Hey everyone!

One thing I think we can all agree on is that this community sucks at treating arguments properly.

The common format is that there's a problem, a confrontation happens, other people jump in, other non-related things get brought into the discussion, everyone starts making long posts to address things, everyone agrees but not really, more arguing, snarky snide comments get upvoted, people start going "WHY IS EVERYONE FIGHTING COME ON CUT IT OUT" and then nothing gets done because no one has any idea what's going on anymore.

That gets nowhere. So, I'm proposing a group be made to address debates. Call it a Council.

This Council would not create set rules, but they would settle debates with decisions. Sort of like how the Supreme Court works. When an argument is had, the Council steps in to mediate between the two, and make sure the best possible solution for both parties is made.

For example, if a Lore debate is started ("AKALI WOULD TOTALLY DO THIS" "NO WAY AKALI WOULD TOTALLY DO THIS"), the Council is the ones that argue among themselves. They work with both arguing parties, map out every possible lore direction, explain to both parties what the other party wants, what they should and probably shouldn't do, and guide the two parties to a direction that both can agree with. Then that direction happens, and people are happy.

If a person debate is started, the Council is the one that talks with the two parties, the problem person and the ones that have a problem, and figure out what's wrong, what needs to be said, what should be improved, and make sure that no hostile distractions are being thrown around.

This way, the entire community doesn't have to jump into every single problem, and make everything confusing to navigate through in an argument. Instead of the entire community arguing about something, the Council argues about it instead.

Debates would happen in-client usually, unless otherwise needed. The Council would make decisions that are correct, and decisions that the community can trust is correct. However, in order for this to work, the Community needs to trust the Council, and respect and follow decisions made by the Council. The community would need to trust that people who decide to just completely ignore the council, aren't very useful themselves either.

Of course, the Council would be run by people the community absolutely trusts and respect. People who have proven they know how to see things from all perspectives and can find the right answer to any problem. People on Old Anivia's level.

For now, before these people can be found, however, I'd like to ask whether the community would like this to happen. It would mean giving up the Anarchy that we currently have, yes, but it would also help get so much done so much more quickly. The most important requirement however is that the Community allows this.

So, I ask you guys. Would you like something like this?

I like this idea...

There are few of those people left. I assume you would use a vote to decide?

I would like this idea, but I don't think people WANT to solve the problem. Some of them are mad about something here and when they can show it, they will. Yep, I'm negative, but if the community can prove me wrong...then I'm wrong. whoop de do. I have no self esteem, so **** having an ego.

Back to the Council, how do you ensure there is no Bias? Its a problem. We do a vote and your solution to preventing the rage threads goes out the window. Do you have a remedy for this?

I'm pretty sure that humanity has time and time again proven itself incapable of complete and irrefutable peace.

Wars happen because humanity loves fighting. There's no way to counter it, it's human nature.

A Council would only serve as an "elite" circle of influential individuals given power over any given situation, which would only prove to corrupt them and twist them into something other than who they once were.

Council members wouldn't be voted in, mainly because if a Council member got in with 32 yes votes and 28 no votes... There's something wrong.

To answer both questions, the requirements to be a council member are that you are 1) willing to put in the effort required to help people, and 2) willing to be open to all perspectives. it's not the council's job to have a personal opinion. They're not there to declare "Trynd x Sejuani can totally happen / never happen." They're there to look for solutions and acceptable directions that Trynd and Seju can take, and let the two find one that works.

The only time bias would be noticed is in a situation like Draven x Orianna, where the council would probably "strongly recommend not do it at all because it would be a huge amount of work."

unless I misunderstood your question. Basically, voting would only be necessary when addressing the entire community, like when you ask "what's the max champions one can RP?"

....Perhaps.

In my opinion, he is right. I'm actually afraid that there might be some form of "elitism" within the RP community.

I'm personally afraid that there might be a government with bias, as Geokhan stated.


Back at the Total War RP where I originated, there was so much corruption in an organization (and a pretty powerful one) called the Association of World Nations. The leader, despite its democratic rules, acted on an autocratic manner and got his most trusted aides. That led to splinter groups arising and ultimately, the death of that organization. (I don't want to get into more details about that...)


I think that the community is unprepared for a government-like structure like this. With all of us voicing our opinions loudly, it's nearly impossible for a small group to band the entire community together and make an organization of some sort.

I think that the community is unable to make a council because it's predominantly a majority-based community. The ruling people can't say "you do this/you do that" when there are no Riot rules about this and when majority of the community opposes to it. I mean, I'm surprised that it was easier than I thought when the rules of the auditions were easily changed. It didn't take an organization of people to do that, just a voice to ask for it.

If you want power..... You don't join this council. They aren't here to make decisions, they are here to settle debates. Even if the council was full of ELITE CORRUPTION, they would not be able to go TOO BAD, WE MAKE THE RULES because there are no rules to be made. The best they could do is give horrible advice that no one would agree is the right decision.

They are mediators. If a rule needs to be made, they would meditate as statements are brought forth, from the community. If an argument appears, they meditate and look for answers that both parties approve. They do not state solid decisions; the arguing parties need to agree to the archive being given, and are the ones who approve the proposition made by the council.

This government would be enforced only by community respect in and of itself. Choosing to do something the community doesn't want is to make no sense at all.

That's the thing; that other community tried to rule. I need to stress that this council is not the "king of the community" and do not rule. They are the "organized voice of the community" and talk to you.

You know that guy that you trust and listen to because you KNOW he has solid advice? That's who they are. They will never say "you do this / you do that." They, however, will map out the lore for you, and help you make a decision.

As you say, there are so many opinions stated so loudly in this community: the council's main purpose is not to overpower those opinions, but to organize them.

Bumping this. One thing I really need to stress is that this is not a "you can do this, you can't do this" governing body. The only times one would say that is on something obvious, like "you can't be nude on the floor."