Second accounts and Security Council role-play
2.2.7 ASAA players should not control the representative of more than 1 nation during Security Council role-play.
Simpler 3 day inactivations
The current rule...
8.1.1 All of the following 3 conditions apply: they have not logged into their account for at least 3 days (72 hours), they have missed at least one bill vote with an 8 IG (in-game) month voting period and another player from the same nation has requested their early inactivation. The player requesting the inactivation should cite this rule when doing so.
...has been modified to...
8.1.1 They have not logged into their account for at least 3 days (72 hours) and another player from the same nation has requested their early inactivation. The player requesting the inactivation should cite this rule when doing so.
The core name must be included in the nation name
No more special exceptions anymore, since this can cause confusion for players trying to locate a specific nation.
More protection for Party Organisations
The rules have been changed from...
12. Party Organisations.
12.1 A Party Organisation will be deleted if one or both of the following apply:
- It has no active leader(s).
- It is more than 20 IG (in-game) years old and does not have a minimum of 2 active members of full member status or higher, who must both be listed with no more than 25 organisations.
Organisations which meet this criteria may be reported for deletion on the Organisations for deletion thread.
12.2 If a player uses an inactive account within an organisation to raise or demote a party from leadership, then Moderation reserves the discretion to reverse the changes if this action is challenged by another player.
...to...
12. Party Organisations.
12.1 A Party Organisation will be eligible for deletion if it is more than 30 IG (in-game) years old and does not have a minimum of 1 active member ("active member" meaning an active member who has leadership or full member status) who is listed with no more than 20 organisations.
Organisations may be reported for deletion on the "Organisations for deletion" thread.
12.2 A leaderless organisation is an organisation with no active leaders. When an organisation is leaderless, a party with full member status may receive leadership status by posting a link to both their party and the organisation on the "Organisation leadership requests" thread. In exceptional circumstances, Moderation reserves the discretion to deny leadership requests.
12.3 If a player uses an inactive account within an organisation to raise or demote a party from leadership, then Moderation reserves the discretion to reverse the changes if this action is challenged by another player.
Easier bill clearouts
13.6.1 Clearouts can be requested for bills proposed by inactive parties on the "Bill Clearout Requests" thread.
13.6.1.1 Bills proposed by active parties are similarly eligible for clearout if they are 10 or more game years old. Players should cite this rule when making the request.
More protection for Treaties
The rules have changed from...
14. Treaties.
14.1 Treaties which have become inactive, meaning they are over 20 IG (in-game) years old and have no ratifications or are over 100 IG years old and have fewer than 2 ratifications, will be deleted. Treaties identified as inactive may be reported for deletion on the "Dead Treaties" thread.
14.2 "Treaty-locking", or ratifiying treaties that completely or nearly completely forbid any proposals to change laws, is not allowed. Amongst other possible sanctions, Moderation reserves the discretion to delete treaties and/or subject parties to a seat reset if this is necessary in order to reverse a treaty-lock situation.
To...
14. Treaties.
14.1 Treaties which have become inactive, meaning they are over 50 IG (in-game) years old and have no ratifications or are over 200 IG years old and have fewer than 2 ratifications, will be deleted. Treaties identified as inactive may be reported for deletion on the "Dead Treaties" thread.
14.2 "Treaty-locking", or ratifiying treaties that completely or nearly completely forbid any proposals to change laws, is not allowed. Amongst other possible sanctions, Moderation reserves the discretion to delete treaties and/or subject parties to a seat reset if this is necessary in order to reverse a treaty-lock situation.
Maximum 15% limit on changes to Cultural Protocols
16.5 As a general convention, players should be able to provide good reasons if they want to significantly change Cultural Protocols which are less than 30 in-game years old. Where the Cultural Protocols are more than 30 in-game years old, then a change to any of the categories by 5% or less will generally be accepted without question. If the changes proposed are between 5 and 10%, then players should be prepared for the possibility of having the changes queried. If the changes proposed are over 10%, then players should always expect to need to provide strong role-play justification for the changes. Changes of over 15% will never be accepted, unless there are exceptional circumstances where this is deemed necessary to repair a situation in which a Cultural Protocol is insufficiently accessible to players.
No more Nationmaster-requested 8 party limits
We were having some issues with this, some of these being:
- Refusing to reactivate parties was causing some upset/frustration.
- Moderators (myself included) were not always very good at remembering which nations had 8 party limits and remembering to deny reactivation requests where they were in place.
- Nationmasters already have the authority to request inactivation after 48 hours, and it was felt that this is in itself is sufficient to deal with the problems which traditionally arise from nations having more than 8 parties.
Some role-play clarifications
21.5.1 The Head of Government may dismiss a Cabinet Minister and replace them with a chosen temporary replacement. In practical terms it may not always be possible to arrange this through the game mechanics, but the dismissal and replacement will be recognised under the Game Rules if the player controlling the Head of Government simply puts forward a bill, announcing the change.
21.6 In cases where a party has no seat, the default presumption should be that the party is able to contribute to debates in the legislature due to one of its members winning a seat at a by-election. However, players may collectively improvise arrangements of their own to provide a satisfying explanation for how parties with no seats in the legislature can speak and vote there.
23.1 Role-play events between nations, such as wars, will be officially recognised if before they are commenced, in all of the concerned nations a RP event bill outlining the event is approved by a 2/3rds majority of all players with seats (not just those with seats who vote) and over 50% of the seats in the legislature. This bill must specify the necessary and possible consequences of the role-play event, as well as a clause that deals with the eventuality of one or more players becoming absent for more than a specified time, and how such an absence is to be interpreted in in-game terms.
An inactive nation, meaning a nation with no players with seats, clearly cannot give consent to role-play, which means players outside the nation should not attempt to role-play with it in in any major or controversial way.