Requests: General [A]

Submit your requests on various areas of the game.

Moderator: RP Committee

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:51 am

1. This bill (http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=583830) has no intention whatsoever to ban a party. It does not even use the word "banning" nor does it actually ban a party or particular political direction.
Could the moderation please proof that this bill bans another moevement or party, because there is no provision whatsoever in this bill.

Therefore I assume:

1. The bill does not need a 2/3 majority nor rp backing, because it does not ban a party.


2. Solentia has a vastly developed rp constitutional amendments which deal exactly with these matters. It is your responsibility to acknowledge that and not confuse players.

3. Again, show me the exact passage of this law by which this shall be accomplished.



I don't know whether the moderation is not working 110% accurate, but I am coming from a culture which puts an enormous emphasize on working accurately. And i demand the same from the moderation.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby MedwedianPresident » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:58 am

Is it possible for nations to vote for:

a.) the secession of a region or multiple,
b.) the transfer of regions to another nation or
c.) unification with another nation?
MedwedianPresident
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:05 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby cm9777 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 10:56 am

MedwedianPresident wrote:Is it possible for nations to vote for:

a.) the secession of a region or multiple,
b.) the transfer of regions to another nation or
c.) unification with another nation?



Hey If you don't mind I'll copy over my discord answer as I think it explains most things.

@MedwedianPresident It can be done via rp so long as 2/3 of the players who are in said nation at the time consent to it. However as Aquinas says a region is limited by game mechanics and can't participate in another nation's elections nor can it be factored out by the algorithm (I imagine this kind of thing could be rped and has been done before )

. Another alternative is a third world nation where the controller of a third world nation could rp some sort of thing like that as they aren't concrete nations.


If you have any more questions on it or find that answer unclear please let me know.
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby cm9777 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:09 am

Govenor12 wrote:1. This bill (http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=583830) has no intention whatsoever to ban a party. It does not even use the word "banning" nor does it actually ban a party or particular political direction.
Could the moderation please proof that this bill bans another movement or party, because there is no provision whatsoever in this bill.

Therefore I assume:

1. The bill does not need a 2/3 majority nor rp backing, because it does not ban a party.


2. Solentia has a vastly developed rp constitutional amendments which deal exactly with these matters. It is your responsibility to acknowledge that and not confuse players.

3. Again, show me the exact passage of this law by which this shall be accomplished.



I don't know whether the moderation is not working 110% accurate, but I am coming from a culture which puts an enormous emphasize on working accurately. And i demand the same from the moderation.


Regardless of whether is bans a party or not (you are right it does not although it is written rather vaguely in terms of what exactly that means. Ie: Far the language being far too broad that it can be interpreted as being very draconian)


1: The content of the law determines the requirement for it to be accepted/passed and in this case the content very clearly would require an absolute 2/3 majority.


2: In regards to what I've said, I have mentioned that this stuff can be rped if there is two party consent to it. Could you provide more details on the constitution/rp laws of Solentia? It is not realistic to demand that Moderation have full comprehensive knowledge of the rp situation in each of the 46 nations

3 As well as for above ^ We are unpaid volunteers and humans who make errors sometimes (I do not think this is one). We're not your slaves and you've little right to demand anything in that manner. Uncivil discourse is not acceptable and will be dealt with harshly if it continues.

This kind of behaviour is what caused Lewis to resign and Moderation won't stand for it.
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:12 pm

1. Why exactly is it vaguely? And the most important question: What law in the world is not vaguely?

It is again a worldwide pecedent that a government must pass a constitutional amednment to prevent parties from using and aquiering government information which in itself is mostly secret. In no country in the world you will find such a precedent and the rules are very explicit: Only when a party is banned then a 2/3-majority is reuqiered.

3. Yes and Lewis also said that feedback is welcome and i feel that accruracy is simply missing here. And i feel that this is yet another case of rule invention: Suddenly claiming that I need 2/3 majority even if I d not want to ban a party.
If I would be in the moderation I would just follow the text of the law to 110% and I cannot see why for this administrative masure a 2/3 majority is requiered.

Furthermore, I never had the impression that moderation made mistakes because it never addmitted them. Every time I propose something, I pass a law it is somehow illegal or not allowed or whatever and that causes frustration, esepcially when I build my law on existing rules and precedents and suddenly out of nowhere a new precedent is being created completly overturning the already communicated precedents and rulings.


But please be aware: While I completly disagree with your ruling I thank you for your service for the particracy community. I can destinguish very clearly between the person and the issue.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby cm9777 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:12 pm

Govenor12 wrote:1. Why exactly is it vaguely? And the most important question: What law in the world is not vaguely?

It is again a worldwide pecedent that a government must pass a constitutional amednment to prevent parties from using and aquiering government information which in itself is mostly secret. In no country in the world you will find such a precedent and the rules are very explicit: Only when a party is banned then a 2/3-majority is reuqiered.

3. Yes and Lewis also said that feedback is welcome and i feel that accruracy is simply missing here. And i feel that this is yet another case of rule invention: Suddenly claiming that I need 2/3 majority even if I d not want to ban a party.
If I would be in the moderation I would just follow the text of the law to 110% and I cannot see why for this administrative masure a 2/3 majority is requiered.

Furthermore, I never had the impression that moderation made mistakes because it never addmitted them. Every time I propose something, I pass a law it is somehow illegal or not allowed or whatever and that causes frustration, esepcially when I build my law on existing rules and precedents and suddenly out of nowhere a new precedent is being created completly overturning the already communicated precedents and rulings.


But please be aware: While I completly disagree with your ruling I thank you for your service for the particracy community. I can destinguish very clearly between the person and the issue.



Messaged you via pm
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby SavelyYuriev » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:34 pm

http://classic.particracy.net/viewnatio ... ationid=32

Since I moved here; can you somehow wipe all the proposed bills? At least the ones by inactive parties?
SavelyYuriev
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:51 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby cm9777 » Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:54 pm

SavelyYuriev wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewnation.php?nationid=32

Since I moved here; can you somehow wipe all the proposed bills? At least the ones by inactive parties?



Hey,

Could you please post a link to all the bills in question to the bill clearouts request thread

The link is here

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363&start=3110
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Moderation/GRC Queries

Postby Aquinas » Sat Oct 20, 2018 10:27 am

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=8200

I suggest deleting this thread (I would suggest merging it with Dolgava's official news thread, but there's no real info in that single post - it's simply a placeholder).

Each nation is meant to have only one news thread in the International News sub-forum.

Obviously, if you do not delete the thread, then you run the risk that other Dolgavan players will start posting in that thread, creating a confusing situation where there are 2 Dolgavan news threads and some people are not quite sure which is the "official" one.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Moderation/GRC Queries

Postby cm9777 » Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:58 am

Aquinas wrote:http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=8200

I suggest deleting this thread (I would suggest merging it with Dolgava's official news thread, but there's no real info in that single post - it's simply a placeholder).

Each nation is meant to have only one news thread in the International News sub-forum.

Obviously, if you do not delete the thread, then you run the risk that other Dolgavan players will start posting in that thread, creating a confusing situation where there are 2 Dolgavan news threads and some people are not quite sure which is the "official" one.


Done
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Requests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests