First of all i would like to apologize for some of the mistakes i personally made at the beginning of my term as moderator.
I made several mistakes that i shouldnt have made and have learned quite a bit from them!
Now as promised we hereby present the first new changes in the rules in the form of Release One. In this release we worked on the following:
Release One:
- Behaviour Policy
- Inactivations / Reactivations
- The GRA
- Minor changes regarding the GRC
- GRC Mediation Process
- Mod Powers: Clearer Boundaries
- Appointment Transparency
- Culturally Open Nations
- New Foreword
FOREWORD
So lets start of with the new foreword!
This is the foreword we propose to implement!
Welcome to Particracy! Here you can find the rules to the game and surrounding sites. (‘Particracy’ is used throughout to refer collectively to the game itself, the forums, the discord, and the wiki). They are in no way a constitution but are intended to act as the general mandate for Moderation and the primary guide for the players. Moderation does however reserve the right to make the final decision regarding interpretation of the rules, make exception to the rules in exceptional circumstances and make the final judgement on any area not covered by the below rules . However, Moderation will generally be following and enforcing these rules unless genuinely exceptional circumstances arise.
Wouter’s word is the final authority on any matter and supersedes both the rules and Moderation.
Have fun and enjoy the game!
As you can see some things have remained the same regarding the foreword and only slight adjustments have been made to better address the current situation of the game.
We are also proposing two additions to Section 1. The additions we are proposing are the following:
1
i. Public discussion of Sanctions and/or warnings is prohibited throughout Particracy. All queries regarding such sanctions should be made in private to Moderation or Wouter if necessary.
J. Moderation and Wouter reserve the right to determine the sanctions/warnings necessary for rule violations
CULTURALLY OPEN NATIONS
The next thing well discuss is culturally open nations. Now this may be one of the more drastic changes in Release One. For a long time culturally open status has been a fear of some players for nations they have played in for a long time. Until now players could just get a 2/3rd majority of players with seats and change the culturally protected status to open which would basically result in a countries entire RP history with a specific culture being flushed down the toilet.
With this new approach and additions we hope to solve these issues and create a friendly environment where culturally open status is something that cannot happen easily.
I would urge everyone interested in this to leave suggestions and opinions on this system as it is one of the more drastic changes of this draft and we as moderation hope to streamline the idea and hear your opinions on it. Also comment on the wording if you can. As some of you may know i am not a native english speaker and so my grammar can be off at times. That is why we would appreciate if you could pay attention to that as well!
o. A nation can determine its culture using Cultural Protocols. These documents describe in detail the cultural (ie. ethnic, religious, linguistic….) makeup of each nation. Nations that have a Cultural Protocol are therefore "Culturally Protected" and bound by this section of the rules. The Cultural Protocols Index should be consulted for more information about the cultural situation of each nation.
i. To install a new Cultural Protocol or replace a current one, users should pass a bill with the support of a two-thirds majority of players with seats and then post a link to the bill on the Cultural Protocols Approval Thread. Following this Moderation will leave the submission pending for 48 hours, so that any community member with an objection can raise them, Moderation will also review in detail the proposal. Once Moderation approval has been given a player should then post a copy of the bill in the “bills under debate” section of their nation, with a link to the original bill.
ii. Moderation reserves the right and discretion to approve or deny new cultural protocols.
iv. A proposal for a new cultural protocol must have the support (voting “yes”) of one party that has been continuously active (ie: no inactivations) there for at least 30 days
V. After 200 Ingame years a Cultural Protocol will expire. Before it expires a player that has been present in the nation for at least 30 days (in total, not consecutive) can request the renewal of the cultural protocol which will add another 200 Ingame years to the Cultural Protocol.
Vi. Moderation has to approve a renewal request if the conditions in rule 6v have been met.
Vii. If a Cultural Protocol expires without a player asking for a renewal the nation in question will become Culturally Open and will regain its Culturally Protected status if a player passes a new Cultural Protocol according to rule 6i and 6iv.
The rules regarding the implementation or change of cultural protocols will remain the same (reference: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8088#p137060 (Section 6: i. ii. iii.)
CHANGES TO THE GRC (MEDIATION/CHAIR)
For the next part of Release One we will look at 3 new additions to the Roleplay section of the rules that we plan to implement specifically regarding the GRC.
The next 3 new rules that i will show you in a second all have to do with the GRC and the GRC chairman.
Moderation is of the opinion that we should give the GRC the ability to actually do its job. Until now the GRC has had little (or at least to little) authority of their own concerning unrealistic RP and managing their own structures. They should be able to do their job and monitor RP, judge RP and managing their own ranks etc.
With the following additions to Section 6 (Roleplay) we hope to solve these issues. Feel free to comment on them!
6Q. The GRC will have a chairman that acts as the face and head of the GRC for a period of 3 months. Moderation will appoint the chairman and will pick between the CRC’s of the GRC
6R. The GRC Chairman has the right to request the removal of a GRC member if there is sufficient motivation to do so. This removal request has to be either approved or denied by moderation
6S. The Continental Roleplay Coordinators (and other non-CRC members of the GRC) will have the authority to review and make changes to RPs ("retcon") in their respective areas, that are considered to be unrealistic or otherwise unfeasible due to provided evidence. Nations or players who are having their RP reviewed should/will be included in the process and steps to rectify the situation OOCly should be discussed prior to the RP being changed or invalidated.
GENERAL ADDITIONS/CHANGES TO SECTION 6
As we told in the feature list of Release One changes to the GRA would also be implemented.
We have tried to figure out a way how to change this accordingly and discourage sudden changes in GRA membership.
Hereby the changes we propose (especially l and m)
k. The Global Role Play Accord (GRA) is an opt-out index of nations. Membership in the GRA allows the Global RP Committee (GRC) to determine the nation’s economic and military characteristics. To opt-out of the GRA a nation should pass a bill with a ⅔ majority of players with seats voting in favour. Opt Outs will only be accepted if the following conditions are met:
l. At least one party voting in favour has been continuously active (no inactivations) in that nation for a period of 30 days;
m. A reason is given for exiting the RP Accord deemed reasonable by moderation.
n. To Opt Back In a nation should pass a bill with a ⅔ majority of players with seats voting in favour.
In addition to these changes to the GRA we propose the following changes/additions to several rules of Section 6. which i will list below now.
g. Moderation appoints players to be members of the GRC with roles at its own discretion and with or without consultation of current members of the GRC.
(Above rule should be reconsidered, more authority to the GRC)
In order to be appointed as a member of the GRC. An account on the forums is necessary. The player is also expected to be active both when being considered for a position and when in that position.
Members of the GRC can all be identified on the forums as having a burgundy coloured name.
h. As a collective the GRC shares responsibility for world RP as a whole. Because of their nature as a committee, information shared with one member of the GRC, such as private messages to a GRC Member on a contentious issue, are considered to be shared with the GRC as a whole by default: as such members of the GRC are entitled to certain necessary and relevant confidential information, and sharing such information outside of the GRC will result in a permanent ban from Particracy.
i. The RP Committee has the right to intervene and mediate in difficult RP situations if contacted by a relevant player (examples may include claims of unrealistic RP, large disagreements over an RPs future, disagreements over retcons, allegations of “nation raiding” -- see 5.c.v -- and more), and their decisions must be respected. Failing to do so could result in sanctions from Moderation. If the players involved, or the RP Committee member asked to mediate, disagree strongly with the ruling or wish to gain a second opinion, Moderation can also be asked to intervene in the process. Moderation’s word is final. The GRC is not involved in rulings on RP Laws unless conditions listed in rule 6S are met and Moderation reserves the right to overrule any judgement if they deem it necessary. The RP Committee also welcomes feedback from players across the community, so don’t be afraid to offer them some friendly feedback.
INACTIVATIONS/REACTIVATIONS
And now to come to another important point. The rules regarding inactivations and reactivations. As some of you may have seen there has been a heated debate regarding this on several threads. We had decided to push through rule changes regarding this without a public consultation (reference: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8088#p137060 under Section 5) which was a mistake. We are ready to correct this mistake however after private consultations with the GRC and expecially with James.
I would like to note and personally thank James for his contribution in rewriting our previous changes to the inactivation and reactivation rules. I would like for everyone to carefully read the new proposed changes and give us your feedback on them!
5.
a. Moderation will inactivate a player's in-game account if they have not logged in to it for 4 days.
b. Moderation reserves the right to inactivate any user who has committed an offence against the Game Rules serious enough to warrant their inactivation, such as failing to conform to a nation's Cultural Protocols within four days of being told or multi-accounting.
c. In certain circumstances, players can request the early inactivation of another player's in-game account. For this to be approved, the user must meet at least one of the following conditions:
- They have not logged in for at least 3 days (72 hours).
- They have not logged in for 2 days (48 hours); they have not filled out their party description; they have not changed the name of their party and they have not voted on more than one bill.
- They are deemed to be "party sitting". "Party sitting" is defined as logging in to an account without voting on bills, for a period of at least five days.
- They are deemed to be "dodging inactivation". "Dodging inactivation" is defined as meeting the minimum criteria to avoid inactivation without actively attempting to play the game, by logging in and/or vote on bills every 3 days.
- As a matter of last resort, when the player has not been contributing to role-play to the extent that is expected by the majority of players in the nation. Understanding and respectful dialogue must be attempted before this point and Moderation should be consulted throughout the process
d. A user who has had their party inactivated, or who has inactivated their party of their own accord, may request reactivation in the Reactivation Requests Thread. Inactivation will not be granted if any of the following conditions apply to the user's in-game account:
- They have the "log-in bug", a problem in which a user's "last activity" is stated as "not recorded" and which makes it difficult for Moderation to make decisions on activity.
- They are in breach of some aspect of the Particracy Game Rules.
- They have been inactivated for "party sitting" (see 5.c.iii for more information) on at least three previous occasions.
- They have shown insufficient willingness to contribute to role-play to the extent that is expected by the majority of players in the nation in the past and have failed to commit to doing so. Moderatio reserves the right to make a judgement on this matter.
Hereby we come at the end of the draft for Release One of the rule changes. I thank all of you for reading them and encourage you to leave and feedback, proposals and questions on this thread. Moderation will do its best to answer all of your questions in a orderly fashion.
This public consultation will be open for 3 weeks and will end on the 11th of january!
Thank you all!