Northern Virginia Conclave September 2003: IC vs OOC
Status message
Displaying output for plurality votingOpen Votes
This is my first proposal, so we'll see how it goes. Not that I really expect to get seconded.
This proposal represents an alternative to "undoing" all the players' "hard work" at the recent East Coast Conclave. It is intended to clearly and explicitly embody the sentiment expressed by numerous CM's that the results
of the Conclave are limited to the IC arena and that Chronicles and their NPC's are free to deviate from it without OOC consequences.
PROPOSAL
Be it proposed that the five results of the vote at the East Coast Conclave in September, 2003, be limited to in-character directives only. Nothing passed by that Conclave shall be enforceable out-of-character by the OWbN Disciplinary Actions nor shall it be treated as a genre
proposition. Individual chronicles are free to have their NPC's not conform with the dictates of said Conclave decision, nor are the individual chronicles required to force or even encourage their players compliance with said Conclave decision.
____
Dan Brackmann, Council Member
Caught in Eternal Twilight
Edwardsville, IL
AIM Sawazar
modan@tenya.net
Nike air jordan Sneakersnike lunar janoski black and gold swoosh blue
| Chronicle/Position | Voted for | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| Carbondale, IL, USA: Forgotten Court | For | Sorry, but I have to be on board with this one. Unfortunately, having some of the games representatives (st, player, or otherwise) determine the OOC OWbN-wide affect of genre and decisons usually discussed in great length by Council and then voted on for a week, seems vastly inappropriate. While I understand the ideas behind them and respect the opinions of everyone involved, I cannot support OOC/Genre repercussions for IC decisions proposed by SOME of the players and STs in OWbN and merely briefly discussed before a hasty vote by a Council that is the Charter's representative body. |
| Saint Paul, MN - USA, Obsidian Towers | Against | |
| Berkeley, CA - USA, Wasting the Dawn | Abstain | |
| Stockton, CA - USA, Stockton by Night | Against | This matter is a dead issue. We need to look at future events and move on. |
| Philadelphia, PA - USA, Nusquam | Against | |
| Fredericksburg, VA - USA, Caine's Chosen: Liberty in Death | For | |
| Indianapolis, IN - USA, Stars Never Rise | Against | |
| Winona, MN - USA, Winona Dark Haven | Abstain | |
| Norwalk, CT - USA, Rails of Revolution | Against | |
| San Francisco, CA - USA, Always Comes Evening | Against | |
| Atlanta, GA - USA, Whispers of Atlanta | Against | Move on. Setites shouldn't be wanting to get in the Cam so badly anyways. That's the real problem we should be addressing. |
| Cleveland, OH - USA, Carpe Noctum | For | It is absolutely inappropriate to have Conclave decisions be of equal weight as those made by council. That said this places those decisions where they always should have been in the IC context. A genre proposal and council rulings are things that chronicles must enforce or they can be punished for not doing so. Players should have a voice, and *major* shifts in genre from a conclave should be either ratified or rescinded by council. Hopefully in the future we can have this be streamlined and not be at the whim of *any* objector, since we are virtually guaranteed one. |
| Columbus, OH - USA, Columbus in Darkness | Against | As I have stated before this is nothing more then an end run around a vote that Caught in Eternal Twighlight lost twice. Pick up the shattered pieces of your life and move on. |
| Washington, DC - USA, Shadows on the Mall | Against | |
| Phoenix, AZ - USA, Secundus Surrectum | Against | |
| Kenosha, WI - USA, Memento Mori | For | |
| Gimli, MB - Canada, Sang Nordique | Abstain | |
| Northern Virginia, VA - USA, Night Falls | For | We actually feel it would be unfair to punish players/chronicles for IC actions that might go against the Conclave decisions...if Game X ends up with a Setite Prince or some such thing, that is an issue to be handled IC, perhaps with NPC guidence or perhaps without...it is not something players and games should be punished for ooc-ly via any method... |
| Edwardsville, IL - USA, Caught in Eternal Twilight | For | We feel obligated to vote yes on this since it was proposed by me. However, I thought I withdrew this prop in favor of a more general one speaking to the general issue of IC decisions carrying OOC weight. More specifically, the issues of this Conclave have now been dealt with properly by Council and thus, the narrow focus of this proposal is moot. Therefore, there should be no vote here at all. The second proposal I offered would be a FAR better statement of what our long term policy and process should be. I restate it here, slightly edited for clarity, for posterity: PROPOSAL: Be it enacted that no decision, decree, resolution, or order arrived at by a primarily in-character method, means, or enactment shall be enforceable, against players, storytellers, or chronicles as a whole, by any out-of-character means available to the OWBN organization without said decision, decree, resolution, or order passing through OWBN Council for approval first. DEFINITIONS: ''OWBN organization'' means through the powers granted in the Charter and by-laws to organizational level officers and their sub-officers, organizational level disciplinary actions, or any other means stemming from a grant of power on a scale greater than the individual chronicle. ''Primarily in-character'' means any method where the decision, decree, resolution, or order finally arrived at was influenced or achieved by in-character play, means, or any other manner which imparted more than 50% of the control over the outcome to in-character entities. The fact that the meeting, forum, or in-character interaction had Council sanction to occur, does not make the results of that interaction not primarily in-character for the purposes of this proposal.
COMMENTARY: This commentary is to aid interpretation of the proposal but is not, itself, enforceable. This proposition intends to make anything to be enforced OOCly pass before Council before such enforcement can occur. It is not intended to limit players ability to meet or make decision in anyway. Nor is it intended to empower or dis-empower genre coordinators beyond the powers they already hold under the charter and by-laws. It is not intended in any way to limit an individual chronicle's ability to enforce anything within that chronicle by any means that chronicle feels are required. It has no effect on IC enforcement or any provisions covering the same within the charter or by-laws. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | For | A select group of players in this organization decided the genre that the entire organization HAS TO FOLLOW. That is not right. So, yeah. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | For | A select group of players in this organization decided the genre that the entire organization HAS TO FOLLOW. That is not right. So, yeah. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | For | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | For | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | We have a shared universe. Let's try to keep it consistant. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | We have a shared universe. Let's try to keep it consistant. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | Our chronicle knew exactly what it was voting for when we voted ''yes'' for a conclave. I empathise with this prop and fully understand why it was put forward but we, EotR, went into this thing with eyes wide open. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | Our chronicle knew exactly what it was voting for when we voted ''yes'' for a conclave. I empathise with this prop and fully understand why it was put forward but we, EotR, went into this thing with eyes wide open. |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Against | |
| LONE | Abstain | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Abstain | |
| Chronicle/Position Unknown | Abstain |