5.3.8 A Roleplay is only valid if all players involved consent to it and continue to do so throughout the duration.
5.3.8.1 By consenting to a roleplay, you accept the consequences of cause, effect and common sense as agreed between the players on EVERY point.
5.3.8.2 Moderation may be summoned to arbitrate or contribute to RP in order to ensure that this is maintained.
The condition, on which I suggest the system be maintained, is that a treaty is still signed by the nation with the system outlined in it. For example: The 3440 Revision of the Port Tackstov Charter, which all players had agreed to.
The treaty simply ensures that the laws don't contradict the system. The description also contains IC information that the players had agreed to. If players wish to abolish the system, they can simply pass a treaty withdrawal bill (which only needs >50% of the legislature).
One such treaty was signed before, to regulate the unique election system we designed.
The North Beluz HoS was elected by an electoral college consisting of all the members of the top party in each state. It was a simple calculation done, using election results, which we couldn't alter and it never put any party at an advantage or disadvantage. It worked, and the players had continued to recognise the system, even when they lost. For example, the Stantons and the Dataks were usually the ones competing for the North Beluz Presidency. They both had to chance to stop each other from getting it by blocking the 2/3 supermajority bill needed to change the HoS title, but they accepted defeat. Instead of accepting defeat, they could have simply declared that they no longer consent to the roleplay.
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=367194
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=367330
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=367832
The rules, that we made up for our own system, are pre-stated (they were read and seen before the instances in which they take effect) and a player can't simply alter them at any random point. They don't give any player any advantage. What I fear is that a new player may come, support the system at first in a case where he/she wins the elections through the custom system, then withdraw consent as soon as someone else wins. When they withdraw consent, they may block the HoS-title bill from passing (if they have enough seats) and it would be unfair that they only consent to the system in the specific instances where they benefit.