• chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    20 hours ago

    “Going high”, in this case referring to using democratic principles to govern? That’s not going high, that’s how the system is supposed to work.

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        17 hours ago

        No, they are cheating, just with the blessing of the public. Like gerrymandering isn’t a thing you should be able to do, fullstop, but it isn’t something normally possible to do in California.

        • 🔍🦘🛎@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          Working within a broken system isn’t cheating though. Cheating means you’re breaking the rules.

          • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Yes, there’s a California rule that states that redistricting is done by a non-partisan commission. This explicitly sidesteps that process. They’re breaking a rule with permission but they’re still breaking a rule.

            If your DM rules that you can have two actions in a turn without reason, it’s still cheating.

            • 🔍🦘🛎@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              17 hours ago

              I’d argue this is explicitly not cheating. Revising the rules though a democratic process IS democracy.

              The D&D example is closer since it doesn’t explicitly call for buy-in from the whole table, but the first and only rule of D&D is to have fun with the DM being chief facilitator. The PHB and DMG are just suggestions. If this favoritism caused others in the party to feel slighted, then it would be ‘cheating’.