Council Of Truth: Reformation First Steps

[Cemetarygate]

Originally posted by Tussa
I'm for the 1 clan, 1 vote option. If it was any other way, I would stay as far away from the future council as possible, as it would mean the larger guilds would sit with all the power and influence, and the small guilds would be dirt on the ground.

Rather, if "one clan, one vote" the large guild should stay away. Otherwise, would mean the 8 large guild leaders would be steam-rolled by the 35 small guild leaders.

Gotta' love how the small guilds are showing the large guilds a little payback, huh?

Originally posted by Tussa
[OOC...when even the ARK Event boss say they support it, it has to have some sort of good ring to it. This is RP...not uber powergaming where numbers and sheer muscle mean everything. Get over it and get with it.]

(( In case you didn't notice, the only two people speaking in favor of "one member, one vote" (and not even that) are members small organizations (100 and 200 members). We don't have numbers on our sides, so please cut the attitude. ))

[Tussa]

Originally posted by Cemetarygate
((In fact, it more so proves that the Rep system can be manipulated. So, the system should not be used at all, or refined in some way with better security (to keep Reps honest).))

[Well...there will be logs from meetings posted, where the reps voting is shown. That should keep people from cheating the vote, I think ]

[Cogs]

((Well, Cemetary, so far we have seen no interest from the "larger" orgs in this. Instead, we have seen a large interest from average and smaller guilds, that want to RP this. Keyword being RP! I had a feeling some kneebiters would enter the arena, and start the micro-argumentation without giving thought to the larger picture here: story, rp opportunities, community interaction, etc. I wanna ask, what issues are you afraid the larger guilds will be "railroaded" on? What is the *real* issue here, Cemetary? Are you afraid that the smaller guilds will deprive the larger guilds of something? I would like to know this.

What I see here, is a magical rp opportunity, where interaction can flourish between OT and Clan side, with a touch of Neutral as well. A chance to spark the story, interact with it again, with the help of and alongside of FC and the Events deptartment.

Here is a hypothetical situation:
CoT is in session. We are debating the beautification of Old Athen. A vote is called, yay or nay. Here is the question.....do you think the smaller clans will vote no, just to spite the larger clans? Is that what you are afraid of?

If there is no other way, I guess you can have the job of jmonitoring every single clan on a daily basis then, Cemetary, to keep track of the exact number of votes any given clan has at any given time.

gah.Im rambling and feeling frustrated atm...so I'll just give it a rest. ))

[Aazamon]

While both systems have faults, both have postitives, I would like to see a technical presentation on how in the world a 1 person 1 vote would work and could be corroberated. People in thier fanciful ideas on what should be right often over look the practicallities. It may be the year 29477 but there is still a problem with proper observation of voting, voting locations and procedures, and voter list building. Until such time as these technical issues are addressed it is impossible to even concider 1 person 1 vote.

I come as a observer of the Council of Truth. I am interrested in it succeeding, but I would never hold any power in it. I hope that helps in your concideration of this point I bring.

Currently 1 Clan 1 vote is flawed, but the best easiest to use system until a better one is put forward with all the technical aspects it requires. Those proponents of Direct Democracy often look back to ancient Athens as an example, and it worked there where those with teh vote numbered less than twenty thousand people. There are millions of people on Rubi-ka, many in places and organizations not recognized by governments. A system of government needs to address this before direct democracy can be achieved. IF you want direct democracy.

Furthermore what I think needs to be done is a constitution written, clearly published, in plain language. This constitution should have a fair and just system for constitutional change written in it. For this I would suggest a super majority, that is a two thirds vote. It needent be a huge document to start, even one page on how voting and representation works is a good start. And as well the main goals of the CoT.

[Windguaerd]

[OOC]
Guys Guys!

Why are you making me do this!!!

You know I don't like going OOC!!

But I got no choice...

There are a few reasons why there is a 1 clan = 1 vote.

Practical OOC in-game limitations...player resources...limited time we will get with greenies.

Clans NEED to choose a trusted representative, if you can't find one, then you're on your own on that part.

Representatives SHOULD be a person that is aware of his or her clan's political views, military strength, diplomatic relations...just the basics, nothing that requires extensive research.

A Rep should know:

Aproximately how many players he can count on within his clan for events (be it social or PvP or PvNPC).

The clan's stance on politics (feelings on OT, Neutrals, Dust Brigade, official AO Clans like Sentinels or Terra Firma).

