Beauty Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 In order to include politics of both sides of the current OOC warfare between CNRP2ers, I want to propose this compromise to attempt to form a bond between all of us to once again role play in harmony and enjoyment. To enjoy the game, not get angry and not enjoy it. You're supposed to have fun here. Feel free to add your opinions and add suggestions. Keep in mind this is to compromise, not to inevitably bring in your personal agenda/proposals. Suggest what you would see fit to appease everyone as much as possible. The Lannister-Bowlman Compromise (If you feel this is overrated, come up with a better less professional suggestion in a reply) Clause 1: GM's Duties GMs are to represent the communities ideals. GMs realize they are elected by the players to be the solve disputes on the matters at hand. GMs are to protect the interests of the community, and serve the community. GM's will not hold absolute power, but rather solve quick decisions until challenged. Clause 2: Overruling GM Decisions If a GM's ruling is to be challenged by a member at any one time, it can be put up for a vote following 2 other members of the community support it as a legitimate and reasonable request. This will open up a discussion into the ruling and a vote after at least 24 hours of discussion if the member believes that their vote represents the community. This vote will take place between a minimum of 24 to a maximum of 48 hours. This is up to the player who authorizes the vote as a challenge to the GM Team's Ruling. If a majority of the community feel like that GM did not rule fairly, the GM ruling can be overruled. The GM does get a vote in this poll as he is a legal member of the community.* * 2.2 - Over Ruling GM Decision's Instructions When a GM's ruling is challenged, role players may continue their role play until the vote is over with. If the player requesting a over ruling is a combatant, they are allowed to not respond and freeze the RP until the matter is handled. This player agrees if the odds do not come out in their favor, they will continue the RP. Clause 3: Removal of a Nation When removing a nation, and not the player as whole for any means, the GMs or Players will put a vote fourth to the community with or without discussion. This poll will allow discussion inside of it if one is not previously made to give the player time to defend or justify their actions that are in question. Clause 4: Removal of a Player Removing or banning a player of CNRP2 is a task that should not go under heavy scrutiny and thought. When permanently removing a player from the game, there will be at least a 48 hour discussion to allow players and GMs to sleep on the decision of permanent removal of a player. After the 48 hour discussion period a vote lasting no less than 48 hours and no more than 72 hours will take place with a GM Sponsor. If the vote passes a majority of 66.6%, the player will be permanently removed from the game.* 4.2 - Explanation of 66.6% In a community of 40 players if 20 people do not wish to play with someone anymore, and 20 people do; it can be quite hectic. This allows a 2/3 majority for a permanent removal of the game to further represent the community rather than a large grouping. Clause 5: Removal of a GM If the community feels a GM no longer represents the community or their ideals and interests anymore than another person can. The GM can be discussed to be removed from his or her respective post. This will undergo a 24 to 48 hour discussion and a 24 to 48 hour vote at the player requesting a removal's leisure. The removal of a GM will coincidentally mark a time for a new vote to be put in place for a new candidate. The removal of a GM Does not remove their respective nation or eligibility as a voter or player in the community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 No. This is open to far too much abuse by a small number of players at any one time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) Clause 4: Removal of a Player Removing or banning a player of CNRP2 is a task that should not go under heavy scrutiny and thought Suggest revision of wording: Removing or banning a player of CNRP2 is a task that should not go without heavy scrutiny and thought. Reason: Saying it should not go under heavy scrutiny and thought seems to be antithetical to the rest of the paragraph. Side note: Zoot also brings up a good point, if there is too small of a voting body then it reverts to being at a fundamental level.. a popularity contest. Edited June 16, 2014 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Clause 4: Removal of a Player Removing or banning a player of CNRP2 is a task that should not go under heavy scrutiny and thought Suggest revision of wording: Removing or banning a player of CNRP2 is a thing that should not happen Reason: It just should not happen. It was one thing you people complained about in CNRP. That certain people would not be able to RP while getting rolled over and over. Well, here you can get booted outright OOCly, merely because you are unpopular, which needs not even be related to how good, bad, reasonable, unreasonable, healthy or toxic your RP is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Timmy Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 I vaguely remember the mods saying players couldn't be banned once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) I wouldn't be at all surprised if that were the case Timmy. It just seems like a bad idea to allow participation to be something dictated by the average forum participant... The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.Winston Churchill Before anyone gets insulted, I am your average forum participant. Edited June 16, 2014 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) This is good work Rotavele, but Id rather overhaul the entire system, eliminate game mods and replace them with wargame mods. Edited June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) Under the CNRP2.1 system upgrade, you would have official wargame mods, but people can wargame with an alternate individual moderating if agreed upon by both players. Dice rolls would be available but it will levy a heavy attrition penalty for those who chose to use it. There would be no canon roleplay and no kicking of players; every roleplay is subjective and could be about any country or white space, and everyone else can chose whether to recognize it or blast it as propaganda. Until you separate wargaming from roleplay, and consider wargaming objective while roleplay is subjective, you will have problems with the GM roleplayer police reinventing the wheel. Edited June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Removal of a GM is silly. Even in the most extreme cases they can be pressured to resign plus there is a another GM to hold their place if they have to leave. But really, we have elections so often we can get rid of a bad GM with an election. You don't need every jerk and their mom holding a vote to kick out a GM who is trying to stand by his/her decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 I am advocating the replacement of game mods by war mods, not individual game mods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Removal of a GM is silly. Even in the most extreme cases they can be pressured to resign plus there is a another GM to hold their place if they have to leave. But really, we have elections so often we can get rid of a bad GM with an election. You don't need every jerk and their mom holding a vote to kick out a GM who is trying to stand by his/her decisions. I believe it is silly too, however I support the power lying within the community and not having another case of the Uberstein/TBM mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 I believe it is silly too, however I support the power lying within the community and not having another case of the Uberstein/TBM mess. The same power of the community that voted Tywin out, I approve. The same power of the community i spared you from as well. How things change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Your vote count was fraudulent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 The same power of the community that voted Tywin out, I approve. The same power of the community i spared you from as well. How things change. There were 7 votes uncounted because they wanted to discuss it first, otherwise TL wouldn't be kicked out on your standards. Rudy has said already the vote was optional on IRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolph Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 There were 7 votes uncounted because they wanted to discuss it first, otherwise TL wouldn't be kicked out on your standards. Rudy has said already the vote was optional on IRC. Seems like SOMEONE doesn't pay attention to what I say, so I'm just going to quote what I already said on this matter: *dons GM Hat* I have said no where where the thread is only recognized at one's own dispense. Neither have I stated that the thread is illegitimate to begin with. STOP PUTTING WORDS INTO MY MOUTH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Seems like SOMEONE doesn't pay attention to what I say, so I'm just going to quote what I already said on this matter: [18:38] <+Yerushalayim> Are we removing Tywin from the game, or are we disregarding that vote? 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> Disregard [18:38] <~Rudy[Zzz]> That is up to the community 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> Uberstein and TBM are dead 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> GM wise 04[18:38] <~Rudy[Zzz]> Rotavele, quiet 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> It is a new revolution in this day and age [18:38] <%Biohazard> go vote me for GM [18:38] <%Biohazard> :D 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> Ok Rudy[Zzz] [18:38] <~Rudy[Zzz]> I am seriously not in the mood [18:38] <+Yerushalayim> Y'all should just give me ops in here. :P [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> I'm the only legit GM and I'm basically corraling a group of kids 04[18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> Fo please, don't tempt me to ban you, Rota 01[18:39] <+Rotavele> You have lead this community to greatness Rudy[Zzz], you're not in the fucking mood? Too fucking bad. I would build a statue of you right now if you really wanted me to. [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> So* 01[18:39] <+Rotavele> You've made me happy :( its not a bad thing [18:39] <+Yerushalayim> Lol [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> I'm not in the mood [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> Accept that and RP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 It was not the will of the community if the votes were fraudulently counted. TBM knew I would challenge any sloppiness so this is a case of his own negligence in not being thorough, taking a screenshot and listing a count of votes. His lack of effort to demonstrate his "count" beyond a reasonable doubt is what makes his vote count either negligent or fraudulent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 It was not the will of the community if the votes were fraudulently counted. TBM knew I would challenge any sloppiness so this is a case of his own negligence in not being thorough, taking a screenshot and listing a count of votes. His lack of effort to demonstrate his "count" beyond a reasonable doubt is what makes his vote count either negligent or fraudulent. While the first was legitimate, I would be perfectly fine with having the vote again. But I do not think you would like what the outcome is now that there aren't 5 people who wish to roll you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Think of me like Hydra. Chop off one head, two grow in its place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Think of me like Hydra. Chop off one head, two grow in its place. Oh my... :psyduck: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolph Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 [18:38] <+Yerushalayim> Are we removing Tywin from the game, or are we disregarding that vote? 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> Disregard [18:38] <~Rudy[Zzz]> That is up to the community 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> Uberstein and TBM are dead 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> GM wise 04[18:38] <~Rudy[Zzz]> Rotavele, quiet 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> It is a new revolution in this day and age [18:38] <%Biohazard> go vote me for GM [18:38] <%Biohazard> :D 01[18:38] <+Rotavele> Ok Rudy[Zzz] [18:38] <~Rudy[Zzz]> I am seriously not in the mood [18:38] <+Yerushalayim> Y'all should just give me ops in here. :P [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> I'm the only legit GM and I'm basically corraling a group of kids 04[18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> Fo please, don't tempt me to ban you, Rota 01[18:39] <+Rotavele> You have lead this community to greatness Rudy[Zzz], you're not in the !@#$@#$ mood? Too !@#$@#$ bad. I would build a statue of you right now if you really wanted me to. [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> So* 01[18:39] <+Rotavele> You've made me happy :( its not a bad thing [18:39] <+Yerushalayim> Lol [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> I'm not in the mood [18:39] <~Rudy[Zzz]> Accept that and RP Nowhere in those logs did I say that it was optionally recognizable, what I meant is that it's up to the community AS A WHOLE to decide if they wish for the vote to be upheld or considered illegitimate. So far to my understanding, most are upholding it and as my duty, I follow the will of the community not of a small few. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 In this case, the will of the community IS the will of a small few Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolph Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) In this case, the will of the community IS the will of a small few Just because you say it doesn't mean that reality will conform to your 'fact'. Edited June 16, 2014 by Rudolph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Just because you say it doesn't mean that reality will conform to your 'fact'. Right, that trick only works for the GMs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.