The State Of the States

---

---

The State of the States
Examining Why They Have Failed.
GraVandius

---

---

​

---

---

---

---

The States program is currently dead. Saxonia (formerly State B) was the first to set up a governmental system. In less than a week after the kickoff on June 24th, Saxiona had set up a full fledged parliamentary system of government, a discord server and was on it's way to having it's first election.Soon after this first election activity began to decline and by the time for the second elections in late August the state was completely dead. The last post was made by yours truly on August 27th, almost an entire two months ago.

The unfortunate part is that Saxonia was possibly the most successful of the 3 states. The Europeian Society (formerly State A) took until August 22 to publish an ambitious Charter for their state.It espouses formidable ideals to educate and develop its members. However, these ideas never got off the ground. Prior to a recent effort of Snowball's to ignite discussion on election procedures, the last post was August 29th. Thus, it took a matter of six days for the state to go from establishing a form of governance to inactivity. The long running State C, through the sheer effort of Alan Lee, finally established an extremely basic charter and changed it's name to Haven only last week, on October 15th.

Thus the question becomes, why did an idea that generated 8 pages of discussion in the Citizens' Assembly and attracted the interest of such a notable Europeian as Sopo end up being a failure? There are multiple possible answers to this, the first from Sopo himself. He believes that as the main driver of the program his Leave of Absence on July 25th left the program without interested and active leadership. The lack of an active leader meant that there was a extended pause in the influx of new members to each of the states. From July 22 to August 10th no new members were added to the states program even though there were 6 requests. This long wait meant not only that it diluted the interest of the incoming members but it also deprived the states of new voices and ideas to keep them going.

Sopo also notes that the individual groups for each of the States was quite small; each state contains approximately 11 members. When not all of those members are active in the states it is hard to keep things moving. This paucity of new members may have happened due to a lack of ability of the applicants to choose which state they wish to be a member of. Since people are assigned randomly they might not sign up if they are interested in or wish to avoid one particular state. This system also does not allow the states to advertise to the greater Euro community and compete for new members.

The prevailing theory is that the political and cultural systems of the states are not different enough from the broader Europeia to generate greater interest. Saxonia for example is simply a parliamentary Europeia. A system of governance that is generally similar to what the region offers as a whole provides little reason for people to get involved. Why would you want to dedicate your time to a smaller, slightly different Europeia when you could focus those efforts on being more successful in the region itself? Haven and The Europeian Society run into a similar problem as they follow the format of a Europeian political party, with the Society having a more developed structure. The Societies' goal of providing mentorship and direct election of a single leader mimic the standard format for almost every party. This shows all three of the states are quite similar in format to existing Europeian institutions.

Finally, this brings us to the issue of how to revive the program and get it moving again. President Writinglegend and Culture Minister Monkey had the idea of including the states in the weekend games. This would be a good idea if the States were not experiencing the activity problems described above. To resolve those outstanding issues I believe it is necessary to do two things. To solve the issue a lack of leadership in the program, give the States the ability to accept and recruit their own members while still keeping them under the purview of culture to help organize broad events. Second, encourage the states to pursue unique and different forms of governance and internal culture. The more different they are from each other and Europeia the better. These two actions should help the states develop activity that will hopefully allow them to become a positive addition to Europeia.

 

[Alan Lee]

Thank you Grav!

 

[GraVandius]

Thank you Grav!

I just Report the facts sir :gentleman:

 

[Skizzy Grey]

We’d be better off if even half the energy invested in the “states” project had instead been plowed into the Citizens Assembly.

The project failed for basically the same reason colonies fail: NS players who want to be part of a small community gravitate to smaller regions, not to a place like Europeia. And it’s probably for the best that it failed; if the states were successful, we’d likely be facing a slump of activity in the main region, and in all the institutions that make it what it is.

 

[Drecq]

I honestly forgot these even existed. But what skizzy said.

 

[JayDee]

They were a nice idea on paper, but way too much stress for extremely little payoff. Skizzy's assessment fits well.

 

[Steven G. Eastridge]

Great article GraV. My main region is TAS, where we do have states, and we have managed to keep the states fairly active by incorporating a system of State Military Role Play. We allow citizens to set up businesses to buy and sell military vehicles and states and citizens themselves try to concur land from opposing states. Granted, that wouldn't really work here since there is no economy set up, and there is too small an interest in role-play. We do have different government styles: one state is a kingdom, one acts like a corporation, one is a communist state, and the last is a true democracy/oligarchy. It's complicated what it wants haha. But citizens are allowed to chose their states, and they are even allowed to be in more than one. Granted, the overall number of active citizens is smaller than that here, so there are a number of factors as to why states didn't work the first time. Also, with a lot of notable and influential members not taking interest in states here, a lot of newer members would likewise think it isn't important. I think states are a great way to just associate yourself with others and have an added layer of fun in the game, but I understand that it isn't for everyone.

 

[Sopo]

We’d be better off if even half the energy invested in the “states” project had instead been plowed into the Citizens Assembly.

The project failed for basically the same reason colonies fail: NS players who want to be part of a small community gravitate to smaller regions, not to a place like Europeia. And it’s probably for the best that it failed; if the states were successful, we’d likely be facing a slump of activity in the main region, and in all the institutions that make it what it is.

The same people that find states appealing, Alan Lee for example, are not necessarily the same people driving activity in the main region. If properly implemented, we would have room for both. A state is an experimental proving ground distinct from the Citizens' Assembly insofar as it allows citizens to tinker with ideas for the executive or other projects not fit for the CA and not ready for the region at large.

Given the actual level of interest compared to the theoretical interest before the project began, we may be better off with one state that serves as a microcosm for the region, a sandbox. That would remove the random assignment on joining and inability to switch which Mal found legally questionable. It would also remove the competition and potential for cliquishness. It may, however, reinforce the problem GraV noted that the states are too similar to Europeia itself.

I don't think the project should be scrapped completely for the same reasons that I started it to begin with. This is certainly a setback, but it's not a reason to give up. There's still potential here.

 

[hyanygo]

I'm going to say this straight up: I started my job on the 1st. In TES the only people who had an clear idea what to do were me and Darc. I'm not carrying people who can't string a sentence together.

If you look at the random (which was a massive mistake) initial groupings most the capacity was in State A. For a state to be successful it needed to be managed well and those who find it difficult to put together a sentence worthwhile enough for someone else to read are never going to be leaders.

 

[Snowball]

I'm going to say this straight up: I started my job on the 1st. In TES the only people who had an clear idea what to do were me and Darc. I'm not carrying people who can't string a sentence together.

If you look at the random (which was a massive mistake) initial groupings most the capacity was in State A. For a state to be successful it needed to be managed well and those who find it difficult to put together a sentence worthwhile enough for someone else to read are never going to be leaders.

I can put a sentence together.
Proof above.

But is not the whole concept of the states to help people learn?

Also, I did have an idea on what to do. Not as clear as you or Darc, but clear non the less

 

[A Random User]

Nice assessment, GraV!

 

[hyanygo]

I'm going to say this straight up: I started my job on the 1st. In TES the only people who had an clear idea what to do were me and Darc. I'm not carrying people who can't string a sentence together.

If you look at the random (which was a massive mistake) initial groupings most the capacity was in State A. For a state to be successful it needed to be managed well and those who find it difficult to put together a sentence worthwhile enough for someone else to read are never going to be leaders.

I can put a sentence together.
Proof above.

But is not the whole concept of the states to help people learn?

Also, I did have an idea on what to do. Not as clear as you or Darc, but clear non the less

You're the exception.3

 

[Regionia Wargrave]

Great article GraV. My main region is TAS, where we do have states, and we have managed to keep the states fairly active by incorporating a system of State Military Role Play. We allow citizens to set up businesses to buy and sell military vehicles and states and citizens themselves try to concur land from opposing states. Granted, that wouldn't really work here since there is no economy set up, and there is too small an interest in role-play. We do have different government styles: one state is a kingdom, one acts like a corporation, one is a communist state, and the last is a true democracy/oligarchy. It's complicated what it wants haha. But citizens are allowed to chose their states, and they are even allowed to be in more than one. Granted, the overall number of active citizens is smaller than that here, so there are a number of factors as to why states didn't work the first time. Also, with a lot of notable and influential members not taking interest in states here, a lot of newer members would likewise think it isn't important. I think states are a great way to just associate yourself with others and have an added layer of fun in the game, but I understand that it isn't for everyone.

States definitely aren't working here.

Sad!