An Interview with Plugson about the CPF

Day 1,871, 09:44 • Published in Canada USA • by Michael 23

Today we’re going to interview Plugson a long-time CPF member and a member of the CPF alumni. His level headed analytical skills are some of the best and he has contributed to countless discussions, articles, debates and more. He’s an amazing player and the CPF is lucky to have him. So without further ado, let’s begin our interview and see what Plugson has to say about the CPF.



Q: What makes people tell you, "Plugson, get outta my head."?

Plugson:
Funky taught me the Vulcan mind-meld technique. I'd have to say that the first experience was very disconcerting but all further melds with other players have been quite enjoyable.

Q: Plugson what made you want to join the CPF?

Plugson:
At the start of this year I returned to the game after taking a few months break. The only other party I had seriously put my time into had been PTOed and CPF seemed the closest in principles to what MOO stood for. I liked the no-nonsense approach Funky and the others took to the game and it seemed what was needed in eCanada as it dealt with govt. procedures that needed to be refocused on the game at hand, rather than what it once was.

Q: How long have you been in the CPF?

Plugson:
I joined up sometime in February of this year and stayed active in CPF until I decided to take a break from politics in the last month as RL got crazy busy.

Q: What are some of the great things you’ve seen from the CPF or some of the great things you’ve seen the CPF do?

Plugson:
--push for a team less reliant on forum-based rules and fewer government organizations that unnecessarily complicate the game
--keep a close eye on government expenditures for such things as merc funding or the funding of government organizations
--call out other parties on their roleplay obfuscations and lack of integrity in matters that affect how eCanada perceives itself as a team based on trust and rational actions.
--served as a sound and stable alternative when eCanada went through a period of intentional unrest caused by pseudo-leaders supported by lulzing egotists

Q: Would you recommend the CPF to others and why? Who would you recommend the CPF for (e.g. newer players, more experienced, a certain type of player)

Plugson:
CPF is better designed for people that want to cut the unnecessary posturing out of governing and party branding and focus on what drives the basics of the game. A CPFer is like a Clan Wolfer since the party originally placed less emphasis on forums and IRC use, while acknowledging that it was necessary and could not be ignored outright (also, while CPF valued group cohesion, it never sold itself on an overdone ‘bro’ buddy system). A CPFer could also be seen to be like MDPer in the way that there is focus on military support yet with less swagger and hands on involvement in such things as weapon drops. CPF deals with the issues of governing a war-based community without trying to embed itself in the mantle of war itself. A CPFer is one who sees the role of government in the game as a means to facilitate MU operations and doesn’t aim to infringe on how MUs operate, whether it be by affected flourishes of roleplay or the notion that community building is the aim of the current game. A CPFer should essentially be fairly hard-nosed, open to rational debate, and aiming for the lesser hand of government in most affairs in-game.

Yes, I’d recommend CPF for others and I would be active in CPF now if I wanted to get involved in changing gameplay for the better. It has a good group of level-headed players that can be relied on. I’d rather take something a bit predictable or dull over something that is prone to unexpected changes of direction or attitude. CPF has managed to keep a very direct line in the game.

Thank you Plugson. That was Plugson answering questions for us about the CPF. I better wrap this up quick before Plugson gets inside my head too, or did he already? Anyway, thanks again Plugson and best of luck to you.