Archivists Manifesto

Why write the archive? Who has the time? Why keep track of a history that is incoherent, not to mention fictional, and requires hours of work? Yet here I am, sitting writing into a wiki, on a page that will not be linked to from anywhere. The only way to find this page will be to seek it out. If you've found it, well it seems I am not the only one with too much time on their hands. I am not even sure why I am writing, perhaps I've finally lost it, perhaps I ought to purchase a journal and stop venting to the internet, or perhaps this is simply pixels on your screen, and thus it does not mean a thing. Simply a byproduct of a technology and language which some may interpret and understand. 
Yup, this is gonna be some meaningless philosophy folks, buckle in. 
Because in the end, who are we as MPs? Why do we do model parliament? Is it simply because we want to learn procedure? The prestige of sitting in the House of Commons? Our friends? The Experience? Fun? Well, we all do model parliament for different reasons, but passion grows amongst many, who envy the prime ministers position, who want to run a party, who want to serve on the committee, and who want to make history (albeit fake history, but I digress).
Sorry, I figured you needed something to keep you reading. Well, here is another question, what is the Value of a title? The Rt. Hon. title is partly what MPSP is about. Its a vile struggle to who can sit in that chair, which having sat in it while the PM wasn't looking, I can say is only moderately comfortable. I was never PM, despite my ambition. I was not in love with the title, I was wanting the position. The power, the glory. Too many focus on the chase. The win. Becoming a Rt. Hon. But that isn't the point. The point is having that moment of power, of focus, of policy, and strength. That seems as though it ought to be earned. But it isn't. There are several who have won and ought not to have, and others who ought to have but didn't. This gave birth to a trend for the passing of the PM for recognition. However, this is not the role of the PM or of the Rt. Hon. title. The title is meant for true PMs. Party leaders, policy innovators and powerful speakers. That is to say, not all of us ought to be PM. I was never truly destined for it, neither were hundreds of people. And that's okay. There is no shame in ending without a title, as in the end, the hard work and fun of the event ought to be its own reward.
So what is MP about? Well it is first about procedure, or it ought to be. It is a simulation, and thus it ought to function as accurately as possible. However, fun has taken a priority, and this isn't an awful thing. However balance is necessary, fun, puns and innuendo is key, but also procedure and rules need to exist. It is an intricate dance, and one none should take lightly. A trend towards niche and fun parties has occurred, leaving some behind. And leaving procedure behind. Experience is key to finding the balance. 
What rules ought to govern MP? Well the rules of parliament of course! But what of the unspoken rules? What about convention? Well, I believe there ought not be dynasties. That is to say repeat PMs. If you won, you sit typically as an independent. It is only fair, to give others a shot (it also tends to be much more enjoyable). Never allow MP partisanship to bleed into reality. MP partisan ship can be as toxic as real partisanship, drawing arbitrary lines and harming relationships in the name of ego. Another, is that we forgive and forget. This archive is meant to hold onto the good memories, and some unsavoury victories, not the negativity If someone crosses the floor, grab a drink with them later. No need for pettiness, its a fake bloody parliament. Another few rules ought to govern party leaders. They ought to have atleast 1 year of participation experience. Don't need to have been a leader (though that is likely true for many) just get some time in the house, in the drama, in tip toeing around issues and watching yourself, learning some procedure and getting ready. Another is that they not be on the committee. The idea that we ought simply trust integrity is fair, but why are you on the committee? Is it to help organize the event? If so, then that is the role you are dedicating yourself to, and by leading a party you will typically divide those loyalties. 
Is Jurassic Park a good movie? Of course it is. Freaking dinosaur zoo guys, like damn. The effects still look good, and its almost 20 years old! It was genius. The book is a tad stronger, but it has more time, and its audience is different. The movie is fine for children (heck I watched it at 6 and loved it, though I was rooting for the dinos), while also entertaining and great for an adult audience. It gives you a sense of wonder and excitement, where these are living creatures. Though the raptors do seem a little too focused on the humans. Like, guys, there is an island full of food. The original ending is a bit more dark, with the Island being Napalmed to smithereens, but then it wouldn't have the same impact (or a slew of cash in sequels). It is also explained more how they are breeding on their own (remember how they are all females), though this is talked about in 3 a bit. Now Jurassic World, that was pretty shit. Some of the jokes were good, but WHO THE FUCK INSURED THAT PLACE? Like, this is 3 incidents. One where the original park goes under, despite its tech and such. Then in SAN DIEGO! Where a T-rex runs rampant. Then again with a family of a whiny teen, a resistant youngster, Chris Pratt and a very poor excuse for a baby sitter, what else could go wrong. 
How do they fit hot dogs to hot dog buns? Who standardized the hot dog? Who decided "hey a wiener is this long, and a bun will be this wide". Whoever they are, they are a genius. People don't talk about them enough, Sir Harold J Wiener deserves more credit, and love.
Nature or nurture? Por que no las dos? In the end, societal forces only go so far, and individuals must take responsibility for actions, despite both of these factors. However how much responsibility? How should we work to fix these injustices? Or is it simply about accepting that there are inherent injustices and inequality, and that despite this we should simply work to love one another and help one another given our gifts, be they natural or from our upbringing. 
How much pepperoni is enough pepperoni? Like should you cover the 'zza or what? Ya need something on there for flavour. Pepperoni is the perfect greasy addition, and I don't think you cna have too much, without going to extremes. Just make sure there is one for every bite. Otherwise, get out.
What is the extent of histories effect on the present? Is there free will? I dunno, but I think we are products of history, and the future will be too, however predeterminism itself is a scary hole. If I think the things I think, do I think them due to the exact circumstance? For example, is it inevitable that I get the chocolate milkshake instead of the strawberry on the basis of my history, and my mind, as I may be predisposed towards such a treat, but then I may say that I've had chocolate before and want strawberry, or that I haven't had chocolate in a while, is my preference for the chocolate a byproduct of my personality and upbringing, as it was one which emphasized playing it safe. 
Who decided to cancel firefly? Like who was the motherfucker who decided that was a good idea. They showed the episodes in the wrong order, and they butchered time slots. The show was fantastic. Maybe if fox hadn't have been so fucked, it woulda been better. Though, it does feel well wrapped up. And it didn't decay like a lot of shows on TV (COUGH*big bang theory*COUGH). Still, that person was a jackass.
The mark of a good philosopher is that they ask far more questions than they answer. I suppose that is more of a sign of a lazy philosopher, but still, you read this shit, so who is the real fool? Well, probably the jackass who wrote this page partly out of spite for his friends who assumed the page would exist. 
Well, thanks for reading. There are a lot more important and interesting pages in this thing, so go read those. In the end, those were built not by me, but by the people involved. I am just writing them down. People are in awe of this project, that this is such a great idea. But the great ideas lie not in the person recalling experiences, but the people involved in those experiences. Go shape history, and give me something to write about. 
Was that inspirational enough? I figured that since I just wasted your time, I ought to at least make an effort to motivate you to go out and do something. I mean, its sad that I am writing this page, but isn't it sadder you are reading it? C'mon, go out, hug a stranger, get a job, volunteer, do good things in the world! Or just spend your time reading the writings of a tired 4th year, who is spending his time writing this crap. In the end, this has acted as a journal in sorts, a page I can come back to and ramble, not caring as it is likely no one will read it. It allows me a space to write and think, struggle and edit when things get too personal. This page will be edited by every Archivist who follows me (or I hope so), and thus what is mine, what is someone elses, like everything in the archive, is all in a constant state of change and evolution as time goes on. Model Parliament is a sum of its parts, which involves everyone who engages in it, and it is a tool to help us learn, grow and inevitably better ourselves. In the end, we will all leave something behind as we go off into the real world. The only real question is, what mark will you leave here? I hope its a good one.