an issue i'd like to see discussed

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:44 am

[quote="michelmanen":22o6v2vt]Well, to be blunt, Pat, I talked early in the year to people whose decision actually counts around here, and what I heard convinced me it would be totally pointless to raise this point in an RA whose majority members didn't, frankly, spend much more time in the CDS than the hour they used for the weekly RA meeting and possibly another hour for some commission they possibly chaired - so that they had no possible idea of the problems this actually caused to those of us who actually made a sustained effort to revitalise our sims and bring commercial, artistic, recreational and educational events to our community -or, indeed any interest at all to actually truly think about it and take any kind of constructive action...[/quote:22o6v2vt]So... you didn't 'raise this issue with various CDS officials - to no avail.' Thought not! KTHXBYE

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:53 am

Incidentally, Pat, CARE Proposes a Local Government Act to be discussed with all CDS citizens by the Institutional Commission we would set up if elected - at which time we would advocate our position regarding the tp issue and give all citizens the opportunity to express their views too... The Commission would then report back to the RA, who would then draw the appropriate conclusions.

As an aside, I'm very curious about what kind of connotations you associate with the term "politics" to be able to state that an issue is "practical, not political" and therefore should not be addressed during an election campaign.... I'd be much indebted to you if you could provide us all naive people who still believe that "politics" has to do with all matters pertaining to the welfare and governance of a "polis" (city or community) with a complete list of all those "practical" issues we shouldn't discuss during an election campaign so we can avoid making a similar mistake in the future?

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:05 am

[quote="michelmanen":2ovzkpx8]Incidentally, Pat, CARE Proposes a Local Government Act to be discussed with all CDS citizens by the Institutional Commission we would set up if elected - at which time we would advocate our position regarding the tp issue and give all citizens the opportunity to express their views too... The Commission would then report back to the RA, who would then draw the appropriate conclusions.[/quote:2ovzkpx8]How does that sit with "CARE will continue to put forward its dynamic agenda ...blah, blah, blah and, if elected, will ensure that direct access to venues organising such events will indeed be available." Which is it? Consultation or dictat?

[quote:2ovzkpx8]As an aside, I'm very curious about what kind of connotations you associate with the term "politics" to be able to state that an issue is "practical, not political" and therefore should not be addressed during an election campaign.[/quote:2ovzkpx8]Sorry, I should have been clearer. I don't think this issue is party political, which is what it seems you and Rose are trying to make it.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:39 am

Ah thank you for that clarification on the "party political" thing... So, if I understand correctly, parties should not take a stand on practical matters during campaigns because they are... err.... practical? What if a party views the practicalities that matter in practice from one perspective, and another party from another? Is it still.. umm... impractical do address the issue during a campaign?

Oh, I do not in any way presume to speak for Rose, but I might venture to say that the reason she brought this up is that she is pretty much the only one (besides CARE/CRAEDO/Michel of course!! ) who has made any kind of sustained effort to revitalise our community and bring to it commercial,artistic, recreational and educational events, and that during the most recent batch of 3 live concerts and one fashion show she organised (and paid for out of her own pocket without receiving a penny from the CDS events fund duly authorised for exactly such purposes by the RA, despite having tried to obtain such funds for both these and similar past events she organised) at the Grand Opening of the Emporium Romani Fashion Centre which she worked so hard to build and fill with high-quality fashions for our community, she was told in no uncertain terms by both performers and their managers what a disincentive to holding regular events this central Tp is and how much it turns people off and makes our sims a place to avoid... But you're forgiven not to be aware of this, since you didn't attend any of these events.. despite the fact that half of them were euro-friendly and close to 200 avies (the vast majority of them being new to our sims) actually made the effort to do so...

Ok now to more serious matters. I know this is hard to grasp for people accustomed with unilinear and single-dymensional bureaucratic practices of discussion, debate and decision-making, but let me try to (briefly) explain this as best I can:

The TP issue is importantt enough for the revitalisation of our sims and for CARE's four priorities who matter most to the vast majority of our citizens (commerce, arts, relaxation, education) for CARE to take a position on this. This means we shall do our outmost to ensure that everyone will understand the problems the central TP causes and come around to our point of view... thus ensuring the matter will be indeed dealt with.

But - and here comes the hard part - if you look at the same statement from a different perspective, which of course CARE can't advocate because it would kinda defeat the purpose of its trying to change people's minds, it is of course entirely possible that, despite our best efforts, a majority of citizens would not be persuaded by our arguments and the commission would report accordingly to the RA (I mean, if CARE would concede that outright from the very beginning, it might as well not bother taking a stand and try to provide leadership on this issue!).. In which case, the RA again would draw the appropriate conclusions.

