These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Establishing Government

Author
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2016-12-02 21:35:01 UTC
How does this differ from what Provi does today?
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#62 - 2016-12-02 22:31:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Dietrich Roosevelt wrote:
-Claimed territory would be hisec only.

What if some entity challenges this claim?

Dietrich Roosevelt wrote:
-There would be a legislative body, probably Parliamentary, that would be bicameral. One half would consist of representatives elected by popular vote of players. The other half would be corporate representatives. Successful legislation would pass both halves. Day-to-day affairs, whatever they may be, would be handled by a small cabinet drawn from Parliament.

Elected representatives I get, but what exactly do you mean by corporate representatives? Where do they come from and how are they supposed to be chosen? Are you thinking of a sort of federal system where every "member state" sends its own representatives?

Quote:
-Legislation would focus mostly on economic infrastructure. Establishing things like a proper contract system, limiting fraud and scams, stable banking, etc. Eventually some form of internal security to prevent unofficial hisec ganking.

What exactly do you imagine when you talk about "limiting fraud and scams"? How would that banking system work? I mean, would people deposit and debit money to and from a bank account? Why? Would there be interest? Where would that money come from? Who would have access to those accounts to manage deposits and payouts? How would you make sure the people in charge of those accounts don't just take everything and run once their personal critical mass has been reached? Every man has his price, right? And when you have full access to several active bank accounts, I can imagine this price is reached fairly quickly.

Quote:
-Players would need to be registered with the government in order to take advantage of certain privileges, licenses, etc. Revocation of these licenses or addition to 'blacklists' would be the first tier of law enforcement. High-level offenders would be 'red-listed', which is basically kill-on-sight.

Licenses to do what exactly? It's nice to think about what happens if somebody does something without a license or to use licenses as an incentive to respect the law, but why exactly would I want one of your licenses again? I know CODE. sell mining permits in "their" space. Is that along the lines of what you are imagining?

Quote:
-Law enforcers would simply be interested pilots given license to gank red-listers (and possibly in limited other circumstances of emergency).

When you say "gank", do you mean suicide gank? I'm asking because suicide ganking a properly tanked ship can be very difficult and very expensive, and in some cases near impossible. It wouldn't be much of a police force if your criminals can freely roam around in brick-tanked T3 cruisers, right? And whoever is involved in a suicide gank will take a significant hit to security status that may sooner or later result in that person getting chased about by NPC faction police, making it hard for your police officer to actually operate in your territory. Or are you thinking more along the lines of having your police force declare war on the offender? This would mean that all the officers need to be in a separate corp, and they'd have to declare war on the offenders corporation. I could imagine that some Highsec Mercenaries are already drooling just thinking about all those free war targets that they don't even have to go and track down, because they are supposed to be coming to them.

I'm not asking for the finer details here. Of course, they are for the legislators to figure out. You surely have a rough idea, though, don't you?
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#63 - 2016-12-02 22:31:58 UTC
Eli Stan wrote:
How does this differ from what Provi does today?

Provi Bloc is nullsec. They can actually enforce their rules, at least in theory.
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#64 - 2016-12-02 23:15:34 UTC
OP writes like Aaron and wants to put a layer of bureaucracy, with another layer of oversight, on top of existing corp/alliance mechanics.
As if running a corp isn't enough of a space job.
Basically: more people in the organisation doing admin in order to reap the wealth (?) of hisec.
"Everyone has been saying that hisec and the four Empires are dying. This simply formalizes that process"
...by setting up an artificial home in the broken egg? Hatching and flying never occurs to people?


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

PopeUrban
El Expedicion
Flames of Exile
#65 - 2016-12-02 23:27:11 UTC
This is literally the reason alliances exist in the game.

Literally.

Alliances are supposed to be the top end organizational structure that allows its subordinate corps to maintain autonomy. The game has multiple organizationational hooks and tools to make this happen.

Just call your alliance "the Democractric Republic of Whatever" and post your philosophy in its info page. Done.
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#66 - 2016-12-02 23:40:27 UTC
Shares have purpose now!

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2016-12-03 00:07:24 UTC
Dietrich Roosevelt wrote:
I want to work on establishing a functioning government in-game, something I've never truly seen. This wouldn't be a Corporation or an Alliance per se, but rather an organization of players separate from other politics. I think it should be put together from the ground up after numerous discussions and planning. Some vague thoughts on what this could look like:

-True democracy in action: organized elections and actual branches of government
-financial regulation: find ways to allow financial systems to exist in EVE and prevent fraud
-ambitious projects, such as a constantly updated wormhole map with autopilot
-laws and law enforcement: develop the ability to attach consequence to player actions and enforce them through player action

I'm not discussing a Corporation or Alliance, so I don't believe this belongs in Recruitment forum. If I'm wrong, I apologize and I ask a moderator to kindly move me over there. I'm also not suggesting updates to the game itself, this is purely something that players would run within the existing game structure.

I'm not calling for a total upheaval of the game's political and power structures, rather something that runs parallel to them. If any of this interests you or you simply want to follow developments, please comment in the thread.


FWIW: I'm an old '09 player who has returned under the new Free to Play system (handy since I haven't the money to play otherwise).


Why would you want to do that?

Think about it, why are governments effective at getting people to do what they want? Because they rely on coercion and violence. Don't do what the government likes they'll come and stop you, resist strongly they'll lock you up. Resist strenuously enough they might just kill you.

But death in this game is meaningless to immortals who after every death wake up in a new clone and continue on.

So the standard approach to limiting what people want to do is not going be terribly effective. Basically, when the government says, "Stop that, or else," that or else really has to mean something. How you can achieve this in a game, IDK. Especially a game like this one where the primary rule is: do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.

Second of all, government is not this awesome beautiful thing that rights wrongs, promotes peace, and such. The usual role of government: redistribute wealth and reduce misery is more aptly described as reducing wealth and redistributing misery. Governments are made of up the same people they rule. They are no different. Thus, the notion that government does things because of pure and noble intentions is nothing short of pure idiocy. People in government are like everyone else and will often do things based on personal and/or ulterior motives. This is why there are concerns about rent seeking, regulatory capture, and special interest groups. Not to mention all the other problems with voting. Voting schemes should be looked at via the lens of game theory, and one of the interesting (depressing) results in game theory is that the eventual outcome need not be optimal.

The notion of financial regulation has much of the same problem. To make financial regulation work there would have to be a binding legal system where people could be brought up on charges for fraud or even negligence. There would have to be an judiciary who followed some sort of code and with the way the game works it would be very hard. For example, as a judge I could, after a suitable period decide my reputation for fairness has gotten to the point where I can cash in on it and make rulings in favor of whichever party pays me the most. What is going to happen to me? Sure you could set me red. You could put a bounty on my head. You could even have some players chase me around the game trying to blow up my ships....geee, would any NS alliances like me to lead such players right into their waiting trap?

Really, we have enough of this Bravo Sierra IRL, can't we just leave it there and enjoy blowing each other to pieces?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Vigirr
#68 - 2016-12-03 00:31:11 UTC
OP is one of those people who likes to talk a lot, creates rules for others to follow and loves to discuss how rule 17 paragraph 18 clashes with rule 78-4. Lots of talking but not actual action or capability. As stated earlier it's the wrong type of person to lead anything at all, just as with all career politicians.
Bibosikus
Aliastra
#69 - 2016-12-03 00:43:59 UTC
Eve has taught me that the only effective and true government is a benevolent tyrant!
This game has had nearly every form of rule rise and fall and the only ones that stick around are tyrannical to some degree.
In fact history has often shown tyrants in their early years out perform every other form of government of social progress.
The sad fact is with that level of power comes a deep level of paranoia and temptation to corruption and dark paths.
Eve need's no democracy because democracy does not work. It is a system of control to give the illusion of freedom through choice within a selected set of options. Capitalism is in fact slavery with extra steps.

True effective government requires the ability to push forward change by a individual entity working for the good of the population.
as the capitalist countries stand corporate greed has to much say in how a country is run. Profit at any cost is the current methodology. Based on a social economic system that when stripped down to its core is nothing but a pyramid sachem built upon the single foundation of continual economic growth fueled by ever increasing the population and the rate of creation and consumption. Eve can sustain this where reality can't as EVE has a ever regenerating base resource pool.

Long story short we should be moving to a more socialist orientated capitalist system where caps are imposed on profiteering and core services are operated at the profit of the populous not the individuals. Freedom's have to be balanced. utmost of which being the freedom to have more than one child. While archaic and in some ways cruel the facts are a lower population is sustainable and nature/universe will do it for us in far worse ways if we can't take the hard steps ourselves. While many will instantly cry foul human rights or economic doom. One societies 'Human rights' are endangering all societies existence. And we have never been in a better place to replace work force with automation. The much popularized view that machines taking Job from people is negative is fundamentally flawed. When we should be celebrating that and reducing the population growth rate to compensate.

New Eden is a truly wonderful place.

Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#70 - 2016-12-03 01:51:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Teckos Pech wrote:
So the standard approach to limiting what people want to do is not going be terribly effective. Basically, when the government says, "Stop that, or else," that or else really has to mean something. How you can achieve this in a game, IDK. Especially a game like this one where the primary rule is: do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.

Actually, I know. Have something people want, and don't allow them to have it if they misbehave. Being ruled by a government needs to come with benefits, otherwise people won't accept it. Think of a big nullsec coalition for example. The member alliances will want space to live in and to rule over, the member corps will want to have moon mining POSes and funding, the line members will want to rat and mine and they want a ship replacement program. The industrial minded will want reaction POSes and a safe place to build their capital ships. All of them want to reach all these things quickly and easily through a jump bridge network. If a pilot or corp doesn't behave, warn them. If they still misbehave, maybe restrict their ratting rights, reject reimbursement requests, take away their moon mining POS. If they still misbehave, give them the boot. So, for actually existing governments in the game (and like I said: they *do* exist), it's usually the carrot, and not the stick.

A government in hisec may not be able to provide as much as it could in nullsec. Yes it can "claim" space for it's members to live in, but its subjects could also just live there anyway, and it wouldn't have a good way to prevent others from living there as well, exploiting their subjects precious resources. They could provide POSes, Citadels and Engineering Complexes, but judging by the number of those structures we see in hisec, it appears people are perfectly capable of building them without a complicated government. It could provide SRP, and in fact, some hisec corps do. But that requires money one would need to have first.

Frankly, I think OP is approaching this from the wrong end. Think about how and why governments form in the real world: There's a stretch of land where people live. As long as there are just very few people, they won't need a government. They'll all do their thing, maybe trade or fight every now and then, but there's no structure or system to it. But then there are more people, and some structure is required. Families form tribes, then villages, then leagues and finally states. Each of those steps is a form of government. In a single family, maybe the strongest adult male will set the agenda. In a tribe, maybe it's the elder, an elected or inherited chieftain, a medicine man, .... Then you have a town mayor and a town council, a bailiff or sheriff, and in the end you see kings and presidents and ministers and parliaments and all that kind of complicated ****. So, there are people there first, and they form and refine a government. Not the other way around.

It's no different in Eve. A 5 man corp may not even need a government, but once the corp grows, they will probably feel the need to start organizing things. It will get difficult to make decisions with 50 people talking at once, so someone may take the role of a proper leader. Maybe they will also find a fleet commander and somebody who knows thei stuff when it comes to industry, or diplomacy. And at some point they may have 2000 members and all sorts of allies alongside a region of nullsec space or two, and if they managed to reach that point, they probably have all kinds of capable people that form a sort of government.

Then, you'd probably want to keep your government as lean as possible, so it doesn't take half a year to make a decision. You really don't need a cabinet with 10 ministers and two houses of parliament with 20 people each, when all you rule over is 500 people that don't even have the same number of concerns, problems and interests that most people in the real world do. (I mean, they do, but immigration, global warming and health care really don't matter much in Eve)

OP simply doesn't have anything or anyone to govern yet, and goes straight for the government. I think you can't start with a ridiculously complicated government, if you don't even have people that could fill all the necessary positions, not to mention people this government could rule over. And if you approach the issue from the government end, you will most likely also have no idea what your government will even need to be able to do. If you start from the people end, you will know because there will be people there that do stuff, and they will let you know what they need. And once you know what they need, you can make it happen. And once you can make that happen, you can take it away if they don't behave. This approach also makes the question whether it should be a constitutional monarchy or parliamentary democracy or something entirely different fairly easy: Whatever works for this paricular group in that particular situation is best. Turns out, in Eve it's straight up autocracy for the most part, because it's simple and efficient, and its downsides really don't matter in Eve. "Bad" autocrats cannot shut their people in, silence opposition or keep subversive influences away, so they will fail quickly. People will usually stick with the "good" autocrats of their own free will, and the community will grow and thrive.

So, if OP really wanted to form a government in Eve, the correct path to that would be to make a corp. However, many people have this idea, and many newbies among them. And most of them fail. Some fail spectacularly, but most just fail completely unnoticed by more than the 5 people they managed to recruit. So, actually, I'd say just join a corp, see how they do things and get involved. If your ideas are good, they will be heard, and if you have a talent of some sorts and give it some effort, they will thankfully put you in a position of responsibility.
Moonlight HU
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2016-12-03 05:15:14 UTC
Dietrich Roosevelt wrote:
I want to work on establishing a functioning government in-game, something I've never truly seen. This wouldn't be a Corporation or an Alliance per se, but rather an organization of players separate from other politics. I think it should be put together from the ground up after numerous discussions and planning. Some vague thoughts on what this could look like:

-True democracy in action: organized elections and actual branches of government
-financial regulation: find ways to allow financial systems to exist in EVE and prevent fraud
-ambitious projects, such as a constantly updated wormhole map with autopilot
-laws and law enforcement: develop the ability to attach consequence to player actions and enforce them through player action

I'm not discussing a Corporation or Alliance, so I don't believe this belongs in Recruitment forum. If I'm wrong, I apologize and I ask a moderator to kindly move me over there. I'm also not suggesting updates to the game itself, this is purely something that players would run within the existing game structure.

I'm not calling for a total upheaval of the game's political and power structures, rather something that runs parallel to them. If any of this interests you or you simply want to follow developments, please comment in the thread.


FWIW: I'm an old '09 player who has returned under the new Free to Play system (handy since I haven't the money to play otherwise).


You have to know the power of government comes from the army. At the early stage of any country's history. Government is result of battles and wars. Any corporation survives in the end will be the government of this country
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#72 - 2016-12-03 07:00:57 UTC
Hi.

I'm interested in your 'government' thing, what benefits do I get if I join? Smile

I'm stupid and all I want to know are two things

1) What's in it for me to 'join' or put myself under this umbrella of your 'government'?

2) What 'bad things' will happen to me if I do not join your government or follow your rules?

If you can clearly answer 1 & 2, your discussion may go somewhere. If not, then what's the point of this 'government'?








Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!

Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#73 - 2016-12-03 07:33:52 UTC
Bibosikus wrote:
Freedom's have to be balanced. utmost of which being the freedom to have more than one child. While archaic and in some ways cruel the facts are a lower population is sustainable and nature/universe will do it for us in far worse ways if we can't take the hard steps ourselves..


This IRL tangent implies there's ever been any scarcity at all.
The world discards enough to feed itself three times a year, last i heard.
In EvE most resources never see a capsuleer, most asteroids, gas clouds and combat anoms spawn and despawn without ever having a player on grid with them. Moons and data/relic sites are a little more intensively farmed, but just the fact that resources spawn forever and there are no women or children to consider makes New Eden a dreamland of violent contention without any of the misery or grief.
We don't share and only co-operate to meet needs, i still don't see what additional informal organisational layers would add.


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Salvos Rhoska
#74 - 2016-12-03 10:00:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
OP:

Technically the bicameranl parliamentary system you propose is not a direct true democracy as you outlined in a previous post. It is a representational democracy. Also, I think bicameral is not especially efficient for your purposes. It creates a lot of back-and-forth. Start with one. Another can be co sidered once the first no longer represents the interests of large entities.

Rather than trying ro build such an organisational structure from the ground up, I would propose it would be more efficient to do it top down.

Meaning establish a consolidated empire with a nascent structure suitable to transition into the system you propose, once it has the organisation and resources to do so. You will need strong leadership and unified goals to establish a powerbase. Once that is done, the organisation can consider transitioning its leadership to empower its constituents

-Engage in aggressive consolidation of a strategic specific sector of HS of all its resources, alongside allies.
-Engage in proactive politics/diplomacy, offering incentives/support to allies, and an ultimatum to antagonists.
-Start forming directorships of dedicated corps, which will in future congeal into the departments/ministries of state, such as police, military, finance, foreign and internal, production etc.

I think your idea may have more success on a HS island from which you can extend outwards into LS.

Ruthlessly usurp/dominate the island through force/diplomacy, consolidate, then start expanding your control along lines back to HS.from the relative safety of your island stronghold.



I dont think your gov model will work in EVE.



But I am getting a bit of a boner thinking about consolidating a HS island and extending outwards.

Im sure its been tried before, and I dont know how powerful entities may already own HS islands as proxies, or how organised the resistance from LS in the vicinity might be, but Im liking the idea.

Im gonna start doing a little looking into HS islands. I think taking them over should be potentially manageable by force and diplomacy, as long as some NS super entity doesnt start pumping alts into it. Local denizens are probably mostly carebears (or atleast alts which operate as carebears and wont care who runs the island as long as they are treated fairly and can profit.)

I think the adjoining LS systems also might be amicable to diplomacy/mutual benefit, and fragmented enough to divide and conquer.

Im intrigued! Feelsgoodman!
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#75 - 2016-12-03 10:56:21 UTC
Hello OP,

Sorry I haven't got a chance to have a serious chat with you I've been so busy in RL.

I just have a few quick points that I wish to put out there.

- Ignore the people talking about making a corp this isn't recruitment, too many people seem to ignore the fact that there is a function within eve called "the blue setting" and it can be used by solo pilots and small corps within hi sec to create a coalition which will assist them in sharing intel, helping one another in pvp and so on. It's very simple to understand but some of the people responding to you will never understand this simple fact no matter how much you try to explain.

- Try to keep this as simple as possible, don't over complicate. Perhaps market this as "a blue community in hi sec" By all means have a few people in key organisational roles, like fleet commanders who organise ganking the gankers, or people who dont mind organising some resource gathering in a wormhole. Get some veterans on board who don't mind helping out a newbro with advice on gamplay and ship fittings

- Try to look at this as a simple platform where people can make friends and work together under a reasonable blue setting agreement, I saw interested parties asking what do they get out of it. Well, If something like what I describe is set up then they will get access to things like intel channels, using an intel channel ganking gate camps can be reported and avoided by the blue community, if people cant see this as an advantage then there is a problem with their perception.

I am on board with you for sure and do whatever I can to assist you, I'd like to run a few ideas I have past you for a similar "government" set up in NPC 0.0 to perhaps run concurrently to the hi sec set up. I know of a few quiet places in NPC 0.0 where we can make lots of money without being disturbed, maybe we could channel this money into hi sec operations?

As I said earlier keep this simple, I'd say call this venture "Government" which is a blue community in hi sec where the little guy can network with other friendlies who have a rebel like quality and wants to fight back against the machine. This is Eve content at its finest, proper scifi, and the start of a great adventure.

Chat Soon.

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie

Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#76 - 2016-12-03 11:03:57 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
OP:

Technically the bicameranl parliamentary system you propose is not a direct true democracy as you outlined in a previous post. It is a representational democracy. Also, I think bicameral is not especially efficient for your purposes. It creates a lot of back-and-forth. Start with one. Another can be co sidered once the first no longer represents the interests of large entities.

Rather than trying ro build such an organisational structure from the ground up, I would propose it would be more efficient to do it top down.

Meaning establish a consolidated empire with a nascent structure suitable to transition into the system you propose, once it has the organisation and resources to do so. You will need strong leadership and unified goals to establish a powerbase. Once that is done, the organisation can consider transitioning its leadership to empower its constituents

-Engage in aggressive consolidation of a strategic specific sector of HS of all its resources, alongside allies.
-Engage in proactive politics/diplomacy, offering incentives/support to allies, and an ultimatum to antagonists.
-Start forming directorships of dedicated corps, which will in future congeal into the departments/ministries of state, such as police, military, finance, foreign and internal, production etc.

I think your idea may have more success on a HS island from which you can extend outwards into LS.

Ruthlessly usurp/dominate the island through force/diplomacy, consolidate, then start expanding your control along lines back to HS.from the relative safety of your island stronghold.



I dont think your gov model will work in EVE.



But I am getting a bit of a boner thinking about consolidating a HS island and extending outwards.

Im sure its been tried before, and I dont know how powerful entities may already own HS islands as proxies, or how organised the resistance from LS in the vicinity might be, but Im liking the idea.

Im gonna start doing a little looking into HS islands. I think taking them over should be potentially manageable by force and diplomacy, as long as some NS super entity doesnt start pumping alts into it. Local denizens are probably mostly carebears (or atleast alts which operate as carebears and wont care who runs the island as long as they are treated fairly and can profit.)

I think the adjoining LS systems also might be amicable to diplomacy/mutual benefit, and fragmented enough to divide and conquer.

Im intrigued! Feelsgoodman!


OP, this is the sort of dude you most definitely want on board. He clearly understands the need for players to work cooperatively. If a blue community is formed then PVP ops could involve a group of us blues going to help out Salvos protect his island. Sounds like pretty cool content, don't you think?


Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie

Salvos Rhoska
#77 - 2016-12-03 11:11:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
OP, beware of Aaron.

It can be speculated he has made his own metagame of his particular kind of "blue" organisation, profiting from it dictating it, and when it falls apart, withdrawing his profits till he starts the same cycle again.

Something similar to how immigrants where enticed to pay to travel to the US in its 17-800s, with promises of work, freedom and streets paved with gold, only to find themselves exploited, beset by antipathy and stuck after their investment.

Im not saying this is so, just that it is so ething to bare in mind.
As Chopper pointed out, Aaron has captained his Titanic into an iceberg many, many times over.

It can also, however, be said that rarely is great success achieved without many great failures preceeding it.

He certqinly has great experience in the matter of loose blue orgs, and understands the game/politics etc intimately.
Arguably the primary authority on it.

Just be careful who you trust, and how much.
That includes me.
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#78 - 2016-12-03 11:20:58 UTC
Please outline how you own ONE hisec system.
The usual thing for people who live in a lowsec area is to do their thing, smash the weak and any tourists, either blue or join larger more powerful groups as they come and go. Look at alliance history of some of these bads and see how they just get absorbed by the local might within weeks of their arrival. There's no contention, if they get uppity they get their pocos and towers slammed by more caps than they have friends to call and their money is over with.
But the hisec system, how to: stop me going in, docking, PVEing. Surely i could ignore your ownership, because it's in no way real and your ownership doesn't allow you to upgrade the system. How to defend against my Skiff mining "your" roids, my battleship arriving in "your" mission to finish it off and salvage for you, my covops arriving in "your" data/relic. Won't CONCORD defend me if you should get upset and make a bad decision?

TLDR: really need some detail here, yeah ultimate adventure wow much original hype hype hype, but HOW?


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#79 - 2016-12-03 11:24:21 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

He certqinly has great experience in the matter of loose blue orgs, and understands the game/politics etc intimately.
Arguably the primary authority on it.
.


Has made many a thread hyping something that people do everywhere anyway.
Luring a bunch of nerds to null to be your captive market has been done bigger and better and i've been part of it on both sides.
Need more detail.




Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Dietrich Roosevelt
The Honourable Four Empires Trading Company
#80 - 2016-12-03 16:28:09 UTC
Many points have been made, some of them good. I'll attempt to address those as best as possible.

I imagine this government to exist in a single location initially, probably a carefully chosen HS system. I like the post/concept proposed regarding a HS island, but I feel like an island can be too easily strangled by malevolent non-HS entities. The key to operating in HS efficiently is the ability to suicide-gank undesirables while maintaining a quick and efficient method of recovering the standing hits resulting from those ganks. I believe a carefully organized and managed system (indeed, a bureaucracy) could allow for an efficient method of doing this.

In our modern world, bureaucracies are much maligned. Everyone envisions long lines at the DMV or complicated contracts no one can understand. However, it should be remembered that the advent of bureaucracy transformed the world. Britains carefully coordinated Naval Board allowed them to field a Navy that dominated the world for well over a century. Bureaucracy is good, when carefully managed.

Really, the point of this government is to permit such a system to flourish and have purpose. Big complex things that a few individuals cant be arsed to do can be coordinated among hundreds of players and made manageable. I'll provide an example in an immediate subsequent post, with regards to a Navigation Network concept. Consider this idea a sample of what kinds of concepts I'm discussing, that are only possible with a government like I'm describing.

With regards to the nature of the government itself, I'd like to stress that it doesnt have to be namby-pamby and overly friendly. I'm not proposing the Federation of Planets, where everyone joins out of goodwill. There likely would be blood spilt, systems taken away from people and a loss of freedoms for some involved. If our government were to take a system and declare certain laws within it, people would need to follow or be forcibly evicted. If this seems contradictory to what I have said previously, perhaps I was not clear enough (or you did not understand clearly). Like I've said, all of this is up for debate.