Join the new world

In this case the phrase "Give me democracy or give me death" seem somewhat redundant.

This article is terrible and you should be ashamed for pretending you are interested in democracy. "Hey Canadians, please vote for this law, but if it doesn't pass a few of us may decide we need to be a dictatorship, but only if whoever we choose to run it gets to run it"

IMO, if you attempt a dictatorship without cooperation from Cordis, it will be very costly and will more than likely fail. You will need a lot of outside assistance. Eventually true Canadians are going to get tired of owing outsiders for everything your government accomplishes.

You need to work towards some common ground with all Canadian Leaders. Not just elected leaders, but the people who are always in charge. This includes large political parties and influential MU Commanders. Rylde happens to lead an important group of nations when it comes to in-game mechanics. Rather than constantly focus your platform as the anti-Rylde Platform, maybe work some back-door diplomacy with him. Key word there is diplomacy. If you don't have it, you shouldn't be leading anything.

I can't speak for my party or MU, but I've already posted some thoughts on what I want from a democratic government. When Rylde was dictator, it was the most democratic I've felt in a long time. He got input from our party and MU, I always knew what was going on, and I felt like I had a true say in the direction of this country or at least I could share my view and if it wasn't in the majority I was okay with it because I understand the definition of a democracy.

I am having a lot fo fun playing even with all the negative Nancy's talking about how dead this game is. I am excited to see the direction our country takes and where we go from here. Focus on positive stuff and motivate the people.

Also, I've given more thought to the legitimate vs illegitimate dictator proposal and I am personally okay with it. Running out of characters so to be continued...

[removed]

Continue😛

I do think there should not be any language removing people from forums and congress should address what happened during this dictatorship. Even in conflict, communication is important. How do you reach compromise or resolution without communication?

Illegitimate dictatorship will still be a game option for any offended party who feels no other means can satisfy their dissatisfaction with government, but as we've seen multiply times it isn't a long term answer and more of a wake up call for change.

sorry, big typo in 2nd post (with vs without) so rather than try to explain it I just pasted it in again and made the correction. I should probably use Word to check for typos and then proof read, but I am lazy.

My changes are not just to do with Rylde. This would be a definition for anyone who wanted to bring the country to a dictatorship.

I want all of to agree on something a little harder then the guy has citizenship or not.

lol ED - this has everything to do with Rylde, and denying it makes you look even more ridiculous than usual.

Great, Rylde listened to you and his membership. Amazing! Democracy at work.

I want democracy. You want what ever Rylde decides for you.

An exec who wanted democracy would realize their influence and not order citizens on who to vote for. What you really want is things to go only your way, which is the opposite of democracy. Last time I checked that was called a dictatorship. Quite two-faced for an exec, don't ya think?

Are you thinking I have God powers?

I cannot make a person vote for whom I choose I can ask them. Have you ever seen an election campaign? That is pretty much what every side does.

But that is not true and you know it. While I do have his back, if I knew he went against what the majority of us wanted or if he treated us like minions, I wouldn't mindlessly follow him. I could start my own MU, hire my own employees, or move on to something better.

I'm going to be very disappointed if that is the only reply to my post from you.

ED you are the exec, at least have the decency to act like it. You are extremely biased against a party, with little grounds to show yours can do anything better. Not only that but as the exec it is your job to keep congress and the government in line, not try to split it up. And since you the exec, anything you say will be taken as an order from half-active two-clickers. This means that telling people who to vote for abolishes democracy.

Yes I'm biased against a party that thinks they have the right to impose a dictatorship on the rest of us any time they so please.

That's the point though... they do have the right to. It's game mechanic. Doesn't matter if you like it or not. And it's called dictator for a reason..

Then we should use game mechanics like the 95% of countries in this game and institute a CP as dictator system.

The choice is do we want democracy and do every thing we can to stay their or we don't really care and which case we should install our own dictator.

This isn't about your proposal, that will go away in a few days, probably before congress elections if the speaker is doing his job. This is about you telling people who to vote for. As an exec. Fighting for this so-called "democracy" you advertise.

Do not vote for the Rylde’s Whores. I agree

For anyone who doesn't want to read all that I've paraphrased for you!

