Yes, I know, I've been bad.

Post by **Shyriath** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:31 pm

I let myself get pulled away from Shireroth for too long. My mind get easily taken up and occupied, and there are many things to occupy it. But Greg found me and smacked some sense into me, fortunately.

But I return here, and I see that Fax has gone (and that what should have been an emotional outpouring of regret got turned into vengeful name-calling... come ON, folks!), and that activity remains low, and that Shireroth remains in serious need of... well, something. I would go so far as to say that it needs something to do with itself.

I've wondered about why I drifted away. I've had real-life problems to think about long before this, and it was rarely enough to take me away for more than a few days. And I think that the thing that was different this time is that there was little to draw me back. The community remained, but it wasn't doing much.

Although I've been gone, I have been thinking about Shireroth. I've also been playing Uru in my spare moments, and those who've played it through knows it involves a good bit of philosophy about the rise and fall of nations. And I've been thinking about things Scott said once upon a time, to the effect that Shireroth at its core is a community of the nifty... that it should be thought of a nation first, and as a state second.

And I think I see now why things have come to this point. Indeed, it's something I should've seen earlier (though I didn't want to) because it's been said before. And it is this: the state is broken.

Now, a state can become broken in many ways, but in the end they all break, and the reason for this is because they age. Precedent piled upon law piled upon tradition eventually becomes a burden rather than a source of delight; the whole assembly becomes so complicated by explicit and implicit interactions that one day, it ceases to move at all. And this, I think, is what is happening with Shireroth; though it has had many extensions of life, in the end our Imperial Republic has locked itself into stagnancy.

But this is merely Shireroth the state. What about Shireroth the community, Shireroth the people? We can and should consider ourselves independent as a group, separate from the rules and government we hold ourselves to. But the fact remains that we are intertwined with those things, and have a share in their fate. And if we do not fix the state, the nation will suffer, and suffer badly.

But now we must consider how the state will be fixed... and that may be the hardest part of all. Because if what holds us back is our own past, with all its cherished traditions and laws, how can it be fixed except by casting aside the restrictions of that same past? If the natural progressions of a set of traditions have built up to their conclusion, leaving nothing further to be done with them, what alternative is there but to tear them down again and start anew?

I have not yet considered how much should be undone. But considering the failures of previous attempts to change things here, it is likely that future change will need to be deep indeed. Should all the laws be repealed? Should the traditions be abandoned? Should the very shape of the government itself be altered?

In order for the nation to remain connected, the state will have to change down to its very roots, so that what comes after may well be unrecognizable. But in doing so, many beloved things will have to be cast aside, and preconceptions abandoned, and it will be a difficult process. Shireroth will not be the same as it once was. Yet I think that such a transformation will ultimately be necessary in order for Shireroth, in any form, to continue to new horizons.

Bill3000 · Post by **Bill3000** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:55 pm

I completely agree - it's what I have been saying. Shireroth's very system is what is broken. THe system is built for stability and has become stagnant as a result of it.

But what of the actual ultimate change of Shireroth that would be needed to do it? People will necessarily dislike some of these changes. Some might even leave because of it. But we need to change in order to do something once again. Shireroth is currently on its last legs - the system can't handle itself anymore. Erik's gone, and unlike what we were supposed to do, we havn't changed the system, or even ourselves, to accomodate it.

Is it neccessary?

If we do not want to be considered as stale and as much of a mockery as the undead nation of Treesia... Yes.

The problem is twofold, however. First is finding some solutions. Second is allowing people to accept and adapt to these changes. What if we need politics again? That very well may be necessary. We very well may need to remove the previous clasps and preventations the nation has against forms of conflict between people - yes, that might even mean unbanning political parties. We will never be something like Antica - that's just not the way we are. That doesn't mean that we can't actually have room for conflict and factionalism, however. Ultimately conflict is the way micronations thrive, the ultimate desire of a micronationalist, stability and peace, only leading to the death of a micronation.

Braden Indianensis · Post by **Braden Indianensis** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:04 pm

The past, a millstone 'round the neck of the future. Well, perhaps we should ditch a few things, but that doesn't mean we should totally jetisson our traditions.

Jupiter · Post by **Jupiter** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:20 am

*ducks the inevitable smack-down* what about an Emergency Direct Democracy, revamp the whole state from the ground up? Erik's gone, allow political blocs to form, and have a bit of competition breath life back into the nation.

Fire everyone but the MiniImNat, and start over. Everyone re-applies for citizenship (most of it being automatic, but yeah), and we start over.

We must not forget our history, but Shyriath and Bill are right in that the state is stagnating.

Post by **Scott of Hyperborea** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:05 am

No.

I suggest a new Kaiser who has lots of big plans. The last three times the state started stagnating, we got a new Kaiser and became uber-active again within a couple of weeks. We went straight from Erik who was never around to GMan who's very cautious and status-quo-y, and so there hasn't been much of an opportunity for the government to encourage stuff to happen.

I am willing to support changes within the Shirerithian system, but not changes that destroy the Shirerithian system and replace it with something else. If we want to destroy the Shirerithian system we can give Shireroth up for dead and found some other country, but as long as this is Shireroth we WILL have a Kaiser and we WILL have a feudal system of some sort.

What good would firing people and making them reimmigrate be? It'd just be annoying and we'd end out with the same people we've got now, minus any who didn't bother to reapply.

Braden Indianensis · Post by **Braden Indianensis** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:43 am

So--are you suggesting we depose the Kaiser? I don't think he'll want to leave. And to get someone with big, new ideas, we're going to have to break this cycle of the Ancien Regime getting the Throne all the time.

Ari Rahikkala · Post by **Ari Rahikkala** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:08 am

REVOLUTION! REVOLUTION! BILL (*) FOR KAISER! *steals chairs from the Imperial palace*

(*) A guy who's not from the old guard, who's got a bunch of good ideas and is willing to realise them if we just give him the chance, who's very likely to stay active for a while, who's actually pretty much emotionally stable these days, etc..

Bill3000 · Post by **Bill3000** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:21 am

Baldwin PlantagenetJulii wrote:So--are you suggesting we depose the Kaiser? I don't think he'll want to leave. And to get someone with big, new ideas, we're going to have to break this cycle of the Ancien Regime getting the Throne all the time.

I don't think legally we can. Revolution or not, we should still abide by the law. Of course this ultimately leads to who he decides what his heir is. I have to admit it seems really disturbing to be talking about having a new Kaiser when GMan can just read this, and I think we should eventually apologize for this or something... I mean, it must be horrible to hear from citizens that they want a new Kaiser because what you are doing is not good for the nation...

I'm going to have to agree with Scott on this. We don't need to completely overthrow the system and instill a direct democracy. We need a new Kaiser with big plans. Mind you this depends on who the Kaiser is. May I suggest that we endorse someone who we think could help revitalize the nation? If GMan does not choose someone who is willing to change the system, then we are doomed. And I think that it's obvious who I want to be Kaiser.

But there is stuff we can do. An Oustfest would be extremely helpful in this regardless of whatever we do. Optimizing the forums would be good as well - micronations tend to have a huge number of forums, and Shireroth has a ton. The Lawbook and Decreebook seriously needs to be optimized. They are a mess now, although the Decreebook more than the Lawbook. We need to reform the Landsraad (again) to come up with ways to get people to come back. I had suggested emissaries a while ago to allow the more politically minded to use the votes of a noble, but people seem to have completely forgotten about that.

An ability for controversies again, I think that is a necessary evil. We can't alienate people just because they have different opinions than the majority. Quite frankly I think we should welcome such diversity - the gods know that we need it.

The feudal system... Urg. I'm afraid we need to revamp it again. It's really disappointing to me, because I seriously liked the idea of allowing feudal politics like that, but no one does that. It's currently just seeming like a necessary evil right now to most people, even me as you'd realize what had happened in Antya. But it needs to be revamped. The old system? A completely new system? A mix of the two plus new ideas? I didn't like the old system that much myself, as it helped create stagnation. The Kaiser should not be the one deciding who the dukes of the nation are. Perhaps we could have some sort of claiming system or something, where dukes could claim what lands they have. This could include disputed territories and lead to conflicts, which could be fun. Problem with this idea is that it might go the way of the NF.

Of course, my ideas are not the only ones here. We have other people in this nation too - quite frankly I think that we should listen to more than just the Kaiser when it comes to these reformations.

...thanks for the kudos, Ari.

Sander · Post by **Sander** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:35 am

I agree! Bill for kaiser! woo!

If this seems entirely random... it is, pretty much.

Ruth · Post by **Ruth** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:38 am

Come on guys, don't be afraid to start a revolution!

Braden Indianensis · Post by **Braden Indianensis** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:59 am

If we get a new Kaiser, I hope it's because the current one resigns. Not that I have anything agianst Greg, he's a good fellow.

Kaiser Alejian II · Post by **Kaiser Alejian II** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:08 pm

So... i'm a bad leader because i'm a good leader? Damnit!

Braden Indianensis · Post by **Braden Indianensis** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:20 pm

No, no, we're not sating you're a bad leader! But just..maybe..someone who'd do better during a time of stability instead of a time of crisis?

Kaiser Alejian II · Post by **Kaiser Alejian II** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:33 pm

So... i'm a stabilizing leader and right now you need a locke...? Hmph! :P

Rarkasha · Post by **Rarkasha** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:05 pm

Not bad, just stable.

Sometimes goverments get more activity when the leader says "Pleasing everyone? Screw that!" and do something progressive, but not necessarily something that everyone likes. Of course, that might end in assasination, but if that's what it takes to keep Shireroth going...

Kaiser Alejian II · Post by **Kaiser Alejian II** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:51 pm

Whoa whoa, now were talking about my DEATH?!

Rarkasha · Post by **Rarkasha** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 4:19 pm

Not yours, the next Kaiser.

Hypatia Agnesi · Post by **Hypatia Agnesi** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 5:20 pm

Not yours, the next Kaiser

I see we're planning ahead, then.

And Greg, don't worry. We don't want to get rid of you right now, since we love you!* I think the thread here is just discussing what we want in the next kaiser. I would definitely support Bill for Kaiser next, because I think he not only deserves a shot at it, but I'd like to see if he could get us out of the rut of low activity.

* (disclaimer)

Kaiser Alejian II · Post by **Kaiser Alejian II** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 6:51 pm

I'll keep my bodyguards around me for safekeeping just in case. :P

Post by **Shyriath** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:08 pm

I wasn't going as far as suggesting throwing out the idea of the Kaiser and the Landsraad... a certain amount of uprooting will be necessary, but the central structure is potentially flexible enough to accomodate necessary changes. I hope.

I have few concrete suggestions about what reforms should go ahead, but one it might be wise to consider is a review of the laws... not just from the Lawbook, but Decrees as well... and see what might be contradictory, or detrimental, or obsolete. The Landsraad could repeal its old laws, the Kaiser could go through the Decrees (as many of those as there are, there's bound to be some detritus in there).

Another law-code-related suggestion, which could be carried out in conjunction with the reform suggested above, would be the combination of the Lawbook and the Decreebook into a unified law code. Running lists of individual laws and Decrees should be maintained for reference purposes, but as far as a comprehensible public law codification goes, it would be better to have one seamless document instead of two.

osmose1000 · Post by **osmose1000** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:15 pm

Potentially, but I doubt it would actually be able to flex THAT much. :P

H4773r 3lfs0n · Post by **H4773r 3lfs0n** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:28 pm

SAVE THE KAISER! dont worry Greg, I support you all the way.

Some of the philosiphy getting thrown around sounds good, but I think the System is fine...

If one makes it a point to be active, there will be activity, I dont think its neccessary to have conflict to maintain activity.

true conflict breeds activity, true, but the reverse is not. Ive had no conflict within my barony and although we dont have a flurry of activity we manage to plug along at a speed everyone can keep up with but definetly not stagnant....

but thats just my view.

Fax Celestis · Post by **Fax Celestis** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:12 pm

Ultra-DecreeTM (work in progress) will be posted into the IAC at next available opportunity.

Harvey the Blue · Post by **Harvey the Blue** » Mon May 01, 2006 5:13 am

Fax Celestis wrote:Ultra-DecreeTM (work in progress) will be posted into the IAC at next available opportunity.

Not to pick on Fax, but he hit the nail on the head on why I left and a major problem with the system. 2/3 people get a chance to have an input while 1/3 has to sit around and wait, see the decision when the other 2/3 are so SICK of talking about it that they don't care any more, get steamrolled and watch it go into place, and eventually get jaded and annoyed and leave.

If you're going to make this place more interesting, ESPEICALLY to the outsiders and the newcomers this nation so desperately needs, lock the stupid IAC and talk in public.

Bill3000 · Post by **Bill3000** » Mon May 01, 2006 7:48 am

I don't even have IAC access, and I'm probably the person who needs it most!

true conflict breeds activity, true, but the reverse is not. Ive had no conflict within my barony and although we dont have a flurry of activity we manage to plug along at a speed everyone can keep up with but definetly not stagnant....

How would you know? Have you been to an extremely active micronation? No.

The reverse is true, and in fact is the part of the reason why there were conflicts in Menelmacar and Shireroth in the past, although it usually is with other nations rather than inside. Activity leads to jealously by other micronations, and as well convinces people to join the micronation who join simply to join an active nation regardless of whether or not that person can fit within the nation. Besdes, in a large nation there are bound to be more people with differing opinions.

If one makes it a point to be active, there will be activity, I dont think its neccessary to have conflict to maintain activity.

And how, exactly, do you expect us to go through that? Clearly yelling at people to "be active!" is not enough. Conflict is only one way that guarentees activity, but in reality it is clashes and the dynamics of a polyfactional system (which may or may not be true conflicts) which allow a micronation to thrive.

I'm beginning to get impatient. We can't just stay here and wonder what to do forever. We need action.

H4773r 3lfs0n · Post by **H4773r 3lfs0n** » Mon May 01, 2006 10:46 am

Quote:

true conflict breeds activity, true, but the reverse is not. Ive had no conflict within my barony and although we dont have a flurry of activity we manage to plug along at a speed everyone can keep up with but definetly not stagnant....

How would you know? Have you been to an extremely active micronation? No. The reverse is true, and in fact is the part of the reason why there were conflicts in Menelmacar and Shireroth in the past, although it usually is with other nations rather than inside. Activity leads to jealously by other micronations, and as well convinces people to join the micronation who join simply to join an active nation regardless of whether or not that person can fit within the nation. Besides, in a large nation there are bound to be more people with differing opinions.

no, i have never been to an extremely active micronation and quite frankly i think throwing that kind of argument is an avoidance of the statement by throwing up an entirely different flag. I didnt say anything about other nations, i was talking about activity in my barony. Im sorry if its not as active as some are used to, however there are subdivisions here who are WAY less active than mine. But fine... i'll leave it at that and try to not say anything that could hurt anyone.

Extremely active micronation? hmm.. i dont think id stay because i couldnt keep up. not because im slow or cant keep up. because its more effort than i want to put forth. i often do not reads all posts because quite frankly i think certain aspects are boring, dont pertain to me, or just too long to read at the moment.

and as far as bringing in new members... im an elitists and id rather have 5 new citizens a year, who mesh with the nation and make relevant contributions than 50 a month who nobody knows and run around spam festing to keep up activity and anoyance. Diversity yes, stupity en mass? no

Bill3000 wrote: If one makes it a point to be active, there will be activity, I dont think its neccessary to have conflict to maintain activity.
And how, exactly, do you expect us to go through that? Clearly yelling at people to "be active!" is not enough. Conflict is only one way that guarentees activity, but in reality it is clashes and the dynamics of a polyfactional system (which may or may not be true conflicts) which allow a micronation to thrive.

Yes, yell at people "BE ACTIVE!" it works when the people your yelling at know that your not a jerk and that you all care for your micronation/subdivision.

I see nothing wrong with finding non conflict ways to bolster activity.

as ive mentioned before activity lies in the hands of the citizens and although conflict is a sure fire way to create activity, i think every one of those stupid bitch fests, mud slinging noob arguments, and generaly 12 year old school yard scuffle like behavior is a sgn of an underdeveloped, uneducated, immature, inadequate, attantion seeking lack-of-intellect mind.

dont get me wrong.. i enjoy a good rhetorical argument, and my above statement may become hypocritical in the future (if youd known me before this youd know im full of shit) but when several parties cant do anything but cuss at each other about thier conflict, thats not activity to me, thats a mature-language spam-fest headache.

Braden Indianensis · Post by **Braden Indianensis** » Mon May 01, 2006 11:34 am

I agree..(though I happen to enjoy a bitch-fest every now and then.)

Anyhow, if you build it, they will come.If we want activity we're going to have to make activity.

Hypatia Agnesi · Post by **Hypatia Agnesi** » Mon May 01, 2006 12:04 pm

Has it not occurred to anyone else in this thread that we are suddenly pretty active? This thread is a political debate that people are generally passionate about, and I think it would be a good idea to step back and look at all the activity happening right here.

Just a thought.

Bill3000 · Post by **Bill3000** » Mon May 01, 2006 1:35 pm

Actually, it just proves my point: Conflict breeds activity. Not all conflict is the traditional micronationalist arguments that, oddly enough, Hatter described perfectly.

Sir Ophiuchus · Post by **Sir Ophiuchus** » Mon May 01, 2006 5:49 pm

Harvey the Blue wrote:
Fax Celestis wrote:Ultra-DecreeTM (work in progress) will be posted into the IAC at next available opportunity.
Not to pick on Fax, but he hit the nail on the head on why I left and a major problem with the system. 2/3 people get a chance to have an input while 1/3 has to sit around and wait, see the decision when the other 2/3 are so SICK of talking about it that they don't care any more, get steamrolled and watch it go into place, and eventually get jaded and annoyed and leave.

If you're going to make this place more interesting, ESPEICALLY to the outsiders and the newcomers this nation so desperately needs, lock the stupid IAC and talk in public.

I support this 110%.

Yes, I know, I've been bad.

Yes, I know, I've been bad.

Who is online