Politician Archive
Thread: Seiging
by your argument, houses and pa's should made vulnerable as well. just cuz someone joins swg 3 yrs down the road when there is no housing left doent mean some newbie gets to usurp your house or pa
alot of ppl made a lot of effort and expense to place it, if u didnt go the trouble we did to do it in time, oh well. if u had a city now after 2 mil in expenses so far and knew u could lose it in 2 days when next vote comes up, u 'd change yer tune.
democratic cities were started by formed pa's with loyalty base already, with the understanding they would operate as a democracy and all the members contributed to it b4 if even started. my city is entirely out of my pocket. just like u can have yer own house to decorate and play sim house all u want with full security, a city hall is given the same protection.
The title of this thread is sieging. This refers to people who camp outside of a city that doesn't have open zoning in order to destroy it so they can build their own someplace when the population cap is reached. It does not refer to the ownership, or lack thereof, of the mayor. The cities belong to the community. Many communites (Pinacha or however it's spelled in Nevada for instance) regulate people moving in. Once people are in, voting should go as game mechanics permit. For now, though, we are discussing groups of people who camp outside of a city in order to destroy it, not any other topic.
I think we can all aggree that doing this isn't what the Developers envisioned for cities. It wouldn't make sense for them to. Immigration should be able to be regulated. Do I think the commands should stay as they are? No. They allow a mayor to blackball everyone from the city hall, and effectively stop anyone from ever running against him, or voting him out of office. Although I'm not sure how easily he would keep his city above the 10 limit, he can do this to his citizens. The /commands do need to go, as they can be misused as well, but they are a lesser evil than seiges. They should not be taken out without putting in a way to stop that. Make the city halls REALLY hard to destroy? Increase the no build radius to maximum? Either way, just so long as the cities are protected from distruction.
Koweim
My two cents:
Think outside of a democracy for a second, people. I won't state where I stand on this personally, but consider this. America is huge. It's a democracy, and for the most part it works. Those who don't like it are welcome to move elsewhere. China is huge. It's communist, and has been working for a LONG LONG time for the most part. People who don't like it can TRY to leave
.
There are more that one means of ruling a community, and a dictatorship IS a viable option, as it is used throughout the world. I don't see why a ruler couldn't use the /commands to do whatever he wanted to do with the city hall, if choosing a "dictator" type means of ruling was most appealing. The thing that people are missing with the /commands, so I've read, is that you can also set entry rights to the city hall using more /commands.
There probably SHOULD be a means to protect a city from sieging techniques, but how does one do that without blackballing some of the possible citizens? As a politician, is itNOT thier job to serve thier citizens, regardless of thier style of ruling? A ruler should communicate with his people and do what is best for all, but does that mean he should be able to be voted out? I dunno.....I haven't the answer to that. But I know that people are missing the BIG FACT that there are more means of truling, other than democracy. I know that reading these posts, I'm noting RAMPART eurocentrism....so I just want to throw those cards out on the table.
Maybe these commands should be left in? Whether it be in the best interest of smaller established communities or just the best interests of a mean dictator type, play style should be allowed to be different.
Okay....Flame on.
No flames here. 
Our city is a democracy, ONCE YOU ARE LET IN. Our citizenship requirements are simple: roleplay, don't exploit, and don't be a complete idiot. Our current residents have agreed to stand behind one mayor until we have the basic needs of a city in place, but then we are going to actively hand experience over to the others in the town who would like to be politicians as well, and then have open elections.
Our system works in that it preserves a very specific type of community: a roleplayer community. There's nothing egocentric or tyranical about it, its just our desire to contribute to our part of the galaxy in our OWN way. The ability to regulate cities and citizenship is a necessity in preserving individual cultures in this game, or there would be no difference between a player town and an NPC town other than player towns cost the players money.
~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
(Snitter): There isn't any island, Rowf...
(Rowf): There is... there... can't you see it... Our island...just stay with me.. I'll get you there...
Not flaming Shab, love ya :x
However, your city pretty much defines Facism, not Democracy. Fascism:the good of the State comes before the good of the individual.
Not that fascism is a bad thing. "your" people want a specific city, which excludes others who have less than desireble characteristics in "your" people's mind.
In a democracy, if the majority of the people want something, they vote on it, and it happens. If they want a new mayor before "basic needs are in place" it happens. If one of your virtual male citizens one day decides he wants to shout "Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo SUXXORS" for 12 hours in front of city hall wearing nothing but pink hotpants and a LLC, it's ok. And if the majority of the city populace wanted to wear only hotpants in the city and chant "we are leet!" that would be ok to.
But it wouldn't be, from your definition. They would be supressed, and eventually forced out....replaced by those with a "more clear vision of the city"
Being a Facist id O.K. Just don't call it a Democracy please
That's just it, though . . . it was the citizens who voted all of this into place. I didn't make a single rule in our city on my own. Five days before the city became official, we even held one last vote to make sure that was the direction they wanted to go in and that they definitely wanted me to be the one to take the training (which I specifically absented myself from that discussion so that they could feel that they could speak freely on that count.) Now, if one of our city members does want to stand in front of the City Hall shouting that we suxx0rs, they are more than welcome to. Of course, the city may vote to ban him, and likely would. But after all, they also voted to let him in.
Please recheck your definition . . . "A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism." I challenge you to create a second character and come spend some time in our city before you accuse us of that.
~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
(Snitter): There isn't any island, Rowf...
(Rowf): There is... there... can't you see it... Our island...just stay with me.. I'll get you there...
OK let's break it down line by line from webster's definitions. (I'm doing laundry and have time to kill) Nothing like a good debate! This is the political forums
The definition is referred to a number. The linked statement to that definition is a nu mber with a letter, e.g. (1b)
Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: 'fa-"shi-z&m also 'fa-"si-
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader
1a- "Our current residents have agreed to stand behind one mayor until we have the basic needs of a city in place"
1b- "The ability to regulate cities and citizenship is a necessity in preserving individual cultures"
- severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
1c- "Our city is a democracy, ONCE YOU ARE LET IN. Our citizenship requirements are simple: roleplay, don't exploit, and don't be a complete idiot"
1d- "Our system works in that it preserves a very specific type of community: a roleplayer community"
1e- "Now, if one of our city members does want to stand in front of the City Hall shouting that we suxx0rs, they are more than welcome to. Of course, the city may vote to ban him, and likely would."
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>
- fas·cist
/-shist also -sist/ noun or adjective, often capitalized
- fas·cis·tic
/fa-'shis-tik also -'sis-/ adjective, often capitalized
- fas·cis·ti·cal·ly
/-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb, often capitalized
Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
Date: 1576
1 : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
1a- . . it was the citizens who voted all of this into place. I didn't make a single rule in our city on my own. Five days before the city became official, we even held one last vote to make sure that was the direction they wanted to go in and that they definitely wanted me to be the one to take the training (which I specifically absented myself from that discussion so that they could feel that they could speak freely on that count.)
1b- 1a tells us your city voted for a Fascist society
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government
3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the U.S.
4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges
5a- The statement you said rejects (5) in that "The ability to regulate cities and citizenship is a necessity in preserving individual cultures"
Like I said, Fascism isn't bad, (Hitler kinda made it look bad) and sometimes a necessity. The bottom line is you want to exclude, or forcesome people out in order to maintain an idealistic, (in your eyes)state, (a city).While it will probably makefor a better, happier town, it is still not aDemocracy.
Also, I'm not saying you or your city folk are mean nasty people, and I am confident if I made another character and visited your fine town I would be most impressed with the kind of folks there
It's still not a Democracy tho so there
I'm sure it will be soon though after thisFacist phase, and will be, as it is now, a wonderful place to live.
You're leaving out a major part here, as stated under your own definition: "and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader". We do not have a centralized, autocratic government by any means, because every member of the city has an equal vote from the instant that they join. The only way that I am a "dictatorial" leader is that the citizens dictate to me what they would like to do, lol. They tell me what taxes to set in what amounts, who gets what town postions, how often those people are up for re-election, even what training I take so thatour town can progress.
If you think about it, we are just as much a democracy as America; actually more so, since the individual has even more rights in suggesting policy than the average American citizen does (and no electoral college to get in the way of votes, either). Just like America, we also have (in a perfect world) secure borders. If you follow the very basic rules, you have a very good chance of being let in, you can become a citizen, and eventually run for office. As soon as you're a citizen, you get your vote. And pretty much anything can become law if enough people vote for it, as long as it does not violate the Constitution (in our case, our Charter). In America, you get a green card (ideally) and can become a citizen. Not everyone gets in. Or, you can try to cross the border illegally. In Tombra, you get sponsored for a week, and can become a citizen. Not everyone will get in.
And does not America also exalt nation over the individual? Just think of the phrases "Truth, justice, and the American way", or "the American dream". They're examples of how the individual is expected to in some way conform to the American idealism if they live in this country. It's the same in Tombra.
So yes . . . we ARE democratic. Or is America fascist? 
~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
(Snitter): There isn't any island, Rowf...
(Rowf): There is... there... can't you see it... Our island...just stay with me.. I'll get you there...
Oh, and just mentioning this because I don't think I have yet: I'm NOT taking any kind of offense to this at all, I love debating and am enjoying the conversation immensely.
~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
(Snitter): There isn't any island, Rowf...
(Rowf): There is... there... can't you see it... Our island...just stay with me.. I'll get you there...
crap reply wasnerfed from time delaylol and i gotta go. Thanks for seeing I'm not a troling flamer hehe
Anyway, my point is mainly states, (or cities) fighting for their survival will often display tenents of Facism. Although the intentions are for good, and probably necessary, it is still something closer to Facism than Democracy.
p.s. yeas, most definately the US leans more to the right (Fascist) during times of war (check out WW2) It was for the best, and necessary, but it still tramples on the idea of inalienable rights.
Aynianu wrote:
Not all cities are democracies in real life, yes i know most (or all?) in america are elected mayor's or such, but in england, traditionally the queen ruled everything, and 'appointed' people to rule cities / counties, i beleive many other countries still do this, and it works for them.
What DO they teach in American schools? It's certainly not world history....
Heavens above....
JediTimbo wrote:
Aynianu wrote:
Not all cities are democracies in real life, yes i know most (or all?) in america are elected mayor's or such, but in england, traditionally the queen ruled everything, and 'appointed' people to rule cities / counties, i beleive many other countries still do this, and it works for them.
What DO they teach in American schools? It's certainly not world history....
Heavens above....
It's not what I learned in any of my history classes lol. Maybe its just him.