PARTICRACY CULTURE REFORMS CONSULTATION

General discussions about the Particracy web game.

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 1:38 pm

Everybody who has followed Particracy closely enough and for long enough knows very well there are a substantial group of players who prefer to play English parties, which means preferring English character names, nation titles, region and city names, constitutional titles and so on. This is not really surprising, given that a large proportion of players come from Anglo-Saxon countries (ie. America, UK, Canada, Australia etc.). It is true that a significant proportion of players from Anglo-Saxon countries (myself included) prefer to RP non-English cultures, but there is also a significant proportion who do not. Whilst I understand the attractions of obfuscation, we really need to be serious enough to acknowledge the reality.

Polites wrote:We are working on increasing the number of English-speaking nations,


Obviously, the concern here is with culture, not just language. In-game, this particularly means character naming. ie. The game needs enough nations where players can have English character names.

jamescfm wrote:you haven’t presented any proposals about which nations should be changed on the map. I encourage you to do so, that’s the purpose of this thread after all.


I would prefer to set fire to the map and scatter its ashes to the wind, actually. But if it's coming anyway (and it looks like it is) maybe allow all of the English/English-friendly nations on the hitlist the option of carrying on as they are? Or at least spare a few more of them from Moderational cultural takeover?
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby FPC » Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:20 pm

Phil Piratin wrote:Everybody who has followed Particracy closely enough and for long enough knows very well there are a substantial group of players who prefer to play English parties, which means preferring English character names, nation titles, region and city names, constitutional titles and so on. This is not really surprising, given that a large proportion of players come from Anglo-Saxon countries (ie. America, UK, Canada, Australia etc.). It is true that a significant proportion of players from Anglo-Saxon countries (myself included) prefer to RP non-English cultures, but there is also a significant proportion who do not. Whilst I understand the attractions of obfuscation, we really need to be serious enough to acknowledge the reality.

Polites wrote:We are working on increasing the number of English-speaking nations,


Obviously, the concern here is with culture, not just language. In-game, this particularly means character naming. ie. The game needs enough nations where players can have English character names.


After working on the descriptions of the nations over the last few days we believe at the moment there are 10 English/anglo saxon countries in game.
Used to be a mod xx current Temporary mod
Wiki Admin and Bureaucrat (for some reason)
User avatar
FPC
 
Posts: 744
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:14 am
Location: Scotland

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Elf » Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:55 pm

I wanna have a properly Anglo-Saxon (Old English) country in the game. That was my plan for Mordusia while I played there. I think it could easily become popular among people who like fantasy stuff. I'm ready to move somewhere to see that happen. Seriously.
Shiny happy people holding hands
Shiny happy people holding hands
Shiny happy people laughing
User avatar
Elf
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:01 am
Location: Kali Yuga

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

FPC wrote:
Phil Piratin wrote:Everybody who has followed Particracy closely enough and for long enough knows very well there are a substantial group of players who prefer to play English parties, which means preferring English character names, nation titles, region and city names, constitutional titles and so on. This is not really surprising, given that a large proportion of players come from Anglo-Saxon countries (ie. America, UK, Canada, Australia etc.). It is true that a significant proportion of players from Anglo-Saxon countries (myself included) prefer to RP non-English cultures, but there is also a significant proportion who do not. Whilst I understand the attractions of obfuscation, we really need to be serious enough to acknowledge the reality.

Polites wrote:We are working on increasing the number of English-speaking nations,


Obviously, the concern here is with culture, not just language. In-game, this particularly means character naming. ie. The game needs enough nations where players can have English character names.


After working on the descriptions of the nations over the last few days we believe at the moment there are 10 English/anglo saxon countries in game.


FWIW the figure I came up with was 14, comprising of 8 Culturally Protected nations with English cultures and 6 Culturally Open nations with a predominant English theme. I also noted a further 9 nations which are Culturally Open with a significant non-English feel but which still technically allow English parties under the rules. See here. The important point to make, though is that the current Cultural Map would reduce the number of English nations to just 7.

Elf wrote:I wanna have a properly Anglo-Saxon (Old English) country in the game. That was my plan for Mordusia while I played there. I think it could easily become popular among people who like fantasy stuff. I'm ready to move somewhere to see that happen. Seriously.


Now recalling the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the stuff about fire-breathing dragons flying over the skies of Northumbria...

On a personal level this excites me too, although I'm not sure how much player demand/interest is out there for something like this. Vorona was once Old Anglo-Saxon, but that never really took off.
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:52 pm

Phil Piratin wrote:I would prefer to set fire to the map and scatter its ashes to the wind, actually. But if it's coming anyway (and it looks like it is) maybe allow all of the English/English-friendly nations on the hitlist the option of carrying on as they are? Or at least spare a few more of them from Moderational cultural takeover?

At least you’ve finally admitted your true intentions here. If you’re not interested in discussing the culture map, why do you continue to dominate this thread?
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:59 pm

jamescfm wrote:
Phil Piratin wrote:I would prefer to set fire to the map and scatter its ashes to the wind, actually. But if it's coming anyway (and it looks like it is) maybe allow all of the English/English-friendly nations on the hitlist the option of carrying on as they are? Or at least spare a few more of them from Moderational cultural takeover?

At least you’ve finally admitted your true intentions here. If you’re not interested in discussing the culture map, why do you continue to dominate this thread?


It is true that I am not a fan of a Moderation-imposed Cultural Map, but this does not mean, I hope, that I am forbidden to express my concerns about the proposed policy. Nor, I hope, does it mean I am forbidden to suggest ways in which I believe the Cultural Map idea could be rendered less harmful.

To quote what Fin wrote in the OP:

4- Only the cultural map and the idea of centralising culture should be discussed here, general comments on the rule redraft should go on this thread: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7767


Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly clear, given the way this is going (the removed thread, this thread, Discord, elsewhere...) and the personalities that are involved, that this Moderation-imposed Cultural Map for the whole of Terra is going to happen regardless of the strength of the arguments articulated against it or the flimsiness of the claims being used to justify it. Three people have now messaged me telling me that this is so, and I am now reluctantly beginning to concede that they are probably right. I am not convinced this is, or ever will be, or ever was even intended to be a genuine consultation on the principle of completely centralising the control of in-game culture in the hands of Moderation.
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:14 pm

Not sure I agree with that. Only one person as far as I’m aware has come out against the proposal whereas numerous players have stated their agreement. On top of that, you’ve not presented any compelling argument other than that some players prefer English nations. It’s unfair to attack the nature of the consultation because it doesn’t appear to be going in your favour.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:43 pm

jamescfm wrote:Not sure I agree with that. Only one person as far as I’m aware has come out against the proposal whereas numerous players have stated their agreement. On top of that, you’ve not presented any compelling argument other than that some players prefer English nations. It’s unfair to attack the nature of the consultation because it doesn’t appear to be going in your favour.


Actually, the folly of the proposal has already been pretty comprehensively exposed, although predictably the posts involved have since been removed from the forum out of sheer embarrassment. Also, you are further proving some of the other points I made.
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby jamescfm » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:08 pm

If you say so, I’ve a feeling most people will read through the thread and draw their own conclusions.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:55 pm

Moving on, a few highlights from what appear to be the changes the current version of the Cultural Map would bring about:

- Aldegar becomes Persian, Kurdish, Baloch and Pashtun

- Baltusia becomes Hispanic American

- Davostan becomes Finnish, Sami, Manx, Cornish and German

- Gaduridos becomes Afro-Caribbean and Mongol

- Hawu Mumenhes becomes German

- Hobrazia becomes Georgian

- Kalistan becomes Hispanic American, African American, Cajun and Edo

- Lodamun becomes Utahn and Estonian

- Lourenne becomes French, Fula and Mayan

- Mordusia becomes Javanese

- Solentia becomes Italian and Romansh

- Talmoria becomes Lingala and Kongo

- Telamon becomes Icelandic and Faroese

- Vorona becomes Igbo and Bulgarian-Macedonian
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest