CON:Concerning the Introduction of New Races into Group Canon (Bylaw)

From 118Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Do not make any changes to this area unless you are part of the Constitution Rewrite Committee.
Unauthorized changes will be reverted.
NOTE: These documents/proposed changes are drafts and are NOT in effect.
For the current Constitution that governs our group, visit UFOP Constitution.


Constitution Rewrite series

Edit this nav

Concerning the Introduction of New Races into Group Canon (CC2379-0002)

  1. In voting for or against the creation of a new canon race for character simming (as opposed to the creation of NPC races to advance plots, which are NOT permanent and which shall NOT circumvent this rule or the section of the Constitution applying to race creation), the following standard shall apply to the vote. Each voting member of the CC is required to apply this standard when voting.
  2. The new race shall enjoy a PRESUMPTION of admissibility (to exist as a new canon race). Unless one or more of the following factors are, in the judgement of the voter, present (any of which factors mitigate against admissibility), the vote SHALL be in favour of creation. A vote FOR or AGAINST creation or not creation is thus entrusted to the honour and discretion of each voting member of the council as weighed against these factors:
    1. The race so closely duplicates an already existing race that it is unnecessary unless the close relationship between the proposed race and an existing race will be a factor which contributed to ST lore or drama in simulation (e.g., a new Gorn offshoot which is substantially the same as Gorn but which creates religious or political pressure which will contribute to simming that race).
    2. The race posseses powers or capabilities which, while biologically justified, are out of proportion to game balance (e.g., members of the Q, Gothans).
    3. The race in any way detracts in some fashion or feature from the dignity of UFOP or Star Trek generally (e.g., pixies, a clown race, etc).
    4. The race is insufficiently documented from a biological or other perspective such that it is not sufficiently "realistic" enough to exist.
    5. Any other compelling reason which in the view of the voter mitigates against admission of the race.