As was announced back in January, Particracy now has a system where Cultural Protocols need to be affirmed during each Cultural Era or else they become candidates for Culturally Open status.
Guys, I know this isn't wildly popular, but for the long-term benefit of the game, this needed to be done. If we are to attract and retain players, we need to offer more Culturally Open nations and more opportunities to create new cultures.
Remember, too, that making a nation Culturally Open does not mean it is not allowed to role-play the culture there; it simply means Moderation will not require players to abide by it. Also, of course, it will be possible to restore an elapsed Cultural Protocol under the terms of section 17 of the Game Rules.
We are now at the close of the Cultural Era. Of Particacy's 52 Culturally Protected nations, 34 have affirmed, whilst 18 have not affirmed.
The candidate nations are Badara, Darnussia, Hobrazia, Hulstria, Ibutho, Jakania, Kalopia, Keymon, Lourenne, Rutania, Selucia, Solentia, Talmoria, Telamon, Tukarali, Valruzia, Vorona and Zardugal.
Moderation has decided that of these candidates, 5 will be allowed to continue with their existing Cultural Protocols, and 13 will become Culturally Open. This will mean, after the process is complete, that 19 out of Particracy's 58 nations will be Culturally Open. Since there has to be a minimum of 8 Culturally Open nations at any one time, there will therefore be 11 opportunities to create new Cultural Protocols.
We are asking you, the players, to advise us as to which 5 of the 18 unaffirmed Cultural Protocols should be saved.
Please avoid laborious explanations and excuses for why a nation did not get around to affirming its Cultural Protocol. Instead, tell us what the Cultural Protocol means in practice to you. Present a positive case for why it should continue into the next Cultural Era.
The final decision will be made by us, but before we make the decision, we want to hear as much feedback as possible.
When discussing a candidate nation on this thread, please tell us a little about your background in the game and provide links to your relevant in-game party account(s). If you do not do this, we may, for example, not realise you have been playing in the nation for the last year as opposed to just being someone from outside the nation who has never actually played there.
We would like this process to be as open as possible. Every player in every candidate nation will be messaged about what the situation is and about this specific thread. Players may, if they wish, approach us privately with their views, but we would prefer if they gave their feedback here, in public, on this thread.
However, in order to ensure this openness, all posters have a responsibility to be civil. Every player in this game needs to feel comfortable coming to this thread and participating in this process. No matter how strong the emotions involved may be, courtesy must be maintained at all times.
One of the factors influencing our decisions will be how the candidate nations have fared in terms of player numbers during the current Cultural Era. Some in-game cultures are more popular than others, meaning some nations are regularly filled with players, whilst others spend most of the time as one-party states.
I have compiled a Party Numbers Rating for each of the candidate nations. This works by dividing the Cultural Era (IG year 3960 to the present) into 5 periods, giving each nation a rating for each period and then adding up all of a nation's period ratings to give it its final score.
For each period, nations were given points based on their election with the highest number of parties with seats and their election with the lowest number of parties with seats.
No points were allocated for having just one party, but for each party after that, points were based on the number of parties with seats. In other words, 0 parties = 0 parties, 1 party = 0 points, 2 parties = 2 points, 3 parties = 3 points, 4 parties = 4 points and so on.
To give an example of how many points a nation might win for a period, if its election with the lowest number of parties with seats was 4 and its election with the highest number of parties with seats was 7, then it would win 11 points (7+4). Similarly, if its election with the lowest number of parties with seats was 1 and its election with the highest number of parties with seats was 3, then it would win 3 points (3+0).
Without further ado, the Party Numbers Ratings are as follows:
Rutania - 75
Solentia - 53
Zardugal - 39
Telamon - 25
Selucia - 24
Keymon - 20
Hobrazia - 17
Tukarali - 16
Darnussia - 14
Lourenne - 13
Ibutho - 8
Jakania - 6
Hulstria - 5
Badara - 4
Valruzia - 4
Vorona - 4
Kalopia - 2
Talmoria - 0
Of course, these ratings are designed to inform the process of deciding which Cultural Protocols to save, not to automatically determine it. As we will no doubt hear soon from others, there are factors other than player numbers which affect how deserving a Cultural Protocol may be thought to be of saving.
Reddy & I appreciate how sensitive this process is, and we want to say we understand how, for some of you - including some of our most devoted players - this will hurt. We take no satisfaction in this. Please be assured we are trying to conduct this process as fairly as we can. And remember the choice of which Cultural Protocols to save and which to allow to expire will not be a personal judgement on any particular player or group of players.
One final request: no polls on this, please. Forum polls are easy to manipulate, because some players have multiple forum accounts.