What other clans he considers allies, and keep touch with the reps of such clans. When it comes to voting usually supporting a close ally would improve relations unless the proposal made by such ally is considered negative by most of the Council.

We're trying to MINIMIZE politics, and MAXIMIZE efficiency here.

Arguing IC or OOC the voting system...is not going to get anybody anywhere...

Like I said before, CLANS NEED TO GET INVOLVED if they want to try and make ANY kind of change.

Q) Why does the Clerical Staff exist?

Because there was a need for a core group to do the following:

1. Forum admin
2. Facilitating meetings
3. Sending out meeting notices for both Clerical Staff and CoT in general
4. Getting in touch with ARK/Funcom about our activities
5. CoT press releases
6. Keep track of Clan Leaders/Reps taking part
7. Setting up agenda/speaker lists for CoT meetings

Also website management (CoT will have it's own domain up and running soon).

2) Who created these positions?

We agreed the previously mentioned tasks needed to be shared in a group of those who were willing to be responsable, thus the Clerical Staff came into existance.

This is what each of us does:

1. Forum Admin - Tussa
2. Facilitating meetings - Ailish
3. Sending out meeting notices for both Clerical Staff and CoT in general - Caid
4. Getting in touch with ARK/Funcom about our activities - Vixentrox
5. CoT press releases - Windguaerd
6. Keep track of Clan Leaders/Reps taking part - Foxferal
7. Setting up agenda/speaker lists for CoT meetings - Cogs

We started the movement for a player-run CoT, and we want to see it become a reality, it is why we're in the Clerical Staff.

Now perhaps I'm going a bit off topic here...but we've spent a LOT of our time, put in the hours and certainly the effort to get this started. We're even trying to get both servers (Atlantean & Rimor) on the same page so that both dimensions could achieve similar or the same goals at the same time (if both servers run the same type of event it is more likely a reaction from FC takes place, as any in-game changes done end up in all servers, remember Tir River?)

I'm going to be blunt...call me pushy...if you're a clan-side player...STOP ARGUING AND GET YOUR CLAN INVOLVED...or the dream of a player-run CoT will just be that...a dream, that would easily vanish to be just another memory with the words "What IF" attached to it.

7 of us in the Clerical Staff have made a spark...a little spark...and we got a few leaves...we got a small fire going...it can go out and die easily...would someone PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF ROLEPLAYING bring us some DRY WOOD we can use to bring the fire to a size where everyone in the whole world can see?

I'm asking for your help guys...no...I'm begging for you to try and stop over-analizing the voting system, right now it's the only way we can get things going...maybe if we had 100 clans involved...100 reps could find a more reasonable option with limited resources...but we're not at that point yet.

So if you REALLY want to see the player-run CoT...talk to your clan, your leader...and see if you can get them involved.

[/OOC]Current CoT Representatives

United we Stand, Divided we Fall.

Now....let's Roll!

[Cogs]

Exactly, Windguaerd.........spot on. So....lets get to it.

[Vixentrox]

Now that the holidays are nearly over, there should be some exciting stuff in the coming weeks. Expect to hear some important announcements in the near future!

[Dabblez]

I think its fair to say there is only one bit of news everyone hopes to read; "Clans renounce violence." It would be a little Christmas miracle.


Savoy

[Cogs]

Yes, we would love to see the same from Omni-Tek....."OT renounces violence, and today states a public apology for the crimes comitted to all people of Rubi-Ka. Phillip Ross said today that OT takes full responisbility for the atrocities commited towards workers so many years ago, and are ready to enter talks with the Clans to see how we can shape the future of Rubi-Ka together, in peace and understanding. I, and Omni-Tek now understand, that if things were handled differently initially; had we shown some concern and understanding for basic human rights, the situation we have endured now for so many years, need not have been the case."

Now, that would have been something.........unfortunately, it will probably never happen, as OT will *never* recognize the responsibility they hold for the history we are all part of. No....according to OT, there is noone to blame but the Clans....and to top it off, we smell as well......

Long live the Clans!

[Dabblez]

Bah, I was just trying to speard a little seasonal cheer, you know "peace on Earth, goodwill to men", but had Cogs had to throw in three pages of Clan propaganda! :-(

Savoy


/ooc Happy New Year everyone and good luck with the CoT project. There could be exciting times ahead for us all if this succeeds!

[Cemetarygate]

All OOC

Originally posted by Cogs
((Well, Cemetary, so far we have seen no interest from the "larger" orgs in this. Instead, we have seen a large interest from average and smaller guilds, that want to RP this. Keyword being RP!

I am role playing. Or, are you saying, because no large guild members are RPing, that I shouldn't bother advocating equal rights among individuals?

Originally posted by Cogs
I had a feeling some kneebiters would enter the arena, and start the micro-argumentation without giving thought to the larger picture here: story, rp opportunities, community interaction, etc. I wanna ask, what issues are you afraid the larger guilds will be "railroaded" on? What is the *real* issue here, Cemetary? Are you afraid that the smaller guilds will deprive the larger guilds of something? I would like to know this. !

The issue is role play, how people choose to play their characters and apparently you're disliking how I choose to play mine.

"Cemetarygate" is about equality, human rights, justice and other things. He is generally reserved, but will not hestitate to speak out on anyones behalf when he sees them treated unfairly (commonly why he speaks on behalf of Silverstone if you havn't noticed). This system does not treat individuals equally and my character is speaking on their behalf.

This has nothing to do with any particular issue, but about role play. You said yourself this is about role play. So, why can't I role play my character as an equal rights advocate?

Originally posted by Cogs
Here is a hypothetical situation:
CoT is in session. We are debating the beautification of Old Athen. A vote is called, yay or nay. Here is the question.....do you think the smaller clans will vote no, just to spite the larger clans? Is that what you are afraid of?

This particular hypothetical has no baring on my character. More than likely he would ignore this situation. Search the archives for further proof if you need. You'll see when Sallust (think it was him) who brought this up again the only thing my character did was provide facts from the first project, nothing more.

Unless, of course, this wasn't done on equal terms. Such as, making individuals in large orgs donate more just because they are in larger orgs. My character would fight so everyone had to donate equally to the cause.

Windguaerd, like I said, I know why "one clan, one vote" and I agree with the concept (primarly the simplicity and ease of it all). However, I'm not going to change my characters play style because of that, nor would I expect you do the same. But I would expect an IC compromise, much like the 1 vote per 50 members that was already suggested (which is probably more OOC me talking than anything). That's not the equality my character wants, he wants one member, one vote, but thats the compromise he's willing to settle on.

[Fixerben]

The decision has been made Cem, Like it or not. They arent going to budge on this. Your arguing is pointless.

[Tussa]

This is a reminder for all clan leaders who are interested in having their clan represented in the new council, to register on the council gridforum and name the two representatives they wish to speak for their clan. You can send me a personal message on that gridforum or place a public message on it with the names. This decision should come from the clan leader.

[Aazamon]

I would like to thank the Council of Truth for allowing the NLF to be an observer to this most important attempt at a democratic movement. I hope that more clans will take up this opportunity.

I would however like to state that this does not change our stance on clans who export notum off Rubi-Ka. We concider those clans to be directly attacking us. Howerver we believe there is now the political will to adress the issues facing Rubi-Ka in a civil manner. Therefore the NLF is withdrawing all millitary actions within Clan territory as long as the Council of Truth is willing to negotiate a solution for the future for Rubi-Ka and a future for the Nanomage People. This is our olive branch, I hope there are those brave enough to grasp it.

[Sukea]

One Clan- One Vote

Tempest says Yes
but would like to offer 2 suggestions on this which can be debated on in the first meetings of the CoT. No reason to do that here.

1. We should go to 2/3 majority on votes. This should help ensure clan population that the issue is voted on more closely to each clanners wish.
2. If in the future this seems unbalanced in any way for the people then the 1 vote 1 clan must be allowed to come back onto the floor of the CoT for Debate with these limitations:

1. There needs to be majority vote in the CoT to bring back the issue of 1 clan 1 vote for debate.
2. It can be brought back to the floor of the CoT only once in the future. this is to ensure that the CoT is seriously thinking that 1 clan 1 Vote is not working and a new system must be devised.
3. Issue must pass the CoT by a 2/3 vote of the representatives otherwise it can never be debated again and 1 clan 1 vote will stand.

but in the interest of moving everything along 1 clan 1 vote seems very reasonable from everything I have read because the interested clans will send their representatives and the un-interested ones will abstain and bicker amongst themselves about the government that evolves from this Council. There is nothing we can do about this but work together to try and formulate a cohesiveness amongst the willing. Those that are being indecisive or protective of their power must be seen as afraid of change not as enemies of the council.

If this should be a democratic governing body we must be able to adhere to our rules but make them flexible enough that other clan organizations will want to have their voice heard and will therefore wish to attend and be represented.

Khastity
Tempest Legal Department

P.S. Future suggestions
Perhaps in the future a 2 house system can be implemented
1. based on 1 vote 1 clan
2.based on population of the clan
each house balances the will of the other.

[Kraized]

I wish Antiy would come back, he sure was good about straigtening these situations out

[Shadowset]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Memo

To: All

From: Andrew 'Boomtastic' Domtar, Advisor
Guild-Assembly, Recruiting Office
Member, Council of Truth

Re: problems with one for one

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

Hi:

First of all let me just say it was very hard leafing through all these posts... 6 pages worth... Oy'

Hard because I kept seeing the same argument over and over again... And thought maybe if I broke out a simple reason maybe it would make sense:

Your Guild has elected a leader. In 99% of cases out there your leader is the voice of the Guild. So this could be a reason for the one for one rule. You the member or Leader should have the communications with your Guild to express your feelings and the vote should be based on it.

Now I understand that SOME Guilds out there are not like that, and I am sorry to those people and I hope you can work it out some how.

[ I was once a guild leader so don't come back with the 'You don't know', because I do know what I am talking about. My Guild ALWAYS took votes and polls on major issues and the rest of the time I was trusted (as I was the elected leader) to voice the choice of the Guild.]

[Tiggy]

The 1 person 1 vote ideology is the very foundation of democracy, unfortunately the 1 person 1 vote ideology requires a clerical administration system capable of holding referendums where every person is able to cast their vote. Although this is something that could certainly be introduced (and indeed actually already exists in the form of votebot on Rimmor, it isn’t something that is widely known about). Administration of a clan wide referendum system will take a chunk of organisation, fore planning (advertising) and then plenty of waiting to allow the people time to make their vote. It can’t be something that is done in an afternoon, it would have to organised so that a vote took a week to allow everyone from the hard core to the casual player an opportunity to express their choices. These choices may also drastically differ from the views of the council members simply by virtue of the voting populous being unaware of many salient points surrounding the issues at hand. Or through hearing only rumours that are misleading and misrepresent the issue. Do we actually want to be heading in this direction in the first place?

A council of leaders operating a one person one vote system, while on the face of it is not proportionately representative would be a much more efficient strategy as a decision could be made in an afternoon. A debate where the so called responsible individuals discuss and present points for other responsible representatives to consider is a more focused system. Such systems have their problems but they do work (eg the United Nations or for that matter any governing body after it has assumed power). The council is there to take decisions on behalf of the whole clan, not on behalf of one guild or another no matter how large that org is. This may mean a large and powerful org has to bite the bullet over an issue. If the council is to function effectively it is essential that the representatives recognise this and are willing to abide by the decisions the council takes irrespective of whether it is good or bad for their individual org.

This has always been the failing of the clan leadership in the passed. If a decision doesn’t suit the leader of a large org they chose to ignore it or blatantly oppose it. Yet should a small org take this stand point the larger orgs throw around their weight. These kind of double standards make the smaller guilds wonder what the point of the council is in the first place as it seems it is only there for rubber stamping the behaviour and wishes of the larger orgs. This in turn leads to a fracturing of the council and eventual emasculation of the council’s power as more and more leaders turn their backs on the council’s decisions and authority.

The only way for the council to function effectively is if it has real and tangible powers and benefits to continued membership and to following its decisions. It is a sad truth but egos cause these mechanisms to fail so in order for the mechanism itself to function it needs to have teeth. It needs to be able to give benefits to those who support its position; it needs to be able to punish those who openly go against its decisions whether they represent a small org or a large org. Perhaps something in like a 10% increase in the financial returns from selling items in the booths for member guilds. With the ability to levy a -10% financial penalty against member orgs who oppose its authority. Perhaps the council itself holds land and can boost the xp bonus or contracts of supporting member guilds and apply penalties to those who are voted in transgression.

However it functions, without carrots and sticks the council is only going to function as long as the egos of the leaders of the large orgs are massaged. The first time a leader of a large org opposes a council’s decision is the beginning of the end of the council.

Tiggy

[Sukea]

Good Observations Tiggy...

Khastity

[Xhairs]

I hope you realy can get this new Council up and running so the peace process can start up again. Sure, a scease fire will not magicaly stop all the violence, but it will allow the wounds to start healing, if ever so slowly. And who knows, one day we might stop shooting at each other for longer than ten minutes. But with the Notum Wars still raging i doubt that will happen, so that is something that we need to have a look at.