Number of Regions/Regional Governments (DEBATE CLOSED)

[tmthforu94]

There are two changes here:
1. I don't like the idea of numbering the regions - I think it sends somewhat of a message that one region is being put over another. This is a concern I raised before but was not addressed, so if someone comes up with a  strong argument why "first, second,third" is better than how I worded it, I'll entertain it.
2. Moving Kansas to the South. I understand that there is a desire to try and keep the number of regions balanced, but 1)I don't think it looks better or difference on the prettiness scale, which a lot of people are going off of, and 2) most importantly, considering the population centers and economics of each state, it would be terrible to separate Kansas from Oklahoma and Missouri. I understand that Kansas is generally considered a part of the "Great Plains", which includes the Dakotas and Nebraska, but we are MUCH close to Missouri and Oklahoma in reality. Kansas has historically had low populations of registered Atlasians and with re-registering likely taking place, doing this won't have any sort of negative effect on the game. It just makes more sense economically, and I hope folks will understand that. This puts the South ahead 18-16-16, rather than 17-17-16, so ultimately they remain pretty even. I wish I had been involved more in CARCA and I would have pointed this out then - I know it is something I've mentioned before.

Now, the only argument I've heard on this is from Griffin, who doesn't want to make the population in the Pacific smaller. I would remind everyone that to my knowledge, we have two folks in the state of Kansas, I'm the only one who is there because of geographic reasons, and I haven't lived here forever. Considering the likelihood of folks moving around with a consolidation of regions (most people in this game don't live in here where they live IRL), I would encourage individuals to dismiss that argument for THIS amendment.

Additionally, I have heard from several delegates that they are opposing this SIMPLY because it wasn't part of the CARCA map. For the record, I was not a member of Atlasia during that discussion, other delegates weren't involved either. It is unfair to shut myself and others out of the process for being part of a non-binding debate and decision several months ago.

[tmthforu94]

My argument makes complete sense - it amazes me how time and time again, individuals at this convention are trying to rush things through and stifle debate.

Your argument is the one that doesn't make sense - comparing this to a presidential election is like comparing apples to oranges.

I have a question for you, Windjammer, and others who are opposed to any changes because of CARCA: Was CARCA binding?

[tmthforu94]

I withdrew my amendment for the time being with the expectation of another amendment being introduced that will alleviate my concerns.

[tmthforu94]

Aye.

Vote for the map here, guys. We can go back and decide on names. I don't support these names, either.

[tmthforu94]

My argument makes complete sense - it amazes me how time and time again, individuals at this convention are trying to rush things through and stifle debate.

Your argument is the one that doesn't make sense - comparing this to a presidential election is like comparing apples to oranges.

I have a question for you, Windjammer, and others who are opposed to any changes because of CARCA: Was CARCA binding?

Sometimes it can be useful to compare apples and oranges by the way, and your argument still doesn't make no sense. CARCA was made in order to speed the process, not my fault if you chose to leave the game.

What an undemocratic way to look at things! "Oh, you weren't registered in the game when we talked about maps, so you can't have an opinion." Once again, if CARCA were binding, you would be absolutely correct. But it isn't. It was a group of random people, not determined by any legal document, who came up with a suggestion.

[tmthforu94]

2 years is a long time in Atlasia - your memory is certainly better than mine.

[tmthforu94]

Griffin, you may have already posted this argument somewhere, but what is the rationale for this amendment? I specifically have concerns with adding some of the Central American states. Shouldn't we be respecting their sovereignty?

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[tmthforu94]

What is the rationale against the regions being named West, Southeast and Northeast?

[tmthforu94]

What is the rationale against the regions being named West, Southeast and Northeast?

I think the current names are more original and add a bit of creative flair to the map; however, if the Convention would prefer compass names, I'd be fine with that as well.

I just think it would be confusing, especially for new members. We want to make this game more welcoming to new members, and I don't think this accomplishes that. Especially considering only one of them (Franklin) is a name with high recognition.

If we reverted to directions, would people be fine with Northeast, Southeast and West? Or North, South and West? What do folks like?

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[tmthforu94]

[1] West, South, Northeast
[   ] Fremont, Rayburn, Franklin
[   ] McGovern, Kefauver, Kennedy
[   ] Wolfen, Griffin, Hamilton
[   ] Bgwah, Duke, Scott
[2] West, South, North
[3] Let the Regions name themselves

[tmthforu94]

Happy to hear. I will reach out to the Governor's of the newly elected regions to ensure there is some consistency between the three.

[tmthforu94]

we should also allow for a process for the restoration to 5 regions while we are at it.

There is a process for that - a constitutional amendment.

[tmthforu94]

Aye, it could get out of hand, but hopefully the regions will put mechanisms in place so that the names aren't being changed every couple of months.

[tmthforu94]

Echoing what Adam said....

Nay, for now.

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OPTION 2: Clyde & Truman's Amendment
[   ] AYE      [X] NAY     [   ] Abstain

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[tmthforu94]

I trust that regions will be able to reflect on mistakes in the past and adjust the size of their legislature independently to meet the needs of the region.

[tmthforu94]

After reading the President's arguments and weighing them my own concerns, Nay.

[tmthforu94]

After reading through the debate, I think there has been some confusion over what we are voting on. I change my vote to Aye, but considering the confusion that has ensued, I urge Truman to clarify and restart the vote.

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[tmthforu94]

Aye