Moderator: RP Committee
Section 11 - RP Intensive Nation
1. An RP Intensive Nation is a nation that requires players within the country to maintain a high level of activity via the forums and in-game, engaging in international and domestic affairs, engaging with the World Congress, international and regional organizations.
2. Players can apply for the label of "RP Intensive Nation" by posting an application in the RP Law Questions and Requests (Approvals/Dismissals) thread utilizing the following template:
- Code: Select all
RP Intensive Nation Request
[b]Nation name:[/b]
[b]Link to nation:[/b]
[b]Link to nations news thread:[/b]
[b]Why should the nation be labeled as "RP Intensive"?[/b]
2. RP Intensive Nations, if approved, will be maintained in the "Game Information" section of the Moderation forums. In addition a bill must be maintained in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation which highlights the nation as an RP Intensive Nation and links to the Particracy Game Rules (and by extension the forums), the Discord and directly to this section of the Particracy Game Rules.
3. RP Intensive Nations will have adjusted rules for players joining/re-joining the nation:
-- 3a. Players in the nation can request a party being de-activated for failure to maintain an expected level of activity via regular posting on the forums and engagement with fellow players in a nation.
Drax wrote:This is a question on how it would work.
If a nation applies, is approved and played for a while successfully and then the player or players have to face RL for a while or otherwise need a break , would a) the nation revert to undesignated or would b) anyone wanting to play that nation need to respect the status and follow the requirements.
I think b) is what is being considering but thought I'd be sure.
jamescfm wrote:In the past, I have been sceptical about proposals of this kind but I definitely think it could be beneficial. In response to the specific proposal presented here, I would suggest that the request should be passed through an in-game bill. Like a cultural protocol update, it might require two-thirds of players with seats to support the bill. Something I am a bit unclear about is the problem that we are trying to combat with this.
Reading through the thread, I think there are two different issues. The first issue is inactive players preventing role-play in popular or active countries. For example, we have had this problem in Cildania in recent months. New players join the country and win a significant number of seats but they don't contribute to role-play. As a result, the active players are left frustrated because the role-play stalls while we wait for the inactive player to do something, or to be inactivated. The proposal presented here would be great at preventing this.
The second issue is the problem that Doc described in this post. New players join a country and make radical changes to its political and/or cultural background. I am not convinced this proposal would solve that problem. Players who do this are often active in role-play, so I don't think rules regulating their activity would discourage that behaviour.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests