TheNewGuy wrote:Siggon Kristov wrote:What do I do, here? (OOC discussion welcomed on the bill itself for non-Moderators)
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=379651So, I ask Moderation:
Will someone else need to take on my obligations?
May I be able to do them myself? (Players could report me for malpractices)
If I was to do it myself,
it would only involve record-keeping.
I understand that I couldn't set anything to vote.
Of course, there is always the option to invite someone to come and keep the system, but no-one has accepted such an offer so far.
First, thank you for your patience as we deliberated.
I'll need even more patience now since you answered an imaginary request, and not one I asked.
TheNewGuy wrote:Essentially it boils down to this. If you wish to see the system continue, either remain and defend it yourself or find someone you trust to defend it for you. If you are the only one enjoying the system (this is assuming you couldn't find someone to continue the system for you) and the others are just "tagging along," there really is no point to allowing you to continue the system from afar while you play somewhere else.
This addresses absolutely nothing relating to what I asked. I never said I would be maintaining the system in the sense of being a vanguard or a player who is promoting it, or forcing it to be in place. All "my obligations" included was record keeping, i.e. doing calculations after elections (I doubt I'll even need to interact with the players).
It won't be me maintaining the system as in protecting it or ensuring that it's recognised; the payers there will already determine that. The players, themselves, were asking me to do the calculations for them. Calculations are all I'd be doing; I can't alter the election results which determine the calculations, and I won't be controlling any characters, so there is no need for me to even interact with players.
One of the players only speaks fluent gibberish; the other, who is willing to help, says he'll be too busy to do the calculations.
I wouldn't be wielding influence or controlling anything; I would only be doing calculations while the treaty is kept signed. As soon as they withdraw from the treaty, the system ends and there's no need for me to do the calculations. I asked Moderation to do calculations, but you're all so busy and the request was rejected. Moderation said that the only thing that can be done (in regards to calculations) is checking on calculations if a player has a problem with something.
If players don't like the system, they can simply withdraw from the treaty; I'll have no control over that, and I haven't had control over that even while being in Beluzia.
TheNewGuy wrote:This would be similar to having parties in two nations (or at least wielding influence in two nations similar to such a circumstance).
By your standards, Romulus would be multi-ing as well, since we have a union with Keymon and he participates in the electoral college (and checks to see if voting is done). He is a party in both Beluzia and Keymon. Personal unions are against game rules, then?
--
I honestly can't bother; it is difficult to communicate with you all (you let me wait for weeks, then not even respond to what I asked). It's less work for me if the system dies anyway. Hail bland republics!