Lorania Board

2-4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid wrote:

Just founded New Lorania so TWC didn’t nab it

Ay, one less trophy for ‘em.

Galactic Powers wrote:

Here's an idea:

Banana duck theocracy, abolish democracy

i fully approve of this idea. dale seal of approval right there

New Excalibus wrote:

Ay, one less trophy for ‘em.
i fully approve of this idea. dale seal of approval right there

It's like you never left the region XD

Galactic Powers wrote:

Here's an idea:

Banana duck theocracy, abolish democracy

We need a parliamentary theocracy with the all-powerful banana duck. The parliament will be the House of Memes with me as the eternal leader.

Seven Seas wrote:

It's like you never left the region XD

Hey, I’m trying my best to say “Lorania should” instead of “We should”.
i’m twying my hardwest. *sniffle*

Jurassic World would be the type of sh*t Tai Pei would do for the laughs.

Tai Pei, where the only animals comparable to dinosaurs are the peregrine falcons that have claimed the entire country.

Tai Pei coup when?

Matroyska wrote:

i love your enthusiasm but please remember that you can reply to several posts in one, so you don’t have to double post. this helps make the rmb easier to read

Will do, buckaroo

Visedo wrote:

CONDEMNATION OF LORANIA

by The Swashbuckling Buccaneer of Puetavisa

---

CONDEMNATION of LORANIA
-----

---

Read dispatch

lol

Abbots wrote:

Tai Pei coup when?

If you support my totally legit coup against the Loranian government, I will... uh...

I'll buy you a lot of Haribo's Starmix.

Cousethii wrote:

Skundi issued a grudge against Turkic Union nine months ago simply because he was banned from the region by its founder, Qazaq Eli, for refusing their embassy request. I find it disturbing to note that he has not similarly issued a grudge against Montealba for concerning content allegedly hosted on its Discord server - content which surpasses the mere "pettiness" that he accused Qazaq Eli of demonstrating - instead merely issuing a statement of embassy cancellation.

Grudges should be issued consistently or not at all.

To be honest, I’m going to delete that dispatch, it wasn’t my finest moment. I don’t think grudges are right to be used and just create a rotten atmosphere in the region. If I kept the grudges and decided to use them properly then i’d have to spend days, or even weeks, writing grudges against every dodgy region on the site, which, to put it simple, doesn’t look fun

Tai Peian national anthem after they get addicted to S C I E N C E .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJj9y4t9UnU

Tinhampton wrote:

Lightning Trials are also unconstitutional.

My original plans for the Basic Law of Thorossia did involve a legislature involving every citizen, as is the case in two unnamed GCRs, but this was not picked up on by Skundi for several reasons - not least because he objected to my definition of a citizen as a WA resident only :P

I’m starting to get more interesting in implementing a citizens assembly like this with WA residents and those with a waiver. I feel that it could make a better and more appealing legislature. I’m leaning towards this idea more and more

Skundi wrote:

To be honest, I’m going to delete that dispatch, it wasn’t my finest moment. I don’t think grudges are right to be used and just create a rotten atmosphere in the region. If I kept the grudges and decided to use them properly then i’d have to spend days, or even weeks, writing grudges against every dodgy region on the site, which, to put it simple, doesn’t look fun

I was under the impression that you as Foreign Secretary could rescind the Turkic Union grudge and remove the penultimate bullet point of the Embassy Policy at will.

Skundi wrote:

I’m starting to get more interesting in implementing a citizens assembly like this with WA residents and those with a waiver. I feel that it could make a better and more appealing legislature. I’m leaning towards this idea more and more

[INSERT RANT ABOUT POSSIBLY BEING VINDICATED HERE] :P

Every addition to human knowledge is an addition to human power, and Tai Pei is about to make humanity much more powerful!

Accept no limits, science knows no bounds!

Skundi wrote:

I’m starting to get more interesting in implementing a citizens assembly like this with WA residents and those with a waiver. I feel that it could make a better and more appealing legislature. I’m leaning towards this idea more and more

I’m still against having a bicameral system, as it will take far too long for bills to pass. We’re already complaining about how long it’ll take to pass a criminal code, so wouldn’t you think it would take even longer with a bicameral system? This is why I prefer an elected unicameral system.

Ogliacia wrote:

I’m still against having a bicameral system, as it will take far too long for bills to pass. We’re already complaining about how long it’ll take to pass a criminal code, so wouldn’t you think it would take even longer with a bicameral system? This is why I prefer an elected unicameral system.

