Banning of Parties?

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 04:45

I know, it sounds very radical, but....In CFC, its working.

Here (well, more appropriately here ) party politics has become too much party of the game. It's become very boring now.

I know that theres no way of completly banning parties. But we can limit their abilities and therefore combat their effect.

Lemmy · August 8, 2002, 04:47

hmm, what sort of parties would be banned then?

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 04:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Lemmy
hmm, what sort of parties would be banned then?

Political parties and organizations. CDC, P4, CCCP....They could not officially exist thereby making it harder for them to run thereby making it hard for politics to become a bigger concern then the actual game itself.

MrWhereItsAt · August 8, 2002, 04:51

It is certainly true that politics are rampant in the Civ3 game, but it has become less about the parties as of late, and more about the egos. Then again, there are only two huge parties in the Civ3 game, so things are straightorward, if stratified. I have no idea how many parties are in existence here, but I have seen at least 5 or 6 acronyms/abbreviations. Things could get really out of control.

The question I ask of you all is this: do you believe, with this many parties, it is possible for those of us here to act responsibly enough to let politics lie whenever it is counterproductive? You are not just answering for yourself, but for everyone here.

Archaic · August 8, 2002, 04:55

We're playing the PK's. What's more in-character than political infighting and bureaucracy in the UN?

Consider also that it seems we'll be going towards a 3-4 party system soon as the like minded parties join forces into larger conglomerates. Many would likely diverge by the late game, but let's get real, this game isn't likely to last long enough for us to Trancend unless we make a special effort to not get into wars.

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 04:56

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
It is certainly true that politics are rampant in the Civ3 game, but it has become less about the parties as of late, and more about the egos. Then again, there are only two huge parties in the Civ3 game, so things are straightorward, if stratified. I have no idea how many parties are in existence here, but I have seen at least 5 or 6 acronyms/abbreviations. Things could get really out of control.

there were many parties in the beginning of the civ3 demo game as well.

Quote:

The question I ask of you all is this: do you believe, with this many parties, it is possible for those of us here to act responsibly enough to let politics lie whenever it is counterproductive? You are not just answering for yourself, but for everyone here.

I do not believe this is possible due to human nature. Party politics always seems to get in the way of things, and....I dunno, I just dont think its possible.

Tassadar

Wojit · August 8, 2002, 04:59

Personally I think parties would be fine, provided it doesn't become a two party system

But I actually think that's probably just what will eventuate, and voted yes anyway. Despite being in a party

*cough*

Lemmy · August 8, 2002, 05:00

ok, then i nominate Tassadar as official watchdog to keep an eye on the parties and tell them whenever things get too political. I think the biggest risk of things getting political is with two very equal parties that do not wish to cooporate for some reason, so that one party does the opposite of the other, even when it isn't their party goal.

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Wojit
Personally I think parties would be fine, provided it doesn't become a two party system

But I actually think that's probably just what will eventuate, and voted yes anyway. Despite being in a party

*cough*

Ive observed...parties in the beginning are plentiful and 'colourful', however a lot of them just have a common idealogy...In civ3, its builder vs. warmonger. Here, it could be the same thing. Or Free Market vs. Green.

But it usually eventually comes to two parties. two ideas. i think its almost inevitable unless we completly ban parties.

MrWhereItsAt · August 8, 2002, 05:11

There were a few parties in the Civ2 game at the start. They kinda lost importance, and politics seemed to stay in their own party threads. How much of that you can attribute to the loss of members and how much to the responsible nature of the posters (

) I don't know, but is the situation similar here?

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:13

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
There were a few parties in the Civ2 game at the start. They kinda lost importance, and politics seemed to stay in their own party threads. How much of that you can attribute to the loss of members and how much to the responsible nature of the posters (

) I don't know, but is the situation similar here?

I think its too early to tell, but....Let's eliminate the problem before it even begins. Let's ban political parties and organizations from forming or operating in any official capacity.

MrWhereItsAt · August 8, 2002, 05:22

It's a fair call, Tass

Something similar that seems to have worked in the Civ3 game was the establishment of the War Academy and Thinker's Guild. The Thinker's Guild was supposedly where you went to discuss the philosophy of actions in the game - you weren't members of a party, merely a small group that chatted there, normally about hopw to expand your alcohol stash. The War Academy threads were on various strategic decisions/plans made and helped significantly in many cases. These groups had no loyalties but to thoughtful exchange, and they did not degenerate.

If anyone is annoyed that parties may be banned here, start one of these - a thread for discussing certain aspects of the game, rather than a thread for so-called like-minded individuals.

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:25

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
It's a fair call, Tass

Something similar that seems to have worked in the Civ3 game was the establishment of the War Academy and Thinker's Guild. The Thinker's Guild was supposedly where you went to discuss the philosophy of actions in the game - you weren't members of a party, merely a small group that chatted there, normally about hopw to expand your alcohol stash. The War Academy threads were on various strategic decisions/plans made and helped significantly in many cases. These groups had no loyalties but to thoughtful exchange, and they did not degenerate.

If anyone is annoyed that parties may be banned here, start one of these - a thread for discussing certain aspects of the game, rather than a thread for so-called like-minded individuals.

WA and TG were good because they werent political parties, they didnt act like political parties, and they didnt serve the function of political parties. AND they were much more efficent than political parties.

DIA and UFC arent good because they did act like political parties. continuously bickering at each other over the littlest thing, and the only reason they do it is because the other party is....well, the other party.

that soon began growing and....thats all it seems to be now

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 05:25

I have an idea! Lets ban tassadar! He is getting too.. controlling and.. BOSSY. Did you ever stop for a second and think that some people might actually LIKE politics? Some people enjoy politics and taking away there parties would just ruin there fun..

(not serious about the ban tassadar thing btw :P)

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:28

Quote:

He is getting too.. controlling and.. BOSSY

Does this mean I have what it takes to run for Commisoner?

Quote:

Did you ever stop for a second and think that some people might actually LIKE politics? Some people enjoy politics and taking away there parties would just ruin there fun..

*SIGH* If you want it, then go join the civ3 demo game...you dont even need the game, since its all politics.

But you dont nesisarily (SP again please!) need parties in order to have politics. all you need is people disagreeing with each other

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 05:29

Who appointed you boss of the demo game? Actually I'd like to change my mind. I am serious about the banning of tass! Maybe I should go make a new topic...

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Emvepe
Who appointed you boss of the demo game? Actually I'd like to change my mind. I am serious about the banning of tass! Maybe I should go make a new topic...

this is just another example of party politics.

i am a builder. i have made that known in the civ3 demo game. emvepe here is a member of the hawk party. they are warmongers. they want to eliminate me so that they can take control of the demo game!

(For those 'serious' people, i'm kidding. also, this is

)

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 05:34

/me runs over tas with a 40 impact rover momentum rush!

Also even if you ban "official" parties you can't stop people from having "unofficial" ones...

Archaic · August 8, 2002, 05:35

Tass, let me reiterate, what is more in-character for the PK's than politics and bureaucracy?

To be blunt Tass, if you want to have total control over a faction and be abe to pick and choose elements of the game so none of them bother you, go and play SP and get out of the Demo game. Part of any Democracy is the freedom of political expression, and obviously, people who believe the same things should be expected to form up into groups for mutual benifit.

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:39

Quote:

Also even if you ban "official" parties you can't stop people from having "unofficial" ones...

Well yes you are correct, however a ban on official parties would make unofficial ones more inefficent.

Quote:

Tass, let me reiterate, what is more in-character for the PK's than politics and bureaucracy?

They also have a -1 efficency rating. Lets make those parties less efficent. Banning them gives them a -1 efficency rating

(Joking, of course)

Quote:

To be blunt Tass, if you want to have total control over a faction and be abe to pick and choose elements of the game so none of them bother you, go and play SP and get out of the Demo game.

As youve already said, this is a democracy game. I am free to express my opinion. I just tend to have different opinions for different reasons.

And someday, me expressing those opinion may help us....one day. hopefully

Quote:

Part of any Democracy is the freedom of political expression, and obviously, people who believe the same things should be expected to form up into groups for mutual benifit.

But those groups quickly start attacking other groups. Case in point: civ3 demo game. I mean, its really gotten out of hand. And banning parties has worked before. Civfanatics Civ3 demo Game, anyone?

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 05:45

Tass were you hit on the head with a very large brick when you were born? This is a DEMOCRACY game.. let me spell it out for you D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y and I'll even say it really slowly DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOCRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACYYYYYYYYYYY YYYYYYYYYYY. How can you have a democracy without politics? Oh wait you wouldn't know anything about a democracy because your obsessed with communism. Communism failed everywhere it was applied. Get over it.

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Emvepe
Tass were you hit on the head with a very large brick when you were born? This is a DEMOCRACY game.. let me spell it out for you D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y and I'll even say it really slowly DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOCRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACYYYYYYYYYYY YYYYYYYYYYY. How can you have a democracy without politics?

Check here.

Quote:

Oh wait you wouldn't know anything about a democracy because your obsessed with communism. Communism failed everywhere it was applied. Get over it.

Democracy is a political system. Communism is an economic system. Plus, your probably thinking about stalinism or maoism (although unfortuantely, maoism combined with some freemarket tendencies is actually doing....good, i suppose.). But that is soo off topic.

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 05:52

The only communism I'm familiar with is leninism and marxism and I'm not interested in learning more.

Back on topic: I eat socks.

I like eating socks. MMM yummy socks.

Also I'd join the civ3 games but I don't have civ3. Also I know your just going to type 'BUT ITS ALL POLITICS YOU DONT NEED CIV3 YADA YADYADAYA'. I don't care. I have AC so I'm going to participate in this game, if I had civ3 I'd gladly participate in that as well.

Got socks?

Nubclear · August 8, 2002, 05:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Emvepe
Back on topic: How about instead of trying to make the Democracy game exactly how you want it you can just NOT PARTICIPATE.

(actually, thats not ontopic

)

Just trying to make it better. By raising these questions, we 1) get them out of the way (for the time being) and 2) are able to debate things early on so that we can improve things ealry on.

Contrary to popular belief (er...), I'm not an evil maoistic russian coming to hijack the democracy game and make it an evil maoism.

This is one potential way to solve the problem of the inevitable party politics.

Remember, its only a thread. You really need to calm down.

MrWhereItsAt · August 8, 2002, 06:02

Whoa, cool it guys. Tass is just commenting on what has befallen the largest Demo game we have here, that's all. He's just expressing his opinion and hoping some others share it with him.

You may well want political parties, but I hope no-one wants them to cause us problems with the game, as is the precedent. Maybe that won't happen here, maybe it will.

Please, can we keep the personal stuff a little bit muted? You have strong feelings towards having parties here, Emvepe. Post them calmly and rationally, and people will listen. What is going on here at the moment isn't helping anything.

I haven't voted yet - I'm currently ambivalent to whether parties are here or not. Give me a good reason to vote for them and I may well do that. Convince us, Emvepe, and you will get your way.

No-one is making decisions here. EVERYONE is.

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 06:05

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Whoa, cool it guys. Tass is just commenting on what has befallen the largest Demo game we have here, that's all. He's just expressing his opinion and hoping some others share it with him.

You may well want political parties, but I hope no-one wants them to cause us problems with the game, as is the precedent. Maybe that won't happen here, maybe it will.

Please, can we keep the personal stuff a little bit muted? You have strong feelings towards having parties here, Emvepe. Post them calmly and rationally, and people will listen. What is going on here at the moment isn't helping anything.

I haven't voted yet - I'm currently ambivalent to whether parties are here or not. Give me a good reason to vote for them and I may well do that. Convince us, Emvepe, and you will get your way.

No-one is making decisions here. EVERYONE is.

A vote for panties is a vote for pants!!! Don't be a fool put some pants on! mmm.. socks...

Edit: I meant parties.

Wojit · August 8, 2002, 06:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Emvepe
This is a DEMOCRACY game.. let me spell it out for you D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y and I'll even say it really slowly DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOCRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACYYYYYYYYYYY YYYYYYYYYYY. How can you have a democracy without politics?

Politics means "The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs."
Politics does not mean two parties of roughly equal power argueing endlessly and never getting anything done. Neither does democracy, even if it seems that way in many modern democracies.
A two parties system just plain doesn't work (When it comes to fun that is). And I'm getting more convinced that there is no way a system built on politcal parties won't turn into a 2 party system

I'll go over here now.

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 06:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Wojit

Politics means "The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs."
Politics does not mean two parties of roughly equal power argueing endlessly and never getting anything done. Neither does democracy, even if it seems that way in many modern democracies.
A two parties system just plain doesn't work (When it comes to fun that is). And I'm getting more convinced that there is no way a system built on politcal parties won't turn into a 2 party system

I'll go over here now.

Could I interest you in some nice pretty pink panties with frilly lace??????????? Or how about some socks? I love socks. Lets all eat socks.

edit: I can even get more childish then this if you want

Wojit · August 8, 2002, 06:10

I deleted my post script about how childish you are, but I think I'd like it mention it anyway. Quit being childish. And quit spamming. I hope your party is ashamed.

Emvepe · August 8, 2002, 06:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Wojit
I deleted my post script about how childish you are, but I think I'd like it mention it anyway. Quit being childish. And quit spamming. I hope your party is ashamed.

You have no idea how hard I'm laughing right now