|
Just a few points to point out
| |
| Marten_Flagg | Date: Sunday, 01 Jan 2012, 2:03 PM | Message # 1 |
 Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 49
Status: Offline
| Keep in mind, I am not trying to be facetious, argumentative or point fingers at anyone, but for the sake of clarification I am posting this, as I intend to continue along my current line of plot within the Cronese Mandate, as I am sure Jamie is as well.
Firstly, in reference here: while there may be no direct reference to an Imperial Gaming Commission, there are various points where the Empire has pitched in at swoop racing (an 'Empire-sanctioned replacement of podracing') and in the Imperial Charter (which covers 'political, military, colonial, transportation, and economic' systems between the Imperial government and the systems) which would seem to cover gambling and casinos. You also have to think logically; would the Empire really let such a lucrative chance go down the drain to gain more cash from people? I think not. There is no record on Wookieepedia of the existence of a Minister of Mining and Resources, yet we have such a character. Certain things that make sense would not need to be requested. Orion even said as much here when you had that huge post about specifics.
Now, in regards to your final post here, I want to direct you to the following set of posts here. If you take the time to read through, you'll see that Ulyanov never officially requested a Labor Party; never requested that there be unhappy citizens and never requested the right to an uprising. Now, I'd say you are being unreasonable in trying to say 'Oh, all the Cronese Mandate folks are happy and cheerful and full of glee.' Frankly, I'd reply that the people of the Cronese Mandate would either have to be extremely stupid or so afraid of their government that they fake it; in which case, an uprising would be not far off.
The point I'm trying to make is that while you, Robier XXIII, in essence run the Mandate, you can't just up and say what every last civilian and citizen is feeling. There's more than one planet in the current timeline that mentions smugglers, pirates, con artists, etc. Do you think they are happy with the Mandate's oppressive totalitarianism? Probably not.
I'll go ahead and agree that the news team was yours. I'll even go with the (temporary) banishment from the Mandate. I'll go along with the fact that the casinos didn't make much money (though if the Mandate seized any monies, rest assured that more money than was seized made it offworld and was stashed), and we can blame the donations on a mix up that works out however you want.
I might add that I don't see any charges sticking to this character; I'm sure it will be cleared up soon. The point that I'm making though is that the Mandate is not all-playable by one single person. Think how big it is. I don't know anyone who even plays a single planet like that. Just give it a thought because I'm sure the issue will come up again.
Owner, Silver Pendant Casino chain
Overseer of operations, Cronese Mandate
Overseer of operations, Tion Sector & Raioballo Sector
|
| |
| |
| OrionKarath | Date: Tuesday, 03 Jan 2012, 0:39 AM | Message # 2 |
 Lieutenant general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 612
Status: Offline
| The Imperial Charter, for the beginning of an address to this, it is the constitution of the Empire. It is also without any detail from a canon standpoint, just as the Galactic Constitution before it and the Common Charter after it are as well. To assume one direction or another based on a few lines of assumptive text is, perhaps, ill-advised. From the standpoint of galactic governance, the Empire governing something like gambling at the galactic level is ridiculously ineffective and cripplingly bureaucratic. Just as real world nations, this is likely left to its member states, and thus in our setting, the individual planets. While the Empire would sanction certain events, such as swoop racing, or perhaps set a law on which games are or are not allowed in legal casinos, and that's a maybe, direct regulation, and certainly whether or not gambling can occur, is something for each individual planet.
I have indeed said, privately and publicly (in perhaps not so direct a manner), I don't want to see every single thing requested. We've seen that before... and it's just unruly as well as unnecessary. However, this comes with a big if; the if being members using common sense. Some rules are silent, and we probably need to change that. In fact, it will be changed. I am of personal belief that the growing amount of one and done characters, (limited use, no avatar, no profile, no requests, no management consultation, etc.), is becoming a major problem and a source of RP that is unbecoming of the group. Now, if I had to request the existence of a company which makes replacement parts for weapons, would it not cross the mind that ownership of a casino, especially one in an area of space controlled by another member, would require a request?
To utilize the example used above, in the matter of Ulyanov and the Baltimn civil war; Ulyanov did not request the Labor Party, but that Labor Party, to my knowledge, at its initial foundation was only an opposition group, not an elected part of the government of the planet. The unhappy citizens and uprising was allowed by Management, and before hand consulted with on the matter, because that was Management's feeling of the public support on the planet. Now, there are several issues at hand here. Culture, mindset, history, recent events, and (ultimately) player action; all of which comes together into Management's moderation on the matter of public opinion in regards to various player controlled planets and factions.
Just because a player takes control of a planet, does not mean they will be mindless drones. It does not mean either that everyone will face revolt. On that note, while it would not be valid for a player to say "Everyone is happy, no opposition exists" nor is it valid, or for that matter respectful, for another player to move in on a player's planet or faction and proclaim a resistance movement existing and making moves against the current government. This is a move which, while possible, is subject as well as Management moderation, and is a move without any class or maturity, in my opinion. While some players may jump on these movements as well, despite their seeming trend of being outrageous, they may do so to give a more measured and reasonable source of resistance. Such as, General Hood's appearance within the Baltimn civil war, who while without a profile, at least had requested the forces he was able to utilize.
For another example, however, of the opposite. Should Vjun see a civilian uprising? Yes. Very much so. Can it? No. The people who do suffer in Vjun's setup are merely too poor and down-trodden to even know what military operations or guerrilla warfare are. Management's consideration is unique to every situation, and favored to no one and nothing, other than an honest and fair assessment, with all factors taken into consideration. Going off-track, but I feel it is also wholly inappropriate to attempt to use an NPC, which Management has not been consulted over and for which no profile, avatar, or posts for that matter, exist, as a validation for a counter to someone's claim, argument, or thought.
Ultimately, this conversation on the relevant issue at hand is perhaps directed towards a definition of "player control", in the sense that applies to the general rules that govern RP as a whole (the general, no need to be posted type stuff). I'd hoped that was clear to everyone, but apparently not so here goes. "Player Control" is formal declaration of "ownership" of a world or faction not of the player's original creation. For example, I have control of Deralia. Since it has all but once sentence written about it, I'm able to expand and form what my view is of the world, how that one sentence, one small event four thousand years ago can change a single world's ideals and philosophy. I've also added little quirks and aspects to it along the way to make it truly unique; going to extreme lengths to ensure those who chose to involve themselves with Deralia understand it, and have even worked on a massive guide to what it has become. It also has a story to tell within, it isn't just a tool to advance one primary character or something with which all my characters try to advance or support. It is almost a character in itself. And it has a certain ending that canon will force upon it within the next few years. I hope I get to explore that, and generate a good amount of RP from it, but there is a story to it, as in all good things, and it is one that could perceivably be enjoyed by not only those involved but by those looking on. It isn't a tool for griefing anyone, and it isn't just there for convienence. I've put real time and effort into it; blood, sweat, and tears. It holds meaning to me, and I merely want to tell a story deserving of such time and effort. It isn't a one and done item. The same should be said of any player controlled planets or factions, be it original, canon, or somewhere in between. Sadly, this is not the case. Should this be an aspect of my management style or merely a player's opinion? I'm honestly unsure, still.
When a player is given control however, it is a show of trust between Management and the player; trust to do the right thing. Is that trust abused? Severely and regularly, to be brutally honest. It's something I will keep in mind in the future. To get back on point, control dictates a certain player as having creative control over something. For example, no one could just jump up and say they are the commander of the Cronese Navy since Carl has control; not without consulting with him, anyways. Were control not asked for, there would be nothing procedurally stopping it, from my viewpoint. He does not have absolute control, though. Management does control public opinion. He has a right to enact any law he wishes, in the manner he wishes, but this will not be without consequence. If we need to make an official rule regarding what player control is, then so be it, but I think this and what Jace has said in his ruling on the matter should cover any confusion, I hope.
Orion Karath
Manager from June 2009 to Present, Administrator from December 2011 to Present
My posts here, pre-2009 archives here
|
| |
| |
| Alyn_Stark | Date: Tuesday, 03 Jan 2012, 7:02 AM | Message # 3 |
 Generalissimo
Group: Users
Messages: 1359
Status: Offline
| You made a lot of good points Orion, and I accept the rebuke in good faith. I would point out two things just to clarify some points though:\
1) The lack of picture for the particular character which was involved in this issue stemmed from a lack of resources as I am cut off from my laptop while in transit from Afghanistan to the states and the public computers are sadly less than adequate.
2) The reason for the 2-3 NPC accounts I've made is that in past times, it becomes confusing to run and track larger numbers of unimportant and temporary NPCs; as such, for the other pair, I at least added pictures. This profile will be rectified once I get stateside and settle back in.
Alyn Stark
Lord of Kinyov
Senior Captain, Retired, Republic Navy
Head of House Malos (former)
Licensed bounty hunter
Majority shareholder, Lorrd Engineering
Owner, Stark Defense Conglomerate
Civilian Medal of Honor recipient
Representative, Lorrd (10 BBY-9 BBY)
|
| |
| |
| Robeir_XXII | Date: Tuesday, 03 Jan 2012, 10:16 AM | Message # 4 |
 Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 75
Status: Offline
| I am in the process of looking for images for the accounts that do not have them. The problem though is that there are 48 pages of members, that means going through 48 pages once I've found an image, to make sure that image hasn't been used before.
Head of the House of Cron
Ruler of the Cronese Mandate
|
| |
| |
|
