Meet the Fundamentalist Faction - Page 3

Method · August 7, 2002, 12:23

concessions like what? we may need help to get a majority on the market matter as most or all of the CDC seems to be green.

Leland · August 10, 2002, 23:47

Okay, what exactly will be the Fundamentalist Faction's official standpoint in the next elections? I agree with TKG's science policies myself, but on the other hand this compromises our cooperation with ACE because Lemmy from SSK is also running for D of S. I'm not familiar with M@ni@cs policies on terraformation and colonization, but I don't think that there's going to be any conflict with our party policies here.

For ACE, I think that the most crucial position is the one of Director of Base Production. I think that we should make absolutely sure that whoever gets the job is in favour of fast expansion, and to rally the whole ACE coalition backing him up. If MrWhatItsCalled is up to the job, then I of course support him, I'll just need to hear his opinions first.

And the party is officially now standing for constitutional ban on atrocities, yes?

DeathByTheSword · August 11, 2002, 06:27

Again u are getting the whole constitution thingy wrong it only explainse the rules of how to play the game not any game options!

Leland · August 11, 2002, 07:02

Yes, that's absolutely correct, the constitution should be strictly about meta-game rules. However I don't see a reason why a party could not pursue meta-game goals as well as game goals...

DeathByTheSword · August 11, 2002, 07:18

a party can but not in the making of the constitution

Leland · August 11, 2002, 07:27

Constitution is meta-game. What you are saying now, i.e. what the constitution should or should not be about, is meta-meta-game. Let's not go there.

DeathByTheSword · August 11, 2002, 07:28

you lost me never mind

Crisler · August 11, 2002, 07:30

There is no reason I am aware of that we cannot place a rule in the Constitution that prohibits the use of part of the game, thus setting a rule.

While the Constitution is deisnged to set forth the particulars of the game it is also a plot device for driving forward role playing issues. As such we can use ti to set ammendments we feel that should be absolutes in the game.

Leland in answer to your question.

I do agree that we should back ACE candidates. As such with the excpetion of the two elections I mentioned, TKG and M@ni@c, we will back ACE candidates to the hilt.

As for the Independent, that is my choice based on ACE not having a Candidate. I suggest we speak with ACE about this. I do agree that we need someone that favors a rapid expansion policy.

Finally my stand on Atrocities is simple, NONE. I feel that should be everyones stand, not sure how people can cry for personal freedom and in the same breathe say it is okay to infringe upon those same rights for others.

Would seem based on those belifes we have the hypocrite party out there as well.

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner

DeathByTheSword · August 11, 2002, 07:34

crisler .> about the atroctie banning this would mean you could also put in the constition never attack miriam or let all hop around naked. the point of THIS constition is to make the game mechanics clear to everone so we have a know way of doing the procedures...not reflect our ethical and moral ideas

Leland · August 11, 2002, 07:36

My problem with TKG, M@ani@c and MrWhereItsAt is that I have no idea what policies they stand for in their respective offices... if they go line in line with my own ideology, then I'll have no problem making it official that Fundamentalists will support them. However, it would be nice if you guys would give a short synopsis of what you're going to do when you're elected...

EDIT: DBTS does have a point there.

DeathByTheSword · August 11, 2002, 07:37

TKG has done that look at our party thread I think or otherwise the nomitions thread....

Maniac · August 11, 2002, 07:37

Yes yes, I'll start election campaign as soon as possible. But isn't it obvious I would be in favour of colonizing and terraforming as soon and as much as possible in the early game? Details will follow...

Edit: ACE, what are your people running for? I can't seem to find a list and I doubt the nominations thread is up-to-date.

Sprayber · August 11, 2002, 07:44

No one is going to say we should wait 20 years until we expand. Everyone is going to favor expanding as soon as we can.

DeathByTheSword · August 11, 2002, 07:46

Sprayber I am waiting for your policy also

!

Leland · August 14, 2002, 15:18

I hereby resign from the Fundamentalist Party. I just don't have time for this democracy game, I'll probably keep voting on some issues as a citizen though and if I come back, I will rejoin this party, but for the time being don't count on me.

Bye.

Crisler · August 14, 2002, 17:26

It is with a heavy heart I see you go Leland. With the lose of Leland the Fundamenalist party is down to one member, me :-) If there are any others that wish to step forward and be a member let me know, otherwise this party will be forced to be disolved.

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner
Last of the Fundamentalist Faction

Lemmy · August 14, 2002, 17:38

Quote:

I feel that should be everyones stand, not sure how people can cry for personal freedom and in the same breathe say it is okay to infringe upon those same rights for others.

that's exactly why i never cry for personal freedom

And Crisler, don't dissolve the party, we already got so few unique parties. Keep the diversity i say!!

Method · September 12, 2002, 18:32

is the FF disolved? i know leland is gone, but is crisler's problem just temporary?

Maniac · September 12, 2002, 19:27

Only God can know.

Darkness' Edge · September 12, 2002, 21:41

Quote:

Originally posted by TKG
is the FF disolved? i know leland is gone, but is crisler's problem just temporary?

give him a while yet

he said it *should* be fixed within a week or so when he resigned
but perhaps it wasn't fixed that easily

Method · September 13, 2002, 16:17

too bad