PARTICRACY CULTURE REFORMS CONSULTATION

General discussions about the Particracy web game.

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Auditorii » Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:16 pm

Several of those have Cultural activity, such as Hobrazia, Aldegar, Gaduridos, Hawk Mumenhes should be Dutch and African of some sort, Lodamun has precedent, Solentia kindve does, Laurene does. As does Telamon.
"An Empire is never peaceably acquired or maintained. It is willed into existence. We are that will."
PT Wiki Aficionado & Fmr. RP Team Member
Eastern Homeland Association (Dolgavia)
Auditorii
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Mbites » Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:46 pm

To be honest, not even mainland Narikaton (Darnussia) has a dutch majority anymore. I killed them.
Lukas is free, Skeet f*c*ed with me, Thaller Gang is my family <3
#freeschlomobites

Join us on Discord! https://discord.gg/skPCNB2 (The good one)
User avatar
Mbites
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 11:15 am
Location: Thaller Fortress

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Roosevelt » Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:34 pm

Greetings to Moderation

Image

I hereby stand before the moderating body to congratulate them so far in seeking to revive the game with more events and new changes so as to keep players more interested and also want to thank them for involving players thus far in the process. At the moment, I am the longest serving party existing in Free State of Malivia , having been formed since 4144 and won numerous elections and made most of the constitutional changes that shaped modern Malivia today, including help shaping and passing current cultural protocols (RP Approved) Cultural Protocols of Malivia to which I am the current President.
Yes, my nation has a Nationmaster of whom I am well pleased in their performance as I have not only created the Nationmaster bill and ensured it was passed, but nominated FF as well.
With that said, having looked at the map, I realise that Malivia is now predominantly Aryan upon which prior, what we passed in Malivia, is for us to be predominantly Indo-Afro Caribbean which actually existed for many years in our multi nation state with various ethnicity. Additionally, I do not believe it's in the best interest of the game to take the power away from players in determining their own culture. To take away that, is to take away our sovereignty to make our own decisions in our own respective states. It is upon this back drop that I am writing hoping that a decision will be reviewed to take into consideration my protest to such a decision.
Last edited by Roosevelt on Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
R. Ferdinand- Governance is best met when a leader can think idealistically and act realistically in the interest of the people and govern pragmatically
Unity Labour Party
President OF Malivia
User avatar
Roosevelt
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:42 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby SlavaD » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:03 pm

Having been alerted to this via a message IG, I do think that the proposed cultural group for Davostan is bizarre.

I have proposed in the past the establishment of a new cultural protocol but it has been bogged down in disagreement among the players in the country. I don't think it will get anywhere. But when I developed the proposal for the cultural protocol, I sought to reflect the centuries of IG history that I saw from different elections, different parties taking over Davostan from the Imperial Dark Rome, and indeed the long-standing tradition that Imperial Dark Rome has maintained in Davostan for the better part of a decade on Particracy. The proposed cultures for Davostan ignore all of that and deny the nation the creative and diverse approach that it deserves. I don't think it is logical for Davostan's players to consent to a complete retconning of what has happened. There has been a consistent but visible trend of a group of players taking over Davostan from Imperial Dark Rome, molding the nation into whatever they want (with as much variety as what seemed to be a Game of Thrones-inspired monarchistic system where various parties were in fact Houses, to simply trying to create a Spanish culture), and then eventually leaving/going inactive and Imperial Dark Rome resetting the country exactly where it was. Nowhere has there been any significant Finnish presence in this thread, and none of the cultural protocols proposed for Davostan that I have seen developed by players before me proposed Finnish as the country's culture. I personally have conceived the mainland Davostanis as a confederation of steppe tribes that maintain strong ties to a dark and complicated religion with various degrees of extremity. This cultural background, and the crusader/colonizer narrative to explain the substantial times where different cultures were forcibly implemented in Davostan by other players, made and continues to make the most logical sense to me. It would be nice to have Imperial Dark Rome's input here at this stage, but he seems scarcely willing to communicate on this matters. In any case, I think this approach is far more respectful of what has happened per simple game mechanics, what has been in the wiki, and what players in the past have sought to achieve. Put the Finns elsewhere please. :)

Edit: I will add that if the goal is to centralize things and make them have a bit more sense, it would perhaps be more beneficial to also look into more probable linguistic/ethnic divergences for neighboring countries. Seems a bit strange to have Japanese and Mayan right next to each other!
SlavaD
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:02 am

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby FPC » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:08 pm

SlavaD wrote:Having been alerted to this via a message IG, I do think that the proposed cultural group for Davostan is bizarre.

I have proposed in the past the establishment of a new cultural protocol but it has been bogged down in disagreement among the players in the country. I don't think it will get anywhere. But when I developed the proposal for the cultural protocol, I sought to reflect the centuries of IG history that I saw from different elections, different parties taking over Davostan from the Imperial Dark Rome, and indeed the long-standing tradition that Imperial Dark Rome has maintained in Davostan for the better part of a decade on Particracy. The proposed cultures for Davostan ignore all of that and deny the nation the creative and diverse approach that it deserves. I don't think it is logical for Davostan's players to consent to a complete retconning of what has happened. There has been a consistent but visible trend of a group of players taking over Davostan from Imperial Dark Rome, molding the nation into whatever they want (with as much variety as what seemed to be a Game of Thrones-inspired monarchistic system where various parties were in fact Houses, to simply trying to create a Spanish culture), and then eventually leaving/going inactive and Imperial Dark Rome resetting the country exactly where it was. Nowhere has there been any significant Finnish presence in this thread, and none of the cultural protocols proposed for Davostan that I have seen developed by players before me proposed Finnish as the country's culture. I personally have conceived the mainland Davostanis as a confederation of steppe tribes that maintain strong ties to a dark and complicated religion with various degrees of extremity. This cultural background, and the crusader/colonizer narrative to explain the substantial times where different cultures were forcibly implemented in Davostan by other players, made and continues to make the most logical sense to me. It would be nice to have Imperial Dark Rome's input here at this stage, but he seems scarcely willing to communicate on this matters. In any case, I think this approach is far more respectful of what has happened per simple game mechanics, what has been in the wiki, and what players in the past have sought to achieve. Put the Finns elsewhere please. :)

Edit: I will add that if the goal is to centralize things and make them have a bit more sense, it would perhaps be more beneficial to also look into more probable linguistic/ethnic divergences for neighboring countries. Seems a bit strange to have Japanese and Mayan right next to each other!



Hi the current cultural map is gonna be updated tommorow and I believe Davostan changes in order to accomodate and certain element of fantasy RP. We are happy to take a look at the wider culture aswell however I think if we are implementing fantasy a celtic, hungarian, finnish culture would be very intrestiing. However I would love to hear what you think about the specific RL culture you would like in Davostan. We are happy to accommodate a steppe tribes feel but I feel the tribes culture and naming conventions must come from somewhere.
Particracy Moderation
Wiki Admin and Bureaucrat (for some reason)
User avatar
FPC
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:14 am
Location: Scotland

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Phil Piratin » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:29 pm

FPC wrote:
SlavaD wrote:Having been alerted to this via a message IG, I do think that the proposed cultural group for Davostan is bizarre.

I have proposed in the past the establishment of a new cultural protocol but it has been bogged down in disagreement among the players in the country. I don't think it will get anywhere. But when I developed the proposal for the cultural protocol, I sought to reflect the centuries of IG history that I saw from different elections, different parties taking over Davostan from the Imperial Dark Rome, and indeed the long-standing tradition that Imperial Dark Rome has maintained in Davostan for the better part of a decade on Particracy. The proposed cultures for Davostan ignore all of that and deny the nation the creative and diverse approach that it deserves. I don't think it is logical for Davostan's players to consent to a complete retconning of what has happened. There has been a consistent but visible trend of a group of players taking over Davostan from Imperial Dark Rome, molding the nation into whatever they want (with as much variety as what seemed to be a Game of Thrones-inspired monarchistic system where various parties were in fact Houses, to simply trying to create a Spanish culture), and then eventually leaving/going inactive and Imperial Dark Rome resetting the country exactly where it was. Nowhere has there been any significant Finnish presence in this thread, and none of the cultural protocols proposed for Davostan that I have seen developed by players before me proposed Finnish as the country's culture. I personally have conceived the mainland Davostanis as a confederation of steppe tribes that maintain strong ties to a dark and complicated religion with various degrees of extremity. This cultural background, and the crusader/colonizer narrative to explain the substantial times where different cultures were forcibly implemented in Davostan by other players, made and continues to make the most logical sense to me. It would be nice to have Imperial Dark Rome's input here at this stage, but he seems scarcely willing to communicate on this matters. In any case, I think this approach is far more respectful of what has happened per simple game mechanics, what has been in the wiki, and what players in the past have sought to achieve. Put the Finns elsewhere please. :)

Edit: I will add that if the goal is to centralize things and make them have a bit more sense, it would perhaps be more beneficial to also look into more probable linguistic/ethnic divergences for neighboring countries. Seems a bit strange to have Japanese and Mayan right next to each other!



Hi the current cultural map is gonna be updated tommorow and I believe Davostan changes in order to accomodate and certain element of fantasy RP. We are happy to take a look at the wider culture aswell however I think if we are implementing fantasy a celtic, hungarian, finnish culture would be very intrestiing. However I would love to hear what you think about the specific RL culture you would like in Davostan. We are happy to accommodate a steppe tribes feel but I feel the tribes culture and naming conventions must come from somewhere.


Okay, let me just catch my breath...

So on the grounds of so-called "cultural realism" or whatever we're turning nation's cultures upside down and, for example, turning unique RP-rich, extensively worked Hawu Mumenhes into another Germany...

And now we're installing a fantasy nation next to Hutori and Telamon with trolls, elves, warlocks, fire-breathing dragons, unicorns, wizards, fairies, goblins...?
User avatar
Phil Piratin
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby SlavaD » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:39 pm

I have personally imagined Davostan very much in Game of Thrones terms to account for the fantasy aspect. I would say there are three important components to the country's culture: the Satanists, the Westerners (from Artania), and the people in between. The Satanists and "people in between" would be descended from a heritage similar to those of the Dothraki, an aggressive, formidable, and nomadic confederation of tribes. The difference between the two would be that the Satanists have kept strictly to their traditions, led by a mystical and immortal figure (the Night King? :D ), and that the "people in the middle" have westernized to a significant degree, becoming sedentary members that view their roots more as a system of beliefs or an honor code descended from legend. The third group here would be the Westerners who would continue living in enclaves (much like the free city states), periodically crusading, and coming into conflict and then peace with the remainder of the country.

Presently IG my party very much seeks to appeal to this imagined "in-between" demographic, maintaining a fragile confederation between all groups.

And now we're installing a fantasy nation next to Hutori and Telamon with trolls, elves, warlocks, fire-breathing dragons, unicorns, wizards, fairies, goblins...?


I think this would be a bit too far. There's definitely something weird going on with the Satanists and their seemingly immortal leaders, but unless you want me zapping airplanes out of the sky with Harry Potter wizard spells we should probably keep it simple.
SlavaD
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:02 am

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby FPC » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:45 pm

To begin, the German aspect of Hawu Mehemes has been altogether removed, tomorrow we are publically replacing the current map with a draft set of Cultural Descriptions for each nation that are *based* off of the current map. As it stands at the moment Hawu is defined as follows:

>> Hawu (African American): 80%
>> Esinsundu-Malivian-Hawu (Afro-Caribbean): 15%
>> Other: 5%


With regards to Davostan there has long been an element of fantsay in that nation, obviously we are not gonna allow over the top ridiculousness. However we are considering allowing a darker, grittier fantasy theme within the nation like they currently have. I am going to be honest and admit that Davostan is the only nation Moderation have not completely decided on, we are still working through possible combinations or ideas and we will be reaching out to players in Davostan with our proposals since it has one of the more complex, long running themes in Terra.
Particracy Moderation
Wiki Admin and Bureaucrat (for some reason)
User avatar
FPC
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:14 am
Location: Scotland

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby Auditorii » Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:09 pm

FPC wrote:To begin, the German aspect of Hawu Mehemes has been altogether removed, tomorrow we are publically replacing the current map with a draft set of Cultural Descriptions for each nation that are *based* off of the current map. As it stands at the moment Hawu is defined as follows:

>> Hawu (African American): 80%
>> Esinsundu-Malivian-Hawu (Afro-Caribbean): 15%
>> Other: 5%


With regards to Davostan there has long been an element of fantsay in that nation, obviously we are not gonna allow over the top ridiculousness. However we are considering allowing a darker, grittier fantasy theme within the nation like they currently have. I am going to be honest and admit that Davostan is the only nation Moderation have not completely decided on, we are still working through possible combinations or ideas and we will be reaching out to players in Davostan with our proposals since it has one of the more complex, long running themes in Terra.


Hawu Memhemes should have a Dutch component, as it was as fantastically created as people are suggesting Davostan is.
"An Empire is never peaceably acquired or maintained. It is willed into existence. We are that will."
PT Wiki Aficionado & Fmr. RP Team Member
Eastern Homeland Association (Dolgavia)
Auditorii
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: PARTICRACY CULTURE MAP CONSULTATION

Postby CCP » Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:45 pm

In general I agree with Phil Piratin, Roosevelt, and SlavaD.

