A plea to the citizenry...

[Pelanor Eldrich]

Just looking at the code today:

1)No Judiciary bill has been ratified by the SC. We'll try to get it ratified, yet, again.

2)The franchulate bill on the books today has a 1:1 relationship between citizen and franchise owner. Citizenship does not increase as it reads now. All that changes is that land is under a different theme and is a parcel on the mainland. As it stands, it just increases our CDS land holding and generates more monthly income since the franch rate is often higher than the NFS rate. All of this is purely academic as we don't have a single franchulate application to date.

We have an expansion to the bill we're voting on that allows groups to join. It is not a major departure from what is on the books now.

3)Landless citizenry is not on the DPU platform and I do not believe the DPU would submit such a a bill this term. The odds of such a bill passing this term are remote in my opinion. I've posted about it, but I'd like to say this, under my conception of landless citizenry, you Ranma, as a large NFS landholder would gain economically in the form of higher property value, decreased monthly land use fee and the ability to rent land to tenants. In no way would you be paying for landless citizens, in fact the reverse would be true. They would pay their dues without receiving land.

[Ashcroft Burnham]

[quote="Ranma Tardis":16fcefg7]You have not answered my question! What does the minority do when the majority insists on an ever greater pace of change?[/quote:16fcefg7]

Sorry: I thought that it was a rhetorical question. If people who are in the minority disagree with what people who are in the majority want to do, they have, broadly, two options:

(1) present thorough, careful, well-reasoned arguments on the forums (or elsewhere publicly), stating in detail and persuasively exactly they are opposed to the change, in the hope of persuading some of the people who are presently part of the majority to change their position, and encouraging others to do the same; or

(2) accept that this is one of the issues on which other people's views will prevail, and hope that you will be the one in the majority when the next important issue has to be decided.

[quote:16fcefg7]These self interest groups are already here and have been here since the beginning.[/quote:16fcefg7]

What do you mean by "self-interest groups" here?

[quote:16fcefg7]Does the minority have to give ground on all decisions?[/quote:16fcefg7]

No, as stated above, there is option 1. And remember, there is no singular minority: people who are in the minority on one issue may well be in the majority on the next. Democracy is all about compromise, trading off some things that you don't like for others that you do (and others being bound by the things that you do like even if they don't like them themselves).

[quote:16fcefg7]I can live with the Judiciary Act. I really dislike the ideal of Franchulettes. It goes against everything the founders intended for Neualtenburg.[/quote:16fcefg7]

Why do you dislike the idea of expanding onto the mainland by prospective citizens investing in advance, instead of us slowly building up reserves, buying one island at a time, and then trying to fill it?

[quote:16fcefg7]The concept of landless Citizens I am totally against and will not tolerate. When this passes I am off to Caledon![/quote:16fcefg7]

I do agree with you on landless citizens (although I will not be leaving for Caledon if/when such a thing is introduced), and I plan to post before long my thoughts on building a civil soceity, and why having a distinctive CDS territory is important for that.

[quote:16fcefg7]The Economic Policy confuses me, are the landowners going to have to start paying more and more for SL economics? I will not pay for the "landless" and their votes to benefit the few! This is how I see events progressing. I came to Neualtenburg to get away from the greifing and disorder of the mainland. I did not come here to be part of someone’s ambitious expansion project. I certainly will not pay for it.[/quote:16fcefg7]

I must confess, I do not fully understand the economic policies myself (I am more of a law man than an economics man), but I do not think that anybody was suggesting any significant increases in what citizens must pay in order to fund any of this: quite the converse, in fact, expansion, certainly, and improved economics possibly, will increase the income and profit of the CDS without increasing the amount that any citizen has to contribute: more out for no more in

[Ashcroft Burnham]

[quote="Pelanor Eldrich":3txz4d7t]3)Landless citizenry is not on the DPU platform and I do not believe the DPU would submit such a a bill this term. The odds of such a bill passing this term are remote in my opinion. I've posted about it, but I'd like to say this, under my conception of landless citizenry, you Ranma, as a large NFS landholder would gain economically in the form of higher property value, decreased monthly land use fee and the ability to rent land to tenants. In no way would you be paying for landless citizens, in fact the reverse would be true. They would pay their dues without receiving land.[/quote:3txz4d7t]

Hmm... there is a difference, isn't there, between a truly landless citizen, and a citizen who has land, but that land is sublet by another citizen?

[Pelanor Eldrich]

Hi Ash, do you mind if we continue this in the citizenship thread? I'd like to keep this thread for thoughts on conducting a civil, inclusive debate. Thanks!

[Ranma Tardis]

[quote="Pelanor Eldrich":1oqvi3c5]Hi Ash, do you mind if we continue this in the citizenship thread? I'd like to keep this thread for thoughts on conducting a civil, inclusive debate. Thanks![/quote:1oqvi3c5]

Seems like the RA is going to do what they wish and pass Acts that are in their best interests but not the best interests of the majority of current residents. At the CSDF meeting last night the debate got hot and I regret any harsh words spoken by myself. I moved to Neualtenburg with the understanding that only people that OWNED land could be citizens. I do not like the Group ownership Act that was passed. I do not like the Franchulettes Act that is coming up for vote soon.
There is nothing I can do to prevent this from happening. The 5 members of the RA are walking in step. Yes I can submit a bill but what is the point? It would receive no votes. Also I can not attend the meetings due to my real life schedule.
As I stated there is nothing I can do to prevent the now Neufreistadt from becomming something that is distasteful. There is nothing more to be spoken.

[Fernando Book]

Democracy is the realm of regret. When choosing in issues like Federalism/Confederalism, Civil Law/Common Law, Trial by Jury/Trial by Judges, Centralism/Devolution, Strong Executive/Strong Legislative, Proportional Representation/District Representation or any political question we should face, whatever decision we make, we will regret it: sooner or later we'll be confronted with a situation in which [i:2pfg790b]the other [/i:2pfg790b]solution would work better.

Since we are bound in good faith to the UNDHR, and in almost any situation we will find that real life countries or communities use different solutions (and democratic ones) to our problems we can only rely in our political sense and in our common sense and try to choose the better option, here and now.

Sometimes we will find a compromise between opposite points of view (and sometimes, like in Real Life, to achieve it we won't choose the better parts of each proposal, but the worst ones), but sometimes that will be impossible, and among several stances that may be equally reasonable, the better way we have found to choose one is the quantity of support it have.

Then minorities could be so annoyed that they would think about the exile. There's nothing we can do in that point: exile is easy (relatively easy) in SL, so easy that one can think in moving out in circunstances that RL will only lead to some grunts until the next visit to the polling station.

Being a political minority is uncomfortable, but in a democracy we should be able to reduce this disconfort.

First, being scrupulous in the respect of the Human Rights (whatever the form they have in the virtual world).

Second, giving a voice to the minorities in the political process.

And, third, assuring that nothing prevents the current minority from becoming the next majority.