We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: OOC: Explaination of the situation
Details
Submitted by[?]: Alleanza Radicale - NCD
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 4184
Description[?]:
| OOC: Sorry, for error I deleted the first OOC bill. So, what happen? The problem was the creation of an article on the Corriere about the dissolution of PLI. He contacted me I thinks because with me he was creating an economic RP between our companies and to say that he can't continue to develop this RP due the party inactivation because, when I asked him, he said that in the UoL he wasn't satisfied, he didn't like the path, etc.... So, I asked him if I could create a plausible RP for PLI deactivation: first I proposed him a history of bribes and corruption but he said me he didn't like so I proposed him a crisis with the UoL, he accepted, and to make understand him what I would write I proposed him this senteces: "together we would be able to change this nation in a paradise for the free market and the business, a land of opportunity! But without freddom also on civil rights together the U.o.L. we can't go anywhere!" That is essentially the same senteces that Mariani in my article used to close its interview and in general all the article is developed around this sentences. In fact, why I proposed this motivation? I proposed this motivation due what we saw, due what all the players saw during the brief Mariani government: a problem of political position on the side of the civil rights that pushed DI to reppeal its law on abortion and that obbliged the Populars to delete and re-create the Ddl on defence and to change the Ddl on the education (and I think the Ddls were in total 3 or 4). So, what other we saw? Was clear to all the world that the proposal of DI and then of PPI were made clearly without the preventive green light of the Head of Government and in fact I wrote this in the article: Mariani was not able to control the Ministries and their parties and given the fact that most part of the changed Ddl were created by the Populars and given the fact that all here know the position of the PPI on the civil rights, I think that was not to strange to immagine a conflict with the PPI that acted without control. And there is also a game rule about the relations between HoG and other ministries: "21.5 By default, the Head of Government is the ultimate figure of authority in the Cabinet/government. By convention, Heads of Government are expected to consult with and gain the approval of Cabinet colleagues (including those from other parties) for their actions, but they remain ultimately responsible for what the government does. Cabinet Ministers who disagree seriously enough with the Head of Government would usually be expected to resign, although of course their respective parties can manoeuvre to replace the Head of Government by proposing a new Cabinet bill or triggering an early election." But, all this RP was based also on some OOC messages between me and Adhitiya about the fact, for example, that for the last two days he wrote to the PPI and he received no response. And I don't think the problem was by the side of Adhitiya, because with me and with DI and Patto for example he communicated without problems and I received enough confirmations of this. So, what kind of falsehood I have written? If we go to read also the my previous articles, I think that the declaration of Mariani was coherent and plausible to explain the dissolution of his party and his resignation. Now, the problems his not about my articles, now the problems is about the articles of Figlioccio, the articles with which he "counter-attack" and in which he used an RP history that was excluded by the player owner and creator of the character of Roberto Mariani. Now, adhitiya gave to me the authorization to continue to use Mariani as a my character, so, first him and now me, we will ask to the mods to delete the article of Figlioccio (here the official character transfert: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6539&p=112351#p112351 ). I don't care if Adhitiya contacted the UoL or not! PLI deactivated and my article to justify it was plausible! But, things more important, my article which involved the character of Adhitiya was write only after I asked the permission to the owner of the character. Figlioccio instead used an history already excluded by Adhitiya (and when Adhitiya asked him to delete or change his article, Figlioccio blackmailed Adhitiya saing: "say to Axxell to delete his article and I will delete my article". So, first thing: someone here thinks that is unrealistic and not plausible my article? I think not! First of all because I received confirmation that the UoL members agreed on a common program and that Populars didn't respected it and all the players have seen the changement of the Ddl for the articles on civil rights. Now, I would like give an opportunity to figlioccio: Go to modify your article so that it is conform to the history and the RP, or I will ask that the mods will delete it. No bribes and corruption RP and also the retirement of this statement: "The PSLI is not new to these wretched tricks of power. Their political dignity is increasingly low and should be ashamed for their allegations.", because in my article was Roberto Mariani, not Lorenzo Verhoeven or PSLI members to speak. Here I past you the rule about the character control: "24. Character control. Characters are considered to be "owned" by the player who first mentioned or created them. In practice, players may share responsibility for role-playing a character, but ultimate authority rests with the owner. 