What problem is this proposal designed to fix? In the other thread which I understand has been deleted or hidden, I read terms like "make sense" and "realistic." FPC and Polites, are "make sense" and "realistic" your objectives with this change? If so, could you be more specific? Because it's not clear to me how retconning 13 years of players' stories and apparently forbidding migration RPs makes sense, or how ethnic contiguity is realistic. I live in the Americas, most of which are peopled by ethnic Africans and Europeans due to various kinds of migration. But if a map like your proposed culture map were drawn up for the Americas, it would be covered with Native Americans. So in the real world, Native Americans are a minority in the two continents that "make sense" for them. Are two real-world continents unrealistic? Do I and my family not make sense? But relocating all my recent RPs to Baltusia or Gaduridos or something makes sense because non-European characters aren't allowed to enter Artania?

Beyond sense and realism, I read in the other thread that if you implement these culture rules FPC and Polites, that you will always take player preferences and input into account when deciding how a country's culture should change. As far as I understand it, the current CP system functions as a way for players in each country to inform moderators about how they'd like to see their countries' cultures change. I think I recall reading Polites say in the other thread that, if he as a moderator wanted to make big culture changes or reject a CP or something like that, controversy would likely result, and therefore it's necessary or useful to change the rules to remove the current mechanism for player input and also to affirm moderation's total control over culture RPing (I'm recalling this from memory, so please excuse me if I'm getting the details wrong). If my paraphrase is a fair one, how can it both be true that 1) you want to remove the impression that player input determines culture RPs but 2) that you're always going to try to accommodate player input when telling players how they must RP in their countries? Either you want player input or you don't. You're either going to respect it or not. If the former, CPs already provide a formal process by which to ascertain player input. I think I read James say in the other thread that a single group of players in a single country shouldn't necessarily be able to determine how culture RPs must be done in their country. No matter how anyone feels about James's position (and I'm paraphrasing from memory again, so excuse me if I'm characterizing things incorrectly), the current rules as I understand them provide for a delay on implementation of CP changes for the specific purpose of allowing players outside a given country to offer their views. Beyond that, I think Phil Piratin pointed out in the other thread that under the current rules, moderators already have authority to reject a CP for any reason including sense and realism. FPC and Polites (oh and CM777, didn't mean to leave you out), have you guys considered whether part of the reason you feel reluctant to use your current authority under the rules to send all the Asian and African RPs to the southeast and entrench European cultures in 2/3ds of the map is that it doesn't make sense and isn't realistic?

As to the specifics of your culture map, since you're proposing to kick Hawu and Malivia out of Artania for instance, how are you justifying keeping Austrians, Norwegians, and Swedes in Dovani? Have Kazulia and Hulstria just been better at making sense? Are Austro-Japanese hybrids just much more realistic?

As you can probably guess, I am not a fan of this proposal. So for those 2 or 3 players saying or hinting that Phil Piratin is the only person who has a problem with this drastic change and is single-handedly holding up things like the 2nd Great Terran War, you are disproved. Players who've put deep and long effort into building 1 or a few countries which are slated to be fully DELETED FROM THE MAP under this proposal are going to be as unfavorable as I am. And if you think my post is enough, just wait til Lucca decides to weigh in here.

So now that I've posted my objections here FPC, Polites, and CM777, are you going to do for Hawu what you did for Malivia by accommodating its current culture? If the answer is yes, and you'll just revert proposed changes to suit individual players, what is the point in going ahead with this?

EDIT: I wrote this before I saw FPC's post saying Hawu Mumenhes would be preserved in some way. Now that I've seen that post, I'm more curious to know what the purpose of this reform is if you're just going to keep all the countries anyone advocates for. Also, if you're going to leave Hawu Mumenhes, why are you insisting on your 80/15/5 makeup? Hawu are not literal African Americans. There is no such population in Terra. They are like African Americans because they descend from various African (Esinsundu) and non-African polities. Your 80/15/5 background completely excises the places of origin that gave rise to the Hawu and which interacted together to make them "African Americans." I get that you probably don't know Hawu Mumenhes's RP background to that level of detail, but if you don't know the 58 countries' backstories intimately enough to know how and why their current demographic numbers are such as they are, isn't it risky for you to be considering a wholesale revamp to those 58 countries especially since you apparently want to take players' past RPs and current preferences into account?
Last edited by CCP on Thu Jan 25, 2018 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CCP
 
Posts: 840
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:24 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests