We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Kazul Colonial Possessions
Details
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 3236
Description[?]:
| Upon the notification from moderation a while back, it seems to be necessary for all players to reach a consensus on the benefits which the colonial possessions of Kazulia bring to Kazulia. All who vote for this resolution shall declare their support that the colonies have the following effects on Kazulia; 1) The Kazul people shall rely on the colonies to produce and maintain fruits, vegetables and other edible crops whereas due to Kazulia's mountainous terrain such production is impossible. If Kazulia looses her colonies, the effects shall include famine, mass-starvation, riots, political unrest, military weakening and low government stability. 2) The Kazul industry shall indirectly rely on production received from the colonial possessions which shall in turn fuel the Kazul industry and generate the profit which is presented and added into the economic capability of the nation. If Kazulia looses her colonies, the effects shall include medium economic recession, extinction of the wood industry, extinction of the mineral industry, medium extinction of the coal industry, medium to large shortage of raw and building materials. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:41:36, December 28, 2011 CET | From | Monarkisterna | To | Debating the Kazul Colonial Possessions |
| Message | Doesn't Section 6.6.2 (of the Game Rules) state that: 6.6.2 Respective of the official game mechanics and existing rules, colonies can only be tools for role play and as such cannot have specific attributes, i.e. population, colonial forces, monetary gain, etc. Thus these colonies cannot have any specific benefits, which this bill gives? |
| Date | 00:07:38, December 29, 2011 CET | From | Høyre | To | Debating the Kazul Colonial Possessions |
| Message | In this case, it does not give any actual gains towards the Kazulian economy as this is all indirect. The colonial industry which is roleplayed, fuels the Kazul industry which comes out with the profit. Therefore in this case there should be no problem with the rules as this is rather roleplay than giving Kazulia specific economic gains such as profit, larger GDP etc. |
| Date | 13:43:40, December 31, 2011 CET | From | Anarkosyndikalisterna | To | Debating the Kazul Colonial Possessions |
| Message | You can claim whatever you like in this bill but it doesn't make it true. As has been pointed out the rules of the game state the exact opposite. |
| Date | 10:37:52, January 01, 2012 CET | From | Høyre | To | Debating the Kazul Colonial Possessions |
| Message | Actually, you are never forced to comply however from this point on the following affects can be roleplayed as a majority approved this legislation. This bill was proposed with guidance from moderation which makes it absolutely valid. Its not my problem that your angry that you can't get your republic and subsequently refuse to roleplay. However, as I pointed out several times you have 33 republican nations to pick from and I suggest you pick one because with the current attitude your presenting you are not going to get very far in Kazulia. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 437 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 234 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 64 |
| Random fact: When it comes to creating a Cultural Protocol in a Culturally Open nation, players are not necessarily required to provide a plausible backstory for how the nation's cultural background developed. However, the provision of a plausible backstory may be a factor in whether Moderation approves the Cultural Protocol if players in surrounding nations question its appropriateness for their region of the game map. |
| Random quote: "How we can possibly be giving £1bn a month, when we're in this sort of debt, to Bongo Bongo Land is completely beyond me." - Godfrey Bloom |