Handling of forum-based country control requests

[Rogue]

Tbh im a bit dissapointed that ive seen no response to my inquiry and that instead New Englia is now eyed upon by a member of the RPC. I was rejected first on the basis that i should do more New Englia RP, then on the fact that someone else still controls a nation. Feels a little unfair and unreasonable.

Cause it feels like that on our end, too, it's hurtful man. I've just overruled the RPC here which is just bad for both me and them. Basically I've also added to their frustration. What I did was shitty. They're just players like you and me giving some personal time to help with tasks, that's it.

In fact, my decision was wrong and unfair to both iltam and the players at the RPC who made the initial decision; and I gotta apologise to them here. Sorry Rogue for the back and forth, but their decision on your request for ND still stands.

On the broader subject, it's totally fair that your concerns come from your requests, but you've kinda made it a big deal of frustration for everyone; you, me, RPC and it's no longer just for your requests, it's kinda systemic the way you brought it forward.

I mean, would you have said anything if the RPC had said yes?

Would it be crazy to have used the feedback subforum to help solve these problems with us like you say, like, anytime?

Well, to be completely honest, the way the RPC is now handling imperial his request is also dubious and adds to the point im making. Imperial has shown over the last year or so to create quality posts, with these being consistent. He has a history as one of the main players in Tropica.

And yet he gets denied because of his "history with plagarism". Is this gonna hunt him through eternity? Because thats just plain unfair to him. Im not gonna bother putting in any FBC requests because they will be denied anyway the way i see it.

I respect the time everyone puts into the game, taking on an extra role isnt easy, but some recognition on the influence the RPC wields concerning FBC's and the way their fellow players can enjoy them would be appreciated. The only thing i keep hearing is denial and hiding behind "were just players too" instead of simply recognizing the points im making and constructively engaging with them.

[GreekIdiot]

Tbh im a bit dissapointed that ive seen no response to my inquiry and that instead New Englia is now eyed upon by a member of the RPC. I was rejected first on the basis that i should do more New Englia RP, then on the fact that someone else still controls a nation. Feels a little unfair and unreasonable.

Cause it feels like that on our end, too, it's hurtful man. I've just overruled the RPC here which is just bad for both me and them. Basically I've also added to their frustration. What I did was shitty. They're just players like you and me giving some personal time to help with tasks, that's it.

In fact, my decision was wrong and unfair to both iltam and the players at the RPC who made the initial decision; and I gotta apologise to them here. Sorry Rogue for the back and forth, but their decision on your request for ND still stands.

On the broader subject, it's totally fair that your concerns come from your requests, but you've kinda made it a big deal of frustration for everyone; you, me, RPC and it's no longer just for your requests, it's kinda systemic the way you brought it forward.

I mean, would you have said anything if the RPC had said yes?

Would it be crazy to have used the feedback subforum to help solve these problems with us like you say, like, anytime?

Well, to be completely honest, the way the RPC is now handling imperial his request is also dubious and adds to the point im making. Imperial has shown over the last year or so to create quality posts, with these being consistent. He has a history as one of the main players in Tropica.

And yet he gets denied because of his "history with plagarism". Is this gonna hunt him through eternity? Because thats just plain unfair to him. Im not gonna bother putting in any FBC requests because they will be denied anyway the way i see it.

I respect the time everyone puts into the game, taking on an extra role isnt easy, but some recognition on the influence the RPC wields concerning FBC's and the way their fellow players can enjoy them would be appreciated. The only thing i keep hearing is denial and hiding behind "were just players too" instead of simply recognizing the points im making and constructively engaging with them.

In all seriousness here, what are the points you're making?

And may I suggest we switch to the feedback subforum?

[jamescfm]

For reference, I have moved this discussion out of the requests thread because it is distracting from the purpose of the thread.

[Rogue]

Well, to be completely honest, the way the RPC is now handling imperial his request is also dubious and adds to the point im making. Imperial has shown over the last year or so to create quality posts, with these being consistent. He has a history as one of the main players in Tropica.

And yet he gets denied because of his "history with plagarism". Is this gonna hunt him through eternity? Because thats just plain unfair to him. Im not gonna bother putting in any FBC requests because they will be denied anyway the way i see it.

I respect the time everyone puts into the game, taking on an extra role isnt easy, but some recognition on the influence the RPC wields concerning FBC's and the way their fellow players can enjoy them would be appreciated. The only thing i keep hearing is denial and hiding behind "were just players too" instead of simply recognizing the points im making and constructively engaging with them.

