Requests: General [A]

Submit your requests on various areas of the game.

Moderator: RP Committee

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:46 pm

So in general if things are like that the description of the law is simply seen as not relevant and consequently without any rp impact?
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:56 am

Govenor12 wrote:So in general if things are like that the description of the law is simply seen as not relevant and consequently without any rp impact?


The way I see it, the text of the description is meant as an elaboration and clarification of the variables the bill introduces, so it is a form of RP without being an RP law. You could make the argument that, since the description is not an exact match of the variables, this counts as a law "outlined in bill descriptions but not specified in game mechanic proposals", which is the definition of an RP law according to Rule 22. But even if that were the case, this would count as a non-constitutional RP law that can therefore be repealed by a non-constitutional majority.

In either case, no rule has been broken by this bill, so I'm not sure I understand what your objection is.
Polites
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Martinulus » Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:36 pm

In addition, since the provisions arise from the variables, one can argue that repealing the change of the variables also repeals the description part of the law.
Image
Hosianisch-Demokratisches Verbund - Hulstria and Gao-Soto

Notable previous parties:
Folkepartiet (People's Party) - Kazulia
User avatar
Martinulus
 
Posts: 971
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 11:53 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:07 pm

which is the definition of an RP law according to Rule 22


Based on that i move that the following laws:
1. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=546594
2. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=546947
3. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=548690

do not compley with the following rules:
22.5 It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current.
22.8 In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity.

I hereby challenge their validity.

In case of law no.1 i additionally refer to 22.3.3 "There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.", because it introduces a new armband law.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:53 pm

Govenor12 wrote:
which is the definition of an RP law according to Rule 22


Based on that i move that the following laws:
1. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=546594
2. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=546947
3. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=548690

do not compley with the following rules:
22.5 It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current.
22.8 In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity.

I hereby challenge their validity.

In case of law no.1 i additionally refer to 22.3.3 "There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.", because it introduces a new armband law.


Those are indeed RP laws. The players in Selucia have been messaged to remind them of the requirement of outlining the currently binding RP laws in the debate section on their nation page.
Polites
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:06 pm

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=549802

Violation of

22.3.2 RP laws which contradict game mechanic laws.
22.3.3 RP laws which cannot be revoked or can only be revoked by a higher majority than was required to create the law in the first place. There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.


http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=549639

22.3.3 RP laws which cannot be revoked or can only be revoked by a higher majority than was required to create the law in the first place. There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown.
Last edited by Govenor12 on Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Maxington » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:08 pm

I think i explained it to you a week ago. It does not have the labels which could classify it as an "RP Law" in accordance with game rules. It just isn't an RP law.
"The future of the Nation is in the children's school bags" ~ Dr. Eric Williams
President of the Trond Henrichsen Institute for International Affairs.
User avatar
Maxington
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Look Behind you.

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Govenor12 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:09 pm

Laws outlined in bill descriptions but not specified in game mechanic proposals are known as "role-play laws" or "RP laws" and are recognised under the rules as binding.


I think the suggested law clearly comes up to this discription.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Polites » Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:17 am

Governor is correct on this, and those were in fact RP laws. As it happens, those were indeed against the rules, as they introduced legislation already covered by game mechanics (specifically, there's already variables regarding paramilitaries, citizenship, and immigration). The players proposing those bills were messaged and the bills in question were removed. Thank you Governor for bringing this to our attention.

If I may also clarify an issue, there seems to be some confusion regarding rule 22.3.3 ("RP laws which cannot be revoked or can only be revoked by a higher majority than was required to create the law in the first place. There must be a clear mechanism through which a RP law can be overthrown."). This rule is not meant to imply that each RP law needs to include a specific mechanism for repealing it in its description, but is rather meant to emphasize that RP laws are not and cannot be permanent, and players may not quote defunct RP laws as still being in place. Typically, if the necessary majority isn't specified, we use a reasonable appreciation of what type of bill it is in order to determine the required majorities, by comparison with existing variables. E.g. a bill introducing a "faction system" and abolishing political parties would definitely count as a constitutional bill, and would therefore require 2/3 majorities to implement and revoke.

That rule might need some rephrasing to make it clearer.
Polites
 
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Questions & Requests

Postby Bobbo255 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:20 am

Could this amendment please be added to Lodamun’s constitution?

http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=510476

Thanks!
Bobbo255
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 11:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Requests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests