Overmoderation

[errant sperm]

At the end of the day, someone has to make a final decision. It seems that Aquinas is the one with this authority. The rules are strict and are being enforced as such. I understand why what was done, was done. I refused to follow the rules. I get it. It is not so much a complaint about Aquinas as much as it is about the institutions of the game itself.

I want the rules changed. They are too strict. They do not have enough flexibility for creative role plays.

I am not the only one with opinions similar to this one but maybe I am in the minority. I don't know but if change is not possible then it is what it is.

[Doc]

Yep. I 100% agree with this post.

What seems to have creeped into the moderation team is that lamentable attitude that so often seems to plague the more established player base: that older, more experienced players know best, and their carefully crafted roleplay is god and cannot be challenged. It puts newer players off by confusing them and making them see the older player base as snobbish, elitist and unwelcoming.

Hit right in the biscuits!

As a long "established" player, please allow me to make an observation.

First of all, it is true that some older players, who have been playing in one place for a very long time, see the things they built as something special. Anyone would. Any player that hangs around long enough to see the mechanisms that they had a hand in building work out over the years would. This is not snobbish- instead, I would say it is something that a player should be proud of. I am one of these folks- Much of Kalistan's history has my Party's name on it. And I can't tell you how many times I have seen my work, which I can say I have cultivated, just kicked over by some player who is brand new to Kalistan like a sand castle in the path of a toddler. And of course, if I dare to complain about this, essentially making the complaint above, but from the point of view of the "experienced players" well, I am ever so condescendingly reminded, yet again, that, well, that's just how the game goes, and I should just be fine with it.

Surely those with any history in any country can understand how frustrating this is! And yet, if I say something about this, then it is seen as snobbish, elitist, and unwelcoming? I have to ask, why should I be "fine" with this? I am the one who has put the time and effort into those RPs and those laws. Why should my long term effort and dedication to this game be undervalued?

I am sure that long time players do not intend to be elitist or snobbish, and anyone who has played in a country for a long time knows to expect that some of their work is going to be immediately undone by new players who have no idea about why the way things are are the way things are, but because of a mathematical calculation, are given an amount of power disproportionate to their contribution to the country. As for me, I always try to be welcoming to people in Kalistan, though at the same time, I have some right to expect that play occurs within a certain millieu, one that I, in large part, built, and one which exists as long as I care to defend it. At the very least, the long time players have the right to expect that new players, when they come in, have already taken a little time to learn the rules, both formal and informal of playing the game. And that is reasonable: Nobody would let you jump into a pickup game of basketball if you had zero idea about dribbling, or what "teams" are, or what "taking it back" means, or if you insisted that there actually were 4 downs in which to make it into an endzone in Basketball. And no person who suggested that there were would be allowed to complain that the other players were elitist for informing you that there actually AREN'T 4 downs in basketball.

In real life politics, we wouldn't see the rise to the majority in the US of a Party which only spoke Mandarin, and not only because that is absolutely unrealistic, but it wouldn't be tolerated by Americans, who would punish that party at the polls, or more likely, simply ignore that Party. But in Particracy something like that is (used to be, any way) possible, with absolutely NO EXPLANATION for it, except that the Mandarin Party decided that the whole country was Mandarin now, and nobody else was around to challenge it.

This game becomes the game of the people who role play it. The moderator is the neutral person who enforces the rules of that game. Without enforcement of the rules by the moderator, there would be less incentive to RP in this game, because any whack nonsense some person came up with would go. I've seen it with my own eyes in my many years playing this game. So I think that we should be happy that we have someone who enforces the rules, and by the way, also encourages new folks to fit into the community that they join when they play Particracy, rather than obliterate the community because they decide to play by their own rules. It is not elitist or snobbish to say that- just like older players should be more welcoming to newer players, newer players should show some desire to conform to some degree to established practice. Because if it is snobbish to insist on that, the older players see the actions of newer players as destructive, chaotic, and juvenile.

[Doc]

Party Leadership

Chief Executive = Norbert Jarek
Cheif of Operations = Wawrzyniec Zoja
Foreign Affairs = Krystian Jarogniew
Internal Affairs = Kastaloc Vortac
Finance = Glen Millhouse
Defence = Fabian Albert
Justice = Longina Lubomierz
Infrastructure and Transport = Malina Brygida
Health and Social Services = Florian Roch
Education and Culture = Walter Łukasz
Science and Technology = Alina Krystyn
Food and Agriculture = Karolina Bożydar
Environment and Tourism = Bronisław Metody
Trade and Industry = Szczepan Adam

In defense of Krystian Jarogniew, et al... Growing up in the orbit of Chicago, I can assure you that there are probably hundreds of people in Chicago with that exact name.

One can easily make the argument that those names are as "Anglophone", in this case, American, as Dave Baker or William Robert Jones.

[errant sperm]

If something is being changed, and you are not around to stop it, then what is wrong with that. You always have the opportunity to jump in and try to counter act another persons RP. Just because my party had Polish names doesn't mean they don't speak English. If you are inactive for decades then why should the culture that you built remain in place if someone, or a group of people, who are active in the nation, want to change it. I'm sure that the RP you did in Kalistan changed things in that country and effected its history. I just want the same opportunity to change things that you had. If everything stays the same all the time then what is the point in playing?

The basketball analogy is pretty weak. Interim rules are subject to change. The dribbling rule in basketball is not.

Does anyone running for President or any office for that matter say, "I just want to fit into the current system." Hell no! Its politics! People get into Politics because they want to change things.

[Liu Che/Zhuli]

If something is being changed, and you are not around to stop it, then what is wrong with that. You always have the opportunity to jump in and try to counter act another persons RP. Just because my party had Polish names doesn't mean they don't speak English. If you are inactive for decades then why should the culture that you built remain in place if someone, or a group of people, who are active in the nation, want to change it. I'm sure that the RP you did in Kalistan changed things in that country and effected its history. I just want the same opportunity to change things that you had. If everything stays the same all the time then what is the point in playing?

The basketball analogy is pretty weak. Interim rules are subject to change. The dribbling rule in basketball is not.

Does anyone running for President or any office for that matter say, "I just want to fit into the current system." Hell no! Its politics! People get into Politics because they want to change things.

To me, it seems that you want to become one of the "established"/"old guard" (we haven't thrown this term around in a long while ), by that I mean you want something to call your own, something in which you helped to create. I suggest you identify a nation that aligns as closely to your desired goals as possible and work within that framework.

The changes you are proposing/have proposed to nations' cultural makeups are, quite frankly, unrealistic. You cannot expect massive change to occur within 5-10 years. Change needs to be slow and well coordinated. If you want Mordusia, for example, to become more Polish, you will have to coordinate with the Valruzian players for RP the simulates massive emigration from Valruzia to Mordusia, in addition to native Mordusians dying off, emigrating to another country, etc. You cannot just simply say, "Well, it has been 5 in game years of RP. The nation has changed, now protect my changes!" You need to commit to a nation and make the changes that are realistic over a long period of time. That is just how it goes.

Thankfully, we have many cultures represented here. I am sure that you can identify one that best fits your needs and fits the confines of the rules.

[Doc]

If something is being changed, and you are not around to stop it, then what is wrong with that. You always have the opportunity to jump in and try to counter act another persons RP. Just because my party had Polish names doesn't mean they don't speak English. If you are inactive for decades then why should the culture that you built remain in place if someone, or a group of people, who are active in the nation, want to change it. I'm sure that the RP you did in Kalistan changed things in that country and effected its history. I just want the same opportunity to change things that you had. If everything stays the same all the time then what is the point in playing?

The basketball analogy is pretty weak. Interim rules are subject to change. The dribbling rule in basketball is not.

Does anyone running for President or any office for that matter say, "I just want to fit into the current system." Hell no! Its politics! People get into Politics because they want to change things.

Does even Donald Trump campaign on the notion that "When I am elected, the United States Government will begin publishing all its documents and making all its statements in Mandarin?" or "When I am elected President, we will be abolishing the Senate of the United States?" or "And by the way, when we begin speaking Mandarin, everyone will just agree that actually it has always been that way?" Donald Trump wants to change things, sure, but he doesn't even get close to the basic rules which govern the regime. He is not advocating, not in his or his most rabid supporters' wildest dreams, for regime change. He is only saying "This year we will have more or less of the same." It is a matter of degrees, not of fundamental alteration of the most basic rules of the system which he is working to change. Nobody "gets into politics" to promote fundamental revolution. You don't run on a "revolution" platform- even Ron Paul didn't advocate regime change. Revolution is what happens outside the system, and its target is MUCH different than which gang of thieves occupies the seat at the head of the table.

The answer is, of course, no- they want to change things, but the things they want to change really aren't all that important, when you compare them to the systemic rules which governs, as you say, the type of rules which also govern dribbling. In the US, we have a constitution which prevents that, and in other countries there are other things which would prevent that sort of change. In Particracy, that institution is known as "Moderation".

And by the way, I defended your names in my next post...

[Doc]

But, for this matter, Kalistan was just declared an open/non protected state. We will be keeping our CP as some sort of guidelines (after I make some changes to it) but you are perfectly welcomed to bring your Polish named Party members to Kalistan, and play them there. I am the only player in Kalistan right now, and would love to have some electoral competition. You can't represent the Particracy version of "Polish" ethnicly, because we have outlawed explicitly ethnic and religious Parties, but if you want to play a Party made up of a bunch of people of Particracy's equivalent of Polish descent, that is totally cool in Kalistan. Kalistan is especially suited, because our people hail from all parts of the globe, either through refugee communities or pirates, or just people moving there who are interested in trading and working and freedom. There certainly would be a constituency that you can draw from, much more likely in Kalistan than maybe in any other single country in Particracy.

I could actually use some help, for that matter- We put a lot of work into the CP, and just demoted it to suggestions, and I want to make sure that the political nature of Kalistani culture is moved to the forefront. If you are interested, you would certainly be welcomed and rewarded by the electorate, only about 20% of whom came out to vote in our last election (for the SP)...

[IdioC]

As much as Cultural Protocols clearly require a broader discussion, I think we're venturing off track a bit here in errant sperm's case (Credit to Doc, however, for inviting errant to a welcoming RP situation, don't always see that sort of opportunity or open-mindedness: kudos).

I thought the only offence was that his/her name variables were incongruous with the nation's culture as in the protocol, resulting in a ban. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any nation variables were as yet changed and I feel that some of the remarks against errant's perceived disrespect of the culture were premature.

I feel there have been a few undue slights against Aquinas' name as well; Aquinas acts in a considered fashion and clearly considers situations carefully in the context of the entirety of the existing rule framework, which is quite a time-consuming task.

I think an odd inconsistent name is fine and may even provide an interesting back story for RP -- Nicolas Sarkozy became French President with a Polish name and heritage after all -- so long as we don't see the inconsistent immorals of yesteryear.

His name is Magyar (i.e. Hungarian) actually

Well corrected. My attention span has been knackered by an insane commute of late!

[Doc]

He was deactivated because his Ministers' names didn't conform to the CP and he didn't want to change them, from what I understood.

[errant sperm]

Liu Che/Zhuli says, "To me, it seems that you want to become one of the "established"/"old guard" (we haven't thrown this term around in a long while ), by that I mean you want something to call your own, something in which you helped to create. I suggest you identify a nation that aligns as closely to your desired goals as possible and work within that framework."
I didn't know there was an "established/old guard" in Particracy. What does that even mean? Aren't we all just players. This statement suggests that I am a lower class of player. You are only adding to the "older more experienced players know best" stereotype that has been mentioned earlier on this thread. You are telling me that if I want to help create something, I should join a nation that is already like the thing I want to create. That doesn't make any sense at all. If I picked a nation where the role play I wanted to do was already done by someone else, then there would be nothing for me to change.

I had no desire to make Mordusia Polish/Valruzian. Quite the contrary. I said to Aquinas, "Our party contains immigrants from Valruzia with dual citizenship as well as Mordusian natives. If you read the history of our party, this would make more sense to you.
http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Conquest%20Party
The Cultural Protocol shows 5.1% immigrants which, in my opinion, puts my current names in compliance with the rules. As time goes on, most of the Valruzian named characters will be replaced by ones with Mordusian names." I think this is a reasonable role play but the rules do not allow it. This is one reason why I think the rules need to be modified.

Doc says, "Nobody gets into politics to promote fundamental revolution."
This is absolutely NOT true. The Nazi party is a perfect example of how inaccurate this statement is. You could probably find 1,000 more examples throughout history but I think this one will sufficiently back up my argument here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_fe ... tion,_1930

Comparing the Particracy Interim rules to the United States Constitution is a pretty bad comparison. Then to suggest that the job of Moderation is to prevent change is why I have been arguing here. I think Moderation should promote change, not prevent it.

Doc, Thank you for your offer to join Kalistan but I have no interest in this. I would like the rules to be changed so I can continue my role play in Mordusia.