Okay, I apologise if the process was unclear to you. As I mentioned in
a previous response to your queries, the purpose of the process is that by the end of it all of the countries on the Cultural Protocols Index will have had their cultural protocols explicitly approved by a member of the current Moderation team. As illustrated with the Vorona case that you have discussed, previous Moderators retroactively seeking to implement cultural protocols has been problematic and this is the reason that we are not doing it. When I use the phrase "cultural protocols that have not received approval", I mean those that do not link to an approval post on the Index.
I don't think that what you quoted contradicts the action that has been taken regarding Rutania. The purpose of the deadline was to identify a time at which Moderation would begin the process of making a decision about those cultural protocols that have not received approval. In outlining the process we have deliberately left some room for flexibility because it is an unusual circumstance and we do not want to punish players for being unfamiliar with the procedures that we are following.
The purpose of this consultation is to make a decision about the cultural protocols that have not been approved. If the players in a country signal that they want to retain their cultural protocols, then I think it would be unfair to them to deny them that on the basis that an external group of players may have conflicting views on the matter and especially if they have followed all the ordinary procedures to do so. As I said in the original post "we will endeavour to retain cultural protocols unless it is thought that doing so would be detrimental to the overall player experience in the country".
As for removing Rutania from the original post, I don't think that is necessary. The change is noted in the thread to make it clear to players and retroactively editing my post would make it confusing for players to then read Pragma offering feedback on the Rutanian cultural protocol. Given that the thread has now been open for a couple of days, I would like to offer some of my own preliminary thoughts on the matter.
The key cases in the short discussion so far seem to have been Ikradon, Solentia and Vorona. Although I understand perhaps some player may feel like the cultural protocols of countries like Mordusia are boring, it is true that English-speaking countries have a disproportionately high number of active players. For this reason it would seem that there is compelling reason to ensure that this demand for countries that have English as a primary language is met. On top of that Mordusia did attempt to pass cultural a protocol update that retained their English-speaking majority, so it would seem that they would prefer that this cultural background is retained.
In the case of Ikradon, one potential option would be to preserve the general cultural background of the country but slightly modify the linguistic component. For example, the "Neter Senek" (Ancient Egyptian) might be retained as a formal or classical language among a certain elite but the rest of the country might be said to speak a more accessible language (like English). In this way the role-play that utilised "Neter Senek" wouldn't be overridden but new players would feel able to role-play with the country in an easier manner.
The truth is that since the cultural protocol was implemented in Solentia, the nation has been almost entirely empty. At the same time we have two other Arab countries in the region that have been generally limited to one active player. Given that the country also has an extensive role-play history linking it to English and the fact mentioned above about demand for English countries, there is a case that making it culturally open would generate increased engagement.
Vorona appears to me to be the clearest case of the group. The current cultural protocol was rejected when it was first submitted for approval but some previous Moderation team decided to unilaterally implement it. I do not know who took the decision, nor do I understand why it was taken. Even aside from the irregular implementation however, the current cultural protocol is unclear and contradicts the country's historic cultural background. Finally the only active player in the country has
signalled that he wants the country to be made culturally open.