Never said I wanted a bicameral legislature

Skundi wrote:

Never said I wanted a bicameral legislature

So you're talking about having a unicameral legislature including all citizens? Understood. However, I'm personally against that as well, for these reasons:

1. Inactivity and Apathy: Some Citizens may be too inactive to serve in the Legislature, and therefore with contribute very little and will decrease voter turnout.. Others may have no interest in regional politics, and therefore might not like being pinged all the time for a juty they didn't want, and will also decrease voter turnout.

2. Small Legislation: Many citizens won't want to bother with small scale amendments and changes, and would rather only large scale changes be brought to their attention (representative democracy).

3. Wording in Legislation: Some citizens may not understand the wording of Proposals, as it can be complex. This may lead to people voting on proposals, and not fully understanding what their voting on.

Ogliacia wrote:

So you're talking about having a unicameral legislature including all citizens? Understood. However, I'm personally against that as well, for these reasons:

1. Inactivity and Apathy: Some Citizens may be too inactive to serve in the Legislature, and therefore with contribute very little and will decrease voter turnout.. Others may have no interest in regional politics, and therefore might not like being pinged all the time for a juty they didn't want, and will also decrease voter turnout.

2. Small Legislation: Many citizens won't want to bother with small scale amendments and changes, and would rather only large scale changes be brought to their attention (representative democracy).

3. Wording in Legislation: Some citizens may not understand the wording of Proposals, as it can be complex. This may lead to people voting on proposals, and not fully understanding what their voting on.

I understand your concerns and i’ll write up my responses to that later when I have time to

Still hold my view of introducing referendums on constitutional amendments, rather than complete legislative reform. Also advocate the view of allowing citizens to debate in the HoC (but only when sponsored by an MP), as that would mean citizen involvement in the legislature.

I echo Ogliacia's comments on the issues of direct democracy/regionwide legislature.

Ogliacia wrote:

So you're talking about having a unicameral legislature including all citizens? Understood. However, I'm personally against that as well, for these reasons:

1. Inactivity and Apathy: Some Citizens may be too inactive to serve in the Legislature, and therefore with contribute very little and will decrease voter turnout.. Others may have no interest in regional politics, and therefore might not like being pinged all the time for a juty they didn't want, and will also decrease voter turnout.

2. Small Legislation: Many citizens won't want to bother with small scale amendments and changes, and would rather only large scale changes be brought to their attention (representative democracy).

3. Wording in Legislation: Some citizens may not understand the wording of Proposals, as it can be complex. This may lead to people voting on proposals, and not fully understanding what their voting on.

I'm with Ogliacia on this one

Sail Nation wrote:

Also advocate the view of allowing citizens to debate in the HoC (but only when sponsored by an MP), as that would mean citizen involvement in the legislature.

Totally agree with this too.

Ogliacia wrote:

So you're talking about having a unicameral legislature including all citizens? Understood. However, I'm personally against that as well, for these reasons:

1. Inactivity and Apathy: Some Citizens may be too inactive to serve in the Legislature, and therefore with contribute very little and will decrease voter turnout.. Others may have no interest in regional politics, and therefore might not like being pinged all the time for a juty they didn't want, and will also decrease voter turnout.

2. Small Legislation: Many citizens won't want to bother with small scale amendments and changes, and would rather only large scale changes be brought to their attention (representative democracy).

3. Wording in Legislation: Some citizens may not understand the wording of Proposals, as it can be complex. This may lead to people voting on proposals, and not fully understanding what their voting on.

1. So it's worse to have a majority of citizens vote (while some don't) than just the few people in the HoC? And pings are trivial matter, they don't make a noise, and only go in your notices, hardly something we have to take into account when making a new structure of government?

2. This may be true, but are all the citizens going to revolt if we ask them to vote on a small piece of legislature?

3. That's what the RMB is for, to help explain you bill and debate it.

Seven Seas wrote:

1. So it's worse to have a majority of citizens vote (while some don't) than just the few people in the HoC? And pings are trivial matter, they don't make a noise, and only go in your notices, hardly something we have to take into account when making a new structure of government?

My concern would be if we had lets say 30 citizens/members, and only 9/30 were truly active and engaged in the legislature, how would you go about setting a simple majority?

Macari wrote:

My concern would be if we had lets say 30 citizens/members, and only 9/30 were truly active and engaged in the legislature, how would you go about setting a simple majority?

A simple majority of those who actually vote?

i’m concerned that if the rmb becomes the debating and voting floor for bills then we lose its other capacity as space for general chat and debate/memes, or it becomes difficult to differentiate

Matroyska wrote:

i’m concerned that if the rmb becomes the debating and voting floor for bills then we lose its other capacity as space for general chat and debate/memes, or it becomes difficult to differentiate

Same here. Can’t get a decent read on foreign affairs if the entire RMB is clogged up with debate about which type of polling Lorania should use.
guys, please find a way to move this somewhere else ;-;