thefalloutfan101 wrote:I retract my previous statements of it being such things.
It was not brought to my attention that CRCs were abolished entirely. Perhaps that is my fault for not reading the General Discussion thread every once in awhile, and if it is, then I accept it wholly. I could do that when I was a private player, but now that I have assumed Chair it will be a firm commitment to check non-roleplay threads and respond to players concerns promptly, but I digress. My thoughts on CRCs are somewhat similar to that of Mr. God's. It is true (at least in my experience prior) that there was limited discussion between players and their respective CRCs, leading to an overall ineffectiveness in terms of cooperation and being a driver for, well, continental roleplay. It would be better on the player to ask questions straight from the source.
On the final point of answering requests on time and providing clarification, Moderation should be certainly be given a push to be more prompt in their answers, but we must remember that they are human beings with their own personal lives and occupations, which may sometimes take up more of their time than particracy. We must also remember that there are unfortunately only two of them on staff, so as such some delays are to be expected. On giving public consultations to rule changes that should be a given right to the players, and it would be the best interest if Moderation returns to this policy.
The World Congress is in need of staffing, that much is certain. Moderation and myself have plans that we are actively deliberating on and will make their results public sometime in the coming days.
So you share the thoughts of it being ineffective and "stupid", yet you are open about bringing it back? It's quite troubling that you didn't even know that the role had been abolished when it was pretty openly known. What changes would you make to the CRC system? You were apart of that very system and I remember that you did nothing time and time again when you were asked by several chairs. What changed? Did you all the sudden have some revelation about service to the community?
You understand that the latest rules revision was done at the behest of Mr. God who cited that consultations were stupid and "things were going to change" in regards to the interaction between Moderators and the player base. Are you stating that you openly oppose the way Moderation handled the previous consultations and are you stating that you will act in the best interest of players on pushing Moderation to hold open consultations on rule changes?
That's incredibly vague. My reforms more or less removed the need for Moderator-based interaction with the World Congress for the better. With the obvious biased nature of one Moderator I do not feel that Moderation should any say in the "changes" to the World Congress. Its blatantly obvious that the World Congress underneath my tenure was far smoother, while not as active but that was due to the PT Alpha exodus, and things got done. What changes are you proposing to the easily one of the most effective systems to date?
(Edited your quote for up-to-date discord info, I'm Elizabeth II now)I have one major concern and that is transparency. How can we guarantee that biases and political beliefs do not get in the way of fair and balanced RP? I’d like to know how Elizabeth (thefalloutfan101) intends to guarantee that her/his own personal biases do not effect the GRC’s decision making capabilities. I’d like to request this from all members of the GRC, but since Elizabeth is the one being discussed, we’ll stick to her/him for now.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests