NationStates

What shall this do for the game?

It seems like it would be rather difficult to pull off, but not impossible...

If Jal has not proposed it, it must be condemned.

It will be like most UNSC resolutions - unenforceable!

The population of NS is divided into subcommunities that are all significantly smaller than the WA voting body. For most WA members, knowing why someone should be commended/condemned would require more effort of learning about the commendee/condemnee than they're interested in investing. The proposal would have to make its case right then and there, and make it well.

I will predict, however, that this feature will disproportionately be applied to the gameplay-side of the community over the official-forum side, as they're more visible to the voters.

Kandarin wrote:The population of NS is divided into subcommunities that are all significantly smaller than the WA voting body. For most WA members, knowing why someone should be commended/condemned would require more effort of learning about the commendee/condemnee than they're interested in investing. The proposal would have to make its case right then and there, and make it well.

I will predict, however, that this feature will disproportionately be applied to the gameplay-side of the community over the official-forum side, as they're more visible to the voters.

By voters, do you mean delegates of large regions?

And yes, writing it properly is likely to be extremely important for success.

Zemnaya Svoboda wrote:By voters, do you mean delegates of large regions?

I mostly mean delegates, but not simply those of large regions. The delegate vote is rarely united and is not a majority of available WA vote. The opinions of the WA as a whole are hard to gauge or influence.

This is interesting...I nice little quirk to add in my opinion. I dont think it will add much to the game, however it is a nice little pollitical way to express a groups outrage at a certain regions/nations actions.

This isnt to say that the people in question would listen to this at all, but regardless i like this idea.

I like this, I really do. It adds a new dimension to WA proposals, which will see quite a surplus in commendations / condemnations. Heck, we went almost a week without a single queue in the proposal bin.

Northern Chittowa wrote:This isnt to say that the people in question would listen to this at all

We listen.

I have no better idea than you how this will shake out, but I am interested to see...

[violet] wrote:

Northern Chittowa wrote:This isnt to say that the people in question would listen to this at all

We listen.

I have no better idea than you how this will shake out, but I am interested to see...

i was on about the people who are condemmed/commended...Such as, will they really care too much what the international community thinks and change their ways if needbe.

But anyway, i like this idea, adds a new thought and purpose to the WA

Northern Chittowa wrote:i was on about the people who are condemmed/commended...

Oh yes, of course.

Northern Chittowa wrote:

[violet] wrote:

Northern Chittowa wrote:This isnt to say that the people in question would listen to this at all

We listen.

I have no better idea than you how this will shake out, but I am interested to see...

i was on about the people who are condemmed/commended...Such as, will they really care too much what the international community thinks and change their ways if needbe.

But anyway, i like this idea, adds a new thought and purpose to the WA

That's the thing... will these nations who are commended get little 'perks' here and there? Likewise, those who are condemned, will there be some sort of negative affect?

I kind of thing getting a commendation is a positive, while a condemnation is a negative. Perhaps, if this is a distinction without consequence, people would be vying for both positive and negative attention?

I would guess some people would be proud to receive a WA Commendation and ashamed to receive a Condemnation, while for others, it would be the other way around.

Yeah, I know atleast a few people who would drool over getting a condemnation - thats right, a condemnation.

NationStaters...

I'm also very interested in seeing how this shapes up... what sort of things will pass in the language, etc.? We've got some breaking the 4th wall by talking about 'players', but that's how Gameplayers think about and describe what we do...

Can you have both a commendation and a condemnation at the same time? I'm guessing it's technically possible. I could see people aiming to have both at once, if so, depending on who was proposing to give it to them and for what reasons.

EDIT: For instance, there's a condemnation in the queue right now for Gatesville which I'm sure they'd wear as a badge of honor.

I think this is a very neat idea, it's a shame there aren't more feeder dictators or invasions going to to actually condemn, but there you go.

I predict that there soon will be.

Unibot wrote:Yeah, I know atleast a few people who would drool over getting a condemnation - thats right, a condemnation.

NationStaters...

Me! Memememememe! My WA nation is Dalmatia Cisalpina WA, for anyone who wishes to fulfill my narcissistic wishes for condemnation.

Sirocco wrote:I predict that there soon will be.

These things take much more time and effort to set up than one might suppose - gameplay can only manage 2-3 a year at most, and we've had one already. Since no one's ever needed a condemnation as an excuse to coup a feeder before, I doubt this will accelerate the time table.

Naivetry wrote:

Sirocco wrote:I predict that there soon will be.

These things take much more time and effort to set up than one might suppose - gameplay can only manage 2-3 a year at most, and we've had one already. Since no one's ever needed a condemnation as an excuse to coup a feeder before, I doubt this will accelerate the time table.

*coughs* You just never know with those ebil tyrant folk...

Dalimbar wrote:

Naivetry wrote:

Sirocco wrote:I predict that there soon will be.

These things take much more time and effort to set up than one might suppose - gameplay can only manage 2-3 a year at most, and we've had one already. Since no one's ever needed a condemnation as an excuse to coup a feeder before, I doubt this will accelerate the time table.

*coughs* You just never know with those ebil tyrant folk...

Perhaps I should implement more security precautions

I predict that this is just a step towards making the w.a. fully and completely a part of gameplay. C&C's are just the indication of what the w.a. is expected to become.

I predict that people are flying off the handle and should calm down.

I would really like to see the C&Cs conform more with the existing WA ruleset and be integrated slowly into the game. Right now we've just got a whole mess of joke proposals, test runs, poorly-thought out commendations, and a general putting the cart before the horse. Can't we hash things out before we pass resolutions we'll have to repeal later?

Well, I like it. I have three almost in queue!

I like the concept, but I agree that the details need more work. I saw a number of proposals that even I would turn down, and I'm not nearly as picky as most of the WA legislators.