sametdze wrote:

i will try to fix those questions

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

2. denizenship needs an actual definition. i cant think of one rn, but im sure you guys could because you're an actual team and im just one guy. what you could also do is make multiple definitions and have a vote on which is the definitive definition, which would fix the problem of nobody agreeing on what denizenship is

3. i do not understand this. do you mean that there's not the same amount of denizens in each gen? do you mean that people from older times being mixed in with people from current times?

4. see the second sentence of number one

5. dont understand, do you mean people jumping from generation to generation (like samx500 jumping from gen 7 to gen 6), if thats the case, dont allow that to happen unless a person truly deserves to jump to an older generation

6. people have sort of put this idea of denizen being very important, so maybe clear that up? also the whole system's inconsistency can also contribute to the problem. also, the people who choose denizens should really think twice before adding a denizen, because simply adding a person without any actual thought will contribute to the inconsistency issue (cough cough blushing issue cough cough)

good luck fixing the system i guess

Kobold84 wrote:

When in doubt, return to tradition.

the tradition being "no tradition, just award it to whoever", not everything has to be objective.

Jangsoodlor wrote:

denizen bad should be replace with degenzen degenerate + citizen

burgernfat wrote:

most of these problems can be solved by leaving all that's in the past in the past and start focusing on the future.
as for the denizen selection process, i suggest something like a direct democracy. when somebody has been around for a certain time (like 8 months or something) a vote is started where everybody can vote whether they would like to see them as a denizen or not. resolution of other denizen-related problems should only use this method as a last resort.

imo denizenship shouldn't be a perk (in most cases). from what i have seen, it is a way to remember the people that made the history of the forum (and the actual events that happened are the chronicles) and it should be repurposed to play that role.

MusicRitman wrote:

ain't reading allat. Happy for you tho, or sorry for what happened

Patatitta wrote:

sametdze wrote:

i will try to fix those questions

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

2. denizenship needs an actual definition. i cant think of one rn, but im sure you guys could because you're an actual team and im just one guy. what you could also do is make multiple definitions and have a vote on which is the definitive definition, which would fix the problem of nobody agreeing on what denizenship is

3. i do not understand this. do you mean that there's not the same amount of denizens in each gen? do you mean that people from older times being mixed in with people from current times?

4. see the second sentence of number one

5. dont understand, do you mean people jumping from generation to generation (like samx500 jumping from gen 7 to gen 6), if thats the case, dont allow that to happen unless a person truly deserves to jump to an older generation

6. people have sort of put this idea of denizen being very important, so maybe clear that up? also the whole system's inconsistency can also contribute to the problem. also, the people who choose denizens should really think twice before adding a denizen, because simply adding a person without any actual thought will contribute to the inconsistency issue (cough cough blushing issue cough cough)

good luck fixing the system i guess

1- So if a lot of people joined OT at the same time, we would have to choose to delay the denizen annoucement of some people because there is a denizen cap per month?, that doesn't seem like a good idea, less when you consider ot may grow in the futuer

2- I mean yeah that's what we're discussing but we cant find a solution

3- read the full thread for more info, but TLDR is that the requirements for denizen have changed over the ages and older denizens have not been adapted to it, so a gen 3 denizen may not acutally qualify in gen 10, which leads to a lot of problems

4- fair

5- no, I mean the switch from gen 9 to gen 10 and stuff like that

6- I mean, even if I try hard to make denizen less prestigious, due to all of the oldfags who will return over time and abraker restless campaign to make denizen a really cool thing, it wouldn't be much of a help tbh

Patatitta wrote:

burgernfat wrote:

most of these problems can be solved by leaving all that's in the past in the past and start focusing on the future.
as for the denizen selection process, i suggest something like a direct democracy. when somebody has been around for a certain time (like 8 months or something) a vote is started where everybody can vote whether they would like to see them as a denizen or not. resolution of other denizen-related problems should only use this method as a last resort.

imo denizenship shouldn't be a perk (in most cases). from what i have seen, it is a way to remember the people that made the history of the forum (and the actual events that happened are the chronicles) and it should be repurposed to play that role.

idk if polling is that great of an idea because it would lead to gatekeeping and favoritism

sametdze wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

sametdze wrote:

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

1- So if a lot of people joined OT at the same time, we would have to choose to delay the denizen annoucement of some people because there is a denizen cap per month?, that doesn't seem like a good idea, less when you consider ot may grow in the futuer

1. ok then, maybe just change how often denizenshit is rewarded, a week would be far too short and a month would be far too long. maybe new denizen every 15 days?

Scyla wrote:

Remove it from existence

sametdze wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

sametdze wrote:

i will try to fix those questions

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

2. denizenship needs an actual definition. i cant think of one rn, but im sure you guys could because you're an actual team and im just one guy. what you could also do is make multiple definitions and have a vote on which is the definitive definition, which would fix the problem of nobody agreeing on what denizenship is

3. i do not understand this. do you mean that there's not the same amount of denizens in each gen? do you mean that people from older times being mixed in with people from current times?

4. see the second sentence of number one

5. dont understand, do you mean people jumping from generation to generation (like samx500 jumping from gen 7 to gen 6), if thats the case, dont allow that to happen unless a person truly deserves to jump to an older generation

6. people have sort of put this idea of denizen being very important, so maybe clear that up? also the whole system's inconsistency can also contribute to the problem. also, the people who choose denizens should really think twice before adding a denizen, because simply adding a person without any actual thought will contribute to the inconsistency issue (cough cough blushing issue cough cough)

good luck fixing the system i guess

1- So if a lot of people joined OT at the same time, we would have to choose to delay the denizen annoucement of some people because there is a denizen cap per month?, that doesn't seem like a good idea, less when you consider ot may grow in the futuer

2- I mean yeah that's what we're discussing but we cant find a solution

3- read the full thread for more info, but TLDR is that the requirements for denizen have changed over the ages and older denizens have not been adapted to it, so a gen 3 denizen may not acutally qualify in gen 10, which leads to a lot of problems

4- fair

5- no, I mean the switch from gen 9 to gen 10 and stuff like that

6- I mean, even if I try hard to make denizen less prestigious, due to all of the oldfags who will return over time and abraker restless campaign to make denizen a really cool thing, it wouldn't be much of a help tbh

1. ok then, maybe just change how often denizenshit is rewarded, a week would be far too short and a month would be far too long. maybe new denizen every 15 days?

2. work hard mf

3. you can't really do much about this. time has changed the denizen system, so unless you wanna remove the older denizens and continue with the new selection process or remove the new denizens and go back to the old selection process, (which would cause alot of drama and confusion one way or the other) there's not much possible to fix this.

4. how tf do i argue with "fair"

5. you guys should decide how long a generation lasts for

6. oldfags come and go from what ive seen, i wouldnt worry too much. as for abraker you'll just have to ignore him i guess

sametdze wrote:

3. maybe what you could do is take gens depending on what the requirements were at the time and split them up into either classic or modern. for example, generations that required you to be active for 8 months would be put in "modern gen". idk if this makes sense but its hard to get this idea of mine out

5. come up with some potential gen lengths and run a poll (i could see this having some cons but i think it could work with some fixing)

B0ii wrote:

I feel like this discussion of fixing denizen is only gonna create more drama ngl

B0ii wrote:

I feel like this discussion of fixing denizen is only gonna create more drama ngl

sametdze wrote:

B0ii wrote:

I feel like this discussion of fixing denizen is only gonna create more drama ngl

coward

Reyalp51 wrote:

So one of the things we want is for the denizen nomination to be objective, something that can work is just a minimal time like 8 months since they joined and an exact number of post for example 500
(Like ot eras but without a time limit)

This way theres no problem with the dudes that are active for a while and then go away or debates on who should or should not be a denizen

DM FOR MUTUAL wrote:

patatitta what's your idea

Reyalp51 wrote:

Reyalp51 wrote:

So one of the things we want is for the denizen nomination to be objective, something that can work is just a minimal time like 8 months since they joined and an exact number of post for example 500
(Like ot eras but without a time limit)

This way theres no problem with the dudes that are active for a while and then go away or debates on who should or should not be a denizen

I still think this is a good idea

DM FOR MUTUAL wrote:

patatitta what's your idea

boat wrote:

What even is this larping and bickering over an arbitrary nothingburger status.

Make a proper library/archive thread of cool, funny or noteworthy threads, posts or other contributions.
Anyone highlighted in this thread is cool, while anybody else is "who?".

boat wrote:

What even is this larping and bickering over an arbitrary nothingburger status.

Make a proper library/archive thread of cool, funny or noteworthy threads, posts or other contributions.
Anyone highlighted in this thread is cool, while anybody else is "who?".

Manishh wrote:

A straightforward solution to resolve the drama is to prohibit Patatitta from discussing the denizen.

Ymir wrote:

Manishh wrote:

A straightforward solution to resolve the drama is to prohibit Patatitta from discussing the denizen.

Patatitta wrote:

Scyla wrote:

Remove it from existence

I would like to but people won't let me

sametdze wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

sametdze wrote:

i will try to fix those questions

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

2. denizenship needs an actual definition. i cant think of one rn, but im sure you guys could because you're an actual team and im just one guy. what you could also do is make multiple definitions and have a vote on which is the definitive definition, which would fix the problem of nobody agreeing on what denizenship is

3. i do not understand this. do you mean that there's not the same amount of denizens in each gen? do you mean that people from older times being mixed in with people from current times?

4. see the second sentence of number one

5. dont understand, do you mean people jumping from generation to generation (like samx500 jumping from gen 7 to gen 6), if thats the case, dont allow that to happen unless a person truly deserves to jump to an older generation

6. people have sort of put this idea of denizen being very important, so maybe clear that up? also the whole system's inconsistency can also contribute to the problem. also, the people who choose denizens should really think twice before adding a denizen, because simply adding a person without any actual thought will contribute to the inconsistency issue (cough cough blushing issue cough cough)

good luck fixing the system i guess

1- So if a lot of people joined OT at the same time, we would have to choose to delay the denizen annoucement of some people because there is a denizen cap per month?, that doesn't seem like a good idea, less when you consider ot may grow in the futuer

2- I mean yeah that's what we're discussing but we cant find a solution

3- read the full thread for more info, but TLDR is that the requirements for denizen have changed over the ages and older denizens have not been adapted to it, so a gen 3 denizen may not acutally qualify in gen 10, which leads to a lot of problems

4- fair

5- no, I mean the switch from gen 9 to gen 10 and stuff like that

6- I mean, even if I try hard to make denizen less prestigious, due to all of the oldfags who will return over time and abraker restless campaign to make denizen a really cool thing, it wouldn't be much of a help tbh

1. ok then, maybe just change how often denizenshit is rewarded, a week would be far too short and a month would be far too long. maybe new denizen every 15 days?

2. work hard mf

3. you can't really do much about this. time has changed the denizen system, so unless you wanna remove the older denizens and continue with the new selection process or remove the new denizens and go back to the old selection process, (which would cause alot of drama and confusion one way or the other) there's not much possible to fix this.

4. how tf do i argue with "fair"

5. you guys should decide how long a generation lasts for

6. oldfags come and go from what ive seen, i wouldnt worry too much. as for abraker you'll just have to ignore him i guess

1- as kobold said, no point in timegate denizen announcements

2- that's what i'm doing

3- point is that if how denizen used to work was different on the past than it was now, and our definition of denizen has changed over time, with the past not beind adjusted or even clarifying it has been adjusted, people would believe that the old denizens have been chosen under the current rule, and even if we clarified it has been changed, under the modern definition of denizen, they wouldn't be denizens which would make the entire history preservation perspective of the thread be totally useless outside the last couple generations

4- you don't, i'm agreeing with you

5- and we cant really agree on anything and that is why i'm making thos thread

6- idk it's hard and people would hate me if I tried to remove prestige from denizen

Scyla wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

Scyla wrote:

Remove it from existence

I would like to but people won't let me

sametdze wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

sametdze wrote:

i will try to fix those questions

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

2. denizenship needs an actual definition. i cant think of one rn, but im sure you guys could because you're an actual team and im just one guy. what you could also do is make multiple definitions and have a vote on which is the definitive definition, which would fix the problem of nobody agreeing on what denizenship is

3. i do not understand this. do you mean that there's not the same amount of denizens in each gen? do you mean that people from older times being mixed in with people from current times?

4. see the second sentence of number one

5. dont understand, do you mean people jumping from generation to generation (like samx500 jumping from gen 7 to gen 6), if thats the case, dont allow that to happen unless a person truly deserves to jump to an older generation

6. people have sort of put this idea of denizen being very important, so maybe clear that up? also the whole system's inconsistency can also contribute to the problem. also, the people who choose denizens should really think twice before adding a denizen, because simply adding a person without any actual thought will contribute to the inconsistency issue (cough cough blushing issue cough cough)

good luck fixing the system i guess

1- So if a lot of people joined OT at the same time, we would have to choose to delay the denizen annoucement of some people because there is a denizen cap per month?, that doesn't seem like a good idea, less when you consider ot may grow in the futuer

2- I mean yeah that's what we're discussing but we cant find a solution

3- read the full thread for more info, but TLDR is that the requirements for denizen have changed over the ages and older denizens have not been adapted to it, so a gen 3 denizen may not acutally qualify in gen 10, which leads to a lot of problems

4- fair

5- no, I mean the switch from gen 9 to gen 10 and stuff like that

6- I mean, even if I try hard to make denizen less prestigious, due to all of the oldfags who will return over time and abraker restless campaign to make denizen a really cool thing, it wouldn't be much of a help tbh

1. ok then, maybe just change how often denizenshit is rewarded, a week would be far too short and a month would be far too long. maybe new denizen every 15 days?

2. work hard mf

3. you can't really do much about this. time has changed the denizen system, so unless you wanna remove the older denizens and continue with the new selection process or remove the new denizens and go back to the old selection process, (which would cause alot of drama and confusion one way or the other) there's not much possible to fix this.

4. how tf do i argue with "fair"

5. you guys should decide how long a generation lasts for

6. oldfags come and go from what ive seen, i wouldnt worry too much. as for abraker you'll just have to ignore him i guess

1- as kobold said, no point in timegate denizen announcements

2- that's what i'm doing

3- point is that if how denizen used to work was different on the past than it was now, and our definition of denizen has changed over time, with the past not beind adjusted or even clarifying it has been adjusted, people would believe that the old denizens have been chosen under the current rule, and even if we clarified it has been changed, under the modern definition of denizen, they wouldn't be denizens which would make the entire history preservation perspective of the thread be totally useless outside the last couple generations

4- you don't, i'm agreeing with you

5- and we cant really agree on anything and that is why i'm making thos thread

6- idk it's hard and people would hate me if I tried to remove prestige from denizen

What? Patatita? Scared from hate? This isn't patatita, who are you. Where is our patatita

Scyla wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

Scyla wrote:

Remove it from existence

I would like to but people won't let me

sametdze wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

sametdze wrote:

i will try to fix those questions

1. in order to qualify for a denizenship, you must have 8 months of straight activity within OT. every month, new person gets denizen

2. denizenship needs an actual definition. i cant think of one rn, but im sure you guys could because you're an actual team and im just one guy. what you could also do is make multiple definitions and have a vote on which is the definitive definition, which would fix the problem of nobody agreeing on what denizenship is

3. i do not understand this. do you mean that there's not the same amount of denizens in each gen? do you mean that people from older times being mixed in with people from current times?

4. see the second sentence of number one

5. dont understand, do you mean people jumping from generation to generation (like samx500 jumping from gen 7 to gen 6), if thats the case, dont allow that to happen unless a person truly deserves to jump to an older generation

6. people have sort of put this idea of denizen being very important, so maybe clear that up? also the whole system's inconsistency can also contribute to the problem. also, the people who choose denizens should really think twice before adding a denizen, because simply adding a person without any actual thought will contribute to the inconsistency issue (cough cough blushing issue cough cough)

good luck fixing the system i guess

1- So if a lot of people joined OT at the same time, we would have to choose to delay the denizen annoucement of some people because there is a denizen cap per month?, that doesn't seem like a good idea, less when you consider ot may grow in the futuer

2- I mean yeah that's what we're discussing but we cant find a solution

3- read the full thread for more info, but TLDR is that the requirements for denizen have changed over the ages and older denizens have not been adapted to it, so a gen 3 denizen may not acutally qualify in gen 10, which leads to a lot of problems

4- fair

5- no, I mean the switch from gen 9 to gen 10 and stuff like that

6- I mean, even if I try hard to make denizen less prestigious, due to all of the oldfags who will return over time and abraker restless campaign to make denizen a really cool thing, it wouldn't be much of a help tbh

1. ok then, maybe just change how often denizenshit is rewarded, a week would be far too short and a month would be far too long. maybe new denizen every 15 days?

2. work hard mf

3. you can't really do much about this. time has changed the denizen system, so unless you wanna remove the older denizens and continue with the new selection process or remove the new denizens and go back to the old selection process, (which would cause alot of drama and confusion one way or the other) there's not much possible to fix this.

4. how tf do i argue with "fair"

5. you guys should decide how long a generation lasts for

6. oldfags come and go from what ive seen, i wouldnt worry too much. as for abraker you'll just have to ignore him i guess

1- as kobold said, no point in timegate denizen announcements

2- that's what i'm doing

3- point is that if how denizen used to work was different on the past than it was now, and our definition of denizen has changed over time, with the past not beind adjusted or even clarifying it has been adjusted, people would believe that the old denizens have been chosen under the current rule, and even if we clarified it has been changed, under the modern definition of denizen, they wouldn't be denizens which would make the entire history preservation perspective of the thread be totally useless outside the last couple generations

4- you don't, i'm agreeing with you

5- and we cant really agree on anything and that is why i'm making thos thread

6- idk it's hard and people would hate me if I tried to remove prestige from denizen

What? Patatita? Scared from hate? This isn't patatita, who are you. Where is our patatita

Manishh wrote:

A straightforward solution to resolve the drama is to prohibit Patatitta from discussing the denizen.

Manishh wrote:

A straightforward solution to resolve the drama is to prohibit Patatitta from discussing the denizen.

Corne2Plum3 wrote:

Manishh wrote:

A straightforward solution to resolve the drama is to prohibit Patatitta from discussing the denizen.

You voted for him, don't you?

Blushing wrote:

ahhhh its time for meeeeeeeeeee.

patatitta, being leader and making decisions that not only reflect you, but impact an entire ecosystem means that your choices and decisions will not be liked and some people will vehemently hate you.

---- To rework the system means you will be Sisyphus. Though you want this thing fleshed out and changed, somehow, someway so go against the grain and propose what YOU want to do. Whether people like it or not.

burgernfat wrote:

make denizenship purely subjective. the catch is that it has absolutely zero perks attached to it, that way, denizenship turns to what i described in my first post, just a way to remember people that were/are a part of the community.

keremaru wrote:

stuff in pink

Blushing wrote:

removing objective milestones for denizenship allows for it to truly be the "honorary" and prestigious title that everyone wants, or seems to desire.

keremaru wrote:

stuff in pink

Sisyphus finds meaning and life in what he does. Sometimes the struggle is better than the reward. Seeing something come to fruition that you have fought tooth and nail for is arguably what a politician should do, whether you like their ideals or not.

If OT!Gov is abolished... nothign changes.

It would be as if it was last year or the year before. This is the only government that has proposed meaningful change and has been useful to some degree, whether you like the changes or not.

Im sorry that you dont like what patatitta is going to do or is trying to do to denizenship. You lot are so attached to a honorary title in a rhythm clicking game for a forum that is mostly shit post and shenanigans. People being gatekept from participating in certain events or activities because they dont have it is insane, to name a few: Corne's Collab, OT elections, Pretty much any Manishh event. It has become less about "hey this dude is historic!" and more like spongebob trying to get into the salty spitoon, its humorous.

There are actual things that can be done, like reducing the objective criteria so people can't complain about how they meet a criteria and it is strictly based on overall feeling. Post quality, amount, and frequency can be helpful factors yes, but to meet a criteria of like 300 posts in 8 months is stupid because I can just spam the front page with remotely relevant posts and be fine and then get denizen based on that, it just isnt a good metric. A good metric would be to genuinely ask the council "What do you remember from blushing without needing to look at their OT history?" If they sayu negative things or "not much" then its pretty clear I was not historic, ya know?

create a separate entity of the government that doesnt report to them but sends them their list of people for denizen then the president, and only the president, signs off on them: yes or no.

patatitta, if people genuinely hate you for a title that holds too many meanings behind it being taken away from them, then they need to touch grass and remember that it really doesnt matter this much and it isnt that deep. Its not as if denizen allows them any privilege outside roleplaying in certain threads.

Blushing wrote:

keremaru wrote:

stuff in pink

stuff that isn't annoying to read

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

Nuuskamuikkunen wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

There is.

Ymir wrote:

hahaha this guy

Patatitta wrote:

too late we're probably just going to implement what I said earlier skill issue everyone

Blushing wrote:

Im sorry that you dont like what patatitta is going to do or is trying to do to denizenship. You lot are so attached to a honorary title in a rhythm clicking game for a forum that is mostly shit post and shenanigans. People being gatekept from participating in certain events or activities because they dont have it is insane, to name a few: Corne's Collab, OT elections, Pretty much any Manishh event. It has become less about "hey this dude is historic!" and more like spongebob trying to get into the salty spitoon, its humorous.

Blushing wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

too late we're probably just going to implement what I said earlier skill issue everyone

Literally biggest fuck you to someone that actually gave feedback and you refused to just comment or even talk about it with me.

Patatitta wrote:

Blushing wrote:

Patatitta wrote:

too late we're probably just going to implement what I said earlier skill issue everyone

Literally biggest fuck you to someone that actually gave feedback and you refused to just comment or even talk about it with me.

i'm sorry but y'all are just plainly wrong and i'm kinda tired to actually respond



1- "Choose another team for selecting denizenship"

Those are tasks of the gov, but I was refeering more to if there should be a more systematic way to prevent us on sleeping on it or whateever


2- "What does denizenship mean?"

We have ended up on a definition that is more on the lines "someone who is in the OT community"


3- "making it not subjective is a bad idea"

For 90% of it's lifespan denizenship hasn't been subjective, the initial ruling by abraker only required 3 months of activity and nothing more, then it got reworked to require more time, and after that, ghouly reworked it to require some sort of contribution to OT, however, the parliament was slow and this basically wasn't enforced. So yeah, OT has NEVER had a subjective ruling over denizen and shit has always been fine. It also supports our definition of denizen.


4- "It doesn't need change"

Excluding this one, in the last 4 years the denizen system has been reworked twice, and even after the latest rework, there has still been drama and complaints which were never solved, just ignored. Take for example the dramas surrounding the switches in generation. Not only that, but i'm trying to avoid things like the blushing situation happening again, where the parliament fucks up and then they make a poll to see if they undo their mistake, because they don't need a poll to actually run shit but they do need one to revert it apparently. This system should prevent a lot of the drama since it makes it harder for us the government to actually pull off things like that.


5- "You can't push this change or else there would be a revolution"

I said I was going to do this exact thing, and I got voted in by mayority, not only that, but then I ran the parliament elections, and the people who ended up winning mostly support these ideas, if you're now mad about it, it's your fault.


6- You guys are really fucking biased.

Like really, i'm sorry blushing but I don't know if you aegree with me because you agree with my idea or because you think licking my asshole will grant you denizen, not only that but I feel people like ymir were already against me even from before this, so I don't know how seriously can I take the criticism torwards this. Whenever you consider a lot of the criticism is just missguided as I said with the "denizen is subjective!!!!" thing, I just can't take you seriously

Karmine wrote:

That's a lot of text.

ColdTooth wrote:

Karmine wrote:

That's a lot of text.

thankfully i am a vulpix so i cant read

Nuuskamuikkunen wrote:

I am glad I did the bare minimum in my presidency.

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

B0ii wrote:

Nuuskamuikkunen wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

There is.

well... is there one that ACTUALLY PUTS SOMETHING ABOUT DENIZENSHIP INTO SET STONE?

V. Denizens may acquire denizenship if they fulfill the current requirements stated by the Royal Society, which can be found at
community/forums/topics/615764

03/19/2021
Time requirement for denizenship increased from 2 months to 8 months

03/19/2021
Remove the 10 page post history requirement to becoming a denizen.

03/19/2021
Formation of the DAT:
Future OT denizens will have to atleast be in OT for 8 months before their denizenship can be reviewed by the Denizen Approval Team (DAT).
Exceptions to this rule will be decided by the DAT on certain specific cases, when the 8 months requirement is not suitable to judge an individual's denizenship.
The DAT will consists of current Parliament members and will hold votes regarding the inclusion of a denizen to OT.
Once every 1.5 to 2 months, or whenever there's an influx of new denizens, the DAT will hold meetings to review new denizenships.

Karmine wrote:

That's a lot of text.

abraker wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

done community/forums/topics/1021462

Manishh wrote:

abraker wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

done community/forums/topics/1021462

So you are saying there has been multiple breaking of constitution. Election not being happen last year and the requirement for voting in the election being changed.

Cerno wrote:

cum

Polyspora wrote:

Manishh wrote:

abraker wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

done community/forums/topics/1021462

So you are saying there has been multiple breaking of constitution. Election not being happen last year and the requirement for voting in the election being changed.

Nobody enforces it so yeah

Manishh wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Manishh wrote:

abraker wrote:

Polyspora wrote:

Uh @abraker we should probably make a constitution

done community/forums/topics/1021462

So you are saying there has been multiple breaking of constitution. Election not being happen last year and the requirement for voting in the election being changed.

Nobody enforces it so yeah

You are saying like it was not your responsibility to apply it last year

Ymir wrote:

8 months is good who is complaining about that?

Patatitta wrote:

Ymir wrote:

8 months is good who is complaining about that?

cephaphysic is, maybe if you read the thread you would understand stuff

his everything wrote:

So far from this thread alone, without counting the president, I can see that there are 5 progressives (Reyalp51, Pillowey, boat, Corne2Plum3, cephaphysic) for the abolition OR the reform of the denizenship and 10 conservatives (Ymir, sametdze, burgernfat, [ Rynn ], Blushing, Manishh, Dementedduck, B0ii, Serraionga, keremaru) against any changes OR for just a few corrections.

(The others are either neutral or I don't know)

((Please correct me if I have made a mistake))

his everything wrote:

So far from this thread alone, without counting the president, I can see that there are 5 progressives (Reyalp51, Pillowey, boat, Corne2Plum3, cephaphysic) for the abolition OR the reform of the denizenship and 10 conservatives (Ymir, sametdze, burgernfat, [ Rynn ], Blushing, Manishh, Dementedduck, B0ii, Serraionga, keremaru) against any changes OR for just a few corrections.

(The others are either neutral or I don't know)

((Please correct me if I have made a mistake))

his everything wrote:

So far from this thread alone, without counting the president, I can see that there are 5 progressives (Reyalp51, Pillowey, boat, Corne2Plum3, cephaphysic) for the abolition OR the reform of the denizenship and 10 conservatives (Ymir, sametdze, burgernfat, [ Rynn ], Blushing, Manishh, Dementedduck, B0ii, Serraionga, keremaru) against any changes OR for just a few corrections.

(The others are either neutral or I don't know)

((Please correct me if I have made a mistake))

Corne2Plum3 wrote:

his everything wrote:

So far from this thread alone, without counting the president, I can see that there are 5 progressives (Reyalp51, Pillowey, boat, Corne2Plum3, cephaphysic) for the abolition OR the reform of the denizenship and 10 conservatives (Ymir, sametdze, burgernfat, [ Rynn ], Blushing, Manishh, Dementedduck, B0ii, Serraionga, keremaru) against any changes OR for just a few corrections.

(The others are either neutral or I don't know)

((Please correct me if I have made a mistake))

I was never for the abolition

Blushing wrote:

I am consistently wanting change to it, just because I am suggesting non-radical changes doesn't mean im conservative.

Any major change I have attempted to talk about just leads people into thinking I want change because I lost denizen or because I want it that bad. Idk.

B0ii wrote:

his everything wrote:

So far from this thread alone, without counting the president, I can see that there are 5 progressives (Reyalp51, Pillowey, boat, Corne2Plum3, cephaphysic) for the abolition OR the reform of the denizenship and 10 conservatives (Ymir, sametdze, burgernfat, [ Rynn ], Blushing, Manishh, Dementedduck, B0ii, Serraionga, keremaru) against any changes OR for just a few corrections.

(The others are either neutral or I don't know)

((Please correct me if I have made a mistake))

man fuck this government shit, I just wanna make silly yet deep threads with interesting stories and lore

his everything wrote:

So far from this thread alone, without counting the president, I can see that there are 5 progressives (Reyalp51, Pillowey, boat, Corne2Plum3, cephaphysic) for the abolition OR the reform of the denizenship and 10 conservatives (Ymir, sametdze, burgernfat, [ Rynn ], Blushing, Manishh, Dementedduck, B0ii, Serraionga, keremaru) against any changes OR for just a few corrections.

(The others are either neutral or I don't know)

((Please correct me if I have made a mistake))