Labor Party presidential primary

[ZuWo]

I have never talked to Bacon King, but from what I have seen he is an intelligent and humorous poster. That being said, I have been part of this game for more than two years now and seen BK in various Atlasian offices and functions. Unfortunately, the issue of inactivity has come up on more than one occasion during this time. While I have no doubts that BK would be more than smart enough for the job, I honestly don't believe that he will be as active as necessary for four consecutive months.

>concerned about Bacon King's level of activity
>supporting Spamage

If you had been part of Atlasia for a longer period of time, you would see that the two situations aren't quite comparable. Just ask some of the older players.

Yeah, you guys really don't want to bring up the issue of activity with your presumptive candidate (unless your party brass is organizing yet another primary coup like they did in June). You're not going to get away with painting a rosy picture of why your candidate gets to excuse away his inactivity and demonize the other side for the same issue.

Again, why can't the Federalists articulate something of their own, rather than react to and attack the opposition? That's the real question that voters should be asking.

I would kindly like to remind you that it was your side that brought up the issue of activity and used it in mean-spirited attacks against Spamage. That's why I find it kind of ironic that we are not allowed to raise the issue of BK's activity levels in the past. As I said, ask someone who has been around for a couple of years if you want to know more. I hope BK is right, though.

Mmhmm, mmhmm, mmhmm. So by your own logic, you're no different than TNF as you're being just as nasty. Notice how none of the candidates in this race have initiated the discussion of inactivity thus far? Candidates can't control what their constituents say or ask.

And in case I wasn't heard:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You think TNF is nasty?

If you want an answer to your question, compare TNF's post in Spamages thread to my post in this thread.

[Bacon King]

Is that last part of your answer supposed to be reassuring? I guess you're defending yourself from the worst of it, but just so I'm clear, are you saying that you didn't take any initiative on your own with this scheme?

That's correct. I fail to see the problem here- it's not like anything would have happened differently if someone else wrote it for them.

Great. As long as I have it on record that you were not giving orders or laying out the step-by-step approach. Things should get fun.

You might want to check your sources Hagrid. Not to accuse you of lying, but you seem to be implying something untrue here?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

No, don't worry.

[Adam Griffin]

I have never talked to Bacon King, but from what I have seen he is an intelligent and humorous poster. That being said, I have been part of this game for more than two years now and seen BK in various Atlasian offices and functions. Unfortunately, the issue of inactivity has come up on more than one occasion during this time. While I have no doubts that BK would be more than smart enough for the job, I honestly don't believe that he will be as active as necessary for four consecutive months.

>concerned about Bacon King's level of activity
>supporting Spamage

If you had been part of Atlasia for a longer period of time, you would see that the two situations aren't quite comparable. Just ask some of the older players.

Yeah, you guys really don't want to bring up the issue of activity with your presumptive candidate (unless your party brass is organizing yet another primary coup like they did in June). You're not going to get away with painting a rosy picture of why your candidate gets to excuse away his inactivity and demonize the other side for the same issue.

Again, why can't the Federalists articulate something of their own, rather than react to and attack the opposition? That's the real question that voters should be asking.

I would kindly like to remind you that it was your side that brought up the issue of activity and used it in mean-spirited attacks against Spamage. That's why I find it kind of ironic that we are not allowed to raise the issue of BK's activity levels in the past. As I said, ask someone who has been around for a couple of years if you want to know more. I hope BK is right, though.

Mmhmm, mmhmm, mmhmm. So by your own logic, you're no different than TNF as you're being just as nasty. Notice how none of the candidates in this race have initiated the discussion of inactivity thus far? Candidates can't control what their constituents say or ask.

And in case I wasn't heard:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You think TNF is nasty?

If you want an answer to your question, compare TNF's post in Spamages thread to my post in this thread.

So if it's dressed up to appear as polite - all the while containing the same, nasty undertones as any other comment made by anyone else - then it's OK? At least TNF is honest, as opposed to your dog-whistling attempts to achieve the same type of rancor in this discussion.


ZuWo is one of the most partisan individuals in this game, one of the big brains behind Federalist operations, and he does a relatively good job at keeping that under wraps. He knows that if he articulates anything in which he truly believes, that both he and his party would never be elected to higher office.

I'll keep trying:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ZuWo]

Yes, I do believe that bringing up an issue in a polite way is very different from making an insulting comment. I think it's common sense.

As for the second part of your post, I sometimes wish I was a big brain in the Federalist Party but I'm not really. Also, if you look at the bills I've introduced in the Mideast you will see that I have never hidden my views. There you will also find the answer to your incredibly pressing question in bold print. In fact, Federalists have plenty of ideas. Look at the regions, the regional governments, and the Senate.

