PDA

View Full Version : TRF Nation


Draco
07-08-10, 17:52
I was toying around with this idea the other day and decided to share it and see what kind of interest their might be.

TRF is host to the widest variety of Earthlings I know of, that actually communicate generally. Such a thing naturally leads to differences of opinion due to culture, religion, and social variances.

The subject of a world government comes up often, largely decried as being a pipe dream, but the concept is a valid one.

I wanted to propose that we (TRF) design, create, build, and administer a political body in the form of a nationstate. Everything from the design of the government to how laws are made or unmade would be done as a collective.

Do we make it a monarchy? A republic? A democracy? What about a council?

Is the military a high priority? What about education? Or retirement? Economy type?

Do we allow for cultural substates (ie 'Kurdistan' or Israel). Do we allow religious freedom? How far?

If you are interested in this idea, share what you think and how you think it should be gone about.

Mad Tony
07-08-10, 19:16
Do we allow for cultural substates (ie 'Kurdistan' or Israel). Do we allow religious freedom? How far?Come on Draco. It's blindingly obvious that if TRF was a state all religion would be punishable by death. :p

Nice idea though.

Alpharaider47
07-08-10, 19:22
Come on Draco. It's blindingly obvious that if TRF was a state all religion would be punishable by death. :p

Nice idea though.

I think it's worth exploring :vlol:

jackali
07-08-10, 19:23
It's a monarchy, with regional governors.

Alpharaider47
07-08-10, 19:25
It's a monarchy, with regional governors.

So like an Administrator and Moderators :mis:

Ikas90
07-08-10, 19:29
Do we need visas to enter?

Mad Tony
07-08-10, 19:44
Just picture Soviet Russia with gay pride parades and Lara Croft statues everywhere.

Alpharaider47
07-08-10, 19:46
Just picture Soviet Russia with gay pride parades and Lara Croft statues everywhere.

In Soviet Russia Statues build you! :vlol:

I think we'd be a little better than *that*

Legend of Lara
07-08-10, 19:46
Just picture Soviet Russia with gay pride parades and Lara Croft statues everywhere.

I may have lol'd.

Mad Tony
07-08-10, 19:49
I think we'd be a little better than *that*Oh of course, that was just my attempt to sum up this place in a sentence. :p

Cochrane
07-08-10, 19:53
Interesting idea. Since this is already an open discussion forum and communication means are about as good as they can get, I’d be for direct democracy and seeing where that takes us.

Capt. Murphy
07-08-10, 19:57
A Nation? :p

What about a school? Justin is the Principal - always in his office doing something on the phone, and usually only making appearances to make a special announcement. Then you have the teachers - the Moderators. They watch the classrooms (forums), culling any fights and disagreements if/when they get ugly, as well as any horseplay (spam and posting graffiti/gifs). Then you have us; the kids. We have our cliques, gangs, friends, cool people, and some bullies... or what-have-you. :pi:

Were not really here to learn anything. Well, anything important -that is.


Now that I've typed all that out - I wonder if I should bother posting it.

Again. A Nation? As unserious as this place is - IMO; calling it a 'Nation' is dressing it up to look fancier than it actually is. It's just a community. Online. We are what we are.

Mad Tony
07-08-10, 20:10
If anything TRF would be a monarchy, and not a mostly powerless one like the British one either.

Alpharaider47
07-08-10, 20:14
If anything TRF would be a monarchy, and not a mostly powerless one like the British one either.

I'd go for that :p

Dustie
07-08-10, 20:36
Whatever it's going to be, I want it to be located in Southern California :cool:


I'm for democracy. It's supposedly bad too, but also the best thing human's have come up with so far.

t-raider26
07-08-10, 21:54
A Nation? :p

What about a school? Justin is the Principal - always in his office doing something on the phone, and usually only making appearances to make a special announcement. Then you have the teachers - the Moderators. They watch the classrooms (forums), culling any fights and disagreements if/when they get ugly, as well as any horseplay (spam and posting graffiti/gifs). Then you have us; the kids. We have our cliques, gangs, friends, cool people, and some bullies... or what-have-you. :pi:

Were not really here to learn anything. Well, anything important -that is.


