I’m not opposed to abolishing Great Councils as they currently exist and returning them to being constitutional conventions I think when we changed GCs from being complete constitutional rewrites to this “amendment” BS, the people who never wanted a GC in the first place got what they wanted. By denying the ability of the community to engage in creative destruction, we’ve foreclosed imagination and ingenuity, stifling everything that doesn’t fit into the predefined box of what the Charter already is. It was always a way to stop the GC from being any kind of effective vehicle for change and transformation, and we’re seeing that fully in play.

I wrote the current article in a way that technically allows starting from scratch. But the whole message from the get-go has been we can’t and shouldn’t do that. And then people are surprised that few are inspired to branch out and come up with the new ideas. We should go back to language that promotes complete overhaul, true constitutional conventions.

(This post was last modified: 08-26-2022, 11:01 PM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

Any further thoughts?

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

Reply

It's been exactly five days since I posted the OP.

Why not- I'd like to motion this to a vote!

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

Reply

It's been exactly five days since I posted the OP.

Why not- I'd like to motion this to a vote!

The motion is recognised and will be brought to a vote on August 31 at 14:00 UTC.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Reply

You haven't really addressed Glen's thoughts about possible ways to reformulate the GC process, all of which would be preferable to abolishing GCs altogether as a procedure.

Even if we're forced to keep the status quo; forcing the region to reconcile with its current governing structure periodically is a good thing

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

I’m not opposed to abolishing Great Councils as they currently exist and returning them to being constitutional conventions I think when we changed GCs from being complete constitutional rewrites to this “amendment” BS, the people who never wanted a GC in the first place got what they wanted. By denying the ability of the community to engage in creative destruction, we’ve foreclosed imagination and ingenuity, stifling everything that doesn’t fit into the predefined box of what the Charter already is. It was always a way to stop the GC from being any kind of effective vehicle for change and transformation, and we’re seeing that fully in play.

I wrote the current article in a way that technically allows starting from scratch. But the whole message from the get-go has been we can’t and shouldn’t do that. And then people are surprised that few are inspired to branch out and come up with the new ideas. We should go back to language that promotes complete overhaul, true constitutional conventions.

I think one of the problems with the Great Council is engagement. All these people gameside are making dispatches saying, “GC is mid,” or “Pigeon doesn’t approve of GC.” But they don’t get involved with the Council. I think we must rework the Council.

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

Reply

You haven't really addressed Glen's thoughts about possible ways to reformulate the GC process, all of which would be preferable to abolishing GCs altogether as a procedure.

Even if we're forced to keep the status quo; forcing the region to reconcile with its current governing structure periodically is a good thing

I feel like it’s going to be easier to start from scratch.

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

Reply

I’m not opposed to abolishing Great Councils as they currently exist and returning them to being constitutional conventions I think when we changed GCs from being complete constitutional rewrites to this “amendment” BS, the people who never wanted a GC in the first place got what they wanted. By denying the ability of the community to engage in creative destruction, we’ve foreclosed imagination and ingenuity, stifling everything that doesn’t fit into the predefined box of what the Charter already is. It was always a way to stop the GC from being any kind of effective vehicle for change and transformation, and we’re seeing that fully in play.

I wrote the current article in a way that technically allows starting from scratch. But the whole message from the get-go has been we can’t and shouldn’t do that. And then people are surprised that few are inspired to branch out and come up with the new ideas. We should go back to language that promotes complete overhaul, true constitutional conventions.

I think one of the problems with the Great Council is engagement. All these people gameside are making dispatches saying, “GC is mid,” or “Pigeon doesn’t approve of GC.” But they don’t get involved with the Council. I think we must rework the Council.

If I can be so blunt: if people have an issue with the GC, they should join it. Even if they don't apply for membership, they can still post their thoughts. Nothing about the process of convening the GC has been obscure or lacked transparency. Just because some people think the GC is "mid", or wish the GC was doing something different, or even think the GC should be moving fast (a ludicrous notion, I think the GC is running at about the expected tempo considering it has the task of - ya know - redesigning the whole government), does not mean there is something wrong with the GC.

If I can be very blunt: just because someone else has a concern does not mean their concern is valid or right, or that you need to give voice to that concern. That's just raw populism conducted through an arbitrary instrument of communication.

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

But they don’t get involved with the Council.

I mean... isn't that their problem?

Spoiler

Republic of Lansoon (Pacifica)

Reply

But they don’t get involved with the Council.

I mean... isn't that their problem?

Sure. It is. But I think we need to start from scratch if we want more engagement in our political process.

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

Reply