Player Community

[Signiture] Solomon Grundy

I'm good with chipping in.

How much is it?

$4 a month plus the domain using my connections.

That's not bad... can I spring for it with out sharing my credit card #?


If you don't like the name, don't like the charter, want something added, whatever it is... SPEAK UP PEOPLE!

Well Solomon you got to fork over your P.O. Box address so I can send you my share of the money every month but you have to give up your credit card# to my connection witch is an authorize.net company so no worries there. If your willing to do that then it is possible, if your interested I'll tell you who my connection is.

Aloha Juggernaut

I consider your part to be coming up with a kick ass site. maybe some graphics where the general assembly is layed out from above and we can click on seats to see who occupies them, find our own. that kind of stuff will take time and work and in reality it's worth more than $4 a month.

Your investment is already greater than mine.

Send authorize.net info to my main account message unless you have a FB country, then Lake Grundy. Please remember I haven't done this before.

which info about authorize.net?

So what do I need to do?

Is it still going to be called the NLUO?

My form of support would be to give the general assembly something useful to do. But I won't elaborate from here. We'll have to wait until it is actually created.

How does this work? we pay 4 bucks per month? Not bad.You should provide a news site so everyone can submit articles. I hate the news bar. I'm in.

Sounds like a revolution. Can I attack Robocop?

Sure you can attack Robocop but first we will need some resolutions that we find him in violation of. lol

But before that we'll need a system of government.

I'm leaning towards the idea of the General Assembly having half the power and the Security council having the other half.

What I do not want to see is a straight up democracy. I do not believe it's in any of our interests for players to be able to completely change the organization into a machine for tyranny simply by rallying 51% of the members in order to do it.

It's structure and values should be fixed to become the framework through which democracy can operate safely. So, even though we will operate as a democracy in our decision making the organization itself is not subject to radical change by the voting. I think that once we determine what it is that we are creating that we set it up to stay the way we've created it.

Need ideas!
Need ideas!
Need ideas people!


Thought:

Security council made up of the leaders from the top 6 federations in the galaxy the 7th seat being the Chairman who is elected from the General Assembly and has the same authority as the other 6, acting as the executive spokesman for the UN.

Voting on the Security Council would be an odd number to avoid deadlock.

Help me out here guys, this thing isn't mine.

One-world guvmint is from the DEBBIL! lol

@ Nix

I got dibs on Tommi. LOL


@ Juggernaut

Thanks for stepping up.

I was wrong about you. You can use my name anytime!!!


@ Solomon

We are already doing much of what is being discussed here, with the security council on WG.

Should we include the existing security councils of each planet, into the galactic security council? Or maybe make it a 3rd branch?

I think this would help to keep some rotation and fresh perspective in the galactic security council.

Also we will need to work out a military branch on each planet, to enforce resolutions.

That is all I have at the moment.

Come on people!!!

Post your thoughts!!!

This could seriously add a whole new aspect to this game.

I would be more inclined to a 3rd branch if we are to elevate them for their in game accomplishment at all and I'm not convinced that we should. The GM has offered the reward for obtaining that specific council already, the dispersion of economic aid.

I would rather see military powerhouses in the UN security council rather than players that simply know how to score well and rating military prowess is not necessarily determined by military size.

I'm not so sure we should prepare this thing with teeth either. It might be a better idea to develop that on an 'as needed' basis. There are other options. The UN can sanction the use of force by one or several members with out actually fielding it's own military.

Echo:

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Come on people!!!

Post your thoughts!!!

This could seriously add a whole new aspect to this game.<!-/Quote-!>

I have a plan, though it involves a favor.

A favor from...

Nanna

Nanna, give MoP a chance to respond and anyone else in a timely manner, after he does will you do us the privilege of writing a UN article that forms the security council and conforms to what all of us are saying? Then we can come to agreement on it or discuss what changes each of us would like to see.

I'm thinking another perspective would help and that you'll be able to look at all of our posts and determine what it should look like.

So, would ya? huh? would ya? (tugs at Nanna)

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

The powers on the planetary SC go beyond simply dishing out financial aid.

They also have the power to enforce peace treaties and ban nukes.

The problem is, the GM never finished the feature. Therefore the resolutions must be enforced by the members of the SC, via boycotts or military intervention. Otherwise they are worthless.

This is what we have started to do on WG. Check out the thread "Enforcement of Security Council Resolutions (White Giant)" on the WG board.

So if the planetary SCs are left out and operate independently, I see problems arising in the future.

I feel that they should at least function as a local government and represent each planet on some level.

If it is only the six largest feds that have the power to bring things to the galactic SC, then isn't it just business as usual?

You've sold me on everything but the overwhelming size of the UNSC. It seems each planet has 15 members in it's 'local' security council, times 5, that's 75 seats!

How about, for the UNSC we reserve those seats for the #1 player from each world, giving us 5. -BRANCH 1

70 seats for the UN Senate. (the remaining members of each planet's SC #s 2-15) -BRANCH 2
~Should players that appear on more than one planet's SC control more than one seat of the UN Senate? Or, should those seats go to General Assembly election? (and branch one to Senate elections?)

Remaining Simcountry players in the UN General Assembly -BRANCH 3

Hmm, and divide the authority up 3 ways... with 2/3s voting margin in both the UN Senate and General Assembly? -of votes cast rather than two thirds of the seats?

Processing...

Thought:

The UN Security Council can put forth resolutions and proposals at will by majority vote. The Security Council is to enforce them with the approval of a 51% voting margin in both the Senate and the General Assembly.

The senate can put forth proposals like the UN Security Council with a 51% voting margin in the Senate and put forth resolutions with a 66% margin with veto option by the Security Council at 4/5 voting margin. Senate resolutions and proposals are approved and enforced by a 51% margin in the Assembly.

The General Assembly can put forth proposals to the UN Security Council with a 75% voting margin in the Assembly with further approval by 51% voting margin in the Senate. The General Assembly can not levy resolutions, though they can be proposed.

This gives the Senators a little more power as they can block proposals coming from the General Assembly and keeps the masses from overwhelming the top with