Goblin Squad Member
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pardon the dust while we are renovating and congratulations to all of the settlement winners! During the Land Rush 2 event, it became apparent that Freevale's Chaotic Democracy just wasn't as much fun or as effective as it might sound. There have been some changes to how our settlement will be governed. Freevale will still have a council moving forward but it will function in an advisory role. Blunt Logic will be establishing the oligarchy that the Council of Freevale advises.
In the next few days we will get a proper settlement thread going with more detail. If you have any questions, holler!
I personally agree with Andius, good luck Gpunk
Geez, you're gone a couple days and they've changed everything.
Sprucing up is oakay. I'm just pining for the good old days.
Damn counters and their fancy math skills. I knew they were up to no good. >:(
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, since I'm sure some people are wondering, here's the basic breakdown on why this was necessary:
democrazies r hurd
Especially ones where you don't want to force company heads uninterested in politics to take part in the discussions. Freevale has a lot of different companies, and each head has a slightly different level of tolerance for pick-a-little-talk-a-little.
Some settlements are big on unity; on forcing their members to get Mumble and keep up and memorize the hex layout and learn all the ins-and-outs of the other councilmembers' preferences. Freevale wants to avoid entangling its players like that, which means, ironically, Freevale has to have a narrower "dictatorship"-style.
"Take away freedom to conserve freedom." We've heard that in every half-assed teen dystopia romance novel—it's showing how bullshit government is and how they don't understand our pain and how teens totally aren't just looking for ways to feel validated about not doing the goddamn dishes and all that fun stuff.
However, this is a game. And we want a solution that maximises fun, practicality, and ease of use. That means not making councilmembers feel obliged to watch the forums like Observers strange eyeball creatures.
In short, simple systems of government are more fun for some groups. It often really just comes down to how heavily you are willing (and able) to control and "prod" your council to take action, as well as how the individuals on the Council get along. We wish the more democratically-focused settlements, such as our fellow Chaotics in Aragon and Tavernhold, the very best.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I the only one already getting private messages about a counter revolt? :]
I am loving chaos...! ;)
But no counter-counter-counter revolution from my part.That said, this dwarf will further aspire to make Freevale as free as possible.
But before that, i need to get some weapons crafted... ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We wish the more democratically-focused settlements, such as our fellow Chaotics in Aragon and Tavernhold, the very best.
I can't speak for Tavernhold, but I assure you Aragon is not a Democracy.
Aragon is governed by common sense and game mechanic optimization. It is better to have a settlement that is run well, than it is to have one that gives everyone an equal voice. What needs to get done gets bogged down with what some would like to have done.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Running any online clan gets to be hard work for those involved and it mainly goes unappreciated. Democracies are the most work and fascist (in the sense that individual rights are irrelevant and everything must be sacrificed for the good of the clan) dictatorships the easiest.
In EVE this has lead to some large coalition leaders (Mittani from GSF/CFC is the prime example) quitting there day job and dedicating themselves to EVE full time. In the Mittani case he now makes a full-time living from advertising revenue from his EVE related news website.
What happened to the group that was going to choose their leader via combat challenges?
Did they end up joining Freevale?
I loved that idea.
I can say that my PvP/PvC (Player verses Corpse) company, when it's created, will operate under such a rule. However, as it's chaotic, nobody would be under any obligation to follow the new leader, and the challenger would have to be willing to take the rep hit for attacking.
We wish the more democratically-focused settlements, such as our fellow Chaotics in Aragon and Tavernhold, the very best.I can't speak for Tavernhold, but I assure you Aragon is not a Democracy.
Aragon is governed by common sense and game mechanic optimization. It is better to have a settlement that is run well, than it is to have one that gives everyone an equal voice. What needs to get done gets bogged down with what some would like to have done.
Oh, sorry. I thought Aragon had a council.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It does have a council, but that does not make it a democracy. As it turns out the council members have agreed on every important issue. But sometimes I have gone lone wolf on an issue, and then Milo, Talon and Xeen back it up after the fact. Any of the three will get the same support from me. In the end we know that we put UNC or Aragon first, so any decision is usually close enough to what the others would agree with.
The UNC is a brotherhood, we back each other's play.
democratically-focused
I did not call Aragon a democracy. America is democratically-focused, too. :P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
democratically-focusedI did not call Aragon a democracy. America is democratically-focused, too. :P
Corporate focused really.
The cynical would say the US tendency to promote democracies in third world countries is because a democracy is easily corrupted by corporate interests.
We have that in Australia where the government of the day is now mainly elected on the basis of who the large mining/media interests decide to promote and lobby behind :D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From Freedom to Tyranny, it is as easy as that, folks!
I kid, I kid. I am sure your new overloads are plenty benevolent!
Sadly, there's a lot of truth to that.
What happened to the group that was going to choose their leader via combat challenges?
Did they end up joining Freevale?
I loved that idea.
Oh yeah, Stone Bear Clan is a Company along with Blunt Logic and Outsiders that agreed to make Freevale into the freedom loving settlement we strived for. Unfortunately, it seems that the 4 person Company of Blunt Logic has decided that freedom is for pansies and that Freevale should become a generic dictatorship like so many other boring settlements. Going for full Chaotic Freedom isn't easy and they just didn't have the intestinal fortitude to handle it.
Stone Bear Clan hasn't changed and lead will still be chosen through combat. It's a fun idea and fitting of a Barbarian themed group. Here's a bit from our home page:
"The Stone Bear Clan follows a Chief who is always the strongest among us. Any warrior of the Clan may challenge the Chief for leadership by Trial of Combat. The winner is the Chief from that point forward until they are defeated in a future Trial."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What happened to the group that was going to choose their leader via combat challenges?
Did they end up joining Freevale?
I loved that idea.
That group is the Stone Bear Clan.
While it is true that we were among those suckered into giving our Land Rush votes to Freevale, Blunt Logic has revealed their true colors today... Conveniently the day after the end of the Land Rush.
I doubt the SBC will remain in a Settlement that allows such under handed tactics.
It was a mistake to trust Blunt Logic with Freevale's keys. I wanted CBDunkerson to have control of the Land Rush for Freevale, but Blunt Logic had happened to submit their Settlement earlier. So when we consolidated, we decided to let Blunt Logic have control of the Land Rush part in case of a tie. Now there is no in game mechanic for Freevale's council to do anything about Blunt Logic's power play.
We had tried to build something unique with Freevale, a bastion for the Chaotic. A home that held freedom for it's citizens as the highest priority. A place where multiple groups could work together as equals and build a city. When we first joined up to create Freevale there were those that said we couldn't make it work. That getting multiple companies to work together for the Settlement was not feasible. Thank you Blunt Logic for proving them right. Yes democracy is hard, it clearly was too difficult for you, so you should have stepped down as Ambassador. Instead, today when I went to the Freevale guildsite to celebrate with everyone for keeping 'I' as our Settlement location I find that Blunt Logic has declared themselves the Master of Freevale. What an immense let down.
It is obvious that Gpunk and Blunt Logic were under pressure from Pax and Aragon to cement a solid alliance, something the council of Freevale was strongly opposed to, something that, now that Blunt Logic has seized control, I am sure we will see very soon. It will be interesting to see what becomes of "Freevale" after it becomes just another puppet settlement for the Empire of Xeilias. I know that you guys want to put on a strong front to intimidate the Hugbox Alliance, er, I mean Roseblood Accord. Did you really have to drag Freevale into it though?
I have played games like this before, anything can burn, so I am not going to hold a grudge. Last thing PFO needs is another Andius :p
Freevale has a lot of quality folks and it was a genuine pleasure talking with you all and dreaming of building a unique home together.
Easy come, easy go. It is all a part of the game. If anything, this experience makes me want to play PFO all the more. Such political backstabbing makes for a great story after all.
*Sigh*
I haven't cemented my personal feelings on this matter yet, but one thing's for sure: I'm not gonna make a public scene about it. I guess I'm just weird like that.
One simple fact, which I already stated: Freevale's old Council was terrible. If the honorable barbarians of the SBC are so keen to keep the Council relevant, perhaps they should begin making suggestions as to how to improve it to something that at least sort of works. That might help the process along.
That said, it looks like the barbarians may be on their way out of town, so it may be a moot point.
Geez, and I thought I was gonna get my schoolwork done today...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What happened to the group that was going to choose their leader via combat challenges?
Did they end up joining Freevale?
I loved that idea.
That group is the Stone Bear Clan.
While it is true that we were among those suckered into giving our Land Rush votes to Freevale, Blunt Logic has revealed their true colors today... Conveniently the day after the end of the Land Rush.
I doubt the SBC will remain in a Settlement that allows such under handed tactics.
It was a mistake to trust Blunt Logic with Freevale's keys. I wanted CBDunkerson to have control of the Land Rush for Freevale, but Blunt Logic had happened to submit their Settlement earlier. So when we consolidated, we decided to let Blunt Logic have control of the Land Rush part in case of a tie. Now there is no in game mechanic for Freevale's council to do anything about Blunt Logic's power play.
We had tried to build something unique with Freevale, a bastion for the Chaotic. A home that held freedom for it's citizens as the highest priority. A place where multiple groups could work together as equals and build a city. When we first joined up to create Freevale there were those that said we couldn't make it work. That getting multiple companies to work together for the Settlement was not feasible. Thank you Blunt Logic for proving them right. Yes democracy is hard, it clearly was too difficult for you, so you should have stepped down as Ambassador. Instead, today when I went to the Freevale guildsite to celebrate with everyone for keeping 'I' as our Settlement location I find that Blunt Logic has declared themselves the Master of Freevale. What an immense let down.