In all seriousness here, what are the points you're making?

And may I suggest we switch to the feedback subforum?

Im making the point that the criteria on which requests are judged upon arent clear and it creates the feeling of randomness. In the case of Imperials request. How long does he have to play regularly in order for the stigma of the plagiarism issue to no longer be named with his requests? What are the policies on "nation sitting" in a FBC? And does the RPC actually weigh the RP history of a player or do they just weigh their feeling of the player instead? Often we get the "we want non repetitive, creative and consistent RP in the FBC's", which suggests that the one doing the request is considered to not provide any of those qualities, without further explaining why the RPC thinks that way.

Plenty of points.

[GreekIdiot]

Im making the point that the criteria on which requests are judged upon arent clear and it creates the feeling of randomness. In the case of Imperials request. How long does he have to play regularly in order for the stigma of the plagiarism issue to no longer be named with his requests? What are the policies on "nation sitting" in a FBC? And does the RPC actually weigh the RP history of a player or do they just weigh their feeling of the player instead? Often we get the "we want non repetitive, creative and consistent RP in the FBC's", which suggests that the one doing the request is considered to not provide any of those qualities, without further explaining why the RPC thinks that way.

Plenty of points.

Lack of clarity and randomness sound like we need to make rules more specific. iirc, James and RPC have already dived into improving the existing game rules on FBCs, secondary accounts and CPs, presumably soon to be presented piece by piece to all players in this subforum. Would you be interested in taking part in that?

There are also 2 rounds already available from 2 past iterations mostly from me, iirc, have you taken a look at those?

By stigma of plagiarism I assume you are referring to past violations of the game rules. If James/RPC don't address this in the manner you think should be done, the best thing to do is to suggest ideas/corrections/improvements in the upcoming feedback rounds.

Nation sitting can also be included - this sounds like an expiry thing or activity level? Dunno.

To bring qualitative standards to the forefront, where qualitative standards may be applicable, that would require 2 things. First, setting the standard in itself, which at the end of the day the game rules are not UN accords. And second, that you'd accept an explanation of such qualities without dispute.

Both, require taking assumptions and throwing them down the drain, though (i.e. RPC member X dislikes my RP).

[Rogue]

Im making the point that the criteria on which requests are judged upon arent clear and it creates the feeling of randomness. In the case of Imperials request. How long does he have to play regularly in order for the stigma of the plagiarism issue to no longer be named with his requests? What are the policies on "nation sitting" in a FBC? And does the RPC actually weigh the RP history of a player or do they just weigh their feeling of the player instead? Often we get the "we want non repetitive, creative and consistent RP in the FBC's", which suggests that the one doing the request is considered to not provide any of those qualities, without further explaining why the RPC thinks that way.

Plenty of points.

Lack of clarity and randomness sound like we need to make rules more specific. iirc, James and RPC have already dived into improving the existing game rules on FBCs, secondary accounts and CPs, presumably soon to be presented piece by piece to all players in this subforum. Would you be interested in taking part in that?

There are also 2 rounds already available from 2 past iterations mostly from me, iirc, have you taken a look at those?

By stigma of plagiarism I assume you are referring to past violations of the game rules. If James/RPC don't address this in the manner you think should be done, the best thing to do is to suggest ideas/corrections/improvements in the upcoming feedback rounds.

Nation sitting can also be included - this sounds like an expiry thing or activity level? Dunno.

To bring qualitative standards to the forefront, where qualitative standards may be applicable, that would require 2 things. First, setting the standard in itself, which at the end of the day the game rules are not UN accords. And second, that you'd accept an explanation of such qualities without dispute.

Both, require taking assumptions and throwing them down the drain, though (i.e. RPC member X dislikes my RP).

I am open to all of that. And yes i do think we need some kind of expiry system or a "at least one post a week" kind of thing. In the playable nations, 3 days and your gone. But a player can just infinitely sit in a FBC at the moment without consequence. Also im fine with the RPC demanding a certain level of quality in RP. What i am not fine with is them stating they want a certain type of quality but not explaining why they think the applicant doesnt fullfill those requirements. Basically leaving them with a feeling of "damn, i thought i was doing good" and no explanation.

[GreekIdiot]

Makes total sense. And I assume it's not easy for the RPC to handle no's or provide explanations. Basically the usual tiptoe every single one of us does to avoid inciting misinterpretations or firing up the other side. The "don't get me wrong" in front of what we're all afraid of: conflict.

My take out of this conversation we're having?

Keep an eye out for the upcoming game rules updates/proposals, definitely jump into them and provide your thoughts since it will come down to the details and not the high-level discussion here, and certainly don't be afraid to like, you know, just post your points man anytime.

No need to wait for nos or shit to happen since you already have them.

Post them for feedback.

[jamescfm]

For my part, I am going to try to offer some clarity on a few points. Let me mention something about feedback first. At the end of last year, I created a feedback thread specifically for players to make suggestions or raise concerns on issues related to the forum-based countries. None of the issues you are referring to have ever been raised in this thread. If you have complaints about the way requests are being handled, it is reasonable for us to expect that you would raise these concerns here. Given you only raised the issues after your recent request was denied, it is difficult not to see this as a reaction to this decision.

I don't understand how your complaint relates to imperialpearl's request to control Tropica. When we made the decision, I explained the reasons why we had reached it in the requests thread. I spoke to the player privately to explain the decision in more detail and I believe he understands our reasoning. I don't think it was necessary or beneficial for you to involve yourself here.

In the coming weeks, I am going to be sharing a number of proposals to update the Game Rules. In this process, I am prioritising the areas of the game that I consider to be the most contentious (i.e. cultural protocols, the forum-based countries, and second accounts). The first of these proposals will be available tomorrow. The objective of these updated rules is to provide greater clarity about how these areas of the game function and how decisions are made by Moderation and the Role-Play Committee. Unfortunately, these things take time.

While the process is ongoing, we have to continue to respond to requests in all of these areas. I believe that we have generally been consistent about the criteria that we use to evaluate forum-based country control requests. In these countries, we prioritise long-term and in-depth role-play. The explicit purpose of the forum-based countries is to facilitate the kind of long-form storytelling that is difficult to achieve in the rest of the game's countries due to the nature of the election mechanism. For this reason, we are never going to require players to post a certain amount each week.

As a player, you have a clear demonstrated a clear pattern of behaviour in relation to the forum-based countries. Once you are approved for control of a country, you produce a large number of posts in a short period of time (usually between four and six weeks) and then move on to a different country. By my count, you have made eleven requests in the past twelve months, which a request approximately every 33 days.

The truth is that this is not the style of role-play that we want to encourage in the forum-based countries and this is part of the reason why your requests have been denied. I understand that this might be frustrating to you. You are entitled to express that frustration but I don't think it is fair to say we have not been clear or consistent in the reasons for our decisions.

[Rogue]

So again, if the concern is the fact that FBC's need more care then playable nations and i somehow havent been "caring", then how on earth am i to prove to you i can apply feedback when given only the option to play in a playable nation. (A playable nation ive been in for a while and have created story archs, character development and a variety of posts for mind you) Apart from the fact i continue to be confused by the role of the RPC i also disagree fully with your continued assesment that my RP somehow lacks in quality because they have a high quantity.

Why does the RPC not give a single example whenever they raise this point? Sure, i tend to do mainly political and military RP, but isnt the point of this game the fact that we can all have a different taste in what we like and dont like? To give a concrete example. The player in Kirlawa has consistently played dictatorial regimes and has, on several occasions, stated that he enjoys to play that playstyle. By your standards, he shouldnt have gotten a FBC because there is a lack of diversity, character development and a variety in story archs. Yet his request for Temania was approved. To be clear, im fine with him liking a particular playstyle, but were judging by your standards here.

Imperial has RPed a wide variety of topics, from green energy to trade and politics. Yet he is refused a FBC because of "plagiarism" that he has long learned from, applying the criticism and feedback he has received. I am one of the few players in FBC's that makes in depth election posts, with various parties and different electoral systems. Something that in my eyes can be considered a more in depth playstyle only possible and wished for in FBC's. Why is my RP judged to be less then RP from others? I enjoy political, economic and military RP. Is that RP discouraged and deemed lesser? If so, let me know.

All in all i would like the RPC to for once come out clean and just tell me what about my posts they deem to be lacking in quality. Just tell me, dont dodge it with vague descriptions on quality over quantity. Just give me what you really want to say and say it.

[jamescfm]

I would seriously encourage you to take some time to carefully read and reflect upon the feedback that you have received. As I stated earlier, it is no longer reasonable for you to claim you do not understand the reasons why your requests have been denied. Both in this thread and in the requests thread, these reasons have been explained to you multiple times by multiple people. Whether or not you choose to accept these reasons as legitimate is your prerogative but it is wrong to say they have not been explained.