Edward Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Can it? Or is it a trouble for disaster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thalmor Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 You have to be more specific. Democracy as in who's the head of the alliance? Democracy for who's the heir or the officers? Democracy for what decisions the alliance should make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 I vote for: #atroublefordisaster Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pfeiffer Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 No. 1 Quote ☾☆ Chairman Emeritus of Mensa HQ ☾☆ "It's not about the actual fish, themselves. Fish are not important in this context. It's about fish-ing, the act of fishing itself." -Jack O'Neill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odin Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Democracy only works with parties. In P&W people leave and found alliances if they are unhappy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 No. Terms tend to be a long period of time and so leaders elected will do as they do and develop a powerbase. The incumbent can often rely on themselves being reelected if they didn't majorly mess up due to the factor of (well he didn't do bad so lets keep him in), or if they wish to appear to be more magnanimous then they are then they'll "refuse" to stand so one of their cronies in their circle of friends can step up. Said circle of friends will have a strong forum and IRC presence and will often occupy government posts making opposition to their views very difficult at best. Not helped as they will all talk each other up to try and make out that each of them is indispensable misleading ordinary members. Ultimately if every leader that came along had integrity and could properly make use out of everybody whatever their personal feelings are towards them then it'd work great. However democracy in these sort of games just leads to corruption/cronyism. An autocracy can also lead to that make no mistake... but at least there is some honesty in that. Democracy only works with parties. In P&W people leave and found alliances if they are unhappy. You are aware that happens in parties too right? If a politician feels his party has taken the wrong direction (unhappy as you say) some will actually leave and form their own party to varying levels of success. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadin Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Democracy produces poor leadership choices. It truly is a popularity contest, and just because you vote your friend into office doesn't mean he's going to be the right man for the job. Even in really active alliances, some of the people I have observed being elected or nominated to run for election are truly mind-boggling. At the end of the day the bottom line is simple. When you choose a leader based on the democratic process you are not necessarily choosing the best man for the job. You are choosing the most popular person. This is an important distinction, and a lot of people don't seem to realize it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 It worked for officers in original EoS. In another game, it did not work at all. Every month, I waited for a new alliance to be created by the loser. Then they went to war. And I sold my oil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Posted July 29, 2015 Author Share Posted July 29, 2015 It worked for officers in original EoS. In another game, it did not work at all. Every month, I waited for a new alliance to be created by the loser. Then they went to war. And I sold my oil. I was in EoS! I miss those days! And haha, I just "sold my oil" that's funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Can it work? Yes. Will it be tough? Yes. You'll always have those individuals who think they know what's best~ 2 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 I think democracy, as in every member gets a vote on every issue would be cumbersome; however, I think running an alliance as a republic (Everybody electing leaders whom they believe will make good decisions) is certainly a viable option. Some of the greatest empires in the world have been republics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hawkeye Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 the best form of government is where i choose who is in gov as i know who is best 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lan Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Democracy produces poor leadership choices. It truly is a popularity contest, and just because you vote your friend into office doesn't mean he's going to be the right man for the job. Even in really active alliances, some of the people I have observed being elected or nominated to run for election are truly mind-boggling. At the end of the day the bottom line is simple. When you choose a leader based on the democratic process you are not necessarily choosing the best man for the job. You are choosing the most popular person. This is an important distinction, and a lot of people don't seem to realize it. >Still upset he lost. Democracy can work perfectly or it can't work. Depends on a lot of things. Quote Drip, drip, drop ヽ( ｡ヮﾟ)ノ "Jump on the crazy brain gravy train!" (｡□ﾟﾉ)ﾉ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadin Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) >Still upset he lost. Democracy can work perfectly or it can't work. Depends on a lot of things. Actually, no, it has nothing to do with that. I've said it all along that I could go anywhere and do the same thing I did in BoC, and more. And I'm showing it now with Noir. I have no faith in democracy because I have seen it fail time and time again as a means of selecting a leader. Claiming that I am upset about losing an election in BoC and that is why I feel the way I do is not an argument in favor of democracy, believe it or not. Why don't you tell me more about why you have so much faith in the idea of selecting a leader democratically? Back up your argument with something other than attacks on me and implications that my position is born of anything besides first-hand experience with the matter in question. If anything it seems to me that you are just upset that I am calling into question the means of leadership selection that your alliance currently employs. I've given my reasons why I don't believe in democracy in these games. So let's hear your argument. Edited July 30, 2015 by Kadin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lan Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I actually don't care how an alliance is structured as long as it works. Quote Drip, drip, drop ヽ( ｡ヮﾟ)ノ "Jump on the crazy brain gravy train!" (｡□ﾟﾉ)ﾉ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadin Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I actually don't care how an alliance is structured as long as it works. So your only purpose in this thread was to criticize me. Good to know. Next time do us all a favor and don't even post, because this is supposed to be a debate board. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 So your only purpose in this thread was to criticize me. Good to know. Next time do us all a favor and don't even post, because this is supposed to be a debate board. Welcome to the internet. People will do this. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadin Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Welcome to the internet. People will do this. I don't need an introduction to the internet, thank you very much. And it doesn't make a difference. That's not what this board is for, and I'm not going to take shit from you for pointing it out. Now piss off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Posted July 30, 2015 Author Share Posted July 30, 2015 I don't need an introduction to the internet, thank you very much. And it doesn't make a difference. That's not what this board is for, and I'm not going to take !@#$ from you for pointing it out. Now piss off. Dude, you can calm down! No need to get all mad over this little thing. You ought not to reply to post if you're like this. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I don't need an introduction to the internet, thank you very much. And it doesn't make a difference. That's not what this board is for, and I'm not going to take !@#$ from you for pointing it out. Now piss off. This is why you need to be introduced. Posts like that are on the internet. No need to get worked up about them. Just ignore them. They won't have anything to feed off of and the they will stop posting. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadin Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Dude, you can calm down! No need to get all mad over this little thing. You ought not to reply to post if you're like this. It's really simple. Don't poke the bear(or dog, in this case) if you don't want any trouble. This is why you need to be introduced. Posts like that are on the internet. No need to get worked up about them. Just ignore them. They won't have anything to feed off of and the they will stop posting. Or you could just not post if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute. If all you're going to do is try to get a reaction out of people then that is a form of trolling and ought to be moderated. Is this a confession? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Or you could just not post if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute. If all you're going to do is try to get a reaction out of people then that is a form of trolling and ought to be moderated. Is this a confession? No. I'm telling you to not feed the trolls. Don't reply and they won't show up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadin Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 No. I'm telling you to not feed the trolls. Don't reply and they won't show up. Or the mods could do their job and enforce the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 It's really simple. Don't poke the bear(or dog, in this case) if you don't want any trouble. Or you could just not post if you don't have anything worthwhile to contribute. If all you're going to do is try to get a reaction out of people then that is a form of trolling and ought to be moderated. Is this a confession? Umm...okay! I think the bear (or dog, in this case) poked himself by commenting. Had he not commented, none of this would have happened. But it seems like he's getting into his feelings. What trouble is awaiting me...if I may ask? I think you're the one who don't want any trouble. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Or the mods could do their job and enforce the rules. The mods have lives, too. Don't rely and they will do their job when they get on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.