The EDP Manifesto - Page 6

FlameFlash · September 5, 2002, 14:25

I'd agree with that.

DeathByTheSword · September 5, 2002, 15:48

argee with keeping it as low profile as possible and with the pre-discussion thingy for merger! but times do not match so a mailing list would be ok by me

Method · September 5, 2002, 18:03

i can't promise i'll be available saturday, but it's likely and possible. since not everyone can attend, perhaps mail or PMs is easier, or threads so we get post count

AdamTG02 · September 5, 2002, 18:07

I have started a Yahoo! Groups mailing list for merger discussions. I will be emailing each of you; respond to that email to be put on the list.

FlameFlash · September 6, 2002, 12:18

Be sure to let us know how to submit to it, Adam... I've sent you my e-mail address to sign me up/invite me.

AdamTG02 · September 6, 2002, 12:27

I thought I had added you (and several others) to it, but you don't show up on the member list.

Has Yahoo! sent you an email saying you need to do X to join? (I'm not really clear on how joining a Yahoo! group works, to tell you the truth.) If not, I'll try to add you again.

DeathByTheSword · September 6, 2002, 12:33

you neeed a verifyed mailbox start an yahoo adress and you are set

FlameFlash · September 6, 2002, 14:23

nope... haven't gotten anything yet...

AdamTG02 · September 7, 2002, 11:37

On the mailing list, it's been suggested to extend the deadline for the vote to allow more discussion on the mailing list. I am open to that, so I'm now declaring that voting will close when all members of the EDP have voted, if no one objects. I originally put a deadline on the vote to allow us to make a decision if one member was incommunicado, but risking that seems like less of a problem to me than does voting before members have had a chance to make up their minds.

Any thoughts?

Method · September 7, 2002, 12:41

who are angus niven, and james_band2k?

and i just got it running after checking my mail, and i posted something in it. this thing is really cool though! chat, polls, links and more!

AdamTG02 · September 7, 2002, 14:10

I'm not certain of either of their identities -- both of them responded othe email I sent out to P4 and EDP members, but didn't identify themselves. However, I believe that angus_niven is GeneralTacticus, and james_band2k is Thud.

GeneralTacticus · September 7, 2002, 19:29

Quote:

angus_niven is GeneralTacticus,

Correct.

AdamTG02 · September 16, 2002, 11:16

Welcome to the EDP's newest member, Mellian.

Mellian · September 16, 2002, 23:45

will comment on the merger discussion once i get myself more informed in the matter.

-Mellian

AdamTG02 · October 16, 2002, 13:59

With all the talk about parties having disbanded, I'd just like to clarify that the EDP is alive and well. We believe in swift exploration and colonization of Planet, and in a focus on scientific and technological research, particularly research that allows us to extend the boundaries of knowledge or better understand and explore our new home.

FlameFlash · October 16, 2002, 14:20

And while some of our members (namely myself) aren't overly vocal... we do always try to vote and help policy along in more subtle ways.

Frankychan · October 17, 2002, 03:32

*peeks in*

what's going on here?

FlameFlash · October 17, 2002, 09:41

Just one of the last few parties letting themselves be known...

Proposition:

Leave or stay in the CDC?

AdamTG02 · October 17, 2002, 10:51

I don't really see a reason for us to leave the CDC. They, like us, believe in democracy, and we can work together for common goals. Coalition membership can only help us in the long run, in my opinion.

Given the present situation, I might consider disbanding the EDP, replacing it with an NGO as Pande was going to do with the CCCP, but as long as it exists I would support it staying in the CDC.

FlameFlash · October 17, 2002, 12:27

The EDP is basically an NGO... all parties are, so I really don't understand the need to disband and become a "NGO" rather than a "Party" not too much difference in my mind except with a NGO you can be a member of as many as you want while with a party you really are in just one.

As far as the CDC thing goes, I'm for stepping out just for the fact of lack of activity and placement. You and I, Adam seem to be the only ones advertising it any more... likewise we're the only ones left advertising the EDP.

Once a coalition no longer serves it's purpose (since most of the parties in it have dropped out, we're basically the only one, aren't we?) then it's time to drop out of said coalition and find another way to get our message out... as a party.

AdamTG02 · October 17, 2002, 13:04

One party dropped out. The Centauri Democrats, Darkness' Edge's party, disbanded, and left the CDC as a result. The CCCP and the LDP are still members.

I grant the CDC hasn't been active lately, but neither of us have done anything to change that either. I'll be posting something soon to debate whether to continue the CDC coalition or announce it disbanded for lack of interest.

Personally, I like the CDC's ideals, I like having a connection to people like Pandemoniak, Kassiopeia, and Voltaire, and I think that remaining in even an inactive coalition is preferable to leaving it, which abandons the hope of reinvigoration. That's just my opinion, and not meant to be authoritative. But I will look into breathing some life back into the CDC.

FlameFlash · October 17, 2002, 14:10

*nods* That does sound good... I'd thought with all the talk of parties falling apart that the CCCP had gone as well (the other super-vocal party in CDC.)

If they're still around, then I'm happy to try to get CDC back up and running.

GeneralTacticus · October 18, 2002, 02:48

I'd say the difference between a party and an NGO is that an NGO is a discussion group, while a party is an organization for supporters of a particular viewpoint.

Pandemoniak · October 18, 2002, 04:05

Quote:

Originally posted by FlameFlash
*nods* That does sound good... I'd thought with all the talk of parties falling apart that the CCCP had gone as well (the other super-vocal party in CDC.)

If they're still around, then I'm happy to try to get CDC back up and running.

The CCCP, gone ?!!

Since my resignation yesterday evening, the CCCP is more alive than ever before. Have you checked its latest advertisment campaigns, those huge ads (12 meters high, 8 meters length)that you can see in the streets of New Apolyton and New Suez, the two bases where the CCCP is the more popular ?

FlameFlash · October 18, 2002, 09:22

ANd that's what I get for wandering the xenofungus too much...

AdamTG02 · October 20, 2002, 14:00

Well, now that Democracy, Free Market, and Planned are open to us, the EDP needs to form a policy on social engineering. Feel free to post your thoughts.

On my end, I believe we should uphold the UN's values and go to Democracy immediately. This will slow our expansion somewhat, because we'll have to build scouts or synthmetal garrisons for each new base before dispatching the colony pod. However, in my mind the gains in principle are more important. Let's not compare unfavorably to Morgan on the issue of Democracy. The economic gains to growth and efficiency are also significant, although they are in my mind secondary.

This would mean increased support costs for our present exploration force. However, we have no Veteran or higher scout units. Thus, we would not significantly lose militarily if we disbanded these units. Disbanding these units would free up a great deal of industrial capacity. If they were disbanded in New Suez, we get a jump-start on the Merchant Exchange.

Other than Morgan, we have no known competitors on this continent. Thus, the pods here are simply waiting for us to take them. We should focus our efforts as quickly as posible on sea exploration, which is workable under FM, to claim pods which are still unclaimed. Once we expand our borders to a pod's location, we can take it under FM.

Does this mean that we should necessarily disband our explorers and switch to FM? Not necessarily. Another option is to disband some, but leave the more experienced and/or mobile explorers to pop the pods to our north. In this scenario, we would either want to stay Simple, and hope that Morgan remains friendly, or go to Planned and risk war. If we go to Planned, we should prepare to shift focus to facilities such as Childrens' Creches and Command Centers, which would help the morale of our troops.

One possible policy:

Democracy now, pull our units back to our borders with all convenient speed (popping pods as we go), and then go FM. Disband our units in New Suez to hurry the Merchant Exchange. Then make a concerted effort, pumping out scouts and colony pods, to fill up the space between us and Morgan. FM ensures that this will antagonize him less than it would otherwise. At some time in the future, upgrade the scouts to synthmetal or plasma garrisons.

Another possible policy:

Democracy and Planned now, build Synthmetal Garrisons for new bases, upgrade the scouts in our easternmost bases to synthmetal, and keep funds in reserve to upgrade our rovers to Impact Rovers. If we go Planned, Morgan will attack us; it's just a matter of time. We would need to be prepared for that eventuality. In this scenario, we would also try to quickly expand to the east, but would rely on Synthmetal Garrisons in the new bases.

A possible compromise policy:

Democracy now. Disband some scouts, to free up support minerals, but not all. Maintain Simple economics and hope that this averts war with Morgan. Maintain a Builder strategy, and don't treat the Morganites as a threat unless and until they become one.

This has wandered from Social Engineering policy to a speech about overall faction policy. However, the one implies the other. I'm going over three possibilities here -- if you see others, feel free to propose them. Personally, I'm leaning toward establishing a Free Market to gain Morgan's friendship -- after all, he instituted a functioning Democracy before we even had the infrastructure of a Democratic government in place.

In any case, I'm open to your thoughts.