Now that I've typed all that out - I wonder if I should bother posting it.

Again. A Nation? As unserious as this place is - IMO; calling it a 'Nation' is dressing it up to look fancier than it actually is. It's just a community. Online. We are what we are.

I like this idea :D Id say we're more of a school than a nation :p

Draco
07-08-10, 21:56
I'm not talking about a translation of the actual forum into a nation state. I mean we are the founders of a new country, after WW3 for example. It just happens to be built from TRF member ideas.

Dark Lugia 2
08-08-10, 01:06
The newspapers ('news' threads) would consist of only miserable local stories. :p There would be a weekly poll about how ugly the human race is, nyeheh :p

tlr online
08-08-10, 02:13
I was toying around with this idea the other day and decided to share it and see what kind of interest their might be.

TRF is host to the widest variety of Earthlings I know of, that actually communicate generally. Such a thing naturally leads to differences of opinion due to culture, religion, and social variances.

The subject of a world government comes up often, largely decried as being a pipe dream, but the concept is a valid one.

I wanted to propose that we (TRF) design, create, build, and administer a political body in the form of a nationstate. Everything from the design of the government to how laws are made or unmade would be done as a collective.

Do we make it a monarchy? A republic? A democracy? What about a council?

Is the military a high priority? What about education? Or retirement? Economy type?

Do we allow for cultural substates (ie 'Kurdistan' or Israel). Do we allow religious freedom? How far?

If you are interested in this idea, share what you think and how you think it should be gone about.

Pretty novel idea. I shall be watching this thread with interest.

Encore
08-08-10, 02:17
I'm not talking about a translation of the actual forum into a nation state. I mean we are the founders of a new country, after WW3 for example. It just happens to be built from TRF member ideas.

Are you suggesting that it's possible for TRF members to come up with a common idea of what this state would be? Or are we supposed to each give our own ideas?

Dustie
08-08-10, 07:21
We definitely need a good justice system. I think a lot of problems in certain countries stem from lack of thereof, or it's multiple failures and general, persistent flaws.

scoopy_loopy
08-08-10, 07:27
just picture soviet russia with gay pride parades and lara croft statues everywhere.

lmao!

Free speech, religion and trade, kthx! :)


*thumbs up* for a Capitalist Monarchy with a separation of church and state :p

Alpharaider47
08-08-10, 07:30
Are you suggesting that it's possible for TRF members to come up with a common idea of what this state would be? Or are we supposed to each give our own ideas?

I'm personally thinking both, and then the popular ideas will probably get passed along. Perhaps Draco could update the OP with what we've come up with so far or a link to some form of "recap" post?

TheBloodRed
08-08-10, 07:31
Just picture Soviet Russia with gay pride parades and Lara Croft statues everywhere.

This. :gay:

the ancient
08-08-10, 08:54
we are full of pedophile priests here
So let us get some here too

Cochrane
08-08-10, 09:39
Alright, some suggestions that I hope will be obvious:

- Official language: English, because we speak that all already here, but no discrimination against others.
- Complete separation between church and state, since that always leads to trouble.
- Complete separation between state and game developer, since that leads to even more trouble.
- No internet blockings, illegal sites will be deleted, not blocked.
- No form of draft.
- Equal protection for everyone, human rights, etc.. Laws must generally allow a citizen to do anything unless it is provably likely to hurt others.

Some that will be more problematic:
- Military: Only enough to defend against anyone who is a credible threat, not a single gun more. Depending on the final location, no military may be necessary at all.
- Highest focus on education.
- Infrastructure: Favor public transportation over individual (e.g. cars)
- That includes taxes on gas similar to average european levels.
- Economy: Open, free market, but with regulation of markets where monopolies or oligopolies are present or may be present.
- Public services: Mostly contracted to private companies, but with contracts ensuring quality over cost-saving for the public. Things like public transit need and get subsidies as long as the total value for the economy is larger than the subsidies. Government duties that involve official force (e.g. police) never contracted to private companies.
- Fully legal marriage for homosexuals.
- No private right to own guns, with exceptions for registered hunters, people living on remote farms and so on.
- Copyright: Generally protected, but with lesser durations (50 years after creation of the work?), right to copy for private purposes and to circumvent copy protection mechanisms for that, extensive fair use rules.
- Courts: No juries or right not to be tried by a jury.
- No symbolism. Flag, anthem and so on are nice, but there should be no requirement e.g. to sing the anthem in schools every morning, pledge allegiance to anything or similar.

