Requests: General [A]

Submit your requests on various areas of the game.

Moderator: RP Committee

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Siggon Kristov » Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:42 pm

Amazeroth wrote:
Siggon Kristov wrote:Based on Moderation's perspective on this, do comments on this bill count as breaking the law?

Note, in Lodamun...
- The Government policy concerning religions is that "There is an official state religion, and membership is mandatory."
- The Government's position towards the administration of law is that "There are no courts, the Head of State will determine what's right or wrong."
- The government's policy regarding regulation of media content says that "It is forbidden to criticize the government, or publish any material that the government does not approve of."
- The law on State penalties for blasphemy is that "Both Private and Public Blasphemy are considered grave offenses, and are heavily prosecuted."
- The law on Parliamentary Privilege states that "Members of the national legislative body are exempted from any civil or criminal liability fot their speech or actions, but this immunity can be overruled by a vote in the nation's legislative body."
- The Government policy with respect to the death penalty is that "Religious doctrine determines the death penalty."

--

Wouldn't it be unfair for his characters to be breaking the law without realistic consequences? Do we need unanimous consent (including his) for there to be RP about his party breaking the law? If his party is going to RP as openly breaking the law, realistic RP would mean his characters would face consequences. Wouldn't it be god-moding if he refused to allow his characters to face consequences?
The articles, in the bill itself, don't break the law. I think the comments break the law.
The pro-religion parties aren't god-moding. There is an easy way to get out of the official mandatory religion that Lodamun has, without having unrealistic RP... Propose a bill to make it that "There is an official state religion, but membership is completely voluntary" (to avoid blasphemy) then abolish blasphemy laws, then abolish the state religion. Moving from one extreme to the next is totally unrealistic in this case, especially since other laws cut down foreign influence that would counter the state's heavy indoctrination of children into Lodamese Nationalism. This isn't what I'm complaining about, though. I have a slight problem with it being unrealistic to propose such legislation, but my real problem is with the comments made by characters of the Allied Humanists.


Since the offending party is gone now, this is just theoretical, but for the sake of making things clear:

In order to punish the character making the comments, you'd just need a vote in the nation's legilative body, as the law on immunity states, in order to take that immunity away. Then this character would be open for prosecution, which, since the HoS is the only judge, should be swiftly leading to execution, based on the rest of the laws (if it is, indeed, blasphemy, which rests entirely on the way that religion defines blasphemy). What doesn't really enter into this is the law about media content, since it applies to the media, and not to the individual making the forbidden statement.


Another unrealistic case: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=416435
My problem here isn't the changing of the national religion, but the unrealistic way in which it is being done.

The player is aware of the following laws:
"There is an official state religion, and membership is mandatory."
"Both Private and Public Blasphemy are considered grave offenses, and are heavily prosecuted."

At the same time, his character made a statement about the national religion, calling it "a deadweight ideology which has been forced upon our long-suffering people for far too long."

There are many cases of the government suppressing Hosianism, yet the character says "Give the people the freedom to worship in the same way as their ancestors did! Long live the Hosian revival!"

I think it would be more realistic to have proposed to change the government policy on religion to having an official religion where membership is voluntary, and changing the laws on blasphemy to allow him to openly criticize Lodamese Nationalism. After that, he could say what he wanted to say about it, and get it removed from the state altogether. Remember, all I'm going at here is whether it's realistic or not.

--

He can't say he wasn't aware of anything, because he had messaged me and I replied. Also, he would obviously be aware of the current variables of the laws he's proposing to change; they're mentioned in the very bill he created.

He can't claim parliamentary privilege because he has no seats, and the President no longer has control of the judicial system. Realistically, what would happen?
Check out my latest Particracy project, and feel free to discuss it in the forums.
Siggon Kristov
 
Posts: 3206
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:35 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Amazeroth » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:06 am

Realistically, I suppose Schmitz would be tried by the courts, found guilty of blasphemy, and executed. However, since the party controlling the ministry of justice seems no to be in favour of an execution, it is also quite realistic that the minister of justice would do things in his power to stop this process. Usually, even in a country were the courts would be completely independent, the minister of justice would have options to do so - both officially and inofficially. Usually, though, the courts don't decide who gets charged with what, but prosecutors do, and they are usually much more under control of the ministry. So I'd wait for the majority party to say what their minister is doing in this case - he might not be able to let Schmitz off the hook completely, but he might be able to at least postpone the execution for years. Or whatever, it's really up to how you all RP.

However, since Aquinas didn't know about the specific consequences of Schmitz' statement, also because there is indeed no really satisfying explanation for there being parties with 0 seats in parliament, I'd also consider letting him retcon the statement into something less blasphemous, so that he can keep Schmitz.
Eines Tages traf Karl der Große eine alte Frau.
"Guten Tag, alte Frau", sagte Karl der Große.
"Guten Tag, Karl der Große", sagte die alte Frau.
Solche und ähnliche Geschichten erzählt man sich über die Leutseligkeit Karls des Großen.
User avatar
Amazeroth
 
Posts: 4169
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:28 pm
Location: Central Europe

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Siggon Kristov » Wed Sep 03, 2014 6:33 am

Amazeroth wrote:However, since Aquinas didn't know about the specific consequences of Schmitz' statement, also because there is indeed no really satisfying explanation for there being parties with 0 seats in parliament, I'd also consider letting him retcon the statement into something less blasphemous, so that he can keep Schmitz.

This is what I was opting for. Aquinas could just have deleted the bill and made a more realistic one with no criticism of Lodamese Nationalism.
Check out my latest Particracy project, and feel free to discuss it in the forums.
Siggon Kristov
 
Posts: 3206
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:35 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Corvo Attano » Mon Sep 29, 2014 11:03 am

I lost the elections in my nation and that is all well and good because this is supposed to be game about such things but the other guy started to actively destroy all the things I tried to build and when I questioned him he said:

Do you have other accounts? Me

Ive been to other nations yes but all my other accounts are deactivated Him

Just saying. Me

And your point is? Him

That I was worried someone was role playing with not Malivias best interests in mind. Me

i have different interests Him

HOWEVER, I do not bias my RP-ing for or against Zardugal. Him

Is this allowed? Anybody can deactivate their party make another into a other nation and fuck that nation up and make it a subordinate of another nation just because they feel like it?
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby thutchinson13245 » Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:06 pm

Actually it's called nation raiding
Image
All rights reserved™©℠
"In peace sons bury fathers, but in war fathers bury sons."

Luthori: Online
Al' Badara: Offline
User avatar
thutchinson13245
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:11 pm

thutchinson13245 wrote:Actually it's called nation raiding


It's only nation raiding when there's at least two people involved, and even then, it's allowed if it's not done out of malice and has solid RP justification.

And yes, anyone can deactivate their party and move to another nation if they feel like it; they are still bound by the game's rules though, including the new nation's Cultural Protocols.
Polites
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Corvo Attano » Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:31 pm

Polites wrote:
thutchinson13245 wrote:Actually it's called nation raiding


It's only nation raiding when there's at least two people involved, and even then, it's allowed if it's not done out of malice and has solid RP justification.

And yes, anyone can deactivate their party and move to another nation if they feel like it; they are still bound by the game's rules though, including the new nation's Cultural Protocols.

I know that but I am rather certain him coming destroying the nation I build without asking me for Dundorfs benefit to make malivia a vassalized state again without my consent is not allowed.

He won the elections yes I understand that but he destroyed malivias Rps and did a one 180 on our foreign policy.

His not Rping his making malivia a vassal without asking anyone.
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Amazeroth » Mon Sep 29, 2014 3:03 pm

Corvo Attano wrote:
Polites wrote:
thutchinson13245 wrote:Actually it's called nation raiding


It's only nation raiding when there's at least two people involved, and even then, it's allowed if it's not done out of malice and has solid RP justification.

And yes, anyone can deactivate their party and move to another nation if they feel like it; they are still bound by the game's rules though, including the new nation's Cultural Protocols.

I know that but I am rather certain him coming destroying the nation I build without asking me for Dundorfs benefit to make malivia a vassalized state again without my consent is not allowed.

He won the elections yes I understand that but he destroyed malivias Rps and did a one 180 on our foreign policy.

His not Rping his making malivia a vassal without asking anyone.


What exactly would you say is illegal? RP doesn't requrie unanimous consent anymore.
Eines Tages traf Karl der Große eine alte Frau.
"Guten Tag, alte Frau", sagte Karl der Große.
"Guten Tag, Karl der Große", sagte die alte Frau.
Solche und ähnliche Geschichten erzählt man sich über die Leutseligkeit Karls des Großen.
User avatar
Amazeroth
 
Posts: 4169
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:28 pm
Location: Central Europe

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Corvo Attano » Mon Sep 29, 2014 3:06 pm

Amazeroth wrote:What exactly would you say is illegal? RP doesn't requrie unanimous consent anymore.

So because Dundorf and his friend decided to make malivia Dundorfs vassal I have to rp as dundorfs vassal?

They didn't even ask for my opinion.
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Amazeroth » Mon Sep 29, 2014 3:18 pm

You could also RP as a party trying to get Malivia out of vasselage.
Eines Tages traf Karl der Große eine alte Frau.
"Guten Tag, alte Frau", sagte Karl der Große.
"Guten Tag, Karl der Große", sagte die alte Frau.
Solche und ähnliche Geschichten erzählt man sich über die Leutseligkeit Karls des Großen.
User avatar
Amazeroth
 
Posts: 4169
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:28 pm
Location: Central Europe

PreviousNext

Return to Requests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron