Regarding NS Parliament and P2TM "3 Thread Rule"

[Kyrusia]

This announcement regards two topics: the "three thread rule" for P2TM and the NS Parliament. We will be addressing these topics respectively.

Regarding the "three thread rule" of Portal to the Multiverse, upon review, Moderation has determined that such a judgment was both unclear and needlessly restrictive, relying upon an older ruling regarding a specific circumstance. As such, for the sake of clarity, the following will be our policy regarding thread quantities in Portal to the Multiverse:

Multiple In-Character threads are acceptable, insofar as they are substantial and otherwise do not consist of spam, and otherwise do not become burdensome to other players, crowding-out the front page of the Portal to the Multiverse board unduly. To quote the P2TM welcome thread: "It's possible to have multiple IC threads however you don't want them to get too invasive."

Archive threads, lore threads, and similar are permissible, insofar as they adhere to the previous ruling regarding being of substance, not merely duplicated information from an Out-of-Character Thread.

In other words: cases will be judged individually, upon their content, context, and history. In the event they are ruled unacceptable, they may be locked or merged into another thread within the roleplay, based upon determination by the acting Moderator.

Hopefully this (re-)clarifies the matter; you have our apologies for any confusion this may have caused.

The following addresses not merely the NS Parliament, but the NS(G) Senate and any successor(s) arising from it or its contemporary rendition. For the purposes of this ruling, Moderation will be treating them all as a part of the same "thread franchise." As such, our ruling is as follows:

1. NS Parliament RP [OOC/Open], Parliament Chamber [IC], NS Parliament Life Outside [IC], and NS Parliament Character Database [IC/OOC] will be moved back to P2TM.
   
   
2. NS Parliament Office [IC/OOC], upon review, has been determined to qualify as a chill/chat location thread, and is thus prohibited. It will be locked. Organization and drafting of NS Parliament legislation may be readily conducted in the above, remaining threads, with onus upon the OP for organization of such; C/CLT-like behavior may not.
   
   
3. All "party list," "party roster," etc. threads currently in Forum 7 will be locked. They are, further, prohibited from being re-created in P2TM. The above remaining threads and/or dispatches may be used for such information, with onus upon the OP for organization of such.
   
   
4. Cross-posting between P2TM and F7 - such as posting some IC/OOC in P2TM and some in F7 - is prohibited.
   
   
5. The NS(G) Senate, NS Parliament, and/or any successor(s) are prohibited from F7 indefinitely.
   
   
6. NS Parliament (and/or any successor[s]) must conduct itself as a P2TM roleplay, to include all of the expectations of such. This thread franchise belongs on no other board. Failure to do so, therefore, particularly if the thread OP permits it to devolve into C/CLT-like behavior, will result in it being ruled as one and the NS(G) Senate, NS Parliament, and any successor(s) being prohibited on the forums indefinitely.
   
   Considering the consensus of the NS Moderation Team on this ruling, it is not subject to appeal. Moderation considers this matter closed.

We thank you for your patience.


— NS Moderation

[MERIZoC]

Can I ask why the old method of having everything in F7, which we did for like 5 years, is now suddenly no longer acceptable? Its a far preferable solution to this.

[Kyrusia]

Can I ask why the old method of having everything in F7, which we did for like 5 years, is now suddenly no longer acceptable? Its a far preferable solution to this.

Moderation decided if the NS Parliament et alia wished to be treated as a roleplay, it must be in a board dedicated to roleplaying. P2TM is the one board dedicated to roleplaying not involving your NS country; thus, NS Parliament belongs there.

The alternative was to rule the entire franchise a C/CLT, thus making them appropriate in F7; unfortunately, all C/CLTs are prohibited in F7, spare the single Mod-sanctioned one, and thus the NS Parliament would have been prohibited indefinitely were it to remain in F7.

Moderation consensus went to the former, not the latter. In short: NS Parliament, NS(G) Senate, and any successor(s) are no longer to be afforded any manner of special treatment, to include immediate archival request approval. If it's a roleplay, it will behave as one and is expected to conduct itself as one, just like everyone else's.

[MERIZoC]

Can I ask why the old method of having everything in F7, which we did for like 5 years, is now suddenly no longer acceptable? Its a far preferable solution to this.

Moderation decided if the NS Parliament et alia wished to be treated as a roleplay, it must be in a board dedicated to roleplaying. P2TM is the one board dedicated to roleplaying not involving your NS country; thus, NS Parliament belongs there.

The alternative was to rule the entire franchise a C/CLT, thus making them appropriate in F7; unfortunately, all C/CLTs are prohibited in F7, spare the single Mod-sanctioned one, and thus the NS Parliament would have been prohibited indefinitely were it to remain in F7.

Moderation consensus went to the former, not the latter.

Why wasn't this the case in the 5/6 years prior though?

[Roosevetania]

May I ask why a thread for drafting bills is considered "chat"? And if we could choose a different 4 threads to be in P2TM?

[Kyrusia]

May I ask why a thread for drafting bills is considered "chat"? And if we could choose a different 4 threads to be in P2TM?

It consists of a singular location of combined IC/OOC without clear definition, to include meager "roleplayed dialogue" for the apparent purpose of merely sitting and chatting at a specific location; this marks it as a C/CLT. The "Life Outside" thread was briefly put under similar scrutiny, but was ultimately decided such was sufficiently above this bar and was to be permitted to continue.

No, you may not. Your four threads have been selected for you. You may request them be locked in the appropriate megathread if you wish to remake your roleplay.

Why wasn't this the case in the 5/6 years prior though?

Moderation considered the history of the NS(G) Senate in sum. It was found that each re-occurrence or re-creation of this thread franchise involved needless, burdensome argumentation, ultimately resulting in a situation that was untenable and unfair to the thread game participants in F7 and the roleplayers in P2TM, granting the thread franchise what amounts to a special set of criteria to which only it was bound.

Moderation has decided that, in and of itself, is no longer tenable. Thus, a new ruling and policy regarding it was drafted, discussed, and consensus reached.

[United Provinces of Atlantica]

As an Admin of the NS Parliament, I fully applaud the decision to allow us to become a P2TM Roleplay. Thank you.

[Kyrusia]

As an Admin of the NS Parliament, I fully applaud the decision to allow us to become a P2TM Roleplay. Thank you.

We wish the NS Parliament OP and Co-OPs the best in the conduction of this roleplay and its future as one.

[Roosevetania]

May I ask why a thread for drafting bills is considered "chat"? And if we could choose a different 4 threads to be in P2TM?

It consists of a singular location of combined IC/OOC without clear definition, to include meager "roleplayed dialogue" for the apparent purpose of merely sitting and chatting at a specific location; this marks it as a C/CLT. The "Life Outside" thread was briefly put under similar scrutiny, but was ultimately decided such was sufficiently above this bar and was to be permitted to continue.

No, you may not. Your four threads have been selected for you. You may request them be locked in the appropriate megathread if you wish to remake your roleplay.

The Office is much more meaningful and crucial to the RP than the Database. We need it to draft bills.

[Kyrusia]

It consists of a singular location of combined IC/OOC without clear definition, to include meager "roleplayed dialogue" for the apparent purpose of merely sitting and chatting at a specific location; this marks it as a C/CLT. The "Life Outside" thread was briefly put under similar scrutiny, but was ultimately decided such was sufficiently above this bar and was to be permitted to continue.

No, you may not. Your four threads have been selected for you. You may request them be locked in the appropriate megathread if you wish to remake your roleplay.

The Office is much more meaningful and crucial to the RP than the Database. We need it to draft bills.

NS Parliament Office [IC/OOC], upon review, has been determined to qualify as a chill/chat location thread, and is thus prohibited. It will be locked. Organization and drafting of NS Parliament legislation may be readily conducted in the above, remaining threads, with onus upon the OP for organization of such; C/CLT-like behavior may not.

How you choose to go about this in the future and how you organize it is not our concern, insofar as it adheres to the rules and the expectations of the board, same as every other thread. We might recommend OOC initial drafting and exact wording in your OOC thread, and IC debate in your IC thread and finalized IC text in the same. This is for you to determine a way best for your roleplay and to ensure it adheres to the aforementioned rules and expectations.

Beyond this, the thread will remain locked, as per the above ruling.

