RP Team & 2nd accounts (was Multiple Account Trials)

[Autokrator15]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=27371

I like Kubricks but this goes against the rules, admin saction is irrelevant as the game rules dont allow moderation to look the other way or to sanction it. If we cant multi-account then no one can.

[jamescfm]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty.php?partyid=27371

I like Kubricks but this goes against the rules, admin saction is irrelevant as the game rules dont allow moderation to look the other way or to sanction it. If we cant multi-account then no one can.

How is this productive in any way?

[Autokrator15]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty.php?partyid=27371

I like Kubricks but this goes against the rules, admin saction is irrelevant as the game rules dont allow moderation to look the other way or to sanction it. If we cant multi-account then no one can.

How is this productive in any way?

Enforcing the rules? The rules say no multi-acounting and arent there for show, I'ts worrying to say you are so hostile to the idea that the rules are for everyone. Should I quote it for you? I'll make it even bold so you can understand it better:

2. Multi-accounting.

Multi-accounting, also known as "multiing", involves the forbidden practice of players running more than one active account in the game at the same time. Moderation has a responsibility to prevent multiing, which means:

[jamescfm]

http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty.php?partyid=27371

I like Kubricks but this goes against the rules, admin saction is irrelevant as the game rules dont allow moderation to look the other way or to sanction it. If we cant multi-account then no one can.

How is this productive in any way?

Enforcing the rules? The rules say no multi-acounting and arent there for show, I'ts worrying to say you are so hostile to the idea that the rules are for everyone. Should I quote it for you? I'll make it even bold so you can understand it better:

2. Multi-accounting.

Multi-accounting, also known as "multiing", involves the forbidden practice of players running more than one active account in the game at the same time. Moderation has a responsibility to prevent multiing, which means:

I am not suggesting I even support the RP Team having second accounts but this is not the way to change that. I asked how your course of action was productive because in my view, you're just being deliberately antagonistic. If you wanted a rule changed, the multiple account trials wasn't the place to do it.

[Aquinas]

This has been split from the Multiple Account Trials thread.

The Game Rules do indeed permit members of the Global Role-Play Team to run second accounts in certain circumstances. To quote section 19.2:

19.2 At Moderation's discretion and with the agreement of the Team as a whole, Team members are permitted to run an authorised second active in-game account in a separate nation, in order to advance the objectives of the Team set out in section 19.1, most particularly with regards to the encouragement of role-play. Where they do this, they should use their party description field in both accounts to explain the situation and provide a link to the other account involved.

I acknowledge Autokrator's point that this was not clarified in section 2, which deals with multiple accounting. That section has now been amended, to take note of the change.

The rule change was introduced on September 2nd and was intended as an experiment. If it is successful, we intend to continue with it and possibly explore the options in terms of extending the privilege more widely.

The purpose behind this is to promote role-play by enabling some of our strongest and most committed role-players to extend their reach beyond what they would otherwise be able to do.

At the present time, Kubrick has accounts in Vanuku and Trigunia, and Doc has accounts in Telamon and Kalistan.

As most of you know, Particracy Classic is over a decade old and is not being developed further. It is my view, and has become increasingly my view, that if we are to maximise the game's role-play potential and keep the game vibrant, then we need to pull out all of the stops and not be afraid to experiment and take the occasional calculated risk. I appreciate this particular experiment is radical and controversial, and perhaps unwelcome to some. If it goes wrong - and that is a possibility, of course - then I will accept full personal responsibility. However, I am confident this will be of benefit to the game and that this is a great opportunity.

[Siggon Kristov]

this goes against the rules, admin saction is irrelevant as the game rules dont allow moderation to look the other way or to sanction it. If we cant multi-account then no one can.

http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty.php?partyid=27371

I like Kubricks but this goes against the rules, admin saction is irrelevant as the game rules dont allow moderation to look the other way or to sanction it. If we cant multi-account then no one can.

How is this productive in any way?

Enforcing the rules? The rules say no multi-acounting and arent there for show, I'ts worrying to say you are so hostile to the idea that the rules are for everyone. Should I quote it for you? I'll make it even bold so you can understand it better:

2. Multi-accounting.

Multi-accounting, also known as "multiing", involves the forbidden practice of players running more than one active account in the game at the same time. Moderation has a responsibility to prevent multiing, which means:

Read 19.2 in the Game Rules.

[Autokrator15]

I am not suggesting I even support the RP Team having second accounts but this is not the way to change that. I asked how your course of action was productive because in my view, you're just being deliberately antagonistic. If you wanted a rule changed, the multiple account trials wasn't the place to do it.

I had no intention of being antagonistic let me reasure you of that. And what rule change? I reported a multi acount according to the rules and stated my objection to the rules NOT being enforced. So you totally mis my point, I wish to enforce said rules, not change them.

On subject of the original place I posted it? Maybe the wrong vennue, I also PM'ed Aquinas with my objection and I thought the place where I posted it was the right place to do so as I did not really know where else to put it. So really I wish no ill, but I do wish justice and proper rule enforcement.

I acknowledge Autokrator's point that this was not clarified in section 2, which deals with multiple accounting. That section has now been amended, to take note of the change.

The rule change was introduced on September 2nd and was intended as an experiment. If it is successful, we intend to continue with it and possibly explore the options in terms of extending the privilege more widely.

This explains alot. I am not saying I oppose the second acount idea but I am warry of giving some more privileges then others. I hope that this expirement will be made more open and increased into looking at ways to keep track of ,and how we keep track of, possible second acounts. And with this I do not mean those who currently have it but in a scenario where more people can have them.

Read 19.2 in the Game Rules.

I had not seen that, though I do not see how these multi accounts that currently exist are helping. Trigunia for example has two of the most active players in the game, how is Kubricks adding to that nation by being there with a second account? I'm not being difficult, atleast not trying to be, but delivering cricism so we can think about it. Also 19.2 goes against 2. (well did seeing its now changed).

[jamescfm]

I am not suggesting I even support the RP Team having second accounts but this is not the way to change that. I asked how your course of action was productive because in my view, you're just being deliberately antagonistic. If you wanted a rule changed, the multiple account trials wasn't the place to do it.

I had no intention of being antagonistic let me reasure you of that. And what rule change? I reported a multi acount according to the rules and stated my objection to the rules NOT being enforced. So you totally mis my point, I wish to enforce said rules, not change them.

19.2, it appears.

I apologise if my assumptions were wrong but I was operating on the basis that I believed you:
-knew that the rules stated that the RP Team could operate multiple accounts
-did not support this idea
-were raising this in the multiple accounts trials thread as a 'protest' of sorts
If this wasn't the case, then that's just a misjudgement on my part I guess.

If it is successful, we intend to continue with it and possibly explore the options in terms of extending the privilege more widely.

Trigunia for example has two of the most active players in the game, how is Kubricks adding to that nation by being there with a second account?

I do think this has to be extended at some point. Restricting it to the RP Team, if nothing else, limits the impact it can have. It would also be a good idea to make clear the reason for choosing each nation for operation of an alternate account, maybe even create a thread where players can suggest nations that need improvement or whatever.

[Autokrator15]

19.2, it appears.

It does appear so, I did not know of this specific rule. And Im quite skeptic about it.

I apologise if my assumptions were wrong but I was operating on the basis that I believed you:
-knew that the rules stated that the RP Team could operate multiple accounts
-did not support this idea
-were raising this in the multiple accounts trials thread as a 'protest' of sorts
If this wasn't the case, then that's just a misjudgement on my part I guess.

No appology needed, texts can be misleading. It happens.

If it is successful, we intend to continue with it and possibly explore the options in terms of extending the privilege more widely.

Trigunia for example has two of the most active players in the game, how is Kubricks adding to that nation by being there with a second account?

I do think this has to be extended at some point. Restricting it to the RP Team, if nothing else, limits the impact it can have. It would also be a good idea to make clear the reason for choosing each nation for operation of an alternate account, maybe even create a thread where players can suggest nations that need improvement or whatever.

I tried to make this point in my post but I think I was a bit vaque. But I couldn't agree more.

[Doc]

As someone who has opened a second account in Telamon, maybe this would be an opportunity to share some thoughts on it:

1) In selecting Telamon, I deliberately selected a country which was occupied by a Party that was doing very little with the country. I also wanted to focus on a country which was open culturally, basically a country nobody was doing anything with.

2) I think the criteria which attracted me to Telamon also drew others to Telamon, and their arrival is basically foiling the nascent attempts to RP a different kind of country than the one I am currently playing in. All things being equal, if I had two Kalistans instead of just one, I prefer the actual Kalistan, because there is an excellent RPer there, and only inexplicable opposition in Telamon.

3) Having been in Telamon for more than a week, I will say, its actually not that much of a privilege. I have to keep in mind where I am playing. I have to deal with two different sets of politics. And I have to try to build relationships with a new set of folks, while trying to keep up with my home country. To be completely honest, early returns are not positive for this experiment, from my perspective. I am not sure how long moderation plans on running the experiment, but my feedback is that it is first of all a lot harder than it seems. I'll stick it out to see if things change, but I am not totally sure they will.

If we are running it as an experiment, I have to be honest. The results may come back to be less inspiring than just focusing our energy on one country, and it might actually not fully be worth the valid concerns that Autokrator is raising.