Ambient on/off

Sign up

 

Continue

Continue By creating an account you agree to the Terms of Service & Privacy Policy
Resend email   |  Can't find the email? confirmation@erepublik.com

Resend the confirmation email to this address

Resend email Can't find the email? confirmation@erepublik.com

My suggestion to admin - Party President rules

Day 1,889, 05:38 by infin

Having the party you serve surprise PTOd is damn annoying and it's just not cricket. I have lodged a ticket with admin recommending they change the rules around Party President elections.

A Party take over occurs when on Party President day, large numbers of players change party membership purely to enable a surprise take over of a party. These players have no intention of being a long term member but usually to cause some sort of injury to the normal party members. Admin should introduce a requirement that before being entitled to be a voting member of a party for Party Presidency that player must have been a member for at least 21 days. Similar restrictions exist in real life political parties. This will reduce the nuisance interference caused by players hastily changing party affiliations on Party President election day. It is rarely ever in the best interest of the party but usually to cause chaos.

Vote and share this if you agree.

Also Binda asked where Icetek Meme #6 is? Two answers for you Binda:

1. Icetek isn't worth 6 memes.
2. Memes are played out.

infin

 

Comments

Tim_Holtz
Tim_Holtz Day 1,889, 05:44

yes lets take away the interesting parts of the political module

Daenerys Stormborn Targaryen
Daenerys Stormborn Targaryen Day 1,889, 05:47

So you are saying Icetek is worth #5 memes?

venja
venja Day 1,889, 05:55

Infin makes good sense .. usually.

On this occasion he is about spot on, although I reckon 21 days is not enough. Similar should apply for Congress and CP.. I would go as far to say you cannot even vote until having been a citizen for a reasonable period.

I n f o r m e r
I n f o r m e r Day 1,889, 05:55

good idea

Reximus
Reximus Day 1,889, 05:58

In my opinion, 21 days is WAY too long. I think a reasonable time-frame would be 5 days.

vergolian
vergolian Day 1,889, 05:59

Here's the problem you and others always miss when talking about rule introductions:

1. By what means are you suggesting a prospective rule change is enforced?

and in the specific case of the rule suggested..

2. Who determines the human behaviour of surprise as the suggested trigger?

E.G. I join a party that I was a member of before. I have the highest XP and your rule became the new rule. Where is the 'surprise' factor besides the elected PP getting the boot?

Case in point - there's too much room in your suggestion for people to rig the system to suit their own ends if a certain clique doesn't like a player. There is also not enough detail on the enforcement power and how it's exercised for transparency purposes. Even eRep decisions are explained when asking using verifiable data (at least when people specifically ask for it and not just expect it).

vergolian
vergolian Day 1,889, 06:00

P.S. This suggested change also messes up any hope of an emergency ATO action if the rightly classed PTOers are in the party for 21 days or more.

Vyrin the First
Vyrin the First Day 1,889, 06:22

TJ I think Infin's point - which is good - is that there is an easy way to reduce PTO's by requiring a time of party membership before voting. I can't see how it would require extra enforcement - and it would probably ease the burden on the admins. It's not full proof, and you'd have to get serious about leaving parties for ATO's, but I think most players would agree that it would help and something should be done.

El Senso
El Senso Day 1,889, 06:24

nice idea

Binda33
Binda33 Day 1,889, 07:52

Thanks for the ticket Infin. I agree completely and would like to prevent asshats from PTOing just for laughs. Anyone who wants to damage members of their own Country is the lowest of the low. It's not like this game isn't shitty enough already..

ronnyJnrJnr
ronnyJnrJnr Day 1,889, 08:44

binda is just upset that she hasn't got a yes man puppet as president for the party she is in. As far as I know, political parties aren't owned by anyone and when binda loses power its automatically a PTO and the person is there to damage the party.

Vyrin the First
Vyrin the First Day 1,889, 08:58

Well then ronny - write an article on your plans for the APP. If you do plan on doing something with it and it wasn't just for laughs, let everyone know. Haven't seen anything in the public forum for the APP either.

Xavier Griffith
Xavier Griffith Day 1,889, 11:25

Except of course as everyone knows ronnyJnrJnr, Binda wasn't running as PP, Argi was. The fact you didn't join the party until AFTER the 2 click PTOer had won says more about you. The problem is, I thought you where beyond these petty type schemes, guess at some point the older players need to get their rocks off somehow.

Xavier Griffith
Xavier Griffith Day 1,889, 11:25

Btw Infin, good article, voted and I like it.

BOUD1CCA
BOUD1CCA Day 1,889, 12:03

Listening to Mr Crumpets podvast, it is quite in order to PTO a party, for laughs, if you don't happen to like the president.
I would have thought that is up to the members of the party, tot blow in's after "lulz"
It was a crappy & low act - and apparently payt back comes into it.
TJ blames in on "game mechanics" wow! maybe a'holes taking advantage of game mechanics may be more accurate. I dont think ronnyronnyjnr was involved at first - but unless he wants to appear as a stooge, he should either resign, or state how he is going to run the party - because I think the point of this PTO was to damage or even destroy the party

infin
infin Day 1,889, 14:38

If you are interested in the future of a party you should no problem with being a member of it for 3 weeks before elections. None of your arguments make any sense unfortunately TJ.

DocterDry3
DocterDry3 Day 1,889, 14:42

admins encourage PTO's, just look at the erepublik blog where they champion the eSouth African PTO.

Sir_c0nstant
Sir_c0nstant Day 1,889, 15:14

I think 3 days at least should be sufficient to be able to vote in a party pres election, around same timeframe as for nominating CP.. Our problem is the small population we have that makes these events more common and the attitude of players in relation to voting in PP elections. It has happened in the past where cross party voters have come in to vote against the regular members and revelled that they did it. Those same people that laugh and have been involved in the past can't now say oh wait a min it's bad when it happens to them, and even if a consensus is reached now, there is nothing to stop a grp doing it again in say 3 months time.

ronnyJnrJnr
ronnyJnrJnr Day 1,889, 18:35

"... The fact you didn't join the party until AFTER the 2 click PTOer had won ...."
Get your facts straight. I had joined before the guy had won...

ronnyJnrJnr
ronnyJnrJnr Day 1,889, 18:40

As to how I will run the party, it is a matter of democracy. The party WILL NOT be run as a 5 player dictatorship on the forums. I have already engaged several party members IN GAME as to the intentions. Calling me a PTOer for using game mechanics is laughable at best. It is similar to icetek calling scottty a PTOer.

infin
infin Day 1,889, 19:47

party members last the distance. if you join a party for 5 mins you have no credibility unofrtunately.

Tim_Holtz
Tim_Holtz Day 1,889, 20:44

so larni isnt a legit member of the ARP then

if i recall she moved from the ACP to the ARP and within a short time was PP

so she was obviously a PTOer too

infin
infin Day 1,889, 21:25

hey if the shoe fits....

vergolian
vergolian Day 1,889, 22:30

We know you don't support ATO efforts infin so it's not a surprise you don't get it. Nevermind.

supereviloverlord
supereviloverlord Day 1,889, 22:40

"As to how I will run the party, it is a matter of democracy. "
You mean a matter of kissing your ass?

infin
infin Day 1,890, 23:37

ATO PTO... these are terms made up by the people in charge at any given time. What we need is rules for membership of a party like any normal party would have. The current PP systems sees that a person (or 100) can join a party for one say and change the outcomes of the leadership then leave.

In who's universe is that fair or transparent?

BOUD1CCA
BOUD1CCA Day 1,890, 00:28

^^^
Exactly

Tim_Holtz
Tim_Holtz Day 1,890, 00:42

who cares about transparency or being fair?

this is natural selection, if you arent strong enough to keep your party then you lose it.

thats the line the ANP have played since the beginning of time

BOUD1CCA
BOUD1CCA Day 1,890, 00:51

That sounds like something Stalin would have said.
If you are going to quote him, you should put the quote in inverted commas

supereviloverlord
supereviloverlord Day 1,890, 01:02

The ANP weren't all that happy when they got PTOed.

Louise Brooks: Stalin didn't seem to believe in natural selection (he did support Lysenko after all).

Though if winning requires being an asshole pretty soon you'll find only assholes who don't understand that just because you can do something doesn't mean you should playing the game.

infin
infin Day 1,890, 01:19

we weren't happy when we got ptod, but the whole concept of PTO is a symptom of a system which permit people to change their party affiliations WITHOUT PENALTY. In real life, you have a penalty which is permanent refusal from join the opponent's party or perhaps an economic incentive like having to pay membership fees over and over again.

Under current erep rules people can do it with the press of a button without economic incentive. Now erep have put rules into other areas such as employment where you cannot resign for 3 days after you join an employer for example. Similarly an employer cannot change the wage for 3 days. Membership of parties needs a similar rule re eligibility to vote on PP. These are basic fair play concepts....

supereviloverlord
supereviloverlord Day 1,890, 02:27

Nothing to keep a PTOer from just putting their multies in a party long enough before the vote (and we wouldn't even know until one of the apparent two-clicking noobs starts getting lots of votes).

Requiring a minimum membership period to be able to be a candidate for PP or to secede to the position shouldn't affect anti-PTO operations but the ability to move around to different parties is useful to fight a PTO.

I think MU captain voting requires you to have been a member in the MU for a few days (does anyone actually use that part of the game though?).

ronnyJnrJnr
ronnyJnrJnr Day 1,890, 02:53

"As to how I will run the party, it is a matter of democracy. "
You mean a matter of kissing your ass?

No.. I do believe you are confusing me with binda

Binda33
Binda33 Day 1,890, 03:19

APP before our PTO was run democratically on Aus Forums, and anyone who wanted a say was certainly able and encouraged to contribute. I'm not at all sure how APP is run now. Not sure how members get any input at all.

infin
infin Day 1,890, 04:39

they are all PMd directly *wink*

supereviloverlord
supereviloverlord Day 1,890, 04:48

ronnyJnrJnr: have you ever considered that if you really want to change the way the party runs that maybe you should find out if that's how the members want it, say be ACTUALLY WINNING A PP ELECTION?

Vyrin the First
Vyrin the First Day 1,890, 06:24

Funny that what this article was about was an idea to try to reduce the possibility of PTOs.

People who don't like this article: Tim, TJ, Ronny.

Pretty obvious what's going on then, wouldn't you say?

Arthur the Elitist Cole
Arthur the Elitist Cole Day 1,890, 06:29

hmm yes, I wonder if the people being accused of being PTOers wouldn't like an article about PTO's

hmmmmmm
I wonder...

LanyIsLost
LanyIsLost Day 1,890, 06:51

yeah, makes ya wonder
I don't particularly like this article.

Vyrin the First
Vyrin the First Day 1,890, 12:53

In all fairness AC, read the comments again - they weren't accused of anything here before they expressed negative opinions. Infin made no accusations here.

BOUD1CCA
BOUD1CCA Day 1,890, 17:34

yeah, makes me wonder
why I particularly love this article so much \o/

 
Post your comment

What is this?

You are reading an article written by a citizen of eRepublik, an immersive multiplayer strategy game based on real life countries. Create your own character and help your country achieve its glory while establishing yourself as a war hero, renowned publisher or finance guru.