Requests: RP Laws [RPC]

[House Spencer]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=576691

I also query validity of 2 RP Laws in Polites RPLaw ref bill in Selucia:

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=554870
(not called RP Law)

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=575265
(not called RP Law)

[House Spencer]

He said I have no respect for the rules presumably due to my rejection of textualism. That's a silly and illogical personal attack.

I've removed the reference bill. I don't care if they are valid or not.

Translation: "I don't care about the rules".

Or a statement of opinion. It simply shows that I'm not defending them. Mods have authority over the game, they can rule them valid or not. I simply expressed my lack of care either way. I'm not the one who makes the decision.

If you think there is possibility they are valid then why remove the ref bill?

[Reddy]

If you think there is possibility they are valid then why remove the ref bill?

As I said, earlier, to hopefully avoid/shorten another annoying tirade. But here's a little one from me. It's an online game, no cares, nothing you do here is important and no one will ever think that. It's not a country, Moderators are not a Government. There's no constitution or any obligation to even treat you decently. It's ridiculous to spend so much time arguing about the interpretation of an RP rule on an online game. I realise that now in full and frankly the whole game just seems silly to me right now. So I'm leaving for now. Good luck with your quest.

[House Spencer]

If you think there is possibility they are valid then why remove the ref bill?

As I said, earlier, to hopefully avoid/shorten another annoying tirade. But here's a little one from me. It's an online game, no cares, nothing you do here is important and no one will ever think that. It's not a country, Moderators are not a Government. There's no constitution or any obligation to even treat you decently. It's ridiculous to spend so much time arguing about the interpretation of an RP rule on an online game. I realise that now in full and frankly the whole game just seems silly to me right now. So I'm leaving for now. Good luck with your quest.

Again the only one here doing a "tirade" and getting over-worked-up & emotional/irrational is you. There is no "quest", this is RP Law Query Thread, folk can query RP Laws here thats all nothing to be scared of about that. Its not personal.

Sorry your going but serously youve got yourself into a big tizz and flounced out all for pretty much nothing. Obviously issues there. You could have just answered the question, like.

[Aquinas]

Clearly the rules surrounding RP laws and RP would benefit from careful review and redrafting.

As a short-term reform, I suggest Moderation simply removes the requirement for RP laws to be labelled as such. This is not really necessary, and in my view it would be a shame to see RP laws declared invalid on these grounds alone.

Same goes for the RP law dismissal procedure, which again is not really necessary and has not even been used a single time since it was introduced in April.

[Auditorii]

”Due to the changing nature of the game and its community Moderation reserve the right to make exceptions to the rules in exceptional circumstances.”

For those who struggle with reading comprehension.

[House Spencer]

”Due to the changing nature of the game and its community Moderation reserve the right to make exceptions to the rules in exceptional circumstances.”

For those who struggle with reading comprehension.

This is downright insulting. Nobody here is strugging with reading comprehension.

[House Spencer]

Can Mods answer or at least bother to acnowledge the questions raised instead of just ignoring them please thanks

[Polites]

Added a slight amendment to the Game Rules, making the requirement that a bill be labelled as an RP law recommended but not mandatory, and the same for posting RP laws in the dismissal thread. We're also working on a more thorough redrafting of rules regarding RP laws, just give us some time to come up with something satisfactory.

Question 1: Are players meant to delete RPLaw ref bills when the RP Laws therein are still or could still be valid?

Question 2: Can a RP Law be struck down just by the player who made the RPLaw ref bill deleting it?

In these cases I'd go with "technically still valid but not enforced by Moderation". In PT ignorance of the law does excuse, which is why it is a requirement for things like Cultural Protocols or RP laws to be posted on the debate thread. Players do have a responsibility to keep the reference bill up to date. If the RP Law ref bill is no longer there the RP laws in question are de facto defunct and nobody will be sanctioned for good faith actions that contradict the RP laws. But this does not excuse violating or going against past RP, especially when the player doing that is aware of it.

[House Spencer]

Added a slight amendment to the Game Rules, making the requirement that a bill be labelled as an RP law recommended but not mandatory, and the same for posting RP laws in the dismissal thread. We're also working on a more thorough redrafting of rules regarding RP laws, just give us some time to come up with something satisfactory.

Question 1: Are players meant to delete RPLaw ref bills when the RP Laws therein are still or could still be valid?

Question 2: Can a RP Law be struck down just by the player who made the RPLaw ref bill deleting it?

In these cases I'd go with "technically still valid but not enforced by Moderation". In PT ignorance of the law does excuse, which is why it is a requirement for things like Cultural Protocols or RP laws to be posted on the debate thread. Players do have a responsibility to keep the reference bill up to date. If the RP Law ref bill is no longer there the RP laws in question are de facto defunct and nobody will be sanctioned for good faith actions that contradict the RP laws. But this does not excuse violating or going against past RP, especially when the player doing that is aware of it.

My little ickle brain is strugling here. Can you explain all this in simple & clearer terms? What does "technically still valid but not enforced by Moderation"actually mean in practise?