Page 1 of 1
Military Alliance
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:12 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Lawbook III.B.2
f. No Duke may enter a military alliance with another Duke.
I'd like it change to
Lawbook III.B.2
f. No Duke may enter a military alliance with another Duke except under SCIRA.
I'm not sure what the original intention of the clause was. With the change, SCIRA, our internal recwarring system designed for the purpose of internal recwars can still be used by different duchies. However, anything else (such as a war outside SCIRA), and assumedly whatever the original purpose was, is still not allowed.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:15 pm
by Nathan of Natopia
Is there any debate on this bill?
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:21 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Apparently not.
Shall we open voting then (you need to post a list of the voting credits, I guess)
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:11 pm
by Nathan of Natopia
I've posted a sticky topic with the current vote tallies.
Brookshire - 2
Elwynn - 2
Kildare - 3
Yardistan - 1
Straylight - 3
Voting begins whenever anyone wants to vote

Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:25 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Kildare votes AYE (3)
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:21 pm
by Malliki
Brookshire AYE - 2
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:34 pm
by Gman Russell
Yardistan NAY (1)
btw, voting credits are stupid.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:45 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
I kinda agree with you there Greg.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:49 pm
by Gman Russell
It puts entirely too much focus on 1: the Ministry of Trade, and 2: the strict simulation side of micronationalism. It's not fun for me when I have to actually do something to earn 'money' so I can vote on something that will never physically exist. This is for fun, people, FUN! If I want a political and trade simulation, i'd find a game to do that in! *rants*
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:05 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
I've just grown to have issue with binding votes to money. I don't think it works.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:06 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Greg, remember that the concept of bounties is that what you're paid for is what you're meant to be doing anyway as a micronationalist - creating cities, writing stories, making culture etc.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:08 pm
by Gman Russell
You make all those things because you find it fun and entertaining, not because you want some 'money'. I refuse to do anything in this damn nation that isnt fun.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:10 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
His point is you are getting paid for what you already enjoy doing.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:24 pm
by Gman Russell
But who determines what is fair compensation for what you do?
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:30 pm
by Andreas the Wise
I *try* to.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:47 pm
by Gman Russell
No offense to you, because you've done a really good job so far

, but how is it determined that you get paid X for this service, or X for that service? For instance, what gets you paid more: Writing a short story, or working on the wiki? How do you decide which is more important?
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:18 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Personally, I try to pay on what seems the quality of the work and the time I would expect it takes to produce. I tend to go with 200+/-100 per thing (but thing can be anywhere from a single map to an entire short story). When the things are bigger (like a whole civil war or a short story over a number of posts) it tends to get 300 automatically or even higher.
Wiki articles, merely because I know many can be churned out fairly quickly, don't get paid as much. Max as Chief Wikier is meant to make a page saying "these articles are absolutely crucial, we'll pay s are important, we'll pay 100. These articles, well, it'd be nice if they were done but aren't essential. 50." And I pay for wiki stuff after that.
I'll openly admit that I don't see everything and don't remember all of it, so when I post announcing future bounties, I rely on people alerting me to the fact they've done something, but the system seems to work. The crucial thing to remember is that though "money for votes" sounds so horribly capitalist, when one remembers the money is primarily earnt by helping build up the nation, it's like saying, "those who do a lot for Shireroth have their opinions respected more," but actually quantifying this respect. At least, that's how I see it. I despise economies where they just give government officials high wages regardless of what they do, and nobody else gets any money, which is why I really like the bounty system. I'll note that Ministers are also paid on the concept of bounty, but start at a minimum of 300 for the month and work up to 7/800 if they've worked really hard. Beyond ministers, there aren't many jobs and so wages haven't caught on too much.
I don't want an economy for the sake of having an economy, but I do want a working economy for the sake of having a working economy. And, so far, bounties + some sort of monetary connection to votes seems to work in Shireroth. This particular voting system is still on a trial run ... it'll take a couple months to really know if it's working or not.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:27 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
Perhaps we should take this to another topic?
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:29 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Definitely.
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:59 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:25 pm
by Ari Rahikkala
Straylight abstains. I'm not hot on SCIRA, but I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch of other dukes want to do military alliances either...
Re: Military Alliance
Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:55 am
by Nathan of Natopia
passes 5-1