And for the form of government:
- Multiple parties, public elections, proportional seat distribution. Founding a new party that matters should be hard (e.g. requiring a minimum number of votes before any seats are allocated) for stability, but it should be easier for concerned individuals to become involved in politics just to discuss a single issue and then leave again.


This is just what came to my mind. Please tear it apart and help replace it with something new!

the ancient
08-08-10, 11:28
what about ministers

Like minster of Economy, Minsister of sports...

Ward Dragon
08-08-10, 11:38
- Courts: No juries or right not to be tried by a jury.

I don't understand this one. I'm probably misreading it, but it sounds like a contradiction to me (no juries, but then someone can't be tried without a jury? :confused:). All of the others I understand (even if I disagree on some of them, but not enough that I feel like arguing over it right now :p)

Cochrane
08-08-10, 12:32
I don't understand this one. I'm probably misreading it, but it sounds like a contradiction to me (no juries, but then someone can't be tried without a jury? :confused:). All of the others I understand (even if I disagree on some of them, but not enough that I feel like arguing over it right now :p)

What I meant is that there is either no jury system, or if there is, you can choose to be tried in a court without jury instead. In either case, the judge(s) would decide whether you are guilty and if yes what the punishment is.

I can see where the american idea that all trials should be with a jury came from, but I think in many modern cases, I would really prefer my case to be decided by a trained professional, instead of many amateurs who may be influenced by either sides lawyer much more easily.

M.A.
08-08-10, 13:03
You know.... we could TRY and conquer the Antarctica. :D

Lara Croft!
08-08-10, 14:10
TRF and every forum is by definition a monarchy which is helped by generals of the military. The monarch being the administrator and the generals all the moderators.

It is them who created this nation from scratch and it is them who create the laws the citizens will live by. They announce these laws openly and ask for complete acceptance and obedience if you decide that you want to live in this nation. Participation is optional since it's the Internet, so dictatorship is left out of discussion. You can leave any time and no one will prosecute you.


Although a monarchy at hierarchy it tries to be a democracy in principal, that not being always the case as it's not possible.

The members are the citizens, simple folk. Some being promoted to generals from time to time, while others are punished from generals for not obeying the TRF laws. A temporary ban is like a temporary relief from your job while a permanent ban is being fired for life. I couldn't use the prison metaphor as in a forum's case you're not put in rather than left out.








Just picture Soviet Russia with gay pride parades and Lara Croft statues everywhere.

You know.... we could TRY and conquer the Antarctica. :D

lmao

Draco
08-08-10, 14:34
TRF and every forum is by definition a monarchy which is helped by generals of the military. The monarch being the administrator and the generals all the moderators.

It is them who created this nation from scratch and it is them who create the laws the citizens will live by. They announce these laws openly and ask for complete acceptance and obedience if you decide that you want to live in this nation. Participation is optional since it's the Internet, so dictatorship is left out of discussion. You can leave any time and no one will prosecute you.


Although a monarchy at hierarchy it tries to be a democracy in principal, that not being always the case as it's not possible.

The members are the citizens, simple folk. Some being promoted to generals from time to time, while others are punished from generals for not obeying the TRF laws. A temporary ban is like a temporary relief from your job while a permanent ban is being fired for life. I couldn't use the prison metaphor as in a forum's case you're not put in rather than left out.


This topic is about what kind of country we would collectively create, not about the forum.

Ward Dragon
09-08-10, 02:11
What I meant is that there is either no jury system, or if there is, you can choose to be tried in a court without jury instead. In either case, the judge(s) would decide whether you are guilty and if yes what the punishment is.