24.1 Players should not role-play characters without the consent of the owner, and if they find they have role-played the character beyond what the owner intended, they should withdraw or amend the role-play appropriately." And above all my RP respected the require to be reasonable and realistic as request by the following rules: "21.2 In general, role-play requires the consent of all players. However, a reasonable and realistic sphere is recognised within which a player may role-play without the direct consent of other players. Within the bounds of realism and reasonability, this includes: 21.2.1 The ability to role-play events primarily affecting the player's party and characters. 21.2.2 The ability, on a modest scale, to role-play events within the nation." So, I acted with the consent of the owner of Roberto Mariani character, Figlioccio not! I created an article on Roberto Mariani after had having the consent of Adhitiya, Figlioccio created the article only to defend its behavior that I judge since the past July, when he returned in Istalia, very very disagreable, I experimented it when I was into the UoL and recently we see this behavior. I received confirmation from many members of the UoL that Figlioccio ignored the concorded program and presented the Ddls without the consent of the First Minister (and all the changement made also confirm this). In the past legislatures all the players saw all the efforts of Democrazia Istaliana to reparair what did by Figlioccio (but I have to say also by Patto), and in particular I'm talking about the same episode in two different terms: DI that was obliged to present bills to reintroduce worker rights. So, why ruin the visibility of a party because it have to create and vote reparative bills in contrast with the previous bill because the other players not respected the program or not asked to the allies what is good and what not? In the A.P.I., and all the current members can confirm, we never procede to present Ddl that was not agreed and first of all we waiting for the response of all the allies about an issue or a matter. But above all, never someone of the A.P.I. presented Ddl that were not confirmed by all the members. So, I invite Figlioccio to take a more cooperative behavior and to respect the right of the other players to not be obliged to waste their visibility to reparair other measures introduced by Ddls not concorded, and I invite DI especially to try to impose him on the DOMINATIVE behavior of Figlioccio, because DI was obliged to take similar actions of reparations and is simply not fair all this! You have to start to RESPECT the other players and the agreement take with the other. And about the agreement, the geentlement agreement, like an RP on early election in case of deactivation of a party, I say again that I will never support other geentlement agreement until that Figlioccio will not show a fair and respective behevior. So, I invite Patto, that proposed me a similar RP, to talk very well with Figlioccio. Because Figlioccio, this is must clear: you are not the boss of the game or of istalia. If you want be the BOSS, you go to find a nation without other players! Understand? And now, after what said to me Adhitiya on your behavior, I will not accept anymore claims of other players about your behavior. Because role of the Nationmaster is also to avoid similar events. It is clear? Now, change or delete your article, because the rules clearly give me the right and the reason and stop to anoy Adhitiya and stop to say things not true (and about this last point I invite you to talk with DI with which I discovered that you manipulated an exchange of messages between me and DI and that the only one to have communication problems with Adhitiya, like you said to me, was you, because Adithiya, Patto and DI confirmed me that among them they communicated perfectly). Now, as said, the question will be solved by the mods, because given the fact that I'm involved in this problems it would be not fire use my position of Nationmaster. And I apologize with other players for the trouble, but I disown any responsibility and I waiting for the deletion or changement of the article of Figlioccio. Thank you. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:15:55, March 18, 2017 CET | From | Popolari per l'Istalia - U.o.L. | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | I would like to point out a few things: 1 - Article created by Axxell presents the PPI as a party that imposes its will on others. This is not true. The coalition program was agreed and the laws which I delivered have been waiting for confirmation from other parties before being put to the vote. The Law on Defence has changed since the opinions of the PLI and DI. I have not imposed anything to anyone: I made a proposal and then we discussed whether to remove items that were not valid for the Allies. This seems to me it's called democracy. 2 - The PLI has not sent me any messages to announce his departure. He did not show me any doubts about the coalition. He did not criticize the way I present laws. 3 - The user of the PLI has not agreed with me story to justify his sudden abandonment. Since the PPI, as proposed by Axxell, is portrayed in a negative way, it should have been consulted before publishing the article. For this reason I asked that the article be canceled. 4 - I do not understand why Axxell continues to criticize me. We are all players, everyone does his best to play this game. I think that everyone is free to manage their own party as they wish. I do not see why a user should have a say on how the other plays, as it does not transgress any rules. Finally: I can edit my article provided that you also Axxell change his article and write a shared history without accusing one another. |
| Date | 16:31:12, March 18, 2017 CET | From | Partito Moderato Centrodestra | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Point number 2 is also something i have problems with. PLI never gave any signal to U.o.L members that it wanted to stop and thus we could not think of a good RP story. We are now in this situation because of misunderstanding and poor communication. |
| Date | 08:35:14, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | you can angry for the lack of information about the inactivation of PLI, ok, I give you. But doesn't exist a rule which oblige to Informe about inactivation. Then, point 1, again falsehood! I had confirmation: you didn't wait for the consent of others: there was a program but you acting indipendently! Stop to lie because I had confirmation of this from many players, so you acted indipendently ignoring the role of the Premier: if DI or PLI had give you their consent you never should have modify or recreate the ddls, stop to say that you received the ok from the other members of coalition because is not true! And the fact that you created these bill as ddl was a way to force the other to vote in favor, like had to do many times DI for example (I remember you the episodes of the bill of DI on working rights to repair past ddl). Also this is a way to force other because they shall continue to support the government and are obliged do vote in favor for the coalition responsability. This is a way to force the others. The PLI user could agree with the history of who he wanted, he liked my history and he accepted. STOP! He had to decide, not you! Fresh confirmation of mods: it is perfectly regular criticise other parties. So, you can respond to criticism and defend you, but you cannot invent particular history on a character of other player. You could simply reject the allegation made by mariani, but not say something on mariani. So, you have two option I think: modify the part on Mariani about bribes, corruption, etc... in you article and limit you to reject the words of Mariani, or waiting for 4 days for an inactivation because you not apply the request of mods about the changement of your article. The choice now is your. |
| Date | 11:36:33, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Nuova Socialdemocrazia | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Ma infatti il gioco mica vieta le critiche verso altri partiti! Se quella storia gli piaceva ed ha dato l'ok axxell non ha violato alcuna regola. Scrivere qualcosa su un personaggio di un altro giocatore senza avere il permesso invece è vietato dalle regole del gioco. sei arrabbiato con il PLI? Eh... Pazienza! Quante volte ha fatto innervosire me figlioccio! Ma perchè? Solo axxell ha visto quel che fa e non fa figlioccio? Figlioccio può pure scrivere valanghe di critiche contro il PSLI, Contro il PLI, contro NS, ecc... E nessuno può dire o ha mai detto nulla fin ora. Ma le regole del gioco sono chiare sui personaggi, se quel personaggio ha voluto lanciare quella critica sono affari suoi e non del PPI. But in fact the game doesn't prohibits criticism of other parties! If to PLI liked that history and gave his ok, Axxell didn't hurt any game rules. To write something on a character without asking permission indeed is forbidden. Figlioccio is angy with PLI? No harm done! I don't know how many times figlioccio made me angry! Why? Is not only Axxell which saw what Figlioccio did or not! Figlioccio can write all the criticism he want against PSLI, PLI, NS, etc... And nobody can say anything about and until now nobody never said anything. But the rules of the game are clear on the character: if that character wanted say that criticism against PPI it was his right and PPI cannot demand nothing. |
| Date | 13:09:52, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Popolari per l'Istalia - U.o.L. | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Look at the conversation beetween me and the user of the PLI: http://it.tinypic.com/r/2dt95bp/9 He clearly states: "I did not give any points i just gave him the right to Roleplay using my character,If you want I would happily ask him to delete that article if your character retracts the accusations" Still have doubts? |
| Date | 13:58:32, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | First of all, I hope figlioccio asked the permission to Adhitiya to show a private message, because this is against the rule: 1.5.2. Private messages may not be shared publicly unless permission was given by the sender, although where appropriate players may privately approach a Moderator to bring the contents of a private message to our attention. Second, as said, I asked to Adhitiya to develop an RP around this sentences: "together we would be able to change this nation in a paradise for the free market and the business, a land of opportunity! But without freddom also on civil rights together the U.o.L. we can't go anywhere!" And as I already explained in the article I mentioned the conflict on the side of civil rights and I talked about the various Ddl presented without the green light of the Premier and given the fact that was in most part Ddls presented by the PPI, I talked about the PPI as the most problematics in the relationships with PLI. Stop! For the rest, I add the criticism on the PPI, perfectly legal and against to any rules, using what we saw, the PPI that acted indipendently, and so make tell to Mariani of conflict especially with the PPI. I was authorized to use the character of Mariani and I make tell to Mariani what I want and adhitiya gave me the ok. As always said and I always sepcified this, I proposed to Adhitiya this story which he accepted, so, Adhitiya in effect doesn't give me guidelines as his initiative, I proposed to him this and he accepted (after that he refused my first proposal, an history about bribes and corruption), he had found realistic my second proposal and I developed it talking, as sais, of conflict for civil rights and a certain insubordination which can be plausible given the evolution of the bills presented during the Mariani governement. Do you want write criticism against my party or against the PLI? It is your right and you are free to write what you want. Do you want pretend that I have to treat you in special way or I can write criticism about you? You can't because as said the mods it is allowed to write criticism against other party. Here the history is simple: you and me submitted to Adhitiya an history to justify the inactivation of his party and he prefered my version. Stop, it is not difficult to understand. I didn't wrote about Mrs Ceglini or Mrs Marini, I makw tell to a character what felt and thought about his experience. Stop. You are free to respond what you want, but not invent bribes history about Mariani. |
| Date | 14:18:30, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Popolari per l'Istalia - U.o.L. | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Ok I can not show the conversation, Axxell have the reason. I just wanted to point out that the reconstruction of Axxell is of Axxell, not of the user of the PLI. So I ask again to Axxell to change this reconstruction, inputting motivations less offensive for the PPI. thank you. |
| Date | 15:29:57, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | No Figlioccio, because of I have to accept to change a mine reconstruction, I have to ask you to change or to make delete most part of your articles and if your reconstruction. One time I asked you something of similar on an article you published, but I was wrong and in fact I let it go and I asked you to change other articles anymore. All the articles contain a personal reconstruction, and given the fact that 1. I had the green light on this reconstruction from the owner of the character and that 2. I based the history on what we see, facts which then was confirmed to me by other players ( the disallow of the accorded program). So I say again that I make nothing of prohibits and with the support of the owner to my history (and I already asked to adhitiya if I can show him the specific exchange of messages to show this and that I was authorized to make say to Roberto Mariani what I wrote. |
| Date | 15:55:33, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Here the authorization of Adhitiya to show our private messages: http://imgur.com/PoCmPAk And here the message were I asked to adhitiya if he agreed on the history of a crisis with the UoL. And he reaffirmed in many other messages that he agree with my article and so also on the part on PPI, which is perfectly plausible, as said, given the fact of his acting dissallow thr program, something that all of us we have seen. So it is perfectly clear. Maybe if you didn't act in that way and all the ddls were in line with the concorded program and you were not forced to change or recreate it, I will have proposed other things. Or you want also I ask to other players to show the messages were they said me that you acted indipendently to have more confirmation? THe green light of Adhitiya: http://imgur.com/LMDAfBf And please leave Adhitiya alone! Why he have to justify publically his inactivation? How many parties became inactive in the last months in Istalia and how many in general in all the game? We have to oblige all the players that pass through istalia to justify creations and inactivations of their parties? He decided that here didn't like,so he has deactivated his party and when I ask him the authoization for a deactivation, he liked my second proposal, stop! But I didn't ask to adhitiya this because I wanted attack or criticise the Populars, I only ask him to give a resonable justification because I have also charged to graant the coherence and the evolution of the RP of istalia. This was my aim, and given the fact that first of all I proposed to him a bribes history, I showed to you and to all the others players that here there is no conspiracy to justify all this brothel built by Figlioccio. |
| Date | 15:57:07, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | because if I have to accept to change a mine reconstruction, I have to ask you to change or to delete most part of your articles and of your reconstructions (sorry for the first version, it was not clear, I hope this is better). |
| Date | 16:05:14, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | when I ask him the authoization for a justification of the inactivation, he liked my second proposal, stop! (Sorry again, I know, I'm a disaster with english) |
| Date | 16:23:58, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Popolari per l'Istalia - U.o.L. | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | He said "ok" to you. At the same time, however, he responded to me: "I did not give any points [to Axxell] i just gave him the right to Roleplay using my character,If you want I would happily ask him to delete that article if your character retracts the accusations" I might add here the full conversation between us. So the problem, as I wrote in my article, is the lack of clarity of Adhitiya. Now I would say that we could finish it here. Go on. Delete both articles and STOP. Are you willing to cancel your? It does not seem so bad. |
| Date | 18:25:28, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | I already explained why I have no obbligation to change the article and the mods already confimed this and asked you to change your article. But we want concentrate us on this message and talk arout it? Ok, say to us: your character retracted the accusations? To me seems no, so you never rectracted until now and Adhitiya confirmed also with more force my article, and you know... I can also oppose myself on the request. Because I didn't go against any rules and because the explaination of the PLI, not of Adhitiya, is already published with my article. If he gave me the ok to talk about a crisis, I talk about a crisis with the inevitable criticism and given the fact, and is the last time I say it, PPI presented ddls clearly not previously concorded, the former prime minister can have all the right to criticize especially the PPI. And again, if I have to accept this "agreement" you will create a precedent and I can also demand to you that when you have to write something about my party you shall ask me before. I don't think you could like this. But, I want make an efforts to put an end to this history and to give you the possibility to remain active showing to the mods you accomplish to their request. But I will not delete and I will not change the article, I will only reduce the part on PPI. This is a good offer given the fact that you are in critic zone and under request of mods. But no more! It is the only concession! Now do you want call this a question of principle? Ok, call as you want. But it is inconceivable that me that I have violated any rule, I must accept what it could seems a blackmail by part of a player already acknowledged being wrong. |
| Date | 18:27:49, March 19, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | And another thing, you are taking all this very OOCly, because you continue to ask an explaination in OOC and not in IC! An explaination to adhitiya on why he left his party. But do not exist obligation or rules regarding the OOC, not in the way you are intending all this history. |
| Date | 15:13:42, March 20, 2017 CET | From |  Moderation | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Hello, Sharing of private messages is not allowed without the consent of the sender. Any repeat of such behaviour will attract penalties. I'm happy to see that the photo seems to have been taken down. This dispute is clearly no longer about the articles and has become OOC in nature. The articles in question are regarded as statements of opinion on a political party rather than news reports. Figliccio however, you have to amend the parts about the character Roberto Mariani to either remove the characterisation or rewrite it in a manner that shows that these are allegations not facts. The standard for characters is higher than for parties, that means if you disparage a character, you have to make certain that such disparaging take the form of allegations rather than a statement of fact. So instead of "Mariani took part in corrupt activities", it could be, "we believe that Mariani took part in corrupt activities." As for this discussion, everyone involved, please calm down Regards, Reddy (Moderation) |
| Date | 13:28:15, March 21, 2017 CET | From | Popolari per l'Istalia - U.o.L. | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | ok, I can edit the article as required by the moderator. |
| Date | 16:13:24, March 21, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | All this history to delete 2 words! You could have said the same things without talk of allegations or judiciary procedures! Thank you. Now, as I said, me too I go to modify my article. |
| Date | 16:35:01, March 21, 2017 CET | From | Alleanza Radicale - NCD | To | Debating the OOC: Explaination of the situation |
| Message | Article modified right now. More neutral, definitely more neutral, okay Figlioccio? Are you happy now? No direct reference to Populars (a part as part of the U.o.L.). |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 402 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 233 |
| Random fact: Role-play is most enjoyable and successful when there is good communication and friendly relations between all players involved. |
| Random quote: "Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves." - Confucius |