"Hi there! I, the CP of eCanada, and I would like you to support by democracy by voting for whoever I tell you to vote for! Just remember, I am the suitable & unbiased leader of your country, kids, and I will do anything I can to gain more support from half-active two-clickers, even if it means ruining eCanada!"

Let me do you the same courtesy. "It's not fair that the leader of a top 5 party and the country president can endorse whoever he likes for Congress or encourage people to vote against his political enemies. Only we get to tell people who to vote for! How dare he stop the impending wipe? Vote to make voting irrelevant!"

It would be different if he were only the leader of a top 5 party, I wouldn't complain so much. But he's the CP, he should be held to higher standards than this. He isn't simply endorsing a party either, he is outright attacking another party based solely on the fact that he doesn't like them.

Screw you ED I left hoping it would buy the dictatorship more time if I let a lulzy guy have the power. Plus he avoided coming back to Canada for years and I thought it was hilarious to force him back into the country.

I also hoped the war with Ireland would continue if I left power and that Colin would drop CO's. Ity was a gamble and I like to gamble.

That I was scared of a revolution I knew was coming anyways is crazy. You stumble around with your band of lazy a** CPF followers making anything you want up along the way. I may not have been a great leader but I didn't lie to anyone about what I was doing.

If you want to play that game I'll plunge us right back into chaos as I still have 1.2 million and you better go crying to Colin to help you.

I never said that at all. I said you had already resigned and that had happened before the revolution. They had nothing to do with each other. That was my point.

You referred to me as a rat leaving a sinking ship so you completely said it as that's a pretty open and closed comment.

I personally would rather see us get our territories back and see what true change this government is going to offer first. We will have a lot more supporters if they truly turn out to be nothing more than hot air and insults.

Yes but I have no illusions as to why you did it. It was to divert Colin and not any thing the rest of us were doing

Seems more or less like i was trying to keep the ship afloat then rather than abandoning it doesn't it then.

So kindly shut your face about me being a rat.

After all the things we have called each other over the years rat bothers you? lol

Excellent!

You also forget you'll actually need the whore's to vote to reach quorum. You really don't want to accomplish anything in country do you.

"I just want to put the power of deciding back into your hands not just one person’s hands that just happens to spend way too much money on this game."

Like Colin Lantrip

Some people did decide that a dictatorship under rylde was good. While i didnt agree with some of what he did or said I did agree with his willingness to perpetuate eternal war that makes eCanadians richer not to mention funding newb programs.

Power was taken from a large portion of eCanadian players by an American player that just happens to spend way too much money on this game.

Is it me or is there a lot of Americans now in positions of power......

Previously power was taken from a large portion of eCanadian players by a Canadian player that just happens to spend way too much on this game (granted, in my opinion that's about $0.69, hue hue hue (I'm feeling some lingering side effects from the buttatorship)).

Sure, Lantrip's an American. I guess that makes things slightly worse. But in this freemium game where there's a dictatorship module that allows anyone with a large enough credit limit to install themselves as dictator, I'm not sure there's all that much legitimacy left when it comes to game mechanics.

I don't have 200K and I'm just happy Rylde pissed off the wrong person.

I won't make that mistake again ED

Bang on.

Canadians fought for and won a dictatorship. American money paid for return to democracy. Now which one has the support of Canadians again?

Trick question - both.

This proposal is essentially saying that any future Dictator must be elected. This runs completely against the entire purpose of the game mechanic. I'm ok with that - it's really not that good a module - but it is worth pointing out that this is an attempt to neuter the position altogether and essentially make it a Presidency with absolute powers.

I can only think of two situations where this would be useful. First, if we're about to be wiped prior to Congress elections, we'll want someone to have voting powers. Second, if we think that a foreign (or potentially even domestic) power is going to try to install a dictatorship and ignore our laws and democracy, a defensive dictatorship makes sense.

Outside of these two reasons, I see no need to have a Dictator. Are there any other reason besides someone just wanting it?

I would approach this differently, firstly by requiring that one of the above scenarios be imminent or seemingly imminent before allowing for a Defensive Dictatorship to be installed. Since it's a defensive tool, I think a 66% bar is a little high, although I think that a 24 hour discussion should be required before any buttons are pushed (so no Presidential Orders on this one).

I like the idea of requiring that the Dictator continue to be elected as CP - in fact, I'd go further and say that the only person allowed to be installed as Dictator should be the current CP. That said, I also think that Congress should have the ability to decide when to get rid of the dictatorship or even to replace the dictator (perhaps after a CP election). As mentioned, we might need an independent MU set up for these purposes.

Lastly, if we were to have a dictatorship, we should still guarantee that Congress retain it's forum based powers. They should maybe even be more robust than that, requiring the Dictator to vote as instructed by Congress.

We should also look into getting a Congress during a wipe.

I agree that 66% is probably too high a threshold in Congress overall. I suspect this suggestion was made because of the quorum/activity disparity between the Fifth Column party and the rest of Canada leading up to this event.

The Presidential election method, on the other hand, is too liberal. We've had Presidents elected with far below 40% of the total vote. Narrowly winning a three way race is not a sufficient mandate for dictatorship in my opinion.

My suggestion would be:
* 50%+1 of the total membership of Congress, or
* An outright majority in the CP vote, with the stated intention to ask for a dictatorship.

Democracy is decided by majorities. Majority vote should be the standard for democracy to eliminate itself. Of course we could just figure out a constitutional dictatorship but that would require some hefty compromises by both sides anyway.

I just copied the impeach numbers. I just want it to be higher threshold then the guy has Canadian citizenship so it's okay like Rylde's team wants.

Any body of means can get citizenship and then become our legitimate leader under those rules.

All the patently absurd hippie nonsense aside, I have some serious problems with the proposed amendment.

In order for a Dictator to be considered "legitimate" (LOL!!!), he has to announce his intentions in advance, win a CP election amid a crapstorm of pinko mudslinging and spin, get approved by 2/3rds of Congress and then agree to willingly step down when asked. All so the feelgooders and psychedelic bunny-snugglers can maintain the illusion that democracy is anything other than a direct impediment to progress, and that they have a say in our future.

Furthermore, you seem to want to impose democratic restrictions on a non-democratic (but so-called legitimate) office that will absolutely, 100% result in a quagmire of political inefficiency. Democracy with a pandering "moderate" CP is already slow, but if you then give that CP unilateral control of the in-game buttons while requiring meta-game voting from an elected Congress on all law proposals... that seems deliberately awkward. Everything grinds to a halt.

Nothing in this amendment serves any purpose against a foreign invasion force. Sure, it will declare them "illegitimate," but it still doesn't give you any other way to dislodge them, or a way to fix the damage they might cause.

This is purely a reactionary change against the recent actions of one group of people. Pretending it is not is ridiculous. While I agree that the dictatorship module does need to be addressed in the charter, these amendments are not the way to go about it. Knee-jerk amendments are almost universally a bad idea.

Dictators don't need permission. It's really that simple.

I find this attempt to legislate a game mechanic laughable because it is an attempt to offset the huge amount of players in the other parties that can't be bothered to do anything because their leadership is lacking any semblance of an ability to engage their members.

Cordis with an MU of 56 players representing only 10.5% of the Canadian population and yet mangaged to hold a dictatorship of Canada.

The problem isn't the dictatorship, Cordis or the whorehouse. The problem is with you, the other parties and MU's and their leaders. You all need to get your people involved or just resign and find someone who can instead of using a bunch of gobbldy goop writing in the forum to try and stop a game mechanic that you have no say over.

The dicatorship didn't happen because Cordis won the battles. It happened because YOU and your leadership abilities failed.

hmph stupid cut and paste not cutting my updated writing that left a few things out. So for accuracy, including the CAF MU as part of the dictatorship war and having to pay off other MU's and relying on foreigners to fund.

But nevertheless, the point still stands.

o/

o7

Democracy and your telling people how to vote?

[removed]

Have you been paying attention to the actual federal election? This is how election campaigns are run. You tell people why they should vote for you.

If the CPF really cared about Democracy they wouldn't have gone out of their way to completely gut congress for the past 3 weeks.

Those of us that take part in the metagame wanted to keep doing what we were doing, and it was made clear that any decisions we made would be implemented by Rylde.

Instead of doing what was right the CPF, and most specifically the two clowns DMV and Aries, did everything they could to completely gut Congress and even went so far as to erase posts and stymie any attempt of getting real work done.

You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

"We're the vote for Democracy"

You guys aren't even worth laughing at at this point. You're not worth the time.