Questions & Requests

In-Game and Forum requests and complaints.

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:53 pm

Govenor12 wrote:
which is the definition of an RP law according to Rule 22


Based on that i move that the following laws:
1. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=546594
2. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=546947
3. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=548690

do not compley with the following rules:
22.5 It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current.
22.8 In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity.

I hereby challenge their validity.

In case of law no.1 i additionally refer to 22.3.3 "There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.", because it introduces a new armband law.


Those are indeed RP laws. The players in Selucia have been messaged to remind them of the requirement of outlining the currently binding RP laws in the debate section on their nation page.
Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises,
Cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum
Polites
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:06 pm

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=549802

Violation of

22.3.2 RP laws which contradict game mechanic laws.
22.3.3 RP laws which cannot be revoked or can only be revoked by a higher majority than was required to create the law in the first place. There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.


http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=549639

22.3.3 RP laws which cannot be revoked or can only be revoked by a higher majority than was required to create the law in the first place. There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.
Last edited by Govenor12 on Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Brace yourself for the Solentian Rebirth
Govenor12
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Maxington » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:08 pm

I think i explained it to you a week ago. It does not have the labels which could classify it as an "RP Law" in accordance with game rules. It just isn't an RP law.
"The future of the Nation is in the children's school bags" ~ Dr. Eric Williams
President of the Trond Henrichsen Institute for International Affairs.
User avatar
Maxington
 
Posts: 2076
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Look Behind you.

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:09 pm

Laws outlined in bill descriptions but not specified in game mechanic proposals are known as "role-play laws" or "RP laws" and are recognised under the rules as binding.


I think the suggested law clearly comes up to this discription.
Brace yourself for the Solentian Rebirth
Govenor12
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:17 am

Governor is correct on this, and those were in fact RP laws. As it happens, those were indeed against the rules, as they introduced legislation already covered by game mechanics (specifically, there's already variables regarding paramilitaries, citizenship, and immigration). The players proposing those bills were messaged and the bills in question were removed. Thank you Governor for bringing this to our attention.

If I may also clarify an issue, there seems to be some confusion regarding rule 22.3.3 ("RP laws which cannot be revoked or can only be revoked by a higher majority than was required to create the law in the first place. There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown."). This rule is not meant to imply that each RP law needs to include a specific mechanism for repealing it in its description, but is rather meant to emphasize that RP laws are not and cannot be permanent, and players may not quote defunct RP laws as still being in place. Typically, if the necessary majority isn't specified, we use a reasonable appreciation of what type of bill it is in order to determine the required majorities, by comparison with existing variables. E.g. a bill introducing a "faction system" and abolishing political parties would definitely count as a constitutional bill, and would therefore require 2/3 majorities to implement and revoke.

That rule might need some rephrasing to make it clearer.
Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises,
Cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum
Polites
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Bobbo255 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:20 am

Could this amendment please be added to Lodamun’s constitution?

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=510476

Thanks!
Bobbo255
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 11:02 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:22 am

Bobbo255 wrote:Could this amendment please be added to Lodamun’s constitution?

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=510476

Thanks!


Unfortunately that bill does not meet the requirements outlined in section 22 of the Game Rules. Specifically, Rule 22.3.7 does not allow Role-Play Laws that require early elections in certain circumstances, so this bill is void from the point of view of Moderation given that it requires early elections prior to proposing a cabinet in case of vacant seats. It is possible for players in Lodamun to voluntarily agree among themselves to have early elections under such circumstances, but this will not be enforced by Moderation.

I should also note that the bill did not pass with a 2/3 majority of seats, so even if it weren't against the rules due to its content, it essentially did not pass, given that it is quite clearly meant as a constitutional amendment.
Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises,
Cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum
Polites
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:55 pm

Brace yourself for the Solentian Rebirth
Govenor12
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby FPC » Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:01 pm

Govenor12 wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=551809
Violation of rule
22.3.3

See your national message board for details. I have removed that bill and the one it was created to discuss.
Particracy Moderation
Wiki Admin and Bureaucrat (for some reason)
User avatar
FPC
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:14 am
Location: Scotland

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby eaportela » Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:08 pm

How can one change their location in the game?

I would like to move from Alduria to another nation that is also French-themed, but a monarchy. Royaume de Kanjor looks nice. I want to RP a strong monarchist movement somewhere.

I deactivated my account so Alduria can move on, but I want to set up my next party in Kanjor. Is that possible?
Ed
- Alliance Royale, Royaume du Kanjor
eaportela
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Game Moderation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest