Requests: General [A]

[Polites]

I don't fully know the details behind this particular bill since it was deleted, but frankly I'm not sure what the issue is. The bill was proposed by an inactive party, so it was deleted after request. I don't see what new dynamic this would create.

[Aquinas]

I don't fully know the details behind this particular bill since it was deleted, but frankly I'm not sure what the issue is. The bill was proposed by an inactive party, so it was deleted after request. I don't see what new dynamic this would create.

If bills in the voting stage can be deleted on request just because the creator has inactivated, then that opens the way for bills being lost which are important to RP. Once news of this gets around, there is also a likelihood some players will start to try to make calculations about whether it is in their electoral interests for these bills to be removed or not. Bear in mind that just because one player in the nation wants the bill to be deleted even though its in the voting stage, that doesn't mean that is what all of the players in the nation want.

Please note also that the wording of the Game Rules suggests bill clearout requests are only for bills that are stuck in the debate section:

b. Users can request the removal of certain bills from their nation’s “Bills under debate” section by posting links to the bills they wish cleared on the Bill Clearout Requests Thread.

[Doc]

The bill in question was an omnibus with 10-12 articles. It was the only bill proposed by a brand new Party (http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=35047), who issued a comment on it, and then immediately went inactive. That player was only active for 7 hours. The bill would have dramatically altered positions regarding size of government positions as it proposed full nationalization of like 5 things.

I'll be happy to answer any other questions I can about the bill. It was not some sort of electoral calculation. It felt like the Party in question tossed a grenade into the Assembly and then jetted.

[Aquinas]

The bill in question was an omnibus with 10-12 articles. It was the only bill proposed by a brand new Party (http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=35047), who issued a comment on it, and then immediately went inactive. That player was only active for 7 hours. The bill would have dramatically altered positions regarding size of government positions as it proposed full nationalization of like 5 things.

I'll be happy to answer any other questions I can about the bill. It was not some sort of electoral calculation. It felt like the Party in question tossed a grenade into the Assembly and then jetted.

Yeah, I totally get where you're coming from Doc, and I'm not personally criticising you at all here. I'm more concerned about what we could potentially be opened up to, if we have a policy of allowing bills in the voting stage to be deleted on request just on the grounds that the user has inactivated.

[Doc]

The bill in question was an omnibus with 10-12 articles. It was the only bill proposed by a brand new Party (http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=35047), who issued a comment on it, and then immediately went inactive. That player was only active for 7 hours. The bill would have dramatically altered positions regarding size of government positions as it proposed full nationalization of like 5 things.

I'll be happy to answer any other questions I can about the bill. It was not some sort of electoral calculation. It felt like the Party in question tossed a grenade into the Assembly and then jetted.

Yeah, I totally get where you're coming from Doc, and I'm not personally criticising you at all here. I'm more concerned about what we could potentially be opened up to, if we have a policy of allowing bills in the voting stage to be deleted on request just on the grounds that the user has inactivated.

No criticism taken, Brother. I was just trying to shed some more light on the matter.

The flipside of the argument is that a player interested in trolling or destabilizing a country can easily form a Party in a country, go and post a bunch of omnibus bills that Parties have to vote on, and suffer a positions blender, or lose visibility, and then deactivate and repeat somewhere else.

I would argue that there wouldn't be a rule against doing that either. Perhaps the Mods ought to have the discretion.

[Aquinas]

The bill in question was an omnibus with 10-12 articles. It was the only bill proposed by a brand new Party (http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=35047), who issued a comment on it, and then immediately went inactive. That player was only active for 7 hours. The bill would have dramatically altered positions regarding size of government positions as it proposed full nationalization of like 5 things.

I'll be happy to answer any other questions I can about the bill. It was not some sort of electoral calculation. It felt like the Party in question tossed a grenade into the Assembly and then jetted.

Yeah, I totally get where you're coming from Doc, and I'm not personally criticising you at all here. I'm more concerned about what we could potentially be opened up to, if we have a policy of allowing bills in the voting stage to be deleted on request just on the grounds that the user has inactivated.

No criticism taken, Brother. I was just trying to shed some more light on the matter.

The flipside of the argument is that a player interested in trolling or destabilizing a country can easily form a Party in a country, go and post a bunch of omnibus bills that Parties have to vote on, and suffer a positions blender, or lose visibility, and then deactivate and repeat somewhere else.

I would argue that there wouldn't be a rule against doing that either. Perhaps the Mods ought to have the discretion.

You can make an argument for that in exceptional cases where a bill has a really large number of articles...but my point is that if we have a general convention where any bill that is in the voting stage can be deleted on request because the creator has inactivated, then that will take us into new territory and there will be issues.

[Doc]

I see your point, of course. It makes a lot of sense.

And I'm not a mod, so I just made the request. I don't want to get anyone in trouble. I think whoever deleted that bill made the correct decision.

[Occam]

I'd say there are good arguments for both sides. I think giving Moderation discretion to delete bills in the voting stage might be the best solution. The important thing is to make sure the rules are (made) clear going forward.

[Aquinas]

I'd say there are good arguments for both sides. I think giving Moderation discretion to delete bills in the voting stage might be the best solution. The important thing is to make sure the rules are (made) clear going forward.

Indeed.

[Polites]

Fair enough, we're considering amending the relevant rules to make this clearer.