Requests: RP Laws [RPC]

[HBulow]

You're decent Aquinas, but it's not you in charge now it's this other set, and I can tell you right now they're not seriously taking on board anything from this, they're just sneering at us all waiting for the discussion to die out. Lewis don't even care to hide the fact he sees anyone who doesn't see the game how he does as a dick.

I have to say it don't surprise me one iota to notice Polites is in command. Long history nation raiding, rules lawyering ,steamrollering thru anything and anyone that gets in his way (& that's just as player)

[Polites]

@Moderators please consider the following suggestions:

1.

ii.To overturn or abolish an RP law you must pass a bill with a simple majority which explicitly mentions which law you are scrapping and provides a link to the original law.

Remove the underlined part from the rules or at least change it from a requirement to a recommendation.

2. Amend the OP for the RP Law Query Thread and the OP for the RP Law Dismissal Thread to reflect the recent amendments to the rules.

3. Add some information about RP laws to the "Bills" section of the FAQ.

Those sound like reasonable additions to me, just waiting to see if the other Mods agree with these tweaks and we'll update the rules. Point 2 is done, will complete 3 asap.

You're decent Aquinas, but it's not you in charge now it's this other set, and I can tell you right now they're not seriously taking on board anything from this, they're just sneering at us all waiting for the discussion to die out.

It's very much in our interest to make sure the rules are as clear and easy to understand as possible, so we have every reason to pay attention to any suggestion that would help fix the rules. If we wait for this discussion to die out without doing anything then we'll have to deal with another discussion further down the line. So yeah we do want to fix the rules, and we are taking input into account.

Lewis don't even care to hide the fact he sees anyone who doesn't see the game how he does as a dick.

I have to say it don't surprise me one iota to notice Polites is in command. Long history nation raiding, rules lawyering ,steamrollering thru anything and anyone that gets in his way (& that's just as player)

You won't get anywhere with irrelevant personal attacks. If you have any specific complaint regarding any member of the Moderation team or the team as a whole please voice your disagreement in the appropriate channel or contact us in private.

[HBulow]

You're decent Aquinas, but it's not you in charge now it's this other set, and I can tell you right now they're not seriously taking on board anything from this, they're just sneering at us all waiting for the discussion to die out.

It's very much in our interest to make sure the rules are as clear and easy to understand as possible, so we have every reason to pay attention to any suggestion that would help fix the rules. If we wait for this discussion to die out without doing anything then we'll have to deal with another discussion further down the line. So yeah we do want to fix the rules, and we are taking input into account.

"Fix the rules" yeah that's about it. Fix the rules for the benefit of the Masters-of-the-Universe brigade.

As for getting "input" good luck with the Mods being so ridiculously thin-skinned & over-reactionary as they are now.

Lewis don't even care to hide the fact he sees anyone who doesn't see the game how he does as a dick.

I have to say it don't surprise me one iota to notice Polites is in command. Long history nation raiding, rules lawyering ,steamrollering thru anything and anyone that gets in his way (& that's just as player)

You won't get anywhere with irrelevant personal attacks. If you have any specific complaint regarding any member of the Moderation team or the team as a whole please voice your disagreement in the appropriate channel or contact us in private.

Please learn to tell the difference between a personal attack and an entirely relevant and entirely accurate observation.

The only personal attacks here have been from Auditorii and Lewis but you don't call out either of those, for obvious reasons.

[lewiselder1]

Complaints against Moderation should either be directed in the aforementioned queries thread for smaller issues, and for more significant concerns should be addressed in private.

Moderation will not be debating on this issue in public any further, for the reasons I have explained repeatedly.

We are always happy to take feedback on board. I apologise for any offence caused on my part, though I believe that I have only called for people to calm down and stop arguing so aggressively over Particracy, which I believe is the same point you’re making. Still, you’re entitled to your opinion.

Completely agree with Aquinas’ suggestions and we’ll get to work on them soon.

[Charli]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

[HBulow]

Moderation will not be debating on this issue in public any further, for the reasons I have explained repeatedly.

Because you lost the argument and can't admit it so can only save face by hiding behind "confidentiality" ( ) and Wouter ( ).

We are always happy to take feedback on board.

Only if it suits you else you shut it down and sanction the speaker.

I apologise for any offence caused on my part, though I believe that I have only called for people to calm down and stop arguing so aggressively over Particracy

He says sorry then says he "only called for people to calm down and stop arguing so aggressively over Particracy" when he's the one who forced a player out of Jelbania who just wanted to play the game, branded us a bunch of dicks, made aggressive threats, flaunted his power to inactivate us by making revolting comments about gulags and now has the chutzpah to tell us to calm down.

Still, you’re entitled to your opinion.

Provided it aint different from your own.

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

There is a reason this bollox is going on = the attitude of the Mods.

#endthisnonsense
#scrapRPlaws
#gamemechanicsfirst
#giveusourgameback

[lewiselder1]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

Sorry, you may have to clarify what you’re inquiring about here

Moderation will not be debating on this issue in public any further, for the reasons I have explained repeatedly.

Because you lost the argument and can't admit it so can only save face by hiding behind "confidentiality" ( ) and Wouter ( ).

We are always happy to take feedback on board.

Only if it suits you else you shut it down and sanction the speaker.

I apologise for any offence caused on my part, though I believe that I have only called for people to calm down and stop arguing so aggressively over Particracy

He says sorry then says he "only called for people to calm down and stop arguing so aggressively over Particracy" when he's the one who forced a player out of Jelbania who just wanted to play the game, branded us a bunch of dicks, made aggressive threats, flaunted his power to inactivate us by making revolting comments about gulags and now has the chutzpah to tell us to calm down.

Still, you’re entitled to your opinion.

Provided it aint different from your own.

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

There is a reason this bollox is going on = the attitude of the Mods.

#endthisnonsense
#scrapRPlaws
#gamemechanicsfirst
#giveusourgameback

Moderation will no longer be publicly debating the House Spencer case with individuals who do not know the full story and are not able to have a fair debate or act appropriately. We are happy now and have always been happy to give Spencer the opportunity to peacefully explain his concerns privately and come to a resolution and he did not wish to do so. There is not much else we can do. We have no issue with House Spencer as a person and want to reach a resolution as much as he. Trust me, I would like to retort with the evidence and facts we have to hand. But to do so would be inappropriate for numerous reasons. Please let House Spencer know he is always free to contact Wouter again and take up the discussion if he would like. We never walked away from the conversation.

Please do not expect any further correspondence in public on the matter. If you would like to discuss it privately with us feel free to contact us.

As for the string of accusations against myself, I am free to respond there in full.

We nation banned Spencer for knowingly ignoring and intervening in valid RP, trolling, acting inappropriately in private correspondence and on the forums; we were perfectly entitled to do so, Spencer had broken the rules of the game. Could Spencer have been informed of the situation earlier? Absolutely, which we have recognised and apologised for. Does it impact our ruling at all? No.

I have already apologised for the ‘dicks’ comment, though I would like to stress it was not a specific reference to anyone and instead was a reference to the generally unproductive and aggressive ethos of the debate.

I have not made any aggressive remarks to my knowledge.

I have apologised separately in public for the gulag comments which were just foolish jokes on my behalf and have taken your point very seriously. I’m not sure how better I was meant to respond in this situation.

You have received a formal warning for your post on the Moderation queries thread, and I stress this again. This is not the appropriate forum or the appropriate way of going around this debate. All we ask is that you speak calmly and productively.

Moderation will no longer be responding to aggressive responses on this matter.

[HBulow]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

Sorry, you may have to clarify what you’re inquiring about here

If you took the time to look you would see in Solentia the fascist party has declared state of emergency & banned Charli's party. Obviously Charli is asking whether this is a legit use of RP laws in this case.

You might have bothered to take the time to actually investigate this for him, specially as the guy's been kept waiting 24hrs for a Mod response allready.

Moderation will no longer be publicly debating the House Spencer case with individuals who do not know the full story and are not able to have a fair debate or act appropriately. We are happy now and have always been happy to give Spencer the opportunity to peacefully explain his concerns privately and come to a resolution and he did not wish to do so. There is not much else we can do. We have no issue with House Spencer as a person and want to reach a resolution as much as he. Trust me, I would like to retort with the evidence and facts we have to hand. But to do so would be inappropriate for numerous reasons. Please let House Spencer know he is always free to contact Wouter again and take up the discussion if he would like. We never walked away from the conversation.

Please do not expect any further correspondence in public on the matter. If you would like to discuss it privately with us feel free to contact us.

As for the string of accusations against myself, I am free to respond there in full.

We nation banned Spencer for knowingly ignoring and intervening in valid RP, trolling, acting inappropriately in private correspondence and on the forums; we were perfectly entitled to do so, Spencer had broken the rules of the game. Could Spencer have been informed of the situation earlier? Absolutely, which we have recognised and apologised for. Does it impact our ruling at all? No.

I have already apologised for the ‘dicks’ comment, though I would like to stress it was not a specific reference to anyone and instead was a reference to the generally unproductive and aggressive ethos of the debate.

I have not made any aggressive remarks to my knowledge.

I have apologised separately in public for the gulag comments which were just foolish jokes on my behalf and have taken your point very seriously. I’m not sure how better I was meant to respond in this situation.

You have received a formal warning for your post on the Moderation queries thread, and I stress this again. This is not the appropriate forum or the appropriate way of going around this debate. All we ask is that you speak calmly and productively.

Moderation will no longer be responding to aggressive responses on this matter.

Because of your bullying and censorship I clearly cannot respond to this in detail other than to make the blindingly obvious point the one being aggressive and misleading is you. You have a habit of insulting people then accusing them of being "aggressive" just for pointing out your behaviour. Lack of self-awareness & unprofessional/cowardly way to shut down discussion.

I have already apologised for the ‘dicks’ comment, though I would like to stress it was not a specific reference to anyone and instead was a reference to the generally unproductive and aggressive ethos of the debate.

It was obviously a direct reference to Spencer everyone saw that. As for "generally unproductive and aggressive ethos of the debate" yes but Mods 75% created that situation.

[Charli]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

There is a reason this bollox is going on = the attitude of the Mods.

#endthisnonsense
#scrapRPlaws
#gamemechanicsfirst
#giveusourgameback

Sorry, you may have to clarify what you’re inquiring about here

If you took the time to look you would see in Solentia the fascist party has declared state of emergency & banned Charli's party. Obviously Charli is asking whether this is a legit use of RP laws in this case.

You might have bothered to take the time to actually investigate this for him, specially as the guy's been kept waiting 24hrs for a Mod response allready.

I don't need you dragging me into your personal squabbles. Leave me out of it.

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=578512 (enforcing: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=574842)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=580007

Sorry, you may have to clarify what you’re inquiring about here

No problem! The party is indeed attempting to potentially enforce a ban on my mine without my prior consent, as well as suspending the legislature itself.

[lewiselder1]

The party is indeed attempting to potentially enforce a ban on my mine without my prior consent, as well as suspending the legislature itself.

Cool, just wanted to make sure, sorry about that.

On precedent the way we’ve done it is that you can ‘ban’ a party in the sense you can make them play as another party under another name but not alter how they vote — it’s basically just an aesthetic change from a party to a party faction or making them change their name so they can’t use the word ‘Communist’ or something. You can do that with an IC bill and an RP law, however consent is generally required. Suspending the legislature I think is a no-go.

As always we like to encourage players to resolve these issues themselves if possible but appreciate that’s not always possible or desirable and sometimes doesn’t work out. We’ll have a word as soon as we can and get it all in order with the rules / stop them from doing anything illegitimate thanks for letting us know.