Server Suggestion Censorship policy

[lencz]

Suggestion Title: Censorship policy
Suggestion Description:
Option A
When Mayor allows the Censorship policy, he will be able to censor/delete advertisements.
Some examples could be:
- Silencing opposition calling for his resignation.
- If the mayor owns a business, he could censor advertisements of his competition.
- Hold monopoly over who gets to make advertisements.

There is also the option of allowing the mayor to be paid off, to only delete certain adverts (making an exception so mayor can break the law in this specific case).

Due to the censorship, people would be allowed to kill the mayor, after he starts censoring the press.

Option B
Similar to Option A (but perhaps more difficult to implement?), but after activation of the policy, adverts would only be published, if mayor approves them. To create more annoyance, people would submit an advert via /advert, payment would be taken and then it would be up to the mayor to accept or deny the advert.

If the mayor is afk, or unaware of /adverts starting the pile up, there would be a 1-2 min time span, in which the mayor would need to deny adverts otherwise they would be published.

Why should this be added?:
- Another way to annoy people, without needing to increase taxes and ruin peoples livelihoods.

What negatives could this have?:
- some might say this could be abused, but that is the point of this suggestion
- Option B, would be more difficult to create an addition to the F3 menu that would allow approving adverts.

What problem would this suggestion solve?: It would make more fun playing mayor, more corrupt mayor RP.

 

[Chris Flynn]

Yes, I'd be able to annoy everyone!!!

 

[Swifter]

Suggestion Title: Censorship policy
Suggestion Description:
Option A
When Mayor allows the Censorship policy, he will be able to censor/delete advertisements.
Some examples could be:
- Silencing opposition calling for his resignation.
- If the mayor owns a business, he could censor advertisements of his competition.
- Hold monopoly over who gets to make advertisements.

There is also the option of allowing the mayor to be paid off, to only delete certain adverts (making an exception so mayor can break the law in this specific case).

Due to the censorship, people would be allowed to kill the mayor, after he starts censoring the press.

Option B
Similar to Option A (but perhaps more difficult to implement?), but after activation of the policy, adverts would only be published, if mayor approves them. To create more annoyance, people would submit an advert via /advert, payment would be taken and then it would be up to the mayor to accept or deny the advert.

Why should this be added?:
- Another way to annoy people, without needing to increase taxes and ruin peoples livelihoods.

What negatives could this have?:
- some might say this could be abused, but that is the point of this suggestion
- Option B, would be more difficult to create an addition to the F3 menu that would allow approving adverts.

What problem would this suggestion solve?: It would make more fun playing mayor, more corrupt mayor RP.

-1 it will remove the advertisements for vault of memes and other companies trying to sell. And they may have rivalry with it

 

[lencz]

-1 it will remove the advertisements for vault of memes if they hate it.

Like there isn't fuck ton of images spammed by tyla around the map already.

Edit: since you updated the message, whole point of the suggestion is to annoy people (without hurting their profits /XP gained from selling, like increased taxes would.) They can kill the mayor if they are being hurt by his censorship.

 

[Swifter]

Like there isn't fuck ton of images spammed by tyla around the map already.

Edit: since you updated the message, whole point of the suggestion is to annoy people (without hurting their profits /XP gained from selling, like increased taxes would.) They can kill the mayor if they are being hurt by his censorship.

My problem is that you spend 200 dollars on an advert and if the mayor deletes it. Is lost. you did it for nothing.

 

[lencz]

My problem is that you spend 200 dollars on an advert and if the mayor deletes it. Is lost. you did it for nothing.

That's the whole point.

 

[Lucius Husky]

I like the idea, perhaps making it cost city budget per advert deleted/denied to make it a bit balanced or to counter all adverts being deleted?

Would also be a way to use city budget more and cause the mayor to have to keep costs down on other fronts seeing as city budget is quite high most of the time anyway.

 

[Japzzi/JoeReel]

you did it for nothing.

Then you got a very good reason to kill the mayor. Also 200$ is literally like 5min of government jobbing.

I like the idea but there is potential for some mayor (get it? Tihi I am so funny!!) drama inducing scenarios. What would stop a big org from getting one of them elected mayor and then using him to control what adverts are made? As far as I know nothing stops the mayor from ''visiting'' citizens, this means that the org also has the PD to come help incase someone tries to kill the mayor? One could say that the player gets a ''new life'' when elected mayor but again, who could prove he didn't?

 

[lencz]

Would also be a way to use city budget more and cause the mayor to have to keep costs down on other fronts seeing as city budget is quite high most of the time anyway.

This could also be covered in an increase price of the policy. Some normal amount for starters 10k, and then 1-2k a minute as long as the policy is active. This could be tweaked.

What would stop a big org from getting one of them elected mayor and then using him to control what adverts are made?

I tried to cover this under mayor being bribed or prioritising his/org business. Also private mercs being around the mayor sounds like both rules and laws would be broken.

While censorhip would be a good reason to kill the mayor. I do not think that protecting the mayor, who is censoring in your favor, is a good enough reason to risk your life over. Besides this can already be done by having your adverts highlighted in /bc, if a mayor is a friend of yours (I would say this is is in a gray field in rules).

 

[Benkonto]

I love this suggestion, I think that option B would work the best

 

[lencz]

I love this suggestion, I think that option B would work the best

I also prefer option B, it also ensure people can't see deleted adverts in console like they can in A. Also in cases mayor is afk, or is not whitelisting adverts there could be a certain time period when adverts are published if they are not looked at by the mayor.

 

[Benkonto]

I also prefer option B, it also ensure people can't see deleted adverts in console like they can in A. Also in cases mayor is afk, or is not whitelisting adverts there could be a certain time period when adverts are published if they are not looked at by the mayor.

Yes, the mayor should be able to access the censoring shit on the city info app on his phone. And all advert automatically gets published after a min or two if mayor dosent decline it

 

[Nottoc]

Then you got a very good reason to kill the mayor. Also 200$ is literally like 5min of government jobbing.

I like the idea but there is potential for some mayor (get it? Tihi I am so funny!!) drama inducing scenarios. What would stop a big org from getting one of them elected mayor and then using him to control what adverts are made? As far as I know nothing stops the mayor from ''visiting'' citizens, this means that the org also has the PD to come help incase someone tries to kill the mayor? One could say that the player gets a ''new life'' when elected mayor but again, who could prove he didn't?

it's literally 1 minute of a job...

 

[Nottoc]

As for this suggestion, I do think it's a fun idea! I love chaotic Mayors

 

[Japzzi/JoeReel]

Also private mercs being around the mayor sounds like both rules and laws would be broken

With all respect Lencz you are Senior Helper, you should know that no rules or laws are broken in this situation. The mayor staying at a civilian's (or his own?) house with ''friends'' around is neither breaking any rules or laws. This is where serious drama could start to be generated because it would eventually be up to the administration team to settle disputes like this or change the rules.


I am still supportive of the suggestions if factors like the Mayor potentially just being run by a org and de jure basing with them would be addressed. Also I would say that if killing the mayor over 10-25% sales tax is allowed then killing the mayor for censoring your adverts would be as well, they both hurt your livelihood again I point to rule 3.12 Mayoral Assassination.

 

[Bnjemann]

It would be good to actually have corrupt mayors we can assassinate on that basis alone. Feel like killing mayors is too much numbers not enough motives at the moment.

 

[lencz]

That no rules or laws are broken in this situation.

I did overshoot it with the law breaks (although any illegal actions commited in front of the mayor would put the mayor in a position where he is not following the law and also failing to report it)

Speaking from experience, I have once RPed as SS (didn't actually enlist as SS) and was told by Staff, that this is negatively impacting their experience of the assassins, who expect to face off SS, and maybe cops not heavily armed gunmen who interfere with their roleplay, If this is not a case of a 2.5 break, then as you say an addition should be made, when this gets accepted.

I am still supportive of the suggestions if factors like the Mayor potentially just being run by a org and de jure basing with them would be addressed. Also I would say that if killing the mayor over 10-25% sales tax is allowed then killing the mayor for censoring your adverts would be as well, they both hurt your livelihood again I point to rule 3.12 Mayoral Assassination.

Here, I either wrote it wrong or you missunderstood me, I was simply poiting out that censorship is much less impacting than having Sales Tax increased to 25%, therefore censorship adds less harmful option to being corrupt. As I stated in the suggestion you should be able to kill the mayor, when he starts censoring adverts.

 

[AtomicAcorn77]

+support This would make being mayor so much fun, option b would be amazing!

 

[Skudist]

Personally I see Option A to be more effective in long-term.

Given how regular /advert is being used, for Option B it would require the mayor to be fully invested into the approval and denial of adverts throughout the entire time the policy is active. If the mayor is not well enough notified by these advert-requests, has subconsciously learned to ignore them after a while or even is just AFK, it could lead to some sort of request jam, which would mean that no adverts would come out while the mayor is inactive or the policy is active.

Thus it would make more sense to give the mayor just the option to remove them while the policy is active as it wouldn't hold anything off, should the mayor be preoccupied.

 

[HuskyD0G]

The media is censored IRL by the government so would make sense why we could do it in a serious RP server. Time for more fake news. Would love to see it for RP reasons.