Atrocity Ban

Crisler · August 11, 2002, 17:25

There has been some discussion on if atrocities should be banned. This discussion has further led to the idea that such a ban should be placed in the Constitution for our colony.

Now lets make sure we all understand what this implies. The Constitution for this game is designed to be a list of the rules of play. As such the concept was not really in place for a proposal such as an Atrocity ban to be included.

However at the same time changing the Constitution takes a much larger majority vote than just changing an in game position, as such it would make an Atrocity Ban harder to remove.

Basically in this poll we will present the choices for an Atrocity Ban in all possible formats, either a ban placed in Constitution, a ban as general policy or no ban at all.

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner

AdamTG02 · August 11, 2002, 17:34

For some of the prior debate on this and other constitutional issues, check out this thread.

Kassiopeia · August 11, 2002, 17:40

This doesn't belong to the Constitution. It's like deciding, "we won't switch to Thought Control in SE", in the Constitution. It's about actually playing the game, not about the mechanics dedicated to Demogame playing. The Constitution is not the place for an Atrocity ban.

Voltaire · August 11, 2002, 17:58

I have one question before I vote, does this proposal consider Punishment Spheres as an atrocity or not?

Method · August 11, 2002, 18:00

that is still being discussed here

Voltaire · August 11, 2002, 18:04

Quote:

Originally posted by TKG
that is still being discussed here

In that case I’ll hold off on voting on this poll until that one is finished.

gopher · August 11, 2002, 18:13

I vote nay. As Chairman Yang says, why deny ourselfs a weapon when we are squemish about it.
Or something like that, so sue me

Method · August 11, 2002, 18:21

"if you deny yourself a useful tool, simply because it reminds you, uncomfortably of your mortality, you have uselessly, and pointlessly, crippled yourself."

is that it?

Anodyne · August 11, 2002, 18:26

Hmm... I did vote, but after reading what Kass said, I have to agree

Kassiopeia · August 11, 2002, 18:29

Quote:

Hmm... I did vote, but after reading what Kass said, I have to agree

People have agreed with me before. It's really not such a big deal.

Vlad Antlerkov · August 11, 2002, 18:30

Yes, we should have an atrocity ban. However, it shouldn't be in our Constitution.

We are roleplaying the remnant of the United Nations. We should do our best to uphold its ideals and its Charter.

Anodyne · August 11, 2002, 18:38

Now, Kass, don't get too cocky, there

Kassiopeia · August 11, 2002, 18:46

Quote:

Now, Kass, don't get too cocky, there

Sorry, my modesty chip is offline at the moment.

Crisler · August 11, 2002, 21:44

For the sake of this discussion I do not think we should count the Punishment Sphere as an atrocity. That will just further complicate this issue. Lets stick to atrocities as defined in the game for now and use the PS on another thread.

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner

MrWhereItsAt · August 12, 2002, 01:42

Vlad has it right. Let's roleplay at the start, and we can always change back later on. I will vote for outlawing atrocities to begin with, and maybe will vote to change later on. We should definitely keep the definition of atrocitry to that which the game punishes you for should you commit it.

I take the points on not including this in our Constitution, but where then do we put it? Do we need a separate game specific set of agreed stances (eg atrocities, SE choices to avoid) in which to include the results of this poll?

Pandemoniak · August 12, 2002, 03:36

We could write a Declaration of Human Rights living on Planet, and we would put there that atrocities, SE choices as Thoughts Control and Police State are not in the Faction Line.

Crisler · August 12, 2002, 07:34

While I expected to see the Ban Atrocity combined socre winning, figured everyone or at least a large majority was for banning in some way, I am supirsed at how many do not want a ban at all.

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner

Juliennew · August 12, 2002, 11:33

It is an important debate but it just doesn't belong in the constitution.

DeathByTheSword · August 12, 2002, 14:28

I agree with everone that says no to the ban in the constitution

and NO i am not a yes-man

The Bloody Baro · August 12, 2002, 20:04

Well if we play SMAX instead of SMAC then we can still gas aliens.

Method · August 12, 2002, 21:36

Quote:

Originally posted by The Bloody Baro
Well if we play SMAX instead of SMAC then we can still gas aliens.

read the official poll results thread. we are playing SMAC not SMAX. besides, gassing the bugs isnt an atrocity

Zakharov VII · August 12, 2002, 21:53

This is a very interesting question...basically (at least to me, opposing atrocities) what is being asked is whether our Constitution should be part of the role playing. Right now we have a very generic (to SMAC, that is) Constitution. But if the main focus of this democracy game is role playing (which, I think according to that other poll, it is), don't we need a document to that effect? Since we are role playing, shouldn't we consider all of "humankind"'s (humankind, as in the people on Alpha Centauri) basic rights, not just those of the Peacekeeping faction which we represent?

If we want to do another democracy game after this, perhaps with more aggressive, pro-atrocity views, we can use the base constitution which is copied and pasted in plenty of posts. But, with our main goal as it is, we need our Constitution to be part of that role playing.

Thus, if we believe is the right of all humans living on Alpha Centauri not to be nerve stapled, planet busted, or nerve gased, we should put it in our Declaration of Rights.

(As to the last posts, some, including me, would argue that if we were playing SMAX (which I don't have, though I guess I could still participate in a SMAX democracy

), the aliens do not deserve atrocities either. Even if "the game" and the other factions say it's OK, we have to be who we are.)

Thus I voted "yes," we need this ban in our Constitution, because we need the ban and because we should pave the way for other role-playing issues to be declared in our Constitution.

Z

DeathByTheSword · August 13, 2002, 06:12

Agian I say there is allready a restriction on the use of atrocities....the UN Charter....lets just keep that and if someone wants it repieled than look at what we all want... and if we are going to put it in a document let not put it in the Constitution but in some thing else (declaration of humanity orsome thing i read.)

Darkness' Edge · August 14, 2002, 01:58

I'm against a ban on the use of atrocities.

It should be up to the people, at that particular time, to decide whether to commit an atrocity.