[tmthforu94]

Napoleon is the only Presidential candidate in this race who I think makes a passing grade in terms of activity - both Spamage and Bacon King have certain weaknesses in this area. I think that in this election, more than in any recent ones, how active of a campaign the candidates run will play a major factor.

I am a bit confused over the fact that Griffin resigned as GM just recently due to RL time constraints, yet jumped into the VP race not too long after. No maliciousness in this, as his activity record has been fantastic (especially as GM), though I do hope he can address this at some point in the campaign.

[tmthforu94]

Also, does anyone else not see the complete hypocrisy that certain Laborites pounced on Spamage for inactivity concerns right after he announced, then immediately endorse a candidate several days later with an activity record (as of late) that is arguably worse than Spamage's? Let's just cut the bullsh**t and admit that both candidates have a weakness in this area, and we're supporting them simply for ideological reasons.

[Adam Griffin]

Yes, I do believe that bringing up an issue in a polite way is very different from making an insulting comment. I think it's common sense.

As for the second part of your post, I sometimes wish I was a big brain in the Federalist Party but I'm not really. Also, if you look at the bills I've introduced in the Mideast you will see that I have never hidden my views. There you will also find the answer to your incredibly pressing question in bold print. In fact, Federalists have plenty of ideas. Look at the regions, the regional governments, and the Senate.

What Labor Has Accomplished Just in the Past Two Months - Just in the Senate:

Prison Reform Act of 2013
Protecting Worker Privacy Act
Amendment to the Labor Rights Act
Amendment to the Student Loan Interest Rate Fairness Act
The It's Not Up to You Act
Death with Dignity Act

It's really not that difficult to articulate what you stand for, ZuWo. Don't be coy and tell us to "go look for it ourselves". You should be ready to defend it and cite it, if in fact there is anything to be defended and cited. So yet again:

Again, why can't the Federalists articulate something of their own, rather than react to and attack the opposition? That's the real question that voters should be asking.

Napoleon is the only Presidential candidate in this race who I think makes a passing grade in terms of activity - both Spamage and Bacon King have certain weaknesses in this area. I think that in this election, more than in any recent ones, how active of a campaign the candidates run will play a major factor.

I am a bit confused over the fact that Griffin resigned as GM just recently due to RL time constraints, yet jumped into the VP race not too long after. No maliciousness in this, as his activity record has been fantastic (especially as GM), though I do hope he can address this at some point in the campaign.

This is a valid question and one that I expected to be asked, so I'll be happy to answer. The fact is that I explained exactly why I could no longer serve as GM - in reality, the duties of a GM are much more pressing than that of a VP candidate - and that rationale was 100% the reason.

I'm in the midst of a real-life campaign and that will keep my schedule limited until the first week of November. This is also the same week that the next President/Vice-President will be inaugurated, at which point my activity will not be hindered. I'm also confident that in my limited capacity, I will be able to contribute the necessary amount of time to this campaign in order to adequately address the issues.

I did not resign as GM so that I could run for VP. Frankly, being GM is far more fun, I'd say. I was asked by Bacon King to be his VP nominee several days after my announced resignation, so that is simply the way things turned out.

[ZuWo]

But Griffin, your post makes clear you don't have the slightest interest in hearing what the Federalists stand for and have achieved. On the contrary, you're only interested in scoring a political point that isn't there. So why should I bother with you? If you're really interested in having your questions answered, you know very well where to look.

Indeed, I'd much rather continue to lay out my and my party's plans directly to the voters, be it in my campaign thread or via PMs. This has worked well so far and will, hopefully, continue to work in the future.

[Bacon King]

Also, does anyone else not see the complete hypocrisy that certain Laborites pounced on Spamage for inactivity concerns right after he announced, then immediately endorse a candidate several days later with an activity record (as of late) that is arguably worse than Spamage's? Let's just cut the bullsh**t and admit that both candidates have a weakness in this area, and we're supporting them simply for ideological reasons.

I completely agree. This tit-for-tat isn't how I want this campaign to be in the slightest.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I think it is a bit unfair to be hostile to the idea of Griffin stepping down from the GM position only for him to run for the Vice Presidency. Speaking as both a former GM and VP, the stresses of the GM-ship are extreme, and the Vice Presidency is really only much of a job twice a term or so. I really don't see any reason to doubt Griffin's potential activity as a Vice President.

[Adam Griffin]

But Griffin, your post makes clear you don't have the slightest interest in hearing what the Federalists stand for and have achieved. On the contrary, you're only interested in scoring a political point that isn't there. So why should I bother with you? If you're really interested in having your questions answered, you know very well where to look.

Indeed, I'd much rather continue to lay out my and my party's plans directly to the voters, be it in my campaign thread or via PMs. This has worked well so far and will, hopefully, continue to work in the future.

I'm sorry, but you misunderstand me. The voters - for once - want to hear a Federalist articulate their own policies and accomplishments to the voters of this game in public. You can't even be bothered to cite a single piece of legislation from your own record or any of your companions. Why is that? Have you guys done nothing, or are you ashamed of your stances on issues? The people would like to know.

If you fail to do so, then I - as always - will draw the necessary light to it on the public front and behind the scenes.

You will not get away with defining yourselves in private: you will do it in public or we will do it for you.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I'm done partaking in these silly in-game fights, but I just want to say that BK's signature has given me a severe seizure, and I will be sending you both my medical bills.

[Adam Griffin]

I think it is a bit unfair to be hostile to the idea of Griffin stepping down from the GM position only for him to run for the Vice Presidency. Speaking as both a former GM and VP, the stresses of the GM-ship are extreme, and the Vice Presidency is really only much of a job twice a term or so. I really don't see any reason to doubt Griffin's potential activity as a Vice President.

[Bacon King]

I'm done partaking in these silly in-game fights, but I just want to say that BK's signature has given me a severe seizure, and I will be sending you both my medical bills.

Image removed; this should cover the medical expenses

[ZuWo]

The bigger the letters, the smaller the strength of argumentation. Read my post again. Carefully. And then you will hopefully understand. I haven't said anything about only talking about my accomplishments and views in private.

I will gladly continue this "debate" tomorrow but unfortunately it's bed time in my time zone

[Adam Griffin]

I can confirm that Adam Griffin's departure from serving as Game Moderator was planned well in advance of his agreeing to join this ticket - we discussed the matter well before his official announcement - and I understood that there was a high likelihood that he would need to leave toward the end of the summer even prior to that.

Thanks for confirming.


I'd also like to take the time to summarize this post's dialogue for those who haven't or don't feel like reading through its entirety:

Federalists: "WE DON'T LIKE WHAT LABOR STANDS FOR/INACTIVE BK AND GRIFF'S VILE TACTICS"
Us: Please articulate one point or policy issue on which you stand."
Federalists: "NO"
ZuWo: "WE GET TO POINT FINGERS BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DID"
Us: "What do you stand for, Federalists? What do you stand for, ZuWo?"
ZuWo: "LOOK IT UP"
Us: "Tell us what you stand for, guys."
ZuWo/Federalists: "NO"
Us: "C'mon, tell us!"
ZuWo/Federalists: "NO, LOOK IT UP"
Us: "Don't wanna show us a link to one single policy achievement or platform that you've accomplished or drafted?"
ZuWo/Federalists: 'NO, LOOK IT UP"
Us: "Where can we look it up?"
ZuWo/Federalists: 'WE CONDUCT ALL OF THIS VIA PM"
Us: "OK, then."

[Sopranos Republican]

What Labor Has Accomplished Just in the Past Two Months - Just in the Senate:

Prison Reform Act of 2013

*Coughs*

[Adam Griffin]

Oh no. That bill died in the hands of the Federalists, was sponsored later by Nix, heavily amended and passed unanimously.

The point of this isn't to say that Federalists have done nothing. It's to say that you guys never talk about it not want to talk about it. It only took the better part of 40 posts to get one Federalist to at least claim a belief or a piece of legislation. I'm amazed at how much resistance is always met whenever we ask you guys to talk about your beliefs, ideas and achievements. You guys resist even the discussion of good ones.

[Poirot]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I hope the role of Vice President is more than doing a job twice a term. The VP can do things tp support the President, like following Senate debate discussion, coordinate with regional executives and cabinet officials.

[Sopranos Republican]

Oh no. That bill died in the hands of the Federalists, was sponsored later by Nix, heavily amended and passed unanimously.

The point of this isn't to say that Federalists have done nothing. It's to say that you guys never talk about it not want to talk about it. It only took the better part of 40 posts to get one Federalist to at least claim a belief or a piece of legislation. I'm amazed at how much resistance is always met whenever we ask you guys to talk about your beliefs, ideas and achievements. You guys resist even the discussion of good ones.

I certainly wouldn't have let it die if I had been reelected and I planned on working with other Senators on amending it to getting as close to perfect as possible (not to say I wasn't pleased with the final product, because I was very much so). And you say "heavily amended" in a negative fashion it seems, well Nix even told me on IRC the original bill had all of the necessary elements, is how I believe he phrased it.

[LastVoter]

Bacon King

[Adam Griffin]

And you say "heavily amended" in a negative fashion it seems, well Nix even told me on IRC the original bill had all of the necessary elements, is how I believe he phrased it.

It wasn't intended as negative - it is to say that the bill that emerged and was passed in the end was a great deal different than the one you and clarence had initially proposed.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

[PJ]