I can see where the american idea that all trials should be with a jury came from, but I think in many modern cases, I would really prefer my case to be decided by a trained professional, instead of many amateurs who may be influenced by either sides lawyer much more easily.

Ah, the US system does have the option for a bench trial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bench_trial#United_States) if a person wants to be tried by the judge rather than a jury. Now that I understand what you meant, I agree that's a good idea to have the option to be tried by the judge instead of a jury. However I think there's a danger in giving the judges too much power so it has to be carefully balanced.

I was reading an article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_253/7530-Phoenix-Wrights-Objection) on the Escapist awhile back and if they got their facts right, the way the system is set up in Japan without a jury, it is extremely biased against anyone who is charged with a crime, so I think going to extremes either way is bound to cause trouble (purely trusting the judges vs. purely trusting the jury). There needs to be some kind of reliable appeals process that will fairly consider whether the verdict was reasonable or ignored substantial evidence.

aktrekker
09-08-10, 02:25
A jury should always be randomly selected. Preferably by computer. Whichever names come up are the ones who serve. Period.
Otherwise you get both sides trying to stack the jury in their favor. Like we have here in the US.

Ward Dragon
09-08-10, 02:31
A jury should always be randomly selected. Preferably by computer. Whichever names come up are the ones who serve. Period.
Otherwise you get both sides trying to stack the jury in their favor. Like we have here in the US.

I wouldn't want a trial where members of the jury hate me due to race/gender/religion/etc. and will find me guilty no matter the merits of the case. That's why the lawyers are allowed to reject jurors that they think are incredibly biased and will not judge fairly.

Draco
23-08-10, 01:41
Alright, let's take this in stages.

What style of government should we have?

NemesisX13X
23-08-10, 01:47
So I don't really get it, we're actually forming a real country?

Draco
23-08-10, 01:52
The world has ended for whatever reason and the only survivors are TRF's members. We must rebuild, so what do we rebuild?

Uzi master
23-08-10, 02:01
I'll just post what I would want it to be:p

Q:Do we make it a monarchy? A republic? A democracy? What about a council?
A: Monarchy, with me as the king, and if an eternal life serum is invented I get it;)



Q:Is the military a high priority?
no, where a peacfull nation and don't go barging around invading other countries

Q: What about education?
A: education is top notch, and government funded so anyone that wont go has no excuse, and will be thrown into the nearest volcano

Q:Or retirement?
A:Retirement programs will be held and depending on there wealth they will get sustainable monthly payments, but certain jobs best suited for seneirs will be offered to less strain on funds

Q: Economy type?
A: Not sure the technical type, but I'll just say that the amount of money a company owner can keep will be restricted to a certain percentage of income

Q:Do we allow for cultural substates (ie 'Kurdistan' or Israel). Do we allow religious freedom? How far?
A: specific cultures are alloud but religouse practises are forbidden:ton:


well, more the "uzi master" nation where everyone has to be like me:p

Agent 47
23-08-10, 04:31
Alright, let's take this in stages.

What style of government should we have?

A Council of Elected Ministers - (20 people in total)
10x Elected officials forming the aforementioned council. (they are elected to maintain the welfare of the people in key areas such as, Education, Health, Employment, Law, Transport)
10x Shadow Council (made of the 10 people with the lowest vote.they monitor the Elected Council, it's through this body the EC are held accountable for the public)

Maximum term of office is 4 years for both the EC & SC.

Councillors are free to run again if they so wish,as are any able citizens who wish to run and serve. The democratic process must be open to all. Voting made mandatory from age 14
10 people with most votes form the EC, the 10 with the lowest form the SC.

#Health - Medical care should be freely available to all regardless of wealth.
#Education - Learning should be the priority in the field of maths,English,history,sciences,engineering,agricul ture

Civil Liberties -
All basic human rights must be observed,Freedom of speech,Freedom of press, Right to fair trial, Rights to Health care and Education, Right to peaceful protest. This also applies to same sex marriages/unions.

Religion -
Any citizen is free to practice their religion in designated places of worship. Intolerance and incitement will not be tolerated however and no recognised religion will be frowned upon.

