Announcement: House Governments

[Ice Princess]

Not sure what ganking has to do with Governments.

---

[Saronsen]

considering their constant whining about how they want to make running away against the rules and how their ships that just slaughtered 3 defenseless traders are getting ganked by lawfuls, I would say yeah, they do care and they should be willing and hopefully able to discuss gameplay issues

how are any of these a government issue
you dont know what the governments do, do you?

[Karlotta]

Not sure what ganking has to do with Governments.

it was just one example of people being self aware and able to consider other people's gameplay.

which is a thing house governments, like official factions, should be able to take into consideration

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=200950
Time left: (Permanent)

[Lemon]

governments, really, functionally are 3 things
Laws
Licences
Optional: Bounty Board

everything else is fluff. That fluff just got more difficult as everything is staff-controlled. He is right that unlawful don't really have much interest in the important stuff

[Kherty]

Don't you love it when your participation gets wholly ignored despite being a direct reply. Sarcasm apart, I would like an answer, please. As well as my questions from the previous pages, these questions were directed at the staff. Thank you very much.

---

-snip-

everything else is fluff. That fluff just got more difficult as everything is staff-controlled. He is right that unlawful don't really have much interest in the important stuff

---

I agree with the first part... however: the fluff (such as preparing a roleplay thread, or setting up a treaty, which will be the case in the near future), will have a roadbloack. Each time a decision is done by the government, we have the metaphorical equivalent of a road toll where we get scanned from A to Z before proceeding, on seemingly innocuous stuff. I find it useless, where, say for example, posts by the government account, could be reversed by a simple option: deletion - and the sender being warned about this, with a copy of the removed reply, and a recommendation about how the reply should be, from a developer's perspective. I assure you, a House govt. is, can, and should be much more than what you cited.

---

As for the second, it is/was... against the main principle of the new Gallic Assembly: we decided to have unlawful, and unofficial factions aboard the "ship", so they can share their opinions to us/now only Lemon is seems..., and propose solution.

This happened for the 20+ decisions we have had, and we hoped it would continue. The opinion of the "other side", of the "enemy side" is, for me, invaluable, as it can influence the decision of the House, so that playing in Gallia would be more enjoyable, with limitations proposed by the unlawful side on certain decisions, that will influence the final decision. Being too much "hard" on unlawfuls will make it even more difficult for them to play, especially if we make the laws even more akin to the IRL laws. If we factor in their thoughts, and opinions, we can make better ones, that will make the unlawfuls capable of playing as much as their could, reasonably, within both our House rules, and the server rules, without being too tight and limiting them to simple piracy, and thus allowing them for more opportunities. This is our point of view, and why we allowed them in the government.

---

One last question; when someone send an inRP question to the government, back then it was replied by the government account. Now, it won't. I am concerned by the reply time, and I usually reply to my question with my character who's part of the government, or the Office part of the License & Permit Office. As it is a question (inRP again, to make sure), can this still be the case?

---

Last affirmation on the behalf of the current government undergoing transition to respect the rules, despite my opinion on this being questionable, but understandable: every time a member is banned, or kicked, or otherwise recieve punishement which makes them unable to fulfill their duty - they is given the role "Suspended Member" which makes him/her/they totally unable to:

• See the Motions (the word used in the Government, equivalent to Decision, taken from standard Parliamentary Procedure) threads;
  
• Once again; unable to enact any moderator-related role (a representative is/was NOT capable of ANY moderator-role related decision, this was the: - "Union Militia" role (which was akin to a Global Moderator, now degraded, and used for bots (reminder that this is for Discord)), and the "Moderator" role (which is akin to "Discord Moderator", the role on the DiscoveryGC server.
  
• Has absolutely no influence over any decision for as long as the punishment goes. For now, every suspended member will become an advisor at best.
  
  I want to make sure as well than any permanently banned member will not have their ban revoked.
  
  

---

"Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously." - Hunter S. Thompson
Favorite song
Second favorite song
Third favorite song
Did you sent something to me/factions/etc. and I forgot about it? Please send a message >here<!

[DrengrCo]

Staff interference with playerbase/house politics is a mod's quickest way to the scrap-heap in my experience.

---

User was banned for: Compromised account
Time left: (Permanent)

[Mark_Brown]

Um, right then. So how does nope sound? I really don't care if you dislike this post, but I've been here long enough and running this faction long enough to ensure its prosperity. So like it or lump it, or ban us all and kill off Liberty entirely.

I think most of the entire Liberty Government can agree with me that this obituary plan is going to go to waste. When they (the staff) realise very quickly none of the Liberty Factions wish to enter, or even agree to such method of governance .

How would such "government" or none existing within your official "discord" work if no official faction leader, or leadership agreed to the following announcement?
It would have being wiser to suggest this to the community rather than a forceful act.

- Flawed plan.

Good luck though, guess Liberty isn't going to approve of any tech or licences for a long time. Yeah staff can, but how long are you guys going to ensure the entire government without any official acknowledgement of changes? You'll get tired eventually.

We'll just carry on as we were thanks. US| remains one of the longest official factions in Discovery. We openly object to this.

Like it, hate it, admire it. We are Liberty, and we the government stand together.

I think you'll find this very problematic to your announcement.

US| Universal Shipping Inc.

---

[Ice Princess]

Um, right then. So how does nope sound? I really don't care if you dislike this post, but I've been here long enough and running this faction long enough to ensure its prosperity. So like it or lump it, or ban us all and kill off Liberty entirely.

I think most of the entire Liberty Government can agree with me that this obituary plan is going to go to waste. When they (the staff) realise very quickly none of the Liberty Factions wish to enter, or even agree to such method of governance .

How would such "government" or none existing within your official "discord" work if no official faction leader, or leadership agreed to the following announcement?
It would have being wiser to suggest this to the community rather than a forceful act.

- Flawed plan.

Good luck though, guess Liberty isn't going to approve of any tech or licences for a long time. Yeah staff can, but how long are you guys going to ensure the entire government without any official acknowledgement of changes? You'll get tired eventually.

We'll just carry on as we were thanks. US| remains one of the longest official factions in Discovery. We openly object to this.

Like it, hate it, admire it. We are Liberty, and we the government stand together.

I think you'll find this very problematic to your announcement.

US| Universal Shipping Inc.

I am not sure where I signed this 'petition to boycott'. Because I didn't and I am also "LIBERTY" as I am leading the 5th. Please, don't speak in the name of others until you talk to them.

I don't think the system is good, it definitely needs polishing, but 2 years ago I was already in for staff observers in governments. Lose it up a bit, we don't need to go extreme on that. Licenses for PoBs and tech shouldn't need staff approval at all as it will just take a lot of time. Bigger changes like diplomacy? Yeee. Go ahead.

---

[Lemon]

Well, licences can be scrapped I guess - "play tech appropriate to your lore, or risk being fined, snowflake"
Navy tech perms can just be granted by OFs directly
PoBs can just be permitted by new rules, staff can just suggest placements in not overcrowded areas.
Bounty can be scrapped and be done by ofs directly.
Money from PoBs can go into staff run events or pobs just need licence without money. Or just split and sent to OF banks.

Treaties and corresponding law adjustments, perms can be done on CNS news level, laws suggested changes by story.

All in all, if nobody comes, staff can easily chop stuff down and give actual factions more stuff to do directly.

[LunaticOnTheGrass]

don't start me on The Government