(10-26-2023, 07:15 AM)SnakThree Wrote: Seeing how staff will be "supervising" everything governments do, I would like to know if there were incidents observed by players, or staff, that have been unfair or illogical that would warrant this shift from player-oriented government to staff-controlled. Thank you to those that can come forward and point out if we made any grave mistakes in our journey.
There have been a large number of issues over the years. Instances in which faction leaders were excluded because of disputes with a government. Instances in which house governments were de facto run by people who were not faction leaders. Decision-making with sometimes questionable outcomes potentially being decided by people with grudges who shouldn't even have been in the position, in a manner that we had no way of tracing the process of.
I've seen these issues first-hand in the Rheinland government, in which we launched a literal coup d'êtat after a power grab by RM, and staff had to get involved when they refused to work with us after.
To be clear, the governments will be staff supervised, not staff controlled. Staff aren't going to interfere with "regular business" the governments do. We just want to make sure that every faction's voices are heard, and we don't have uninvolved players pulling the strings in the background, using governments as their own personal tools.
You could have asked to have Staff rep in LibGov server to see if we are problematic. Going 0-100 really fast here. And what's the issue if LibGov is made of more unofficial players than official leaders? 14 people with 14 opinions is better than 4 when it comes to making decision based on majority of votes. I might have time for LibGov the most, because I don't actively play in official faction, but that doesn't make me less beneficial to LibGov. Especially when I am constantly drilling people to vote, to change laws, to improve things and overall be more pleasant people to be around and interact.