Law and Order -
Right to fair trial is a must. Punishments for crimes can vary from x many yrs imprisonment to exile (all punishments must be consistent)

:D

scoopy_loopy
23-08-10, 05:00
Religion should be taxxed -- and no political standpoints may be backed by religious "morals".

Capt. Murphy
23-08-10, 05:07
Religion should be taxxed -- and no political standpoints may be backed by religious "morals".

Then would doing away with the "morals" in a political standpoint be regarded as a standard of morals in and of itself? If so, that's no better than prohibiting the morals that (other) side is trying to stand for.

In other words; some things can only be 1 way or the other. And either way it's either moral or immoral (good or evil).

scoopy_loopy
23-08-10, 05:11
Then would doing away with the "morals" in a political standpoint be regarded as a standard of morals in and of itself? If so, that's no better than prohibiting the morals that (other) side is trying to stand for.

In other words; some things can only be 1 way or the other. And either way it's either moral or immoral (good or evil).

You can make decisions WITHOUT resulting to religion to back your decisions. It's also quite possible to be moral and apathetic towards religion.

Capt. Murphy
23-08-10, 05:42
Then I guess it comes down to this. When referring to a "moral" - how can one not attribute it to a "religious moral"? For if we believe something is either right or wrong - isn't what we "believe" getting into the realm of religion?

What's the difference between a "religious moral" and a "regular, everyday moral"?

Is there really a difference? :mis:

scoopy_loopy
23-08-10, 05:53
^
Of course there is.

IE; All polls in Australia suggest that Australians want gay marriage. Both political parties shoot down legislation for gay marriage in favour of, "good Christian values".

Uzi master
23-08-10, 05:55
religouse morals are set in the religion for the member to (or theyre supposed to) follow.

regular morals are what a socienty find's good or bad, usually conflicting with riligouse morals.


I suppose it could also mean morals set by individuals for themselves too.

Capt. Murphy
23-08-10, 06:25
^
Of course there is.

IE; All polls in Australia suggest that Australians want gay marriage. Both political parties shoot down legislation for gay marriage in favour of, "good Christian values".

I know and understand what you're saying.

Let's say they approve gay marriage. It would be like; both political parties uphold legislation of gay marriage in favor of immorality.

Because if being against Gay marriage is religiously moral - then being for it would be immoral.

The whole point I'm trying to make is - you can't have morals without religion, or standards of what is right and wrong.

scoopy_loopy
23-08-10, 06:32
The whole point I'm trying to make is - you can't have morals without religion, or standards of what is right and wrong.

Um.... yes one most certainly can. :wve:

Cochrane
23-08-10, 08:53
Ah, the US system does have the option for a bench trial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bench_trial#United_States) if a person wants to be tried by the judge rather than a jury. Now that I understand what you meant, I agree that's a good idea to have the option to be tried by the judge instead of a jury. However I think there's a danger in giving the judges too much power so it has to be carefully balanced.

I was reading an article (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_253/7530-Phoenix-Wrights-Objection) on the Escapist awhile back and if they got their facts right, the way the system is set up in Japan without a jury, it is extremely biased against anyone who is charged with a crime, so I think going to extremes either way is bound to cause trouble (purely trusting the judges vs. purely trusting the jury). There needs to be some kind of reliable appeals process that will fairly consider whether the verdict was reasonable or ignored substantial evidence.
Well, Japan is quite different culturally from most of the western world. In almost all european countries, trial by jury has been abandoned. There are also procedural differences between trial in the english language area and the continental tradition (here, the judge is the one interviewing defendants and witnesses, lawyers can add their questions later), but that would probably lead too far here. Anyway, I donít really mind jury trial for those who choose it, I just wouldnít.

A Council of Elected Ministers - (20 people in total)
10x Elected officials forming the aforementioned council. (they are elected to maintain the welfare of the people in key areas such as, Education, Health, Employment, Law, Transport)
10x Shadow Council (made of the 10 people with the lowest vote.they monitor the Elected Council, it's through this body the EC are held accountable for the public)

Maximum term of office is 4 years for both the EC & SC.

]Councillors are free to run again if they so wish,as are any able citizens who wish to run and serve. The democratic process must be open to all. Voting made mandatory from age 14
10 people with most votes form the EC, the 10 with the lowest form the SC.
I hope you donít mind me tearing this apart, it is an interesting proposal. First of all, I donít see anything stopping the government from passing evil laws, or does the Shadow Council have such powers? I would also give the SC positions to whoever got the second highest vote. Imagine the "Mafia and Racists United Party" running. Under your system you could assume that theyíd automatically get important government jobs.

I also donít see the point of mandatory voting. I doubt that it will make people more interested. Instead, it will just add an element to randomness to every election when people who vote only to avoid a fine select whatever name looks best.


No disagreement there, although the order of fields for education might be debated (agriculture? Really?). But that is a minor detail.

[QUOTE=Agent 47;4843040]Civil Liberties -
All basic human rights must be observed,Freedom of speech,Freedom of press, Right to fair trial, Rights to Health care and Education, Right to peaceful protest. This also applies to same sex marriages/unions.

Religion -
Any citizen is free to practice their religion in designated places of worship. Intolerance and incitement will not be tolerated however and no recognised religion will be frowned upon.

Law and Order -
Right to fair trial is a must. Punishments for crimes can vary from x many yrs imprisonment to exile (all punishments must be consistent)

:D

Sounds good, but you seem to forget fines for punishment.

jackles
23-08-10, 10:37
what about community service for those who have transgessed in small ways?


Say....for drunk and disordely or something? Making redress to the society in some way would benefit that society.

lunavixen
23-08-10, 11:18
You can make decisions WITHOUT resulting to religion to back your decisions. It's also quite possible to be moral and apathetic towards religion.

i am, i have "morals" and i couldn't give a rats about religion in the slightest

scoopy_loopy
23-08-10, 12:30
i am, i have "morals" and i couldn't give a rats about religion in the slightest

:tmb:

Cochrane
23-08-10, 12:53
Religion should be taxxed -- and no political standpoints may be backed by religious "morals".

I am not convinced that this is a good idea. Truly religious people will claim that religion is the reason for all of their decisions, including ones that you and I would not object to. Maybe they would take Jesusís teachings as the reason to implement universal health care, as an example.

Instead, the constitution should make sure that religion is a private matter. No "In God We Trust" on money or similar, for example, and a strict statement that religion and government should be separate. That would mean that a law against anything based only on "God does not want this" would have to be rejected, if no other reasons can be found.

Religion is based on the people who believe. You canít take religion out of government without taking religious people out of government, and that would be oppression. That would be far more dangerous than right-wing people trying to deny marriage to gays or teach creationism in schools.

scoopy_loopy
23-08-10, 12:57
I am not convinced that this is a good idea. Truly religious people will claim that religion is the reason for all of their decisions, including ones that you and I would not object to. Maybe they would take Jesusís teachings as the reason to implement universal health care, as an example.

Instead, the constitution should make sure that religion is a private matter. No "In God We Trust" on money or similar, for example, and a strict statement that religion and government should be separate. That would mean that a law against anything based only on "God does not want this" would have to be rejected, if no other reasons can be found.

Religion is based on the people who believe. You canít take religion out of government without taking religious people out of government, and that would be oppression. That would be far more dangerous than right-wing people trying to deny marriage to gays or teach creationism in schools.

I totally agree with your second paragraph - perhaps I worded mine too harshly earlier -- but you probably also saw my latter post about Australian Gay Marriage and the brick walls it hits in parliament; which is more alike the kind of issue I was trying to get at by politicians taking a standpoint on their religion and NOT listening to the people.

Orionvalentine
23-08-10, 15:39
I think Mad Tony hit the nail on the head in the first page. This place would be just a big gay pride parade with a king penguin.

Seriously, it's the single largest place that I know a lot of homosexuals will be hanging around :P

Draco
23-08-10, 15:42
That just means we will have low population growth.

Ill post more indepth soon, I'm on my Droid.