IdioC wrote:MichaelReilly wrote:I'm sorry to be so frank, but mods: stop interfering in matters that don't require you, by which I mean overzealous enforcement of cultural protocols, protocols which weren't even ratified with the approval of the player base in the first place.
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.
Unfortunately, as older, more experienced players tend to be those who make the cut for moderation selection through understanding the game enough to get the visibility through play to become trusted, this has always been a problem. It's probably best I stay quiet on this.
If there is a problem in how the game is currently being moderated at the moment, then it is probably fair to say I am primarily responsible. Amazeroth has been occupied, which has meant, in practice - and through no fault of Amazeroth's - that most of the day-to-day running of Moderation has been done by me. The majority of the initiative that went into devising and then implementing the new rules also came from me, although of course it was done with his involvement and agreement.
Please do not let me leave any impression I am offended or taking this personally, but I do feel compelled to respond to what has been suggested about Moderation's attitude to new players. This is because new players are people I care very much about, and if they are following this discussion, I want them to know this.
Recruiting and retaining new players is key to the future of this game. All of us - players and Moderators - should do what we can to make new players feel welcome and help them to learn the ropes. In technical terms this game was never fully completed, is over a decade old and over the years has developed a set of rules and conventions which are not always immediately obvious to new players as they navigate around the game screens. Particracy usually takes a while to get the hang of. New players do sometimes have frustrating experiences. Similarly, old players do sometimes find it frustrating when dealing with new players. There is bad attitude sometimes - both from old and new players. The success of the game depends upon us working together to overcome these obstacles and make the game be all that it can possibly be.
Let me make absolutely clear I am personally committed to making this game as welcoming and helpful to new players as possible. Assisting new players is one of the most important parts of my job and I enjoy doing it. I want them to see me as approachable and to come to me with anything they need help with - which many of them do. Hardly a day goes by when I do not help a new player with something or other.
During the time I have been a Moderator, I have taken the lead in updating the
Rules of the Game, especially the rules on culture, because before the situation seemed more ambiguous and a number of players, most especially new players, were unsure about what the requirements of the Cultural Protocols actually were. I am currently working on a more comprehensive edition of the rules which will make a lot of things clearer, especially for those less experienced with the game.
I have updated the
FAQ and the
Tutorial to make them more helpful, and in particular, to educate new players about the Cultural Protocols. Longer-term, I am hoping to put together a more detailed guide on the wiki about playing the game, and I also want to look into whether it would be possible to make certain presentational improvements to the game which would make life easier for newcomers.
I have redrawn the
Cultural Protocols Index so it is more presentable than before, with the nations listed in alphabetical order and short descriptions of the culture of each nation. For the first time, Particracy now has a list of all of the nations and their main cultures on the same page, which makes life much easier for new players when they are trying to research which nation to join. I also took the initiative in implementing rules to ensure Cultural Protocols are reasonably easy for new players to understand and that they are always listed on the nation pages.
I have crammed the
Random Facts at the bottom of the game screen with useful additions to help new players learn about the game. I hope to continue that process.
I am looking into the possibility of
restricting the early election and treaty-locking tactics, because I know how much they can alienate new players.
I make an effort to respond to requests as fast as I can because I know this is something that helps newer players feel more positive about and engaged in the game.
So whilst others are fully entitled to their views, I hope any new players reading this will hear what I have to say: I won't always get it right, but I do value you, I do want to learn from your experiences and I do want to do everything I possibly can to make the game better for you and other new players in the same position as you. Amazeroth, I know, would share this view too.
IdioC wrote:I would like to add a voice to the calls for migrant parties to be recognised in line with, rather than seen as merely contradicting, Cultural Protocols. In the real world, minority rights parties have been formed (e.g.
the Sami People's Party, Norway) for cultures which have their own identities and even their own domains. Regions can have variations on the main national culture or be viewed as nations within nations (
vis. Catalonia vs Spain; Scotland's independence movement; Quebec). Minority rights are often a political issue and it makes sense that a group of migrants from a neighbouring country would seek a better life in the first; with all the RP wars that have occurred in the Particracy world, displacement of populations would have been inevitable.
There is a Particracy world example too. My original party was in Pontesi during the later stage of Pontesi's Dynastic Commonwealth era when the Pnték variant of the Jelbék language had been accepted as a minority language. OOC, Pontesi had requested the province of Tadraki to expand into before Beiteynu came into being, with Beiteynu then becoming a Jewish state with a strong cultural identity which benefited the diversity of the game.
One summer, Beiteynu lay empty, so I moved across to form a bunch of Pnték irredentists, recognising the Beiteynu claim to the other three provinces, to make some interesting RP and also highlight its plight (I was a mod at the time so wasn't going to usurp it!). This encouraged more people to come to play for Beiteynu to "fend me off" and eventually, after a good RL month or so of fun ranting in newspapers and bills, I elected to hand the cabinet over, call early elections, inactivate and go back to Pontesi.
Migrant parties -- provided they remain true to the original cultural protocol of their original nation yet respect that of their "host" nation -- can only be a good thing for diversity, realism in RP and the game in general. If players feel so moved by the "invasion", they can take up the role of defenders of the original culture and the RP that results will be excellent. If players don't take up the mantle, surely the protocol represents a culture that was dormant as per the original text to define a grace period for returning players, if not completely dead?
You said once before that you support abolishing the Cultural Protocols. I am not sure what your precise views are now, but it seems to me that allowing "migrant parties" to operate in the way you have described would render the Cultural Protocols rather meaningless. If it was possible to prevent a migrant party from winning more than a small percentage of the vote, then this would be more practical. But as you know, Particracy does not work like this. At the last Mordusian election, errant sperm's Polish migrant party won 45% of the vote, despite the fact that under the Cultural Protocols, they could not possibly have more than 5.1% of Mordusia's population. Do you see the issue here?
Remember also, by the way, that the system is not inflexible as Cultural Protocols are not set in stone. Cultural Protocols can be changed, but it has to be done realistically and with player consent.
IdioC wrote:In short, cultures clash. Ultimately, my own name would fall foul of the cultural protocols: Saxon first, Greek middle, Celtic surname with an uncertain meaning... I couldn't stay in any nation.
This is not true. A name like yours could be used as a character name in any nation in Terra, so long as the player's spread of character names was realistic. As the rules say:
6.8 Character names and especially Head of State, Head of Government and Cabinet minister names must be appropriate for the cultural background of the nation. Whilst a small number of character names may be permitted to come from minorities, the broad spread of character names should be realistic. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented.
6.8.1 In nations where English is present as an in-game culture, but not the majority, English character names must not be too disproportionately prevalent. For example, if 10% of the population are English, English characters should not make up half of the Cabinet or half of a party's list of candidates. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented.