Axxell wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewvariable.php?variable=SECURITY%20COUNCIL%20SEAT%20B
Could anyone add once again the option "Istalia" among the options of the "Nomination for the Security Council Seat B" legislation?
I raised this whole issue surrounding the changing of the permanent members during the rankings consultation, and am disappointed we still do not have clarity on what the situation is. This should have been more carefully thought through and organised.
Axxell wrote:I didn't understand very well if the new rankings are now officially in force or not. It is not really clear all this situation....
Thank you
You are not the one one. I have spoken to at least two others who are confused as to whether the new rankings are in force yet, and even as to what they actually are.
This confusion is not surprising due to the disorganised way in which this has been handled. Specifically:
(a) The
consultation thread has been locked but the final rankings were not formally announced there.
(b) The rankings which I presume are the ones intended to be the final official rankings appear to be listed on the
OP of the rankings thread. However, in this post, they are preceded by a message describing them only as "draft rankings". Obviously, this is likely to lead people to believe they are not in fact the final official rankings.
(c) The
previous set of rankings have exceeded their official expiry date, but are still pinned in the General Discussion sub-forum, which is likely to confuse people into assuming they are still binding.
(d) The rankings link at the
General Information Board links directly to the
previous rankings, which again, is likely to confuse people into believing they are still binding.
I raised these issues days ago with Moderation on Discord, but they failed to follow through.
At present, the communication of the rankings to the community is so insufficient, it is questionable as to whether it would be reasonable to even consider them enforceable.
The handling of the rankings consultation was problematic enough by itself, with the GRC refusing to answer important questions raised by players. Frankly, the follow-through following the closure of the consultation has, unfortunately, further undermined my general confidence in the capacity of GRC/Moderation to competently administer the rankings and the Global Roleplay Accord.
On a final point, as I have suggested previously, it would be a good idea to merge this thread with the
Moderation/GRC Queries thread. There is little point in having two stickied threads devoted to queries.