter and a regular law doesn't need to be set by voting thresholds. The constitution is supreme. It describes the framework of the government. Regular laws can't contradict it, and deal with a wide array of issues. Having a distinction doesn't mean you have to make one harder than the other to change.