Feedback: Natural Resources (including Oil and Gas)

[jamescfm]

Hello everyone. It seems we've strayed off the discussion; let's re-focus.

-snip-

I appreciate the effort you have put into trying to deal with this situation and your thorough response. With all of that said, I am not sure your response addresses the problem. The question that we would like a definitive answer to: is the list of natural resources (including gas and oil) produced by Moderation binding on players?

At present, no evidence has been presented to show where it was made binding before Auditorii's post on 18 September. As has been mentioned already, there is no mention of this list in the Game Rules. At the same time, Zanz has been called a liar for pointing out what appears to be an objective fact.

As an additional point of reference, Auditorii has made explicitly clear in the past that it is only the Game Rules document that binds players and specifically that "no ancillary topics contain de facto rules".

[Auditorii]

Hello everyone. It seems we've strayed off the discussion; let's re-focus.

-snip-

I appreciate the effort you have put into trying to deal with this situation and your thorough response. With all of that said, I am not sure your response addresses the problem. The question that we would like a definitive answer to: is the list of natural resources (including gas and oil) produced by Moderation binding on players?

At present, no evidence has been presented to show where it was made binding before Auditorii's post on 18 September. As has been mentioned already, there is no mention of this list in the Game Rules. At the same time, Zanz has been called a liar for pointing out what appears to be an objective fact.

As an additional point of reference, Auditorii has made explicitly clear in the past that it is only the Game Rules document that binds players and specifically that "no ancillary topics contain de facto rules".

First, I like the finding of a thread from 2020, it really displays your considerable investment of time into the game.

Second, yes they (the Natural Resources List and the Gas and Oil Index) are binding.

Third, as a Moderation Team we've discussed how we can avoid this sort've issue in the future. We'll be ensuring that the Particracy Game Rules are updated to reflect this, but until then see point 2.

[alaskancrabpuffs21]

So as I have been searching through things I noticed how many countries are indeed in the Green on certain items. However in this case Kazulia has only medium and small reserves of certain items. I know that Kazulia has a medium reserve of fossil fuels but I think it would be prudent if Kazulia had a large reserve of Chromium. It is one of the only nations in Terra to have it and would provide a great opportunity for not only Kazulia but for other nations to have access to it. North Dovani is the only nation with a large reserve of Chromium and with it being infrequently RP'd I think it would be good to have another state contain large reserves.

I know this is probably sounding biased but these are my observations and suggestions. I really believe there is a great opportunity here for trade and good RP.

Thanks

[GreekIdiot]

@Alaskan, appreciate the feedback, I'll get to some of your points just below.

@James, I'm just gonna move entirely past the contextual details, if I may, and jump straight to the point:

1

Moderation is not here to limit RP; we're here to make sure RP isn't unfair to the majority of players, that's it. Most of the times all that's needed is a little bit of guidance and a little bit of back and forth with a proper RP planning thread. Guidance, anyone can give.

2

The resources index needs to be considered by players wishing to RP on these resources, just like the oil and gas index. Simply put, just like Beiteynu can't claim it has an endless reservoir of oil under its desert, it can't claim is has an endless reservoir of uranium. So it's binding in the same manner that it's binding when we think of oil: Trigunia has a ton of it; does that mean Beiteynu needs to absolutely RP with Trigunia or bye bye economy? Nope.

As a player in Beiteynu, I can completely disregard the resources index if I wanted to for doing RP on the defence industry without having iron (which I've done) and the nuclear energy industry without having uranium (which I haven't done, because I thought I'd be fun to do RP with Kundrati being our main provider). Now on the other hand, Kundrati, with its endless reservoir of uranium, can RP being the Trigunia of uranium, if they wanted to, based on the resources index.

So what does binding/can/can't mean?

A common language for all players on where a lot of stuff is on the map. That's it. So it's binding for players in the sense that players need to consider it if they decide to do some extended RP on resources and seek to generate more RP with other players from doing so.

Will we abolish Beiteynu's RP if I decided to RP the country as king of all uranium? No, but wouldn't it be lame for everyone else?

3

In understanding that the language is not specific and it's not embedded into the game rules, we're gonna do 2 things moving forward:

- Embrace flexibility on the resources index, which again, should be used as the map we all look at to generate resources-focused RP with each other
- Take a look at the Game Rules and see how we can adapt them a bit to consider this "binding" essence of auxiliary material

4

We have most certainly missed past RP from players, old and recent alike. We simply can't go through thousands of posts. As such, the resources index will forever remain open to petitions for amendments from any player, at any time.

Players can hit the moderation queries/feedback topic with links to past posts and we'll make sure the list is updated for the missed RP.

@James, @Alaskan, I hope I managed to cover your points, at least on a significant level, if not entirely.

[Zanz]

Thanks @Greek. Are you able to provide any clarification on a few other pertinent questions, when you have a chance, please?

1. Are the Game Rules the only source of official rules for players to follow? That was the position taken by Auditorii in 2020 (which James pointed out and which was responded to quite rudely, in my opinion), but which he has now told us is not the case. I think we need clarification here because it is very difficult as a player to understand just what is and is not off limits today. I cannot find any evidence that the position Auditorii held in 2020 was ever made null by some other decision he rendered (or by an update to the rules, which I would have to believe would be necessary given the position he took)... Can we get this cleared up?
2. If the game rules are not the only source of official rules for players, can you offer any clarity to what sort of things do / do not present official rulings or rules which will be enforced by Moderation? We are told here at the Oil and Gas Index is and always has been binding, but my request for evidence of that has not been answered (except by Auditorii calling me a liar for asking for a source, another instance of rudeness, in my opinion). Moderation makes a lot of forum posts, not all of them in moderation capacity - can any clarity be offered?
   