It is obvious that Gpunk and Blunt Logic were under pressure from Pax and Aragon to cement a solid alliance, something the council of Freevale was strongly opposed to, something that, now that Blunt Logic has seized control, I am sure we will see very soon. It will be interesting to see what...
It is not in the Nature of the Keepers to interfere in other settlements business but I will point out that as a NG settlement non-evil chaotic players/companies are always welcome at Keepers Pass and whilst not a democracy by any means, affiliated chartered companies are offered a position with some influence.
Meanwhile - hopefully Freevale can sort out its internal issues without anyone needing to jump ship.
For those looking in and seeing another settlement drama, let's be clear: I don't believe this is going to explode like certain others have. Freevale has always been a chill crowd. Some of our members have been more stressed than others of late, but we're still chillaxed at heart. At worst, people will leave and start their own town with saps and ogre hooks or whatever. Both sides are at least making some effort at keeping things calm.
This is an especially dreary day in Freevale's run, but I hope things can be leveled out over the next week.
I'm off to finish my Bio homework and go to bed. Now, nobody kill each other while I'm gone unless you get it on video!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When internal politics come to the point members leave over them, they are no longer internal. The people who left aren't airing their dirty laundry but your dirty laundry because they are no longer a part of you.
Acting like "Oh we're all mature because we keep our own skeletons locked in our closet, unlike those guys who left and revealed them" is pretty ridiculous.
Now that it is public if be interested in knowing:
1. Who is a part of the new leadership?
2. Who was involved in the decision to go Oligarchy?
While I still believe democracies to be a proven failure in these forms of MMOs I can sympathize with the other factions involved if 4 players turned a promised democracy into a dictatorship the day after the landrush without support from the other groups. On the other hand if the majority made the decision to go oligarchy then that's how democracies work. The majority is always right no matter how badly that screws over the minorities.
Andius, since you want to know (and RL will likely be happy to tell you regardless) here is my understanding:
This morning I woke up, went to my Biology 101 class (damn it, I'd forgotten an assignment we had due!), popped by the library for my three-hour break and learn two things.
1. We kept I. No big surprise.
2. We are now a dictatorship of some sort. I learned this from the Paizo forums, and initially assumed I'd missed a big discussion on Freevale's quite active forums. Nope. I wasn't contacted in advance, and I don't know of anyone who was. For all I know, this was a decision made without even the input of other members of Blunt Logic.
Now, the Council (what's left of it) hasn't really taken a stand one way or another on the shift. BL's representative is opposed, obviously.
Ravenlute and Gpunk have been butting heads for some time now, over issues ranging from forum moderation to the Northern Coalition. It's gotten to the point that they rather dislike each other, and that is the surest way to ruin some shit.
That's all. Good night, everybody!
Oh god, Kobold is on the council!
BAIL, BAIL, BAIL!
FREEBAIL
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Then I'll go on record as saying, despite my agreement with the superiority of oligarchies in this format, Zodd's jab at me, and what sounds like an upcoming alliance with Freevale...
Democracy is what you promised those who voted for your settlement, and if the democracy is to be ended that should be decided democratically.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Soooo...... Have you considered contacting Goblinworks about how you feel you where scammed and the possibility of removing your votes from Freevale. It may be worth a try.
Nope, I'm not that petty. Doing so may result in Freevale being placed somewhere else, which would displace another Settlement and maybe even cause a chain reaction. That could be heartbreaking for the displaced and while I play a crazy CN character, in real life I'm a pretty decent guy and I'm not about to do that to others after this Landrush is finally over.
We will deal with this situation as needed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, I'm not that petty. Doing so may result in Freevale being placed somewhere else, which would displace another Settlement and maybe even cause a chain reaction. That could be heartbreaking for the displaced and while I play a crazy CN character, in real life I'm a pretty decent guy and I'm not about to do that to others after this Landrush is finally over.
We will deal with this situation as needed.
The situation should be that an individual or group is presented with all the information to make a decision beforehand so in my opinion retracting your votes would net really be petty in this situation because you clearly where not presented with all the information you needed.
I do however respect your choice of action. The above explanation is not meant to say what you should do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It is obvious that Gpunk and Blunt Logic were under pressure from Pax and Aragon to cement a solid alliance, something the council of Freevale was strongly opposed to, something that, now that Blunt Logic has seized control, I am sure we will see very soon. It will be interesting to see what becomes of "Freevale" after it becomes just another puppet settlement for the Empire of Xeilias. I know that you guys want to put on a strong front to intimidate the Hugbox Alliance, er, I mean Roseblood Accord. Did you really have to drag Freevale into it though?
That is not true.
No one was putting pressure on anyone to change their internal politics. Each group has their own way of doing things, and they are left to do just that.