[The Miaphysite Church of Coptic Archism]

I want to second Atlantica's comments, this was a reasonable call and I think it's also for the best for the roleplay. Legislation can be drafted in OOC and stored in the Chamber OP, and party thread stuff can go into factbooks, or perhaps in the database?

Anyway, thank you mods.

[Kyrusia]

I want to second Atlantica's comments, this was a reasonable call and I think it's also for the best for the roleplay. Legislation can be drafted in OOC and stored in the Chamber OP, and party thread stuff can go into factbooks, or perhaps in the database?

Anyway, thank you mods.

The database (an "archive thread" under our policies) would be considered acceptable as well for party organization and profiles, with posts edited as needed for new members or adjustments in IC party policy/doctrine/etc.

[Thermodolia]

I want to second Atlantica's comments, this was a reasonable call and I think it's also for the best for the roleplay. Legislation can be drafted in OOC and stored in the Chamber OP, and party thread stuff can go into factbooks, or perhaps in the database?

Anyway, thank you mods.

The database (an "archive thread" under our policies) would be considered acceptable as well for party organization and profiles, with posts edited as needed for new members or adjustments in IC party policy/doctrine/etc.

Problem solved then. Thank you mods

[Roosevetania]

I want to second Atlantica's comments, this was a reasonable call and I think it's also for the best for the roleplay. Legislation can be drafted in OOC and stored in the Chamber OP, and party thread stuff can go into factbooks, or perhaps in the database?

Anyway, thank you mods.

I'd like to clarify that while I don't find which thread was locked to be ideal, this was overall a helpful decision and I don't want to come off as more combative than I meant to. Thank y'all for allowing 4 threads.

[The Archipelago Territory]

Your decision was overturned for Washington, why did you do it again here?

[Martune]

Another co-admin, but thank you for this decision. I appreciate the time spent on this decision and the allowance of NSP as a P2TM RP.

[Kyrusia]

Your decision was overturned for Washington, why did you do it again here?

The "Washington" roleplay is unrelated to this ruling, spare to the clarification regarding thread limitations. Regarding said limitations, the Washington threads were originally locked; they were then voluntarily unlocked pending the outcome of the discussion regarding thread limitations. Based upon last review, all of the Washington threads meet our requirements as outlined above, and thus no action is required regarding them.

Edit: They've been updated regarding that, since I forgot to earlier.

Edit 2: You also seem to be mistaken about this thread in general. This ruling is cumulative, and derived from the consensus of the entire Moderation team, and arises from this announcement. It is not the consequence of any one Moderator acting alone; I just happened to be the member of the NS Moderation team that posted it. As signed in the OP, it is derived from the team.

[Rebels and Saints]

Thanks!

This seems like an acceptable, helpful ruling, and I'm glad it got reviewed. I stopped participating in the roleplay after the administrators of the roleplay and myself got into a dispute, but I'm still happy about the ruling.

[Lamaredia]

Since I don't want this thread to make it seem like we're breaking the rules, please lock this thread as well.

[Kyrusia]

Since I don't want this thread to make it seem like we're breaking the rules, please lock this thread as well.

I had a feeling at least one got missed. Locked and archived. Thanks for letting us know.

[Thermodolia]

Since I don't want this thread to make it seem like we're breaking the rules, please lock this thread as well.

I had a feeling at least one got missed. Locked and archived. Thanks for letting us know.

This one was forgotten as well

[Kyrusia]

I had a feeling at least one got missed. Locked and archived. Thanks for letting us know.

This one was forgotten as well

Got 'em. Thanks again.

[Zurkerx]

I'm a bit late to the party, but as one of the co-admins too, I applaud this decision. Thank you!

[Old Hope]

Hm. This might be slightly less related to this, but it is as one of the threads was closed as a chat thread. What does qualify as a chat thread and what not? I couldn't find advice anywhere, and it would make it clearer why the one thread(that was apparently an important part of the roleplay) got locked and how people could avoid making those in the future(including e.g. me).

[Farnhamia]

Hm. This might be slightly less related to this, but it is as one of the threads was closed as a chat thread. What does qualify as a chat thread and what not? I couldn't find advice anywhere, and it would make it clearer why the one thread(that was apparently an important part of the roleplay) got locked and how people could avoid making those in the future(including e.g. me).

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=389112