Chiron Democratic Coalition

[Nubclear]

Remember, were all on Planet together now...Can't we just get along?

[DeathByTheSword]

no this is not an attack or something (it is irritating that i have to say that btw ) but if we merger we wouldnt be the biggest party CCCP has 10 members now only dont know how many active partymembers not following there thread

[AdamTG02]

On orders and reactions

Some clarification:

Pandemoniak did not decide where to place the first base; Darkness' Edge did, because he wanted to get moving with the game and Pande hadn't given any orders. After that, Pande understandably wanted to give some orders, even if there wasn't time to post a poll. The decisions that have moved our game forward quicker than many would like were made by Commissioner Darkness' Edge, not by Pandemoniak.

I don't want to assign blame. As I posted in Darkness' Edge withdrawal from the CDC thread, we come into this game with varying expectations, and when others with different expectations don't meet ours, we are likely to come into conflict. That doesn't mean those others are wrong, for valuing speedy decision-making more than consensus. It means we have grounds for discussion. And lest someone bring up the Constitution again, I remind you that we did vote for a representative democracy, and this principle is reflected in the Constitution even if not explicily stated.

Sadly enough, Darkness' Edge's withdrawal has removed my uncertainty about whether I want to stick with the CDC. Pandemoniak can't be blamed for the Commissioner's moving ahead before he had the chance to respond, and the CDC certainly can't be blamed for the actions of a single one of its members. I wish this resolution had come another way, though -- it seems petty not to blame the coalition for something that was in effect one man's decision, simply because that man has withdrawn.

I now intend to support the EDP's staying wthin the CDC. That support is not absolute; if the party votes to merge with the P4, I will go with it, both because the merged party would be closer to my beliefs than any other party remaining, and because I wouldn't want the other former EDP members to be marginalized within the new party.
This decision is, like anything, subject to change,. I intend to stick by it, but I've changed my mind before. However, I wanted to give CDC members a heads-up, and tell them that I no longer have the uncertainty I just yesterday had.

[DeathByTheSword]

so to get it clear for me: you want to merge but still want to stay in the CDC? if so dont relpy then i will understand

[AdamTG02]

Merging and staying in the CDC would be my ideal outcome, but I believe that with the opposition of P4 members to the CDC, that most likely won't be an option.

What I said was that I would vote against merging, unless convinced otherwise, in order to keep the EDP in the CDC. However, if the majority of the EDP decides to merge, I won't up and join the Liberal Democrats -- I will work within the new party in support of my ideals.

If a majority of P4 members agreed that the new party should join the CDC, that would remove my opposition.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
Now, I am waiting for your apologies.

If Archaic won't offer them, please accept mine. I didn't know the orders for the second base position were temporary. Now I do know that, I realize you weren't in mistake as I first thought. Darkness' Edge still is though...

[Method]

well, if we merged and joined CDC, it would IN THEORY create a 2 party system. but with all of ACE (except TSA) so inactive here as they are, it would really be a 1 party system

Adam, why would you rather stay with CDC?

[Maniac]

I agree with TKG. That's the reason I would personally never ally with the ACE or CDC. Voltaire, P4 is the only party who wants to prevent a two-party system. Your party seeks it instead!

Accusation reversed.

[Darkness' Edge]

Originally posted by Archaic
Thank you for proving my point. DE moved the pod in a direction completly different from where the people had asked for it to be moved. Can DE not even open up a thread and see the results of the poll himself without you posting it up?

Um, I hate to break it to you, but I did.
I searched for relevant topics, found only one thread, and went on the consensus in that thread.

Originally posted by Pandemoniak Until DE precise the deadlines in which he wants the directors orders, I wont be able to organize any debate, nor any poll.

I apologise for this one. Put it down to inexperience.

[AdamTG02]

Reasons

well, if we merged and joined CDC, it would IN THEORY create a 2 party system. but with all of ACE (except TSA) so inactive here as they are, it would really be a 1 party system

It's a valid point, and P4 members have made it clear that they don't want to be part of the CDC. So, I withdraw that idea. It was a long shot in any case, and born from an attempt to find compromise where perhaps I should have simply stated my position.

Adam, why would you rather stay with CDC?

There are a few reasons, which I'll try to list here. I like the fact that the CDC is somewhat roleplaying-focused, and that it brings in Old Earth political ideologies. I like the CDC's support for Democracy, including in the initial expansion phase. I like the CDC's focus on peace first, typified in Ade's statements on foreign policy. I like Pandemoninsive colonization policy, because while it may sacrifice a few turns of production now it ensures that we'll secure the territory we'll later need to be a major power.

To some extent, I don't feel justified in leaving the CDC without cause -- and while they may not focus as singularly on science as does the EDP, they recognize its importance. CDC members have supported both EDP candidates in the elections, and the reason isn't simply coalition loyalty: We share a liberal outlook, meaning not ideology but mindset.

If I am going to walk away, I need a sufficient cause -- and after deliberation I've deciided that the proposed new party doesn't fit the bill for me. A new party would be larger and support many ideas in common with my own -- but I would also be expected to make compromises that I would rather not make. The Free Market in return for eternal expansion is an example -- while I'd like to never stop exploring, I don't support that to the extent that I'd back a long-term Free Market economy with its associatedd ecodamage in order to continue expanding. At some point, exploration will be done by our scientists and astronauts, not our pioneers. But if we treat Planet's environment recklessly, "entire species may vanish, without our ever having understood, or even known them."

I haven't been vocal on environmental issues because I haven't wanted the EDP to come across as a Green-only party; I've repeatedly said that Free Market is consistent with the ideals of the EDP. But the fact is that I do feel strongly about it, even if I haven't made my views widely known. Why take Free Market for an energy bonus we could get without the eco-damage, running Wealth and Golden Age? We'd antagonize Deirdre -- the more dangerous of the two pacifists due to her normal Support and population caps, and her enhanced ability to capture mindworms. We'd antagonize the Planetmind, which will send succedingly stronger waves of mindworms to eradicate us, mindworms that we'll be less able to defend against. In my mind, we would be operating on unsound principles -- allowing inefficiency in our economy, and taking the standpoint that it doesn't matter what harm our actions do to Planet's native life. We are newcomers to this world, and we have a duty to ourselves to treat it as we would the home of a friend -- because otherwise it may legitimately treat us as an unwelcome intruder. That applies whether the Planetlife is able to strike back or not.

That concludes my rant. I'd like to clarify, if it wasn't apparent, that what I am saying here is not EDP policy but my own personal opinion. However, it is my opinion, and it guides my vote. As I said before, I am open to being persuaded, but as I also said before, I don't anticipate much chance of being brought over to the other side. P4 members, you're welcome to bring up points you think will change my mind, though. In the end I am only one vote, and my views will not dictate the decision of the EDP. As I've said, I will stay with my party however the vote turns out. Hope that explains my side of things, and I'll now yield the floor.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Maniac
I agree with TKG. That's the reason I would personally never ally with the ACE or CDC. Voltaire, P4 is the only party who wants to prevent a two-party system. Your party seeks it instead!

Accusation reversed.

First of all, how exactly is the CDC in favor of a two party system???

I mean it’s not a party, it’s a coalition composed of different parties, which do not agree on every little detail, since if we did we’d all join together to form one party.

Its original purpose was to prevent the P4, the largest party at the start, from getting too power since the current CDC members are opposed to a Free Market economy (or more accurately, we’re not so much opposed as would prefer another economic system over Free Market). As well as to prevent vote splitting between candidates from different parties who share similar viewpoints. I don’t exactly see how the CDC seeks a two party system; when the game progresses and our differing viewpoints on what future societies we should implement chances are the CDC will dissolve itself and other alliances will be formed; or perhaps by that time there will no longer be a party system at all. Also, coalitions in a multiparty democratic system are often inevitable if smaller parties hope to have a majority government.

[Maniac]

Voltaire: Ok then, you are in favour of a two-coalition system.

AdamTG: Personally I like the idea of Wealth+GA. In fact I planned to propose it during 3D party policy discussions. The ultimate goals of P4 (and hopefully of 3D as well in a possible future) are technological progress and Eudaimonia. Free Market (with its +2 Economy) and Knowledge, thus creating a knowledge based society, was just the means towards that end. So at least personally I find Wealth+GA just as fine as it also creates a knowledge based society (many talents representing well-educated citizens).

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Darkness' Edge
Um, I hate to break it to you, but I did.
I searched for relevant topics, found only one thread, and went on the consensus in that thread.

I ask you for the second time: which thread did you look at?? In every thread I looked at, I found a majority for HQ on landing spot and second pod east.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Maniac
Voltaire: Ok then, you are in favour of a two-coalition system.

Yes, it is my personal intent to create a two “coalition” system; somehow that is part of the agenda of the CDC.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Maniac
AdamTG: Personally I like the idea of Wealth+GA. In fact I planned to propose it during 3D party policy discussions. The ultimate goals of P4 (and hopefully of 3D as well in a possible future) are technological progress and Eudaimonia. Free Market (with its +2 Economy) and Knowledge, thus creating a knowledge based society, was just the means towards that end. So at least personally I find Wealth+GA just as fine as it also creates a knowledge based society (many talents representing well-educated citizens).

Eudaimonia + Free Market? I though that the P4 was intended on running Eudaimonia + Green in the end-stage of the game, because of the fact that it provides a greater energy flow than Free Market does at the time.