Feedback: Section 8 of the Game Rules

[jamescfm]

For some time now section 8 of the Game Rules has been inactive and outdated. Moderation has decided to redraft this section and bring it back into effect, taking into account the changes that have occurred within the game in the intervening period. In its current form this section of the rules is titled "Global Roleplay Committee (GRC) and the Global Roleplay Accord (GRA)" whereas it will now be called "Role-Play Coordinators" and outline the responsibilities of the two roles with that title.

Before implementing this new section Moderation would like to hear player feedback on both the substance and wording of the new rules. The proposed new section can be read in full below but in effect it codifies the roles of the Third World and World Congress Coordinator as they have existed for some time. The only notable change in terms of the the responsibilities of each of these roles is that Moderation (and not the World Congress Coordinator) will be tasked with overseeing World Congress elections moving forward.

In line with these new rules we believe it would be useful to appoint new players to both of these positions, given that they are both currently occupied by members of the Moderation team. Once we have taken feedback on the changes and implemented them, we will provide more information about this but in the mean time if you feel that you would be suitable for one of these two positions within the game then please get in touch with a Moderator through the forum or Discord.

Let us know if you have any questions and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on these changes.

The new section 8

Section 8 - Role-Play Coordinators

Moderation will endeavour to appoint players to coordinate role-play in two key areas of the game: the Third World and the World Congress. The primary responsibility of these players is to oversee and advise about role-play in these areas of the game and to coordinate role-play between players.

Section 8a - Third World Coordinator

1. The primary role of the Third World Coordinator is to coordinate and promote role-play in the "Third World" countries. As part of this role they are expected to provide players with advice and facilitate relationships between players to aid in the development of role-play.

2. While the ultimate decision to approve or deny Third World control requests lies with Moderation, the Third World Coordinator should be consulted when considering applications and provide advice to Moderation about a request. In offering this advice they should consider the appropriateness of a player request as well as whether it conforms to the historically role-played background of the country.

3. The Third World Coordinator has the opportunity to produce role-play in uncontrolled Third World countries. Where this power is exercised it should be done in a manner that is sensitive to the impacts of the role-play on neighbouring countries as well as the relationship to previous role-play in the country. If the Third World Coordinator wishes to engage in significant role-play in a country then they should still seek control in the ordinary manner.

4. Over time the Third World Coordinator should, using feedback from other players and their own judgement, offer advice and suggestions to Moderation about how the role-play experience in the Third World can be improved.

Section 8b - World Congress Coordinator

1. The responsibility of the World Congress Coordinator is to promote and coordinate role-play related to the game's intergovernmental organisation: the World Congress. As part of this role they are expected to take the lead in World Congress discussions as well as provide players with advice and support for engaging with the organisation.

2. The World Congress Coordinator shall have control over the role-play characters associated with the World Congress bureaucracy, in particular the General-Secretary. Through these characters they are responsible for moderating debate and driving discussion in the World Congress chambers.

3. Although the task of overseeing and calculating Security Council election results shall lie with Moderation, the World Congress Coordinator is expected to make efforts to engage players with the process of election and encourage role-play related to the Security Council.

[Rogue]

One thing im not sure about is this. Will there be more then two positions?
The first section talks about Role-Play coordinators. Are the Third world and World congress coordinators meant by that?
Or will there also be seperate coordinators with less authority but a more "guidance" oriented role?

[jamescfm]

The purpose is only to formalise the two roles that already exist. The term "Role-Play Coordinator" was just created to avoid having to say "Third World Coordinator and World Congress Coordinator". As some players will know we have had roles in the past that had a more generalised responsibility for role-play guidance and advice but most with experience of these roles will agree that they were largely ineffective. At the moment we aren't considering bringing these roles back. Do you think the first section could be clearer about this?

[Wu Han]

I think this is completely sensible. This describes the present situation, how could they possibly be rejected?

I was on the GRC; it was completely useless at best, and clientalistic at worst. No reason to resuscitate its corpse in any way.

Idea: I think it could be beneficial for both the TWC and the WCC positions to have sanctioned in-game-accounts; Whether created for purpose by individual players serving in those positions, like an authorized-second account, or one single account passed down to players with the position, this might help these positions be more directly integrated with the broader game community: drafting potential "international law" treaties (like making SC resolutions legally-binding to those who ratify them); potentially acting as a negotiating intermediary; simply sending messages informing players of SC resolutions, etc. In practice, ideally, this would create the opportunity for more new (passerby) players to simply learn about the forum RP side of the game through increased interaction they might otherwise not have. This account would, of course, be inactive in mechanic terms (and perhaps, for RP purposes, located within specific countries).

Side notes:

1. I think it would be preferable to use a "single inherited account" model, as this would create a continuity of treaty authorship (in other words, all treaties relating to the WCC being associated to the same account). And perhaps message history?

1a. I want to underscore that particularly with respect to the WCC, this could create an opportunity to increase the visibility of and interest in the World Congress and Security Council, making these institutions more relevant in/to the game. In my view, it's directly aligned with Section 8b(1) as it's proposed; In fact, if we think of the account as just another instrument of "the World Congress bureaucracy," in practice, I think it meets the conditions of Section 8b(2) in a creative way as well. Of course, if a WCC or TWC player was found to be using the in-game accounts associated with their role in a way completely inconsistent with the principles of the role, Moderation could take control of it — just as they surely would the forum functions.

1b. As a more centralized and slow alternative (not a performance-based judgement, just procedural and practical), this idea could be institutionalized to a lesser degree by including a addition to Section 8 similar to as follows: "Moderators will agree to create treaties and propagate mass messages on behalf of the initiative of the roles described in 8(a) and 8(b): Moderation reserves the final right to deny requests to discharge this obligation subject to their judgement." In this way WCC and TWC players could still do some of the stated functions of the in-game account proposal, but more power would remain firmly in the hands of Moderation to prevent exactly how these roles interact with the in-game community.

2. I'm very open to the idea that this entire proposal until now just might seem unnecessary, beyond the scope of the position, or simply pose problems I'm not considering.

3. Final suggestion: I've long thought we should move away from the term "third world" to describe the non-mechanic countries in the world; I refer to them as such because it relates to the most fundamental base dynamic between those countries which exist between the forum and the base game. In other words, they are not subject to the mechanics of the base game. If we're being honest, we cannot ignore the imprecise and frankly contested implications of using the term "third world" to describe a group of imaginary countries of diverse and distinct roleplay lore-based contexts: the principle here has often been "Vascania isn't third world," in discussion (and in praise of Pragma's work). If players choose to use this term to describe these countries OOC or IC I think that's perfectly acceptable as well, but surely Moderation's terminology shouldn't be so imprecise.

3a. With gratitude, I'm urging adoption and support of the last proposal.

[jamescfm]

At the moment there is a World Congress Coordinator in-game account that operates in the manner you described as being passed from player to player (just like the Moderation in-game account). In my time in the role I have used the account relatively sparingly, the only real purpose being to notify players on their nation page when their country has been elected to the Security Council.

The other time I did use the role was when we held a consultation on the creation of Seat E. At that time I sent a message to all nation pages notifying them about the ongoing consultation, which I believe did direct some player attention to the thread.

As far as I am aware Moderation does not have the ability to create new treaties because that is a power reserved for specific ministers (the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Head of State), the same would be true of the World Congress Coordinator or any other account created to serve this purpose. Moderation does have the power to edit existing treaties though, which might provide a workaround if the intention is to create and maintain treaties for World Congress resolutions, for example. The power to edit and re-title treaties applies to those that have already been ratified too.

In the few months that I have been World Congress Coordinator, I do not hide from the fact that I have been less active and engaged in the role than I would typically expect from a player. Primarily this was because of being distracted by Moderation duties, which again is part of the reason that I am keen to get somebody else in to serve in this role, in the hope that they will be able to dedicate a bit more attention to this part of the game.

Having said all of that I think these are good suggestions and I'll talk to Auditorii about how we can make them work although much will depend upon who we decide to appoint to these roles and the burden will fall upon them to a certain extent.

The matter of the naming of the Third World is something that we have discussed multiple times in the Moderation team. Personally I understand the point that you make about the term "Third World" and why we might want to avoid using it, given the real world connotations. Over time the countries have been known by at least half a dozen names including my own (largely failed) attempt to brand them as the "forum-based countries".

On the other hand, "Third World" is actually somewhat precise in the sense that most players know which countries you are referring to when it is used even if it isn't a very accurate label. Finding another term that works both in-character and out-of-character would be difficult, which is why it might be better to adopt terminology that is explicitly out-of-character (like forum-based countries or non-mechanic countries).

Another alternative would be to invent and adopt an entirely fictional term to refer to this group of countries. Either this could refer to some genuine part of their position, for example calling them the "Group of 26", or it might just be an entirely made-up term like the "Otras countries" with some invented meaning. In an in-character context the only real unifying feature of all of these countries is that they all joined the World Congress Security Council at a later date than the ordinary playable countries.

I would encourage other players to share their thoughts on this subject and we can always move the discussion elsewhere if it distracts from the main point of this thread.

[jamescfm]

Does anybody else have any thoughts or queries about the update to section 8 of the Game Rules outlined in the original post? If so please let us know as soon as possible because we will be hoping to conclude this consultation in the next couple of days. If you feel that you need a little longer to properly review the proposed changes then let us know and we can consider extending the feedback period.

[jamescfm]

As per our official announcement, please note that these changes have been implemented. For players wishing to apply for the two new positions you can find all the necessary details in that post. The discussion that Wu Han opened on the name of the "Third World" countries can be continued in a dedicated thread if anybody is interested.