New parties ignoring RP history- A question

[Doc]

Not looking for a huge debate here, but some constructive input may be helpful

I would like some advice on approaching new arrivals to one's country. As long as I have been experiencing this in Kalistan, I would think that I should be an expert on the matter, and yet, I am clearly not doing a very good job at it: I am really just wondering how other countries with long and storied histories handle new players who come to their countries and just willfully play as if its a free for all, with no RP around their rise, nor any sort of justification for their policy proposals, nor any sort of acknowledgement of the RPed History of the country.

Please- if your answer is "Well, that's just how it is, you have to put up with it until the election yada yada..." I am asking for some more constructive feedback than that. I don't feel like I SHOULD just have to put up with it. I feel there is something we can do to insist that new players at the very least familiarize themselves with our history and RP within the milieu and context that exists there before they got there. How do you balance the desire for new players in your country with the desire to maintain historical RP continuity?

[Rathon]

Have you tried approaching these players and informing them that the country in question *does* have a history and isn't just a blank slate? Offer to give them at least a quick primer on current events and recent history?

[Doc]

Have you tried approaching these players and informing them that the country in question *does* have a history and isn't just a blank slate? Offer to give them at least a quick primer on current events and recent history?

You can bet on it. But, apparently, its "Well, the masses are sick to death of the communist tyranny of the SP and are demanding change..."

Honestly, sometimes I think that these guys must all read from the same exact script. "When you go somewhere with a strong socialist Party, try complaining about Communism and then propose a bunch of laws which establish the military as a defacto police force while dismantling the militias. That always works, and of course the socialists will go along with you, because you are right- it is time for a change in how the core institutions of the society operate, and it must happen in 9 months or things aren't fair..."

I think what I would be more interested in, if this is possible, is maybe a primer of sorts that they should look at when they join, which says things like "Kalistan, an anti-law enforcement player's dream. Don't play here if you want to play a fascist." or "Dorvik- they have a history of nationalist Parties..." Stuff like that... That way, players can at least have some info about the country to go off of before proceeding to pretend like none of it existed.

And to be clear, I am sure it is just as frustrating for new players to run into institutionalist Brick Walls like the SPoK as it is for the SPoK to have to repeat, for the twentieth time, "Look: Just take a look at our RP Laws, read a few of them. Ask questions, but don't pretend there is a huge ground swell for fascism just because you say there is..." I am convinced that the frustration is mutual here...

[SelucianCrusader]

I obviously don't mind new players but sometimes I've felt like there's a factory somewhere that produces a special kind of people who can't stand when the country isn't run by a President and a Prime Minister presiding over a Congress/Senate and gets their mind blown if they see something that doesn't go along their view of how things should be, such as an original ideology (even a thing like Hosian Democracy) or a conservative/nationalist party named "Liberal"/"Liberal Democrat" or using the colour red, or liberal parties being against gun control or abortions etc. Of course I realize some would probably accuse me of the exact opposite: being a bit too much against clear definitions in general and unable to stop imagining a banana being a pineapple or a sports car etc.

I think the best way to handle a situation like this would be to send a p. m. with some welcoming statement and some friendly advice, as well as having some such good advice visible on the nation's page in the the top of the debate section. Unfortunately, in my experience, some (but not all) might see this as older players unfairly trying to dictate how they should be playing the game and might view bills in the debate section as lacking official authority because of.. well, being bills in the debate section. Maybe this is controversial for some, but for me it seems like around 80% of the game population fluctuates very vividly - the reason why don't see more players on the forum seem to be because many of them don't stay that long. I'm all for helping people stay and getting involved in RP and bringing up original new ideas to contribute to the lore etc - but if someone leaves after getting friendly advice from you and information about game rules and stuff, don't blame yourself.

[Rathon]

I obviously don't mind new players but sometimes I've felt like there's a factory somewhere that produces a special kind of people who can't stand when the country isn't run by a President and a Prime Minister presiding over a Congress/Senate and gets their mind blown if they see something that doesn't go along their view of how things should be, such as an original ideology (even a thing like Hosian Democracy) or a conservative/nationalist party named "Liberal"/"Liberal Democrat" or using the colour red, or liberal parties being against gun control or abortions etc. Of course I realize some would probably accuse me of the exact opposite: being a bit too much against clear definitions in general and unable to stop imagining a banana being a pineapple or a sports car etc.

Nah, parties like that are what make games like Particracy fun! If every party were a carbon copy of the major US/UK/Canadian parties, things would get boring around here pretty quickly.

I think the best way to handle a situation like this would be to send a p. m. with some welcoming statement and some friendly advice, as well as having some such good advice visible on the nation's page in the the top of the debate section. Unfortunately, in my experience, some (but not all) might see this as older players unfairly trying to dictate how they should be playing the game and might view bills in the debate section as lacking official authority because of.. well, being bills in the debate section. Maybe this is controversial for some, but for me it seems like around 80% of the game population fluctuates very vividly - the reason why don't see more players on the forum seem to be because many of them don't stay that long. I'm all for helping people stay and getting involved in RP and bringing up original new ideas to contribute to the lore etc - but if someone leaves after getting friendly advice from you and information about game rules and stuff, don't blame yourself.

I used to do this back when I played in Hulstria. I'd send a welcome message (and, to add flavor, I did this in the character of my party leader) to the new party. I included links to the tutorial, FAQ, main wiki page, and forums, and explained the current political situation, where there are ideological vacancies, and the culture of the nation. I have an example here:

[CCP]

Doc, who is the player that's bothering you? The Revolutionary People's Party player?

I was very sympathetic to your post and was going to post some stray thoughts on how we might make some game-wide changes to address this recurrent issue. But then I looked at Kalistan, and all I see is a new party proposing bills, and you and the Labor Party player telling him of her why they shouldn't propose those bills, and then you and the Labor Party player reducing the number of new bills the player can propose. Proposing bills opposed to the majority party's position is how the game is played. I think you're worrying over nothing. Even if s/he gets a majority (which is doubtful given you and Labor Party's visibility), I think the longterm story you've developed in Kalistan is resilient enough to survive a new party.

[Rathon]

Doc, who is the player that's bothering you? The Revolutionary People's Party player?

I was very sympathetic to your post and was going to post some stray thoughts on how we might make some game-wide changes to address this recurrent issue. But then I looked at Kalistan, and all I see is a new party proposing bills, and you and the Labor Party player telling him of her why they shouldn't propose those bills, and then you and the Labor Party player reducing the number of new bills the player can propose. Proposing bills opposed to the majority party's position is how the game is played. I think you're worrying over nothing. Even if s/he gets a majority (which is doubtful given you and Labor Party's visibility), I think the longterm story you've developed in Kalistan is resilient enough to survive a new party.

Similarly, it's important to remember that game mechanics force new parties to propose a lot of bills to establish themselves (to set up their positions and visibility). Generally (at least in my experience), new parties make a lot of "controversial" proposals early, then slow down a bit and (hopefully) compromise more once they've actually won some seats. I RP this early period more as my party "establishing a platform" and "petitioning the government for redress of my party's grievances," rather than as a serious attempt to change policy straight out of the gate. I don't know the exact specifics of your situation, but perhaps bearing this in mind, you could show a bit more leniency to having actual opposition parties.

[jamescfm]

Doc, who is the player that's bothering you? The Revolutionary People's Party player?

I was very sympathetic to your post and was going to post some stray thoughts on how we might make some game-wide changes to address this recurrent issue. But then I looked at Kalistan, and all I see is a new party proposing bills, and you and the Labor Party player telling him of her why they shouldn't propose those bills, and then you and the Labor Party player reducing the number of new bills the player can propose. Proposing bills opposed to the majority party's position is how the game is played. I think you're worrying over nothing. Even if s/he gets a majority (which is doubtful given you and Labor Party's visibility), I think the longterm story you've developed in Kalistan is resilient enough to survive a new party.

Similarly, it's important to remember that game mechanics force new parties to propose a lot of bills to establish themselves (to set up their positions and visibility). Generally (at least in my experience), new parties make a lot of "controversial" proposals early, then slow down a bit and (hopefully) compromise more once they've actually won some seats. I RP this early period more as my party "establishing a platform" and "petitioning the government for redress of my party's grievances," rather than as a serious attempt to change policy straight out of the gate. I don't know the exact specifics of your situation, but perhaps bearing this in mind, you could show a bit more leniency to having actual opposition parties.

I'm the Labour Party in Kalistan and I appreciate what's been said but I do want to offer some counter. The problem wasn't to do with the number of bills, that was played up for IC reasons, it was more to do with the attempts to completely destroy Kalistan's law. Withdrawal from treaties which make up a major part of the economy, banning militias which have been around for hundreds of years, it doesn't make any sense in the context of the nation. I did send a message to the both players when they joined, the contents of which I will reproduce below. Perhaps there was things I could've done better in phrasing or info or whatever.

Hi,

Welcome to Kalistan!

Sorry to patronise you but can I ask that you familiarise yourself with our laws, culture etc. by reading the House Rules located here: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=447205

Our nation has a distinct identity which can make it difficult for new players to adapt, hopefully by reading through those bills you'll be familiar with our identity soon.

Hi,

Welcome to Kalistan! I'm not sure if this is your first time playing in Particracy but if so I'd recommend checking the forum, there's a lot of interesting stuff going on over there- particularly at the moment due to the World Congress Security Council seat. Particularly helpful might be this thread: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6908

Doc, who wrote it, plays as the Socialist Party of Kalistan, he has been a great helping getting me into Particracy in the past few months. The best advice I can give is always remember the difference between Out of Character remarks and In Character remarks. Even if someone is being extremely rude, aggressive even bullying in their tone, as long as it is in character, don't worry. It isn't you they're attacking, it's your in game character.

If you want to post in Kalistan's thread: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&start=260
then you can either post in 'The Republic' which is like the national newspaper and should be as unbiased as possible or you can create your own publication (the two current ones are 'The People's Press (for the Labour Party) and IZQUIERDA- The Voice of the Kalistani Left (for the Socialist Party).

It might help to read through some old articles if you have got time on your hands, to get an idea of the recent history of Kalistan. Although, it was only really me and Doc who posted at all.

If you decide to post in 'The Republic', we ask that you stick to the format of

Title- Bold and Large
Sub-Title- Bold
Location and Date- Italics
Pictures- Caption underneath written in 'Small'

Good luck and I hope you enjoy playing with us!

Additionally, I think that it should be pointed out that the real problem isn't necessarily that we are concerned our history will be erased, Doc has played longe enough to know he can outlast most parties but more about getting players who actually want to contribute positively within the RP context. I should acknowledge that I, not long ago, was a noob in Kalistan. I was naive with some of my bills and rhetoric (see: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&start=170#p101869) but Doc did message me about it and I learnt from it. The issue is creating an environment where more people react as I did and less react as the RPP and CDP did.

[Doc]

Doc, who is the player that's bothering you? The Revolutionary People's Party player?

I was very sympathetic to your post and was going to post some stray thoughts on how we might make some game-wide changes to address this recurrent issue. But then I looked at Kalistan, and all I see is a new party proposing bills, and you and the Labor Party player telling him of her why they shouldn't propose those bills, and then you and the Labor Party player reducing the number of new bills the player can propose. Proposing bills opposed to the majority party's position is how the game is played. I think you're worrying over nothing. Even if s/he gets a majority (which is doubtful given you and Labor Party's visibility), I think the longterm story you've developed in Kalistan is resilient enough to survive a new party.

Agreed on all points that James made, and to add one of my own:

I think the RPP was just the most recent manifestation of the problem I am pointing at. It ain't them specifically. My problem is more with a Party coming in without taking any time to bother to learn about the country he (or she, I don't know) is about to start playing in, not asking any questions, not reading ANY of the RP bills which, whatever their plan is, still govern the limits of RP in the country. I know Kalistan isn't the only country this happens in, but it is the country I happen to know most about.

The problem which I am addressing in this thread is that this sort of development happens way too often, and not just in Kalistan. And it is obnoxious. I don't care if they feel that they have to propose a bunch of laws to establish their position- Unlike a real electorate, which knows the difference between a legitimate political position within the context of our country's history and development, and a charlatan who goes out and claims that Aliens are invading and so we need to give the government extraordinary powers to address this, elections in Particracy are decided by pure math, without regard for the nonsense our political leaders RP or simply just claim. In the real world, claiming you are a fascist in a "socialist" country has actual consequences, while in Kalistan, there are zero consequences for what one says, and only for the votes one takes. And that the players who are there already should be powerless to stop them when they are OOC not interested in learning anything about the country, just because, as of the fact that a party must propose "controversial" bills to get established seems to me to be unreasonable.

So, back to my original question: How do we encourage new Parties to observe the established RP history BEFORE they attempt a unilateral retcon of the Country's current situation, BEYOND the election mechanism? And I suppose then, what tools do we have to sanction them when they refuse to do so?

[Doc]

I used to do this back when I played in Hulstria. I'd send a welcome message (and, to add flavor, I did this in the character of my party leader) to the new party. I included links to the tutorial, FAQ, main wiki page, and forums, and explained the current political situation, where there are ideological vacancies, and the culture of the nation. I have an example here:

This is fantastic- And just keeping this as an OOC bill or something, and copy and paste it would make things quite simple.

Right on.