   • Should I assume all stickied posts by Moderation on the forum are to be interpreted as equivalent to rules? (the Announcement: Particracy Oil and Gas Information thread presented as evidence of that list's "binding nature" is the best we've got there yet, and it's unfortunately not stickied, so maybe this is not a great barometer?)
   • Perhaps all forum posts titled "announcement:[...]" might be a better list of content to consider equivalent to rules (keeping in mind of course that THIS thread, unfortunately, contains such a binding ruling but does not have the word "announcement" in the title, so certainly not perfect yet)... This puts quite a bit of administrative burden on players (who I think could not be blamed for assuming the Rules might just include all of the rules), but hey, at least it'd give us clarity if this was just stated...
   • If "announcements" on the forum are "rules", what about announcements made only on the Particracy Discord? For that matter, is Discord a source we should consider as possibly providing content we need to consider rules, at all? Many Particracy players never participate on the Discord, and Discord by its nature is much more fast paced and easy to miss important information. What about players who have been Discord banned but not banned from the full game - they couldn't see these rulings at all... I'd argue that it should certainly NOT be the case that Discord announcements alone (or just conversation on Discord by Moderation) should not serve as adequate announcement of a ruling - but I want clarity on this, too.

To bring it back to the content you posted, above, I want to comment specifically on this:

The resources index needs to be considered by players wishing to RP on these resources, just like the oil and gas index.

Given my questions above (and maybe you'll answer my concern by addressing them), are you able to provide clarity on why the oil and gas index is binding? You answer here that the resource list is binding "just like the oil and gas index", but as I said - I am still not sure that I understand why thatis the case.

And a couple final points:

Simply put, just like Beiteynu can't claim it has an endless reservoir of oil under its desert, it can't claim is has an endless reservoir of uranium.

Why not, if others want to engage with Beiteynu on a story to this effect? Beiteynu might claim it, but that might be bravado, it might be incompetence - there are many reasons the flexibility to allow this might actually lead to much better outcomes for this community than the alternative presented to us by Moderation here

So what does binding/can/can't mean?

A common language for all players on where a lot of stuff is on the map. That's it. So it's binding for players in the sense that players need to consider it if they decide to do some extended RP on resources and seek to generate more RP with other players from doing so.

Will we abolish Beiteynu's RP if I decided to RP the country as king of all uranium? No, but wouldn't it be lame for everyone else?

I disagree that this is a helpful definition of the word "binding" for our purposes, and so far as I can tell so does your co-moderator, if I am to take him at his explicit word here. I have been told by one moderator that if I do not use this list my RP will be unilaterally declared invalid, and by another that it will not. These positions cannot co-exist. What am I not getting, here?

Thanks.

[Auditorii]

Are the Game Rules the only source of official rules for players to follow? That was the position taken by Auditorii in 2020 (which James pointed out and which was responded to quite rudely, in my opinion), but which he has now told us is not the case. I think we need clarification here because it is very difficult as a player to understand just what is and is not off limits today. I cannot find any evidence that the position Auditorii held in 2020 was ever made null by some other decision he rendered (or by an update to the rules, which I would have to believe would be necessary given the position he took)... Can we get this cleared up?

The assumption here that this is some sortve legal process or bureaucratic organization is simply another attempt by yourself and others to undermine Moderation and the wider game for your own benefit. A post from 2020 is hardly “binding” when the context and situation is different. We’ve made it clear time and time again that the Oil and Gas Index are binding, the Natural Resources List is binding. We’ve provided information that we’re flexible in some regards when it comes to the NRL.

If you have such an issue with this, something that was decided in your extended absence, you’re free to depart the game if it isn’t to your liking.

The constant attempts to playing “Bureaucracy Simulator” are taxing and unnecessary. Moderation reserves the right to alter, edit or otherwise amend the rules as necessary, including make them informally or ad hoc. It’s been made clear that we’re going to clarify this with a rules update that especially clarify the position of the OGI/NRL, but that doesn’t mean what we’ve said isn’t any less binding.

I really don’t understand why you guys spend so much time forum PvPing with the rules when you could easily invest yourself into the RP that has kept this game alive.

[jamescfm]

In short, we are only welcome to play the game as long as we are agree to do exactly what you say. Understood.

[Pragma]

The people you're going after are the ones who've been putting out a large share of the recent RP this game has seen. If you really cared about the game, why don't you communicate with us with some respect and listen to what we're saying?

[Auditorii]

In short, we are only welcome to play the game as long as we are agree to do exactly what you say. Understood.

No, that isn’t what was said at all but I have little confidence you’re capable to see beyond your emotions what’s actually being said.

[Auditorii]

The people you're going after are the ones who've been putting out a large share of the recent RP this game has seen. If you really cared about the game, why don't you communicate with us with some respect and listen to what we're saying?

I’m not sure that we haven’t listened to what has been said here, Greek and I discussed about being flexible when it comes to generic RP related to resources not listed for a nation.

In regards to dismissing the binding nature, we’re not interested in doing that as we’ve seen RP generated from this and the Oil and Gas Index that we’re happy with and seeing where it goes.

If you’ve got suggestions outside of that, as we’ve said, we’ll listen.