Office of the Director of Social Engineering

[Archaic]

All those desiring an input into the way this directorship is run should post here. Arguements with the director are encouraged, however you should know that the director is anything but social in his rebuttals of those who would challenge him, especially if they're treading over ground which he has already covered.

[Archaic]

This post will later be updated with an FAQ of all points already answered. Read it before debating. Other links to topics, et. al. related to this office may be posted here too.

[Drogue]

During the election you stated:

If we have the vats, then the PK's should be at the forefront of the Brave New World, and go TC. If we have the Backbone, we go Cybernetic.

Does this mean you are prepared to support a change to Thought Control if we aquire the Cloning Vats?

You also stated you want to change to FM ASAP, so should we expect a poll on that in the very near future?

[Archaic]

Yes, I am. And I can give you a rather extensive RP justification for this. Want it?

Yes. And you can expect a poll on "Elect the person - elect their policies" soon too, assuming I can get the Comissioner to allow it.

[Pandemoniak]

And you can expect a poll on "Elect the person - elect their policies" soon too, assuming I can get the Comissioner to allow it.

What do you mean by that ?

[Archaic]

I mean that people would give a policy statement before being elected that they'd have to try to keep to as much as possible, but they wouldn't have to poll the electorate to get their policies through.

Let's use my FM stance for example. There were 21 votes in the election I remember. 10 for me, 9 for him, and 2 abstains. Now, let's assume I have to poll the electorate to get FM in place. 10 people vote for me in that.....but 11 people vote against. Therefore, despite the fact that I got into office, I can't get through the policies I put forth that got me voted in in the first place.

[Pandemoniak]

I mean that people would give a policy statement before being elected that they'd have to try to keep to as much as possible, but they wouldn't have to poll the electorate to get their policies through.

Ok, thats what I thought. This is totally unconstitutional, and this is stanced very cleary in the constitution :

UN Constitution says :
They are required to conduct polls in order to interpret the people’s will.

and this is especially true for the Director of Social Engineering

UN Constitution says :
May NOT:
Change the social engineering settings if there hasn’t been a poll saying it is ok.

assuming I can get the Comissioner to allow it.

This is not up to the Commisioner, but to the people. You'll need to pass an amendment to have such a thing. In case you think I have a wrong interpretation of the UN Constitution, you can still ask the Justices advice.


Theres no way to do that.

[Drogue]

Unless he takes the election as a poll of policies, which for DSE the election is based on policies. In that case he has fulfilled: "May NOT: Change the social engineering settings if there hasn’t been a poll saying it is ok." In that that the election was the poll for SE settings.

Saying that, I would be against such a move. Even though I'm all for giving more power to elected officials, I think there should be a poll to show public opinion, just that for more minor decisions (with a change of SE is not) are subject to the Directors on ideas. If the Director doesn't go with the poll, he'll usually be elected out.

Archaic:

Yes, I am. And I can give you a rather extensive RP justification for this. Want it?

Yes please, be interesting to hear.

[Aaron Blackwell]

Archaic,

We had a long discussion during the election where we both had the opportunity to start debating our different point of view concerning Free Market policies.

I think I have clearly made clear that such a switch will not be easy.

Now that you have been elected DSE and knowing you want to switch to FM, I think it is high time you expose the reasons WHY it should be done and HOW it should be done.

Such a change should not be taken lightly as the social and ecological consequence could be dramatic should we switch to FM and not properly doing the switch.

Now that you have been elected, you are in a favorable position to make yourself heard.

For the moment, I am certainly DON'T think that Free Market would be a good idea at least not right now and I think I am far from being the only one.

Here is your chance to convince the citizen to support your policies ( the election was to support you as a person and NOT necessarly your policies as a whole).

Yes, I am. And I can give you a rather extensive RP justification for this. Want it?

Yes, I would very much like to hear it. To be honest, the sole idea of supporting this policy is simply frightening.

Being a former member of the hive, I perfectly know how dangerous, inhuman and disrespectfull of human right these kind of policies are.

Because , to be honest, Thought control is like Police State. It is just a way for a minority to deprivate the majority of their fundamental right to freedom.

Though control would simply be more effective toward achieving that goal .... but that does not mean it is something to be desired.

The ball is on your side Archaic. I am waiting for your explanations ....

[Archaic]

Well DUH it's against the constitution unskilled labourer. I want the constitution changed, though I believe I already made that perfectly clear.

As for the matters of Thought Control and my FM policy, you ask quite a lot of me. The Thought Control justification I could perhaps write later tonight, but the FM would take time, seeing as first I need t break down all your foolish biases and misconceptions. (One must wonder if you've even actually properly used and got used to FM in a real game.)

EDIT: Oh, and perhaps you'd like to give the reasons you think we *shouldn't* switch to FM. GT's already rebutted all of them in the STEP thread, but it wouldn't hurt if they were reposted here too.

[Aaron Blackwell]

As for the matters of Thought Control and my FM policy, you ask quite a lot of me. The Thought Control justification I could perhaps write later tonight, but the FM would take time, seeing as first I need t break down all your foolish biases and misconceptions.

This is not a justification to NOT explain your policies and why we should switch to Free Market, Archaic.

This attempt at avoiding the discussion will not be successfull.

Besides, considering that Though Control will not be a possibility availabe in MANY,MANY years, I think that the Free Market justification has the priority ... especially since you want us to switch to that.

seeing as first I need t break down all your foolish biases and misconceptions. (One must wonder if you've even actually properly used and got used to FM in a real game.)

Also, I am asking for an intelligent and constructive response. I hardly consider this sort of what could be considered personal attack as an acceptable response.

This is not the first you are caught doing that Archaic. Though it was still acceptable when you were a normal citizen, it is no longer the case since you have the responsability of SE.

Oh, and perhaps you'd like to give the reasons you think we *shouldn't* switch to FM. GT's already rebutted all of them in the STEP thread, but it wouldn't hurt if they were reposted here too.

Yes, I would very much like that so that I could rebutte them in turn. This thread is supposed to be the official one concerning all that relates to Social Engineering.

So If you want to use this material, I am afraid that you will have to work to have it posted here. As Direction of SE, it is your responsability to make all relevant material concerning SE easily accessible to all citizens.

Besides, I specifically asked for YOUR opinion on the subject. I find the one of General Tacitus interesting but YOUR opinion on the subject is the one that is being requested by the citizen (that is why you were elected by the way).

Again, this futile attempt at avoiding to justify your policies will not be succesfull Archaic.

Also, I have already made several statments based on REAL FACT to why switching to FM RIGHT NOW is not a good idea in the thread of Director of SE's election.

I am ready to post them here but, again, you are director of SE and , as such, you are the one who should expose his ideas first.

[Archaic]

Who said I'm avoiding justifying my policies? It happened to be 10:40pm when I typed that post. It's 12:40am now. I'll write it in the morning, assuming I have time. I *DO* have a life you know.

As for GT's views, I share them virtually to the letter, as you'll soon see well enough.

[Pandemoniak]

I *DO* have a life you know.

Well, we dont care. Please avoid posting such things in a forum which is supposed to be RP, and stop using Non-RP reasons for RP questions.

[Pandemoniak]

I want the constitution changed, though I believe I already made that perfectly clear.

Do you realize your changes involve a total rewriting of the whole constitution, since the role of our directors is to conduct polls in order to interpret the people's will, and not to be elected top conduct their own policies.
And dont forget you'll also be circumvening our Bill of Rights, since no citizen shall be denied the right to vote in any poll, but they shall not be denied the poll itself -- which, even if not stated in the Bill of Rights, is quite obvious.

[Aaron Blackwell]

Who said I'm avoiding justifying my policies?

Your post seemed to indicate that. I would be more than happy to see fact to would prove otherwise.

It happened to be 10:40pm when I typed that post. It's 12:40am now. I'll write it in the morning, assuming I have time.

It is okay for me. I am more than willing to be patient to wait for your response ( as I think It was the case before). I am not pushing you to answer quickly but simply to answer the points that were raised.

If you have problem connecting to the net or finding the time to respond, please directly say so. It will certainly not be reproched to you and I think everybody would understand.

I *DO* have a life you know.

So Have I Archaic. You are not the only one to be in that case.

[Nubclear]

Archaic, I'm wroking for the CNN And I would like your comment on your recent but very close victory in the Peacekeeping elections.

[Drogue]

Oh the injustice of it all

[Archaic]

Pan, instead of interpreting the peoples will through polls conducted during the terms, under what I propose, the peoples wll would be interpreted by whichever canditate they voted for.


Now, a comparison. Free Market, Planned and Green.


Pros and Cons


Free Market
+2 Economy
-3 Planet
-5 Police

Pros
Increased cash flow through +2 Economy
- Increased speed of research
- More funds available to rush build
- Surplus of funds allows for spending in psych, with inefficiency being balanced through the sheer amount of funds generated. (Golden Ages under FM = *VERY* nice in terms of further increasing cash flow)
Ecological Disruption
- Higher clean mineral thresholds in both short and long terms

Cons
Ecological Disruption
- Fungus Production Reduced
- Fungus "Pops" disrupting terraforming
- Negatives to Psi combat
Lack of police
- Approx 1 extra drone per base, where not countered by the increased to Psych through +2 Economy
- Military units outside of territory cause Drones


Planned
+2 Growth
+1 Industry
-2 Efficiency

Pros
Increased growth
- Easier to Pop Boom (Irrelevant before CC's and Psych facilities are already well established)
Increased Production
- All items cost 10% less.

Cons
Inefficiency
(Caused directly by the inefficiency)
- Extra B-Drones (Needing twice normal psych or police to counter than regular drones)
(Caused through the lowered available funds)
- Reduced research output
- Lack of funds for rush building
- Lack of fund for Psych spending. Almost impossible to kick start a Golden Age from all the further inefficiency causes by changing the sliders


Green
+2 Efficiency
+2 Planet
-2 Growth

Pros
Efficient
- Significantly higher base threshold for B-Drones
- Potential for a small increase in cash flow
- Ability to move the sliders without penalty if also in Demo
Ecological Harmony
- Potential to catch mind worms
- Lower eco-damage

Cons
Ecological Harmony
- Lower clean mineral thresholds in both short and long terms, leading to PK's turning into an industrial backwater
Low growth
- Unacceptable low growth levels in new bases.



Direct Comparisons


Free Market Vs. Planned
- Free Market increases Research to levels impossible under Planned
- Free Market's sheer cash flow through +2 Economy gives greater flexibility than Planned's flat +1 Industry bonus.
-Planned has more flat drones than Free Market through its inefficiency causing B-Drones than Free Market has through its inability to use Police.
- Free Market's ability to virtually ignore inefficiency with its sheer excess of cash flow allows it to pump funds into Psych spending, countering its Police Problem as noted above, and further increasing its already noted advantages over Planned through the potential for increased cash flow from Golden Ages.
- Free Market allows pops to be caused sooner and easier, allowing for higher clean mineral thresholds in the short and long terms at the expense of some terraforming time. (NB. Condensors, Mirrors and Boreholes cannot be destroyed by Pops.)
- Planned allows for conventional troops deployments outside of territory.
- Planned has a higher flat growth, though this is balanced if Golden Ages are achieved.
- Free Market has a lower ability to attack Psy troops like the Mind Worms. Defensive abilities are not reduced.

Winner: Free Market


Free Market Vs. Green
- Free Market increases Research to levels impossible under Green
- Free Market's sheer cash flow through +2 Economy allows for much speedier production
- Free Market has more flat drones through its lack of ability to use police, and through Green's extra efficiency to kill B-Drones.
- Free Market's ability to virtually ignore inefficiency with its sheer excess of cash flow allows it to pump funds into Psych spending, countering its Police Problem as noted above, and further increasing its already noted advantages over Green through the potential for increased cash flow from Golden Ages. However, Green's increased efficiency allows for it to pump funds directly into Psych with no penalty. It must sacrifice some cash flow or research to do this though.
- Free Market allows pops to be caused sooner and easier, allowing for higher clean mineral thresholds in the short and long terms at the expense of some terraforming time. (NB. Condensors, Mirrors and Boreholes cannot be destroyed by Pops.) Green will likely have no eco damage short term, but sacrifices industrial ability in future through lower clean mineral thresholds.
- Green allows for conventional troops deployments outside of territory.
- Free Market has a higher flat growth, though this is balanced if Golden Ages are achieved.
- Free Market has a lower ability to attack Psy troops like the Mind Worms. Defensive abilities are not reduced. Green has the potential to catch mind worms.

Winner: Free Market

[Archaic]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
Archaic, I'm wroking for the CNN And I would like your comment on your recent but very close victory in the Peacekeeping elections.

To be blunt, IMO, CNN is a left wing rag more concerned with making itself and its supporters in the CCCP and STEP look good. If you want to write a story, you'll get no comment from me for it, off the record or not.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Archaic


To be blunt, IMO, CNN is a left wing rag more concerned with making itself and its supporters in the CCCP and STEP look good. If you want to write a story, you'll get no comment from me for it, off the record or not.

Hmm.....I'm not pro-STEP and am DEFINATELY not Pro-CCCP (Apparently someone hasn't been reading all the threads.....)

[RP]

I will however respect your right to decline to comment, however I must say it is incredbily odd that you do not even open your mind to commenting.

Open your mind, and the tides of wisdom shall flow through you. However apparently, you are not that type of person.

[/RP]

[Archaic]

The propaganda machine your rag is nothing more than would seem to contradict you.

It never ceases to amaze me how people twist the concept of being "open minded" to mean the absolute acceptable of all ideas.......no matter how devoid of reason they may be.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Archaic
The propaganda machine your rag is nothing more than would seem to contradict you.

I think my posts would contradict that.

It never ceases to amaze me how people twist the concept of being "open minded" to mean the absolute acceptable of all ideas.......no matter how devoid of reason they may be.

If you see responding to a newspaper about your victory as "devoid of reason", who am I to interfere? Although if one did not know better, they would think that you would be hiding something.....

(Oh wait, that doesnt work)

[GeneralTacticus]

To be blunt, IMO, CNN is a left wing rag more concerned with making itself and its supporters in the CCCP and STEP look good. If you want to write a story, you'll get no comment from me for it, off the record or not.

I'd be careful about saying things like that... Tass may be left wing, but that doesn't mean the CNN. Judge it by the content, not writer (I still have a small stake in the CNN, you realize).

[Archaic]

I've been steering well clear of the CNN since its propaganda campaign against me. If it's changed since then, I retract my comments......though they certainly hold true for its majority owner.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Archaic
I've been steering well clear of the CNN since its propaganda campaign against me. If it's changed since then, I retract my comments......though they certainly hold true for its majority owner.

Yep, I'm so left wing....I mean, I'm even a member of the CCCP! I'm their most aggressive supporter, even moreso than Pand!

[GeneralTacticus]

I've been steering well clear of the CNN since its propaganda campaign against me. If it's changed since then, I retract my comments......though they certainly hold true for its majority owner.

When was this propaganda campaign against you? Was it around the time of 'Abstain' beating you? I can't even remember the last tim eyou were mentioned in the CNN.

[Drogue]

And your FM vs Planned or Green is not biased at all (you include pro rebuttals for FM's failings and con rebuttals for Green and Planned's good points). IMO a society starting with Planned for Growth, then when bases cease to be formed en mass, switch to Green for Planet and Efficiency bonuses, is the best way to play. Then you get no real problem from lack of growth under Green, and near the begining are not producing much energy, and with bases close together too, the efficiency loss under Planned is not such a problem. Although obviously that is for the style I play, and you're style obviously lends itself better to FM.

[Pandemoniak]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000


Yep, I'm so left wing....I mean, I'm even a member of the CCCP! I'm their most aggressive supporter, even moreso than Pand!

Comrade Tassadar, I personnaly award you the Great Award of Reverse Propaganda

[Archaic]

Probably about that time GT. I haven't been keeping much track with all that's been happening IRL.



And considering that my style would seem to be superior to yours from what's been demonstrated Drogue, guess where that puts FM?

I put rebuttals to FM's failings because they are failings that
1) Can be managed rather easily with a little micromanagement
and
2) Can be turned into assets (ie. Pops, *needed* to boost the clean mineral threshold, despite your protests to the contrary
The fact that you never seem to consider these facts only points our your lack of knowledge concerning how to use FM

The Con rebuttals to the "good points" simply point out things you have failed to consider time and time again. It's not my fault if you can't find a con for +2 Economy.

[Aaron Blackwell]

And considering that my style would seem to be superior to yours from what's been demonstrated Drogue, guess where that puts FM?

Would you care to develop and give fact that prove that this statment is correct ?
If you do not, I will consider this as a personal towards other players, attacks which clearly does not have their places here.

The fact that you never seem to consider these facts only points our your lack of knowledge concerning how to use FM

I have already proved with facts , during your election, that it is clearly not the case. I see that you have carefully avoided speaking of my argument and rather concentrate only on the argument of people that support your FM policies.

So I will have to repeat them ( I'll summarize them this time).

*** The Fungal pop problem :

It is true to say that fungal pop blooming that occurs now will reduce eco-damage in the long term.
On the other hand, it is false to say that FM is a requirement to do so.

The reason is that "clean minerals" are unaffected by your SE choices. The Planet penalty that FM grant only make existing eco-damage greater and make them more uncontrollable.

Forcing Fungal pop is better accomplish via use of minerals haversting crawlers as it allows us to control how, where and when these pop occurs.

Also, as a side note, late game eco-damage is not a big problem contrary to what some people said. The reason is that late game empire are big enough to rush build nearly everything wich leads to less requirement on minerals. ( At least, I never had problems with it in my games).

*** Drone problems :

We already have bases who uses doctor to control drone problems. Switching to FM will worsen these problems.
Pacifist drone will make it difficult to expand ,protect the terraformers and will make exploration that much difficult ( The director of exploration and intelligence will have a difficult time assuming his responsabilities in such a case).

Besides, switching to FM now will lead to the use of doctors which is counterproductive with the idea of FM ( at least now where we don't have that many workers).

*** The Rush building factor :

Switching to FM will not grant us that many extra energy reserves and will not allow us to consistently use rush building. Which means that industry bonuses will serve us better RIGHT NOW than energy bonuses. ( When our bases will be bigger the situation will be different).

*** The true bonus of FM :

It lies on the number of worker each city has as they are the only ones getting the bonus. We do not have enough workers at this time to make it worthwhile.

Pop booming via Dem-Planned-CC is much more important right now. FM will only reduce the pop growth and, due to drones problems, will make the growth more difficult to manage.

*** Economy Bonus versus Efficency Bonus.

Economy is better suited to mid-sized empire, when the efficiency loss remain small and, due to not so many cities, when there are not many B drones.

Efficiency is better suited to big-sized empire with many cities where it will gain as much or more energy via reduction of energy loss than energy gain, plus bonus point for reducing B drones and allowing more flexible allocation of energy between Reasearch and Economy.


-------------------------

If you really want to support FM policies, ask for a Pop Booming first, which will drastically increase the bonus granted by the extra economy provided by FM. Also, when empath will be available, it will allow the creation of Golden ages in our bases further ehancing the already existing bonus.

In a few words => WE ARE NOT READY FOR A SWITCH RIGHT NOW !! IF YOU WANT FM, MAKE THE NECESSARY PREPARATION FIRST !

Seeing that you have time to make personal critics toward other players and to post things like "My style is superior", you certainly have the time to respond to all those points.

It is not the first I make them and, as you told me during election, you mentioned that you were prepared to discuss them.

I am awaiting for your response