In brief, there is no contradiction whatsoever between taking the lead on an issue and promising to provide decisive leadership on that matter, and still acknowledging the realities of a democratic, participative, inclusive consultation process the result of which may or may not go in the direction one wishes... And acknolwledging the existence of both these dimensions does not preclude one party to do its outmost to steer the process in the direction it believes to be most appropriate by means of discussion, debate and persuasion.... Isn't that what the power of the best argument is all about in an open, communicative environment ? (see Habermas for more detailed explanations of communcative actions and best argument theories ,, )

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:00 pm

Wow! So the essence of this manufactured 'issue' is that:

[list:1kjlhii6]One faction favours an inclusive discussion which takes into account all points of view and interests but has a presumption that we need to abolish the central telehub in Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova (despite no consultation with any of the affected parties) and...

Another faction favours an inclusive discussion which takes into account all points of view and interests but has not prejudged the outcome of the consultation that needs to take place?[/list:u:1kjlhii6]
That's it? ppft. BFD. Move along folks, nothing to see here....

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:15 pm

Put differently, one party has a clear position on the issue and intends to provide leadership on it during the consultation process and the other doesn't have a clear position and intends to adopt the old maxim "I am their leader, therefore I will follow them.."

Dnate Mars · Post by **Dnate Mars** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:42 pm

[quote="michelmanen":6w6tbqvg]Put differently, one party has a clear position on the issue and intends to provide leadership on it during the consultation process and the other doesn't have a clear position and intends to adopt the old maxim "I am their leader, therefore I will follow them.." [/quote:6w6tbqvg]

Actually, I read it as on party thinks that we need to get rid of the central TH and got to P2P. The other party says, "I can see both sides of the issue, we should look into what is really best for the sims."

One person see a need to get rid of them, the other wants to talk to the other 60 or so people that never post on these forums before doing something that is changing the very reason why some of us picked the plots that we did.

Beathan · Post by **Beathan** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:01 pm

[quote="michelmanen":4qxsco7v][quote:4qxsco7v]LOL Beathan! Get a life![/quote:4qxsco7v][/quote:4qxsco7v]

::sigh::

I am perfectly happy with my life. (It is a wee bit busy and stressful -- but, as lives go, I rather like it.)

It is a pity that when I take issue with CARE's [i:4qxsco7v] modus operandi [/i:4qxsco7v] I am accused of making personal attacks -- but when Michel fails to respond to my posts in a substantive manner, but resorts to childish gibes, his partisans are silent as the grave. Double standard?

So -- Michel -- how about this. I will get a life when you grow up and leave your pathetic (and insincere) will to power in secondary school where it belongs. I also used to like Nietzsche and Julius Caesar -- but then I turned 16 and grew out of it. It saddens me to see the issues of importance to the CDS and our project held hostage by one person's arrested state of emotional development.

Beathan

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:51 pm

[quote="Patroklus Murakami":zhzyrz4m]

...This is not a 'political' issue but a practical one....

[/quote:zhzyrz4m]

Actually it may not be a controversial issue (I hope it isn't anyway), nor a divisive one ... but because it is a SIM wide issue ... it could very well be an issue of politics!

I take it that if your party and mine gets in the RA, they are of a like mind on this one?

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:55 pm

Pat,

If "of like mind" means "holding a wide consultation process that takes into account all opinions" and abiding by the RA's final decision, then yes our parties are of like mind.

Michel

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:01 pm

Dnate, you are only partially right. CARE sees a need to have local tps and intends to strongly argue in favour of this during the in-world Commission consultation process, but has in fact proposed that such a process take place and be carried out in an open, public and accountable manner, and will of course abide by whatever decision the RA finally reaches.

Dnate, if you remember how the legislative process works in CDS, it was the rule, before CARE began to shake things up, that the vast majority of laws were drafted by half a dozen people at most with comments from maybe another half-a-dozen on the forums. CARE is the party that has been fighting hard for actually opening up the legislative process, conducting wide consultations, and involving other members of the community.

In fact, the very trigger for my resignation for the RA was that exactly such an undemocratic and elitist legislative process had given rise to a draft citizenship law, sponsored by the current CDSF RA member, designed to restrict even more citizenship rules and refusing to even consider, never mind accept, delinking citizenship from land ownership... I resigned and initiated the Citizenship Commission, which the self-same CSDF member watered down and passed into law, but which for all intents and purposes had only one public meeting and achieved strictly nothing..

It is quite ironic now that, after all this, the CSDF platform favors the adoption of radical changes to our citizenship laws to make it more inclusive and welcoming to new members, including delinking citizenship from land ownership, and conducting wide consultation processes involving as many citizens as possible.

But, since this has been CARE's position all along and the reason I decided to resign from the RA, I'm glad to see that my (admittedly radical) action is in the process of bringing about the desired results.. (yes Pat i'm gloating.... this is supposed to be fun too, remember? )

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:13 pm

LOL Beathan! Get a room!

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:37 pm

Deleted. I have better things to do with my time.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:46 pm

Good night, sweet Prince! Good night!

Rose Springvale · Post by **Rose Springvale** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:48 pm

Pat, Beathan, Michel.

I don't play this game. If the three of you want to take a legitimate concern about something that actually MATTERS to one of the citizens you "govern" and turn it into sandbox bullying, be my guest. I withdraw the question.

unbelievable. You are all better than this. just stop it.