Terran Cultural Demographics

Talk and plan things about the game with other players.

Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby jamescfm » Fri Nov 23, 2018 12:53 pm

As discussed on this thread about Keymon's culture, I'm looking to get some momentum in favour of a unified cultural map of Terra: an idea which previously received widespread support from both the active role-play community and the game's player base as a whole when proposed by a previous Moderation team.

Last time round, I drafted a "cultural map" in consultation with other players and then that was presented for discussion. On this occasion, I'd like to utilise a different approach. One of the main problems with the map was that it disguised many of the cultural nuances, like prominent minority groups, and so I think a more specific approach is necessary. The way I intend to do this is by addressing nations in a "one-by-one" fashion and having an open discussion about the demographics (or potential demographics) of country's which pose particular problems, Keymon is an example of one such nation.

A starting point, from my perspective, would be to establish about which there is little or no disagreement. I have created a list of these nations and a brief description of their culture below (I will be adding to this over the next couple of days so feel free to volunteer suggestions.
Aldegar: Iranian
Beiteynu: Jewish
Dorvik: German
Endralon: Hungarian
Hobrazia: Georgian
Indrala: Chinese
Rildanor: French
Telamon: Icelandic
Trigunia: Russian
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Auditorii » Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:47 pm

Well to be fair Dundorf is German (rather Dundorfians) while Dorvik, Aloria, Darnussia (of Narikaton and Darnussia; not quite sure Darnussia exists still), Rutania and Kirlawa all had periods of significant German culture. It’s kind of Austria - Germany argument, while the Dorvish are ethnically Dundorfian, they are culturally Dorvish. The problem is, and I agree with it, is that people just assume “German” is German. I honestly prefer what I’ve done or at least RPd in which there’s different sub cultures within the overall sphere and it allows for some differences.

Dundorfian-Alorians are known as Sarstians, Dorvish-Uwakahians are known as Thalsbach, ethnically Dundorfian Triguno-Dundorfians are called Götbergers. I had a name for Rutania Dundorfians somewhere due to the presence of the German culture during the “Rutanen Reich” while Kirlawan Dundorfians are known as Merkanians or Merkans.

While I realized that isn’t totally about that I felt I had to make a point...
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Aquinas » Sat Nov 24, 2018 2:42 am

jamescfm wrote:As discussed on this thread about Keymon's culture, I'm looking to get some momentum in favour of a unified cultural map of Terra: an idea which previously received widespread support from both the active role-play community and the game's player base as a whole when proposed by a previous Moderation team.


...and if you said it was raining, I would look out the window to see if it was.

As I noted at the time, during the public consultation on the forum, there were 8 players in favour of the proposal (including 5 who stood to gain significant personal influence from it) and 9 against. There was also an unreliable Moderation-conducted online player survey (which anybody who wanted to could vote more than once in), and even that recorded more than 40% of players being opposed.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby jamescfm » Sat Nov 24, 2018 5:31 pm

Please stop posting the exact response on every thread relating to this topic. If the numbers you are quoting here were true then you wouldn't have to present them in the first place. The only reason you do so is in the hope that players will take your bullshit at face value without reading the thread themselves and that's because you know that anyone who reads the thread will see it for what it is: the majority of the active playing community coming out in support of the proposed reforms.

For the sake of those players who don't have time to read the thread, Aquinas (or Phil Piratin as he was back then) is patently lying about the positions of several players. He says that there are nine players against the reforms and then lists those names. The fact of the matter is that at least three of those players (Kubrick, LukasV and Roosevelt) were not actually against the reforms at all, leaving us with an 11-6 majority in favour even if we utilise his bizarre methodology.

Aquinas, if you aren't willing to add anything other than poisoning the well then I would appreciate if you refrained from involving yourself in the conversation further and allowed other players to contribute.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Zongxian » Sat Nov 24, 2018 6:57 pm

I am inclined to be supportive of a cultural map, especially one that, as you propose, captures various nation-specific nuances and heterogeneity. Having a cultural map could also help make it easier to work out history to explain the presence of different groups throughout Terra. As it currently is, much of that can vary, especially as nations change over time or in some cases, get retconned. As this is a fractured game world, a cultural map wouldn't be perfect and true logical cultural geography won't happen but I think it would be a step in the right direction.

Now, speaking from a more biased position, I think a cultural map is also an opportunity to highlight (maybe even give more protection to) non-Western cultures.
User avatar
Zongxian
 
Posts: 1042
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Aquinas » Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:47 am

jamescfm wrote:Please stop posting the exact response on every thread relating to this topic. If the numbers you are quoting here were true then you wouldn't have to present them in the first place. The only reason you do so is in the hope that players will take your bullshit at face value without reading the thread themselves and that's because you know that anyone who reads the thread will see it for what it is: the majority of the active playing community coming out in support of the proposed reforms.

For the sake of those players who don't have time to read the thread, Aquinas (or Phil Piratin as he was back then) is patently lying about the positions of several players. He says that there are nine players against the reforms and then lists those names. The fact of the matter is that at least three of those players (Kubrick, LukasV and Roosevelt) were not actually against the reforms at all, leaving us with an 11-6 majority in favour even if we utilise his bizarre methodology.

Aquinas, if you aren't willing to add anything other than poisoning the well then I would appreciate if you refrained from involving yourself in the conversation further and allowed other players to contribute.


James is fully aware of my objection to this post, and has had ample opportunity to retract his statements if he had wished to do so. I sincerely hoped the need for me to comment here could be averted, but in the circumstances, I do feel compelled to defend myself.

James claims I am "patently lying" about who opposed the culture reform proposals during the public consultation about culture reform on the forum, and that because of this, I do not want people to read the thread for themselves. This is not true. Indeed, I linked to the thread myself, so that anybody who was interested in reviewing it for themselves could very easily do so. With regards to the discussion which took place at the time, I regard it as regrettable that we do not actually have more transparency than we do. As I stated at the time, I feel it is regrettable Moderation decided to remove the original consultation thread from the forum, as that means a significant portion of that discussion is no longer accessible to us.

The assessment I made at the time of who in the public consultation was for or against the proposals was based on what people were saying. Anybody who wanted to challenge that assessment or suggest corrections etc. was completely free to do so, and in fact I openly encouraged them to do so. There was no intention at all of any misrepresentation on my part. Naturally, I do not completely preclude the possibility that somehow or other, I inadvertently placed someone in the wrong "camp", but I do point out that at the time, persons had the opportunity to point out any mistakes, and that nobody did. This included James himself, who was actively involved in that consultation, and I am quite sure would have been the first to challenge me if he felt I was trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. I also add that James has failed to demonstrate that any misrepresentations were actually made.

James accuses me of "poisoning the well" and describes my point of view as "your bullshit". There has been no "poisoning" or intention of "poisoning" on my part; nor has there been any "bullshit" or intention of purveying "bullshit" on my part. That lurid and negatively personal language is not appropriate from a GRC member who one would reasonably expect to have a positive attitude towards encouraging and facilitating open constructive discussions about the game, and respecting the presence of a diversity of views in those discussions.

James goes on to state "I would appreciate if you refrained from involving yourself in the conversation further and allowed other players to contribute", his implication being simultaneously (a) that I am trying to prevent persons from contributing to the discussion here and (b) that I should myself not feel welcome to participate further in the discussion. With regards to (a), this is false. I welcome discussion, and have made no attempt to discourage anybody from joining in. With regards to (b), it can clearly be seen, I hope, that it is James himself who appears to be trying to discourage persons from contributing who might disagree with his views. This was also, as some will recall, a trait he and others appeared to prominently display during the original culture reform consultation.

When it comes to any set of proposals for reforming the game, it is important we are careful not to assert the Big Claim that there is a consensus of support for those proposals when (a) the proposals have not yet been made clear and/or (b) a community consensus of support has yet to be convincingly demonstrated. Too often, an unfortunate and unfair consequence of doing this is to discourage persons from dissenting from or asking challenging questions about the proposals in question. This is particularly the case when this is being done by persons with positions of authority within the game. I can verify the reality of this myself, as I remember the conversations I had with various community members during the original consultation.

Evidently, we are now in a situation where a GRC member is demanding a community member be silent just for challenging the assumption that there is a consensus for the plans he personally supports. I invite James himself, and also the GRC collectively, to carefully consider whether or not this is a development to be welcomed.

The argument I put forward is that any proposals for reforming the game ought to be debated respectfully, rationally and on their own merits. If you believe your plans are a good idea and you believe you have a consensus for them, then by all means, please try to demonstrate that. But please do not shout people down just because you are irritated by having certain of your assumptions challenged.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Auditorii » Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:43 am

Hey uh...can we stay on topic and not constantly have sermons about your beef with James? It’s getting old. Take it PMs man.
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Aquinas » Mon Nov 26, 2018 1:56 pm

Auditorii wrote:Hey uh...can we stay on topic and not constantly have sermons about your beef with James? It’s getting old. Take it PMs man.


This is a further example of the behaviour and the attitude that is the problem here.

We have now had two GRC officials demanding the person who has challenged their claims should be silent.

Unfortunately, there has in recent months been a pattern of GRC officials shouting down community members, particularly on Discord.

To be clear, I am all for GRC members participating in debates and expressing their opinions, but this should please be done respectfully and constructively.

If reforms to the culture rules are to emerge, then that should be the result of a full and open discussion, where all of the points at issue are fully examined. It should not emerge as a result of game officials bullying through the proposals by claiming they already have a consensus when they clearly do not, and then demanding the silence of any who question their assertions.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Auditorii » Mon Nov 26, 2018 2:04 pm

Aquinas wrote:
Auditorii wrote:Hey uh...can we stay on topic and not constantly have sermons about your beef with James? It’s getting old. Take it PMs man.


This is a further example of the behaviour and the attitude that is the problem here.

We have now had two GRC officials demanding the person who has challenged their claims should be silent.

Unfortunately, there has in recent months been a pattern of GRC officials shouting down community members, particularly on Discord.

To be clear, I am all for GRC members participating in debates and expressing their opinions, but this should please be done respectfully and constructively.

If reforms to the culture rules are to emerge, then that should be the result of a full and open discussion, where all of the points at issue are fully examined. It should not emerge as a result of game officials bullying through the proposals by claiming they already have a consensus when they clearly do not, and then demanding the silence of any who question their assertions.


No, you’re completely fine expressing your opinions and desires. However, a vast majority appears to be a private spat or “beef” with james. Don’t try and say I’m trying to silence you when that’s completely untrue and you’re welcome to complain about me as well; I welcome it.

Perhaps what I’m trying to say is stay on topic and if you’re going to introduce personal, private “problems” please do so privately.
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Terran Cultural Demographics

Postby Aquinas » Mon Nov 26, 2018 2:17 pm

Auditorii wrote:
Aquinas wrote:
Auditorii wrote:Hey uh...can we stay on topic and not constantly have sermons about your beef with James? It’s getting old. Take it PMs man.


This is a further example of the behaviour and the attitude that is the problem here.

We have now had two GRC officials demanding the person who has challenged their claims should be silent.

Unfortunately, there has in recent months been a pattern of GRC officials shouting down community members, particularly on Discord.

To be clear, I am all for GRC members participating in debates and expressing their opinions, but this should please be done respectfully and constructively.

If reforms to the culture rules are to emerge, then that should be the result of a full and open discussion, where all of the points at issue are fully examined. It should not emerge as a result of game officials bullying through the proposals by claiming they already have a consensus when they clearly do not, and then demanding the silence of any who question their assertions.


No, you’re completely fine expressing your opinions and desires. However, a vast majority appears to be a private spat or “beef” with james. Don’t try and say I’m trying to silence you when that’s completely untrue and you’re welcome to complain about me as well; I welcome it.

Perhaps what I’m trying to say is stay on topic and if you’re going to introduce personal, private “problems” please do so privately.


As can clearly be seen, the issues I have raised here regarding James relate directly and entirely to the serious statements he made on this thread. What is at issue here are the public actions of public GRC officials, not any "private spat".
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests