NationStates

This is a non-modly "splicing off" a discussion from another thread to avoid cluttering it. Here are the relevant posts, as well as Sedge's suggestion this be given its own thread. Since it looks I started it this time, I'm starting the thread for it, too.

Only post here out of character, please.

This thread is meant for discussing the pros and cons of GA being restarted. For SC, someone might want to make a thread over there.

Araraukar wrote:Though I have to say I'm fairly disappointed at the various GA regulars who are currently jumping on the chance to get repeals through with lies. You may think you're forcing the mods to take back the ruling, but some of them have posted opinions to the tune of "more repealed resolutions is good, as it opens up topics again". If that was really the aim of the Moderation team, they should work at trying to convince Max to allow the WA to be re-started again.

Mousebumples wrote:

Araraukar wrote:If that was really the aim of the Moderation team, they should work at trying to convince Max to allow the WA to be re-started again.

From what I've heard from the mods that were around when the WA became a thing, there was a lot of outrage from those that had passed resolutions under the UN that had them "insta-repealed." While I was playing then, I was bogged down with grad school, so I wasn't actively involved on the forums at that time. Would this be "widely accepted as good" ? While that did not even play into my thinking of this rule set, I have half-jokingly suggested that to [violet] in the past, and I've been told that that's not happening again because of the aforementioned reaction. We've got enough authors reading this thread, and while I don't want to start a threadjack (so ... this might need it's own thread somewhere) ... thoughts?

Araraukar wrote:

Sciongrad wrote:No.

Honestly speaking it would be better to enshrine everything the GA has done up to now into an archive, than flushing it down the toilet with the drivel that's being brewed up.

Sedgistan wrote:That discussion is best continued in a new thread, should anyone want to pursue it.

Sedgistan wrote:I think it would be best player-started, as I'm not aware of any mods advocating it at the moment (not to say that none would support it, but I don't think any are pushing the idea).

So, should the WA be restarted, with the currently existing resolutions frozen into an archive, and the slate wiped clean?

With the recent rule change which takes away the ban to intentionally lie in repeals, some regulars have decided to brew up a shitstorm of more or less false repeals, which will likely not only make the Moderation team sigh and shake their heads sadly at us