Requests: Cultural Protocols - CPs [M]

Submit your requests on various areas of the game.

Moderator: RP Committee

Re: Cultural Protocol Approvals

Postby Reddy » Sun May 01, 2016 7:38 pm

Prometheus79 wrote:
Reddy wrote:
Prometheus79 wrote:The players of Dundorf have decided not to change our proposal:
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=470790

We stand behind our update proposal:
http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill. ... lid=470029

We ask the moderation for approval.


I strongly suggest that you read up on the Game Rules (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6363), particularly section 16, before doing and posting such stuff. It's Moderation which has the discretion to decide whether or not accept Cultural Protocol updates, not players.

Here's the relevant section


16.5 As a general convention, players should be able to provide good reasons if they want to significantly change Cultural Protocols which are less than 30 in-game years old. Where the Cultural Protocols are more than 30 in-game years old, then a change to any of the categories by 5% or less will generally be accepted without question. If the changes proposed are between 5 and 10%, then players should be prepared for the possibility of having the changes queried. If the changes proposed are 10% or more, then players should always expect to need to provide strong role-play justification for the changes.


You have utterly failed to do what's required in the bolded part. You provided no RP justification whatsoever to justify these extremely drastic changes. A thousand votes by all the Dundorfian players on this would not change that there's no RP justification.



Of course the decision whether to approve our proposal or not is up to the Moderation. The decision to change our proposal or not, however, is up to the Dundorfian players. And we have decided not to change our proposal. It is now up to the Moderation to decide whether or not to approve this proposal.
As to the justification. Religion has been continuously banned in Dundorf for 80 years. If that is not justification enough for a massive increase in Atheism, nothing is. Of course if you stick to the wording of the rules you can say the game is irrelevant only role-play counts. Of course if that is the case there is no point to the game. I/We may "have utterly failed to do what's required in the bolded part."


Show me any kind of RP about the drastic increase of atheism in Dundorf over the past 80 years. A ban does not mean that religiosity decreases in a country. Guess who said that in a bill debate a few days ago? You. You have to RP the change you want to see. A mere bill banning religion is not sufficient RP justification. That does not mean that the bill doesn't count, it just isn't enough. I suggest you study recent cases where drastic changes have been approved.


Prometheus79 wrote:I'm afraid you have utterly failed to use common sense.


This is the nicest thing I've heard all day. God forbid that I should make a decision based on someone else's (IMO) faulty conception of common sense.
To live outside the law, you must be honest.
Reddy
 
Posts: 4116
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:20 am

Postby Prometheus79 » Sun May 01, 2016 7:49 pm

Empty
Last edited by Prometheus79 on Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Prometheus79
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 am

Re: Cultural Protocol Approvals

Postby Aquinas » Sun May 01, 2016 9:46 pm

Prometheus,

Okay, we geddit that you and the Dundorfians want a major increase in non-religious and you're feeling hemmed in by Moderation at the moment.

Let me see if I can make things any better/clearer here...

Moderators have always been wary about accepting really big changes to a Cultural Protocol in a single update. Even if, theoretically, the demographic change is said to have taken place over decades/centuries/whatever, the fact remains that as far as the player community is concerned, if you make a massive change, it still means that one day the Cultural Protocol was one thing and the next day it has become something radically changed.

For this reason, as Reddy, pointed out, any changes to the demographics by 10% or more come under close scrutiny. It is rare these days for Cultural Protocols to be changed by hugely more than 10% at a time.

Your Cultural Protocol update proposed increasing non-religious from 40% to 78%. That is a mammoth increase. If we approved that, I suspect it would be the biggest change to a Cultural Protocol that had been approved since I became a Moderator a year ago.

We're not discounting what you told us about Dundorf's anti-religious history. Actually, if you remember, I suggested you propose a 15%-20% increase in non-religious in your first update, and then did another update increasing it further in 30 or so in-game years time.

So to be fair, we're not saying "No" to you and the other Dundorf players. We're saying you can have this increase, but to keep within the rules, we're suggesting you space it out over 2 or 3 updates, rather than doing it suddenly and all at once in one update.

We are on your side and we're not here to oppose you. We're just saying there is a procedure we all - players and Moderators - have to work around.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Postby Prometheus79 » Sun May 01, 2016 11:18 pm

Empty
Last edited by Prometheus79 on Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Prometheus79
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 am

Re: Cultural Protocol Violation Reports

Postby Govenor12 » Tue May 03, 2016 11:04 am

http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=25649

This player is using non-yeudi names.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Cultural Protocol Violation Reports

Postby Aquinas » Tue May 03, 2016 11:11 am

Govenor12 wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty.php?partyid=25649

This player is using non-yeudi names.


They look like a reasonable enough set of character names to me, although admittedly I am no expert on Jewish names, so I welcome any second opinions on that.

Just to clarify the Game Rules on character naming in Culturally Protected nations:

6.4 Character names and especially Head of State, Head of Government and Cabinet minister names must be appropriate for the cultural background of the nation.

Please remember it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocol.

Whilst a few character names may be permitted to come from small cultural minorities, the broad spread of a party's character names should be plausibly realistic. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented.

6.4.1 In nations where English is present as an in-game culture, but not the majority, English character names must not be too disproportionately prevalent. For example, if 10% of the population are English, English characters should not make up half of a party's Cabinet ministers or list of candidates. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Cultural Protocol Violation Reports

Postby Govenor12 » Tue May 03, 2016 11:22 am

As Beiteynu is real life israel, this his highly unlikely as most immigration to israel was german or russian and not american. Moreover these names would then be not suitable for Lourenne,as it is french leaning. The same name for two states can surely be not appropriate.This can surely be not in line with the rules. On either side there has to be a violation.
By the way, if you look on the caibinet there is a minister named "Leo Trotzky". This can surely be not in line with the rules, either.
Last edited by Govenor12 on Tue May 03, 2016 11:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Cultural Protocol Violation Reports

Postby Aquinas » Tue May 03, 2016 11:40 am

So far as I am able to establish at the moment, silya's spread of character names is reasonably in compliance with the Game Rules and Beiteynu's Cultural Protocols. Although as I said, I am no expert on Yeudi/Jewish names, so I am willing to take account of any second opinions on that.

The player has been messaged about the "Leon Trotzky" issue, since I accept that seems to go against the spirit of section 5 of the Game Rules.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Cultural Protocol Violation Reports

Postby Govenor12 » Tue May 03, 2016 11:42 am

I understand.

However, if it is suitable in Beiteynu, can it be suitable for Lourenne, too with the same names?
Govenor12
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:20 am

Re: Cultural Protocol Violation Reports

Postby Aquinas » Tue May 03, 2016 11:47 am

When it comes to the cultural rules and character naming, we look at the broad spread of character names. Not every single character name has to belong to one of the dominant cultures in the nation. It is okay to have a small portion which come from minority backgrounds.
User avatar
Aquinas
 
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

PreviousNext

Return to Requests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jamescfm and 2 guests