|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 07, 2020, 04:47:56 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Constitutional Convention (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Number of Regions/Regional Governments (DEBATE CLOSED)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 30 Print
Author Topic: Number of Regions/Regional Governments (DEBATE CLOSED)  (Read 39509 times)
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,051


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #325 on: October 26, 2015, 04:28:45 pm »
« edited: October 26, 2015, 04:32:39 pm by Lincoln Republican »

I do not like the idea at all of naming the regions after Atlasians.

I much prefer historical figures.

I have come up with a list of three individuals who have all served as Chief Justice of the United States.

Ellsworth, from Connecticut (north), appointed by Washington, no party

Vinson, from Kentucky (south), appointed by Truman, Democrat

Warren, from California (west), appointed by Eisenhower, Republican

I believe these are three good picks, of historical significance from each region, one appointed by a President of no party, one appointed by a Democratic President, one appointed by a Republican President.

I believe this list is fair and balanced, and all three names are suitable names for  geographic locations.

Although they do have political backgrounds, nevertheless, their significant achievements and what they are most remembered for is their service on the Supreme Court and as Chief Justice.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,999


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #326 on: October 26, 2015, 04:47:57 pm »

I considered naming the western Region after Warren, but decided not to due to his support for Japanese Internment during WWII. Ellsworth and Vinson are, frankly, no-names, and I can think of many more deserving figures to name the Northeast and South after. Who wants to live in a Region named "Vinson", anyway?

I picked Franklin, Jefferson, and Fremont because I felt they embodied the best qualities of Atlasian democracy: Franklin the ingenuity and philanthropy that has driven Atlasian society; Jefferson the idealism of the Revolution; and Fremont the rugged individualism of the pioneers. I can understand replacing Jefferson with another Southerner who embodies the same egalitarian principles minus the stain of racism, but we need to be careful not to over-think this. My goal with this amendment was to reference Atlasia's origins and to avoid bland names like "the West" and "the North," not to define every aspect of Atlasia's past, present, and future.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: -1.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #327 on: October 26, 2015, 05:02:46 pm »

Two things:
1. I don't think it is necessary to say "the first region, the second region, etc."
2. Naming regions after any sort of figure is confusing and weird. Just stick with directions - north, south and west. If we start naming after people we're going to have the Airport Renaming Act all over again...
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,051


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #328 on: October 26, 2015, 05:42:27 pm »
« Edited: October 26, 2015, 05:46:10 pm by Lincoln Republican »

There are many good names that could be used for the regions, and for many of these names, there could be some controversial aspects to their careers.  Being a slave owner is no better than supporting internment camps though.  Had I known, or remembered, that aspect about Warren, internment camps, I would not have suggested him.  

The names I put forward were merely suggestions, but I really don't want my region nor any other region named Gustaf or Demrepdan either.

I like the names Franklin and Fremont, and we should probably approve them as a convention, but I really think we should come up with something besides Jefferson for the south.

The problem is that so many prominent individuals in the early history of America were slave owners.

Suggestion, Rayburn, after Congressman Sam Rayburn from Texas, the longest serving Speaker of the U.S. H/R, known for his honesty, integrity, ability, who had the respect of the entire House, as well as much of the nation.

That is, if we even decide to name the regions after public figures at all.

So, we simply might end up with North, South, West anyway.

Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,999


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #329 on: October 26, 2015, 05:54:40 pm »

I'm okay with "Rayburn."
Logged
Classic Conservative
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,648



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #330 on: October 26, 2015, 06:07:34 pm »

Here is my map



Puerto Rico would be added to either the Northeast or the Southern/Pacific Region.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,999


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #331 on: October 26, 2015, 06:15:46 pm »

Honestly, I don't think that proposal will prove stable in the long term. It is based on the assumption that the Northeast will continue to account for the vast majority of activity long into perpetuity, which is highly unlikely. Furthermore, putting Washington in the same Region as South Carolina makes absolutely no sense: the two have nothing in common geographically, culturally, or historically.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,051


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #332 on: October 26, 2015, 06:19:54 pm »
« Edited: October 26, 2015, 06:21:36 pm by Lincoln Republican »

Classic Conservative, do you know approximately how many members would be in each region for this map?
Logged
Clark Kent
ClarkKent
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,459
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #333 on: October 26, 2015, 06:27:39 pm »

I'm not proposing anything as radically different as what Classic Conservative is for the regions, but I would like to see ~6 states in different regions:

Delaware, Maryland, and West Virginia: South=>Northeast
Minnesota and Iowa: West=>Northeast
Oklahoma: South=>West
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #334 on: October 26, 2015, 07:05:36 pm »

Honestly, I don't think that proposal will prove stable in the long term. It is based on the assumption that the Northeast will continue to account for the vast majority of activity long into perpetuity, which is highly unlikely. Furthermore, putting Washington in the same Region as South Carolina makes absolutely no sense: the two have nothing in common geographically, culturally, or historically.

Or putting Indiana in with New York as Indiana has nothing in common geographically or culturally. I hereby object to any and all maps that put Indiana in a Northeastern region. It's disappointing that this body rejected maintaining 5 regions.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,999


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #335 on: October 26, 2015, 07:17:56 pm »

Honestly, I don't think that proposal will prove stable in the long term. It is based on the assumption that the Northeast will continue to account for the vast majority of activity long into perpetuity, which is highly unlikely. Furthermore, putting Washington in the same Region as South Carolina makes absolutely no sense: the two have nothing in common geographically, culturally, or historically.

Or putting Indiana in with New York as Indiana has nothing in common geographically or culturally. I hereby object to any and all maps that put Indiana in a Northeastern region. It's disappointing that this body rejected maintaining 5 regions.

Indiana and New York are both Northern states that fought for the Union during the Civil War, border the Great Lakes, have sizable German-American communities, and were once home to the Algonquian Indian culture. The two states are, by far, a much better fit than Washington and South Carolina.
Logged
MadmanMotley
Bmotley
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,278
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.77, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #336 on: October 26, 2015, 07:18:43 pm »

This would be my map proposal.
Logged
Biden/Abrams Voter
Adam Griffin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,631
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #337 on: October 26, 2015, 09:05:38 pm »

Oh, for the love of fycking God.

This is exactly why we did CARCA in the first place - so everybody had a chance to weigh in on the concept of boundary lines. We did it - in 2013 AND in 2015 - and everybody in the game had an ability to weigh in on that map (if they chose not to participate, then tough titty!). We did it because we knew everybody and their mother would be saying "this is my map" and, well, rabble rabble rabble! The process produced a superior outcome with respect to balancing the desires and wishes of everyone involved, who came from a wide array of backgrounds. It won. Twice. Obviously that has to say something.

Now with regards to naming the regions: why? Just specify the boundaries of the regions in the Constitution and allow each region to name itself. Maybe even provide a framework (as in, names can come from the following places/types of people) to prevent absolutely asinine choices. Otherwise, we'll be objecting over "this guy was a slave-holder", "that specific regional moniker doesn't fit with this one state" or "this guy was a shitty Atlasian" for the next 10 pages.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,051


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #338 on: October 26, 2015, 09:23:01 pm »



I agree.  This must be the only map pick, if it is the one previously agreed upon during the boundary process deliberations. 

As to names, we cannot leave it to the regions.  That would simply lead to some off the wall, ridiculous selections.

The names must be decided upon in this convention.

A possibility as suggested, Franklin (for the north), Rayburn (for the south), Fremont (for the west).

Or simply The North Region, The South Region, The West Region. 
Logged
Biden/Abrams Voter
Adam Griffin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,631
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #339 on: October 26, 2015, 10:16:30 pm »
« Edited: October 26, 2015, 10:18:21 pm by RG Griff »

For the record, this was the CARCA map winner from 2013 and from 2015. I'm not inherently against MN & IA being in the red region due to the likely population difference between red and blue, but the problem becomes one in which if we open up small changes here and there, then everybody wants to start flipping this state and that state, and so forth. I think there is a legitimate argument with respect to flipping those two states - a means to further ensure population balance naturally - but I do not think that any other considerations should be made along those or any other lines. I also tend to think that if we implement the regional legislative controls (if a region becomes too small or too big, then its legislative seats shrink) that the population between regions will naturally equalize a bit more.

If we could all agree that that particular flip needs to occur but would then proceed to honor the multiple verdicts given on these maps by the people, then that would be acceptable. Otherwise, it just devolves into a situation where we're debating completely re-doing boundaries or flipping a dozen states back and forth, and that will take ages and leave many people very upset (as opposed to everyone being just a tiny bit upset).

Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,051


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #340 on: October 26, 2015, 10:30:40 pm »

If this is the map chosen in the selection process, there is no need to flip any states.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #341 on: October 26, 2015, 11:14:34 pm »

Honestly, I don't think that proposal will prove stable in the long term. It is based on the assumption that the Northeast will continue to account for the vast majority of activity long into perpetuity, which is highly unlikely. Furthermore, putting Washington in the same Region as South Carolina makes absolutely no sense: the two have nothing in common geographically, culturally, or historically.

Or putting Indiana in with New York as Indiana has nothing in common geographically or culturally. I hereby object to any and all maps that put Indiana in a Northeastern region. It's disappointing that this body rejected maintaining 5 regions.

Indiana and New York are both Northern states that fought for the Union during the Civil War, border the Great Lakes, have sizable German-American communities, and were once home to the Algonquian Indian culture. The two states are, by far, a much better fit than Washington and South Carolina.

