Editorial: Why I Oppose The Council

❗ Note ❗

This post does contain bias and represents my personal opinion. It does not represent any of CPAC’s staff or heads opinions, but mine. 

In recent months, I feel one of the most highly talked about subjects is the idea of a council. It seems the majority of the army leaders and powerful figures in our community are in full support of a council. Elections for a  new head, mainly set up by CPAC itself is underway. In this post, I am going to let you know why I differ from many of those opinions, and believe we shouldn’t have a council.Or at least not like the one we are currently proposing.

What’s Wrong With A Council?

Complexity

Well, I have several reasons, but I feel I will only share my most important. One of my vital reasons is none other than our history. I want to ask you, the reader, to take a second and think about armies in general. For nearly 7 years kids from the ages of 8 to around 15 have built a community of armies on a virtual game which has captured the minds of many kids and teens a like and truly proved something incredible. The whole idea and process of armies is unbelievable when you really think about it. Against all odds we have created something magnificent  and innovated it so well year after year and one thing has always been consistent throughout the years… we keep things simple! Probably the most complex thing armies have ever established is the idea of governments, which few armies actually dependably follow or listen too. Why make things more complex and in reality, harder, by adding a council? The only simple thing I see coming from it are a set of rules, and the rest is going to be highly debated, very unrestricted, destined to fail plans.

Too Much Power!

The only way I see a council working, is if we have army leaders from all around the community represent themselves in a democracy. Having a head and a group of top powers is giving those in charge way too much power, at least with how we plan for it to run right now. I mean, the idea that one person can decide a battle in a war is beyond ridiculous to me. If you believe that as long as we choose someone who doesn’t lead an army all the bias will magically disappear? If so, I strongly disagree with you. There will always be bias with anyone. One cannot help it, it’s basic human instinct to judge. Let me give you a simple analogy.

Not to single Waterkid out, but do you think if Waterkid100 was to receive the privileged of leading the council as long as he quit Pirates, then he would automatically lose all his strong feelings against ACP? I highly doubt it because he could simply not help it. His past hatred of ACP would easily overtake his morals of equality. Who knows, maybe Waterkid would be more fair than I thought, but I definitely doubt it from others. Sorry Waterkid, you were simply the best I could think of on short notice.

The point is, it is too much power for one person. It gives that power way too much control over the path of armies and their direction. For someone to be in charge of a group that can decide battles, rules, and other disagreements in all of armies? That is absurd if you ask me.

It Can Be Done Differently!

Since the beginning idea of a reformation of the council, I have been pleading that if we design and do a council, that it be run differently! Our current plan for a council is too controversial. There are too many flaws, and I could easily single out where problems would arise just as soon as it begun. We would need a full proof and completely fair plan that nearly everyone could agree on. I notice army leaders can vote on rules with the current plan, but then what is the point of a head? Why can’t armies just battle out wars like wars are supposed to be fought? Why should one man be able to decide who wins and who looses? I have my fair share of hatreds too, but if I was given the chance to design a lay out for the council, I would make sure that their votes counts just as much as mine.

Take for example, the idea of army leaders voting. I agree that the major and medium army leaders should be allowed to gather for a vote, definitely. What I don’t agree with, is that it’s a majority rules. If you ask me, just one vote in opposement is too much and shows the rule simply won’t work. For a rule to work, it needs to be as agreed and obeyed as the 24 hour rule is. Not to mention the Council has already made too many plans for too many rules. Rules should only be added when it’s a necessity. We shouldn’t be adding rules every time someone has a problem or a discomfort makes it’s presence. Only rules that we can all agree on, and that work for everyone should be engraved into our rule book. And we certainly shouldn’t have a rule page 14 scroll lengths long.

_____________

So tell me, what are your thoughts? Do you agree, or disagree with me? Or are you somewhere in the middle. I am not saying having a council is bad, I am saying the Council that is currently being designed is flawed.

Please let me know what you feel in the comments below! Thank you!

14 Responses

  1. I couldn’t agree with this more.

    Like

  2. Exactly. I prefer the idea of major/medium army leaders voting instead of the council. The idea of the council is kind of stupid when you read this post. 7 years we’ve been going strong and you’re right, it’s due to simplicity. Great post.

    Like

  3. As a former head, the council was a mess. We had some high points and some low points, but the biggest issue is that the old council couldn’t please everyone and during a time such as the Black Alliance wars, it was damned from the moment me, blue, weather and pie took office. WA held more power, the major rep from the BA was from the old ideals to knock ACP off of top, and not kill them. The Radicals were ditching every other week because of a rule proposed or the Council agreed that ACP beat Pirates or vice versa. The amount of laws proposed were trying to level the playing field of a community ran by idiots who wanted to kill one another for no god damn reason. Armies were falling apart from 3-4 battles a day and the council was being treated so badly that we gave up and hoped that with the lack of rules armies would fall apart so bad they realized the need of a council.
    Now I look back on it and I am thinking about what would be best in my opinion. A book of rules voted upon by the clear majority and a group of people voted upon by the people to judge battles if requested. Armies need more control of rules, and the only time a council should take over is if we have another major conflict full of controversy, BS, and the inability to work together.

    Like

  4. As I said to Burr, I unfortunately have not gotten around to explaining how the new council will work; many of these ideas have already been incorporated. Hopefully when I get the elections out on Sunday I will have that explanation as well.

    Like

  5. You are mistaken, it’s been talked about for YEARS. And in that time, many have been made and ALL have been scrapped or shutdown at some point.

    Like

  6. The best way to do it is to make it a treaty type thing, and make it only affect those who sign it. That’s the only fair way to do it.

    Like

  7. I had come up with several ideas on how to make a council more fair, and less powerful. In hoping I get elected prssident or vice president, or if we have a debate before we have the next election, I would share the ideas. If I dont get elected, I will simply give them to the president.

    Like

  8. Too many editorials on this site

    Like

  9. Though I think the council is needed, I think there shouldn’t be one person as president. It will just be another way to call it biased. There should be a board of five members that are at the top of the council and have an equal say in matters.

    Like

  10. Very well put together post, using solid evidence, and had lots of ideas for improvement. First good read I’ve seen on this site in quite a while.

    Like

  11. I don’t think we should have anything, honestly. Why should we let others rule how we do things? We have all the rules and regulations we need.

    Like

Leave a Reply to »тσмв« Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: