Post by Mendoza Chávez De La Hoya Card on Sept 25, 2016 21:16:52 GMT
Retrolisers statement of being unaware is invalid as I proved. The SAP has worked towards this since the beginning of this round.
Last but not least: I am not in the mood for a time consuming diplomacy shenanigans based on my former points and on the fact that there is no official rule change. It's not the fault of the SAP that others are passive in for example this specific matter
Post by Archibald Stanford on Sept 26, 2016 2:59:19 GMT
It doesn't matter if I was unaware, Dave. What matters is that the pair of you caused ANYONE who was unaware to miss out. Both Abdul and Orlov have volunteered since it's become blatantly obvious that a third party is needed. So, even though it's true you and I discussed Eastern Europe, I wouldn't be able to get involved with that anyway since it'd be very bias, and it doesn't apply to the others. As far as we're all concerned, if you and Nag had been more clear, you'd have had these two chaps volunteer two weeks ago instead of now.
The rule states that an Admin, i.e; me as the only admin has to be contacted after one week has passed and no counter reply is made.
After One Week or Seven Days has passed, and the member in waiting has not got a counter-reply then he must PM an admin : Rohan and the Admin will ask the Faction Leader of the Opposing Faction to respond in the inactive member's place.
I was not contacted on the forums either through PM's or mentions. Since the terms of the rule were not followed, you cannot use it as a basis for claiming a territory through the one week basis.
The post was last edited on "Dec 17, 2015 at 11:24pm by Rohan". Near about 8 months have passed since anything new was added. So, why did you two not know about the above ? the reasons could be : A) The rules were not easy to access or The rules were not clear enough.
I think it's both, so I will make an edited version of the post accordingly and re-format the rules section to make access easy.
If anyone is interested, they are free to make their own version of the One Week Universal Rule and post it Here.
I openly question this request since the one who started this complaint explained that he wasn’t aware of it. This is not true. You were aware of it since we talked about this matter on skype. You were aware that Russia was going for them 2 neutral Euro clays, as did I told I was fishing elsewhere for own clays.
Now on to using Skype as a means of communicating RP matters, please don't. If you want to inform the faction leaders about a move which could affect the entirety of the RP (Claiming a territory, attacking a region); please contact them on this forum only. Please keep in mind that two faction leaders Abdul-Al Rashid and Wang Xi Jintao along with a few other members do not use Skype.
There is also This Rule which voids any deals made on any platform other than the Forum.
Sorry for not participating in it. I lack the knowledge about it. I just want to have some fun and add some drama into this roleplay.
Even if it is hard to understand, you can at least try to understand ? I even told you Here that you should participate in a test battle to understand the system easily. I have yet to get your reply on that post of mine. As a faction leader of China, you need to take the responsibility of giving your input on the Battle system. You represent one sixth of the roleplay right now so it is important to give your input on every rule made so that the China side won't have problems later on.
So for this matter: Admin you should be clear about what the rules are. I guess that’s the easiest way?
There are no rules concerning claiming neutral territories through diplomacy. The only rule on claiming neutral territories was based on warfare Here. However, I would consider the method used in the previous rounds to be the best. Once again, either I will make the rules for diplomacy or someone else can do it.
Perhaps we should get all active rules together in a decent overview that it is all clear. Speaking as a new player: it is hard to find several rules back. They moved to other sections, or are older and disappear in older pages.
The basic rules can be found in this thread for now. However I am thinking of making separate threads for each rule post to increase the ease of access.
The battle system has been halted for a fair moment of time.
No it has not been halted. Keep in mind that only four people are participating in it regularly : Dmitry Molchanov , Mendoza Chávez De La Hoya Card , Archibald Stanford and Sergei Varennikov . The rest are not even bothering to participate. Even after mentioning them so many times, the other members leave only one - two posts. This is why it appears to be slow. If everyone participated with full conviction, then the Battle system would have done and over by now.
You have given your reason for not participating, I would like to know the reasons for the others not participating with special emphasis on John Fitzgerald Kennedy II (Not posted in the thread at all) and Abdul-Al Rashid (Only one post in the thread) as faction leaders. Out of the six faction leaders, only three are participating. That's like three sixths of the roleplay's base not participating in solidifying the Battle System Rules.
Clarification : I have made the basic rules, but I will not be making the advanced rules of the Roleplay. This has to be done by the Faction Leaders and other roleplayers. If I make the rules concerning how the roleplay runs, it will be flawed as I do not roleplay at all. I am only a manager of this site and the "Final Word" man on issues which are stalemated and cannot be resolved by the Faction Leaders. Thus, if you people want a stable rule base, you as the roleplayer have to make an effort to make them yourself as you are the people who are roleplaying. Thus, you will know the inner mechanisms, things which could be abused, etc of the roleplay. The best people as such to make the rules are the Roleplayers themselves not me.
Again, if there is a stalemate about passing a certain rule or not, I will take the "Final Word" Role.
Now back to the issue raised in this thread, both sides are in stalemate.
Archibald Stanford has a good point, but the diplomacy process and rules themselves do not exist currently. Until they are added officially, the faction leaders can do as they please on the situation as long as no one has an objection.
So, I will end this with a two step process.
Step - 1 : Mention all the Faction Leaders and ask if they have any objection of your faction claiming the territory. For this purpose please make a new thread in this section and mention the other five faction leaders.
Step - 2 : If none of the faction leaders have an objection, then Dmitry Molchanov and Mendoza Chávez De La Hoya Card can either go the diplomacy route or let everything stay as it is (No NPC Diplomacy meeting). That is their choice.
Post by Dmitry Molchanov on Sept 26, 2016 23:01:02 GMT
I didn't realize that there was a contact-admin statement. That is another thing, and therefore, my claim would be considered null and void about it. However, I was contacted as a moderator of the world map by Mendoza for his claims. I don't know if that counts, but I doubt it does since it states that an admin has to, not a moderator. As for the non-diplomacy route, I've already started my end. But yes, if none of the other factions leaders (since it's obvious at this point that Retro will disagree entirely with it), we should still be allowed to keep our claims or enact diplomacy for them.
"Мы здесь, чтобы сохранить мир, не начинать войну. [We are here to keep the peace, not to start a war.]" - Dmitry Molchanov, President and former Prime Minister of the Russian Federation