But also many Hoosiers had sympathy with the South during the Civil War. My own (Anglo/German/Native American) family included.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,999


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #342 on: October 26, 2015, 11:30:36 pm »

Honestly, I don't think that proposal will prove stable in the long term. It is based on the assumption that the Northeast will continue to account for the vast majority of activity long into perpetuity, which is highly unlikely. Furthermore, putting Washington in the same Region as South Carolina makes absolutely no sense: the two have nothing in common geographically, culturally, or historically.

Or putting Indiana in with New York as Indiana has nothing in common geographically or culturally. I hereby object to any and all maps that put Indiana in a Northeastern region. It's disappointing that this body rejected maintaining 5 regions.

Indiana and New York are both Northern states that fought for the Union during the Civil War, border the Great Lakes, have sizable German-American communities, and were once home to the Algonquian Indian culture. The two states are, by far, a much better fit than Washington and South Carolina.

But also many Hoosiers had sympathy with the South during the Civil War. My own (Anglo/German/Native American) family included.
That hardly makes Indiana a Southern state, anymore than the fact that east Tennessee had large pro-Union pockets makes it a Northern state. Historically and geographically, Indiana has been part of the North, and while it's true that there are some grey areas, we have to draw the line somewhere.
Logged
Leinad
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,843
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.03, S: -7.91


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #343 on: October 27, 2015, 01:13:35 am »

I object considering the map endorsed by the convention of regional consolidation isn't this map.

Did anyone post the popularly selected one from a few months ago? I think that's our best choice going forward.

I will amend my amendment to put MN and IA in Franklin (the North), which is the only difference between my proposal and the CARCA map.

But why?

Seriously, why on earth would we move Minnesota and Iowa into a different region (they're Midwest now, and most of the other Midwestern states are heading to the new Western region) especially when that new region (Northeast) is already the one that accounts for the most activity (which will be increased when you throw in the new states)?

It's preposterous!

Yes, I know, it's what CARCA said, but I objected to it then, and I received no good reason for why it's that way--except that in the last CARCA people complained (which is a stupid reason).

Give me a good reason why Minnesota and Iowa need to be in the Northeast and I'll gladly shut up. Until then I'm opposed to it--we're here to make the best map for Atlasia, not just parrot the CARCA map, and I'm convinced that those aren't the same thing.

The CARCA map is mostly fine, I'm just opposed to the Minnesota/Iowa bit. Truman's first map was probably the best we can get--I think we should go with that. Anyone else agree? (Or at least have a good enough reason why I'm crazy and need to shut up?)
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #344 on: October 27, 2015, 01:30:52 am »

I agree with Adam on both issues. One the Carca should be the basis. We can deal with some minor shifts like the IA/MN one obviously, but we should operate from that as the starting point and make as few changes as possible. If we get too far into the weeds on state shifts, it will destroy any hope of agreeing to a constitution, much less ratifying it.


I also fully agree that the names should be decided by the region's themselves if they ae going to anything. The Constitution should use directions, not numbers and aside from that it should be up to the region. The South has changed its name three times since I joined this game (Southern, Dirty South, Imperial Dominion of the South and now just South). They are perfectly capable of making that choice themselves.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,742


Political Matrix
E: -0.84, S: -3.04

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #345 on: October 27, 2015, 08:58:58 am »

The committee was formed for a reason. Please let's not waste time on debating the map. I don't care if someone individually disagrees with it. We can't all get what we want. The map produced by the committee is the Will of The People and it should be the one we chose.

I find it ironic that some people who used The People to justify their support for secession are now going against Their choice in maps because they personally disagree with it. Yes, I can be sassy too.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,553
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #346 on: October 27, 2015, 08:59:37 am »

Let's move with Truman's amendment.
A 48-hours vote is now open. Please vote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Logged
Chief Justice windjammer
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,031
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #347 on: October 27, 2015, 09:40:16 am »

Aye, but I will propose an amendment adopting the map endorsed by the will of the people later.
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,553
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #348 on: October 27, 2015, 09:44:57 am »

Aye.

I agree with Windjammer. The only difference between this map and the CARCA's map is the position of Minnesota and Iowa. We can change that with another amendment.
Logged
Biden/Abrams Voter
Adam Griffin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,631
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #349 on: October 27, 2015, 10:16:27 am »
« Edited: October 27, 2015, 10:19:38 am by RG Griff »

Aye

Honestly, if we can just adopt this map and move on, I'd be perfectly fine with that - as I outlined above, this might (from a sheer population mechanics standpoint) be a better overall solution if we can just get some broad agreement on it. I'd just hate to spend 10 pages debating individual states. The fact is that several people raised a fuss over IA/MN being in either region in the initial CARCA debates (I remember Snowguy flipped out about MN being with the Pacific over the population argument, and threatened to derail the process) but it is a specific area that makes next to no sense being in either region.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 30 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines