Overmoderation

Talk and plan things about the game with other players.

Overmoderation

Postby errant sperm » Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:16 pm

I have had fun playing particracy but the moderation interferes way too much. It really takes the fun out of it for me. My party has been inactivated by moderation due to "Not intending to follow cultural protocols." The following is a copy of the full conversation.


Date 00:19:09, September 28, 2015 CET
From Moderation
To Conquest Party of Mordusia
Message
Conquest Party of Mordusia:

Moderation:

Conquest Party of Mordusia:

Moderation:

Greetings,

Please be aware that under the Rules of the Game (see viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6365 ) your character names, especially the names of Cabinet ministers and the candidates entered on your Party Overview page, need to reflect the Cultural Protocols of the nation you are playing in.

Mordusia's Cultural Protocols can be seen here: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=445378

As you can see, Mordusia's culture is mainly English, with a French minority.

Regards,

Aquinas
(Moderation)

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.

The rules are strict about character names:

"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."

It would be okay for a portion of your Cabinet ministers, character or candidates to have Polish names, but the majority should be English.

Regards,

Aquinas
(Moderation)

You are grasping at straws and overmoderating. I will change the names as I see fit. If you don't like it then you can change them yourself or ban me from the game. I have grown tired of ridiculous Moderator interference. What is the point of the game if Moderation is interfering all the time. The whole point of politics is to change things to try and change things to the way you want them. In the United States, we have a Black President, named Barack Hussain Obama even though only 10% of the population is Black.

I regret it has come down to this, but since it is clear you do not intend to abide by Mordusia's Cultural Protocols, you leave me with no real choice other than to inactivate your party. If you wish your party to be reactivated, all you need to do is fix your character names, both in your party description and in your candidates list, and then request reactivation.

Aquinas
(Moderation)
errant sperm
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:12 pm

Re: Overmoderation

Postby MichaelReilly » Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:18 pm

Yep. I 100% agree with this post.

I've said it in the past and I'll reiterate it here: I think moderation are guilty of overkill on the role-play front. Nation names, character names as well as other instances of meddling by a moderation team that had previously found an acceptable level between laissez-faire and intervention has now crossed the line into making the game not fun in some cases, to infuriatingly unplayable in others.

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.
Down with this sort of thing
User avatar
MichaelReilly
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:39 pm
Location: The boy from the County Hell

Re: Overmoderation

Postby Aquinas » Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:53 pm

As I told you, errant sperm, I regret this situation ended like this, but once you made clear you were not prepared to abide by the rules, you really did leave me with little choice. Cultural Protocols are part of the Rules of the Game and they are enforced in the nations where they apply.

Valruzia has a Polish theme and if you wanted to play a Polish party, you were (and are) welcome to play there. Indeed, you were playing there not so long ago. Mordusia, however, is an English nation, so playing a Polish party there was not appropriate.

I do very much understand and respect the fact that some players prefer playing without the constraints of the rules surrounding Cultural Protocols. This is why you will see, in the Cultural Protocols Index, that 3 nations have been set aside as "Culturally Open", where Cultural Protocols do not apply. All of them have playing slots available and you are welcome to play in any of them if you wish to. You are also, of course, welcome to request reactivation in Mordusia, provided you adopt appropriate candidate names and agree to abide by Mordusia's Cultural Protocols.

Michael: I'm not sure what you mean by "over-zealous enforcement", since all that has happened is that the rules have been enforced. Is it that you have a more general problem with Cultural Protocols, or you think they should be enforced in some cases but not in others? Anyway, what I can definitely assure you of is that I am personally determined to make this game as welcoming and accessible to new players as possible. Retaining players is key to Particracy's future.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Overmoderation

Postby errant sperm » Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:45 am

Its good to hear that I am not the only one with this opinion.

Its a shame because I really felt like I had a pretty fun role play going. My party faced "religions persecution" in Valruzia, so we fled back to the birthplace of the party so of course some of the names of the party leaders would still be Valruzian. I was having fun and being creative but I guess that's not allowed.

This isn't the first time I have had a disagreement with Moderation. At one point, we passed a cultural protocol in Mordusia that replaced the 500 year old one that existed at the time. It had the support of 3 parties. (over 2/3 majority) It made minor changes that were backed up by roleplay and laws passed but it was rejected by Moderation.

I agree that a single player should not be allowed to completely change a nation's culture within a few years but when you have multiple players role playing, and trying to change things over time, then I think it should be allowed. It should be realistic but if it hasn't been updated in 500 years then I think even major changes should be allowed. There are plenty of examples throughout history when areas have had their cultures completely changed due to particular events such as the holocaust and the Jews emigrating to Palestine. This is a good example of an event where within only a decade or 2, the culture of a nation completely changed. The cultures should be player controlled, not Moderator controlled.

This is a game and these nations are fictional. Why do they need locked cultures? Even the names of the cultures and religions are now fictional. Let them be dynamic and allow them to be shaped by the players.

Particracy has a really fun, unique concept. If they would loosen up on the role play restrictions I really think the player base would grow, but when half of my messages are complaints from Moderation, it ruins the fun. Instead of being excited that I got a new message, it like, "oh man, what did I do wrong now." No fun.

Time for me to take a break from Particracy. I will have to find something else to do while I'm waiting in line for Starbucks. Oh well. If the cultural protocol rules are not significantly relaxed then I will probably not be returning.
errant sperm
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:12 pm

Re: Overmoderation

Postby EEL Mk2 » Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:57 am

If we could create more culturally open nations, that might be an adequate compromise solution.

But I do agree that if a nation has remained culturally dormant for a long time, significant cultural changes are entirely reasonable.
Image
EEL Mk2
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 1:11 am

Re: Overmoderation

Postby MichaelReilly » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:07 am

errant sperm wrote:Particracy has a really fun, unique concept. If they would loosen up on the role play restrictions I really think the player base would grow, but when half of my messages are complaints from Moderation, it ruins the fun. Instead of being excited that I got a new message, it like, "oh man, what did I do wrong now." No fun.


This is what I'm referring to.

I'm not getting hostile, I'm just saying: mods, leave people alone.
Down with this sort of thing
User avatar
MichaelReilly
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:39 pm
Location: The boy from the County Hell

Re: Overmoderation

Postby Imperial Dark Rome » Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:14 am

Damn, I wish Davostag had that level of cultural protection!!! Argh...

I can see it now... (Hazy dream sequence begins...)

Moderation sends in-game message to new player or invader that says.…

"I'm sorry, but your character(s) names are not evil enough for the Unholy Davostag Empire. According to Davostag's Cultural Protocols, all names must be evil sounding or have a evil title as part of a name. Please change your character(s) names in a timely manner or else you will FEEL THE WRATH OF MODERATION!!! Mahahaha!"

(End of hazy dream sequence...)

I have a dream today! That someday the evil hellhole on Terra, the Unholy Davostag Empire will have equal cultural protection as the vast majority of nations on Terra!
Satanic Republican Party
Imperial Dark Rome
Unholy Davostag Empire
User avatar
Imperial Dark Rome
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:32 pm
Location: Devil's Hood, Oregon, United States

Re: Overmoderation

Postby IdioC » Tue Sep 29, 2015 8:54 pm

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. :lol:

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?

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.
What is that weird Jelbék language what I types with me computer buttons?

"Kae orzy sedrijohylakmek, megàmojylakjek, frjomimek. Kaerjoshu zri? Afrkmojad firja, Kae grzy Zykhiko ajozuo zri?"
User avatar
IdioC
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:28 pm
Location: Just the forum

Re: Overmoderation

Postby Aquinas » Wed Sep 30, 2015 12:32 am

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. :lol:


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.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Overmoderation

Postby errant sperm » Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:00 am

Aquinas, it is clear to me that you are passionate about the game and I think that is awesome. Its good to see that you care greatly about the opinions of the players. I understand that when rules are made, they need to be enforced. All of us players are going to have varying opinions on issues but at the end of the day, somebody has to decide what the rules are going to be and how they are going to be enforced. Its a tough job so I empathize with you.

I really like the game as well and I want to keep playing so I hope my input will help change things for the better.

Based on reading the forums it seems to me that there is much dissent about the cultural protocols amongst the players and that the protocols are a fairly new thing. There are many complaints about it and I feel that it has many problems that need to be flushed out.

I don't understand why the cultural protocols need to be so strict. Why would only 3 out of 58 be "Culturally Open"?

When new players start playing a new game, they do not read the rules, they do not read the FAQ, or the Tutorial. They want to get straight to the fun stuff. I read the Tutorial for the first time tonight. People usually read these FAQs, Tutorials, ect. after playing for a while once they understand the game a bit better so that they can form an even better understanding. These player guides and rules do not need to be more detailed, they need to be less restrictive and simple.

I started playing as Mordusia. I had no idea how the game worked when I started. I just started playing. That is what people do. Now I have a history in this nation and one other nation that I want to continue to develop. It should develop in a combination with my goals and the obstacles (other players) that I encounter. It is dynamic. The rules should allow the nations to be more dynamic. Nations should not be permanently culturally locked. Why oh why does it have to be this way? Why are these strict protocols needed. I just don't get it.

The concept of the game should not be sacrificed for the sake of making new players happy but I don't feel that is the issue here. These are new stricter rules that are causing problems and they should be fixed for the sake of all players.

I changed nations one time. The reason I did so had nothing to do with cultural protocols. I wanted to seize power. And I did. And it was fun :). Valruzia seemed to be the easiest target so that is the nation I picked. It was fun to be running things with a 2/3s majority but it what was also fun was incorporating what I had done into the role play and into the history of my party and of the nations I was effecting. My party had majority power for about 14 years. IRL, culture, religion, and language can be seriously effected in that amount of time if major events take place. I think a 50% majority of seats in a nation should be able to change the Cultural Protocol and the amount of change allowed should be based on role play events, laws in effect, and time passed. I think that using the 2/3s of players with seats model that currently exists is too restrictive. A minority party should not be able to hold up reasonable cultural changes that are backed up by laws and role play.

My party in Mordusia that Aquinas deactivated was not an all Polish party. It had a mix of Valruzian immigrants and Mordusian natives. I don't think it is at all unrealistic at all that we had 45% of seats. I live in California and we had an Austrian born Governor. What percent of the population in California is Austrian? Probably less than 1%.
errant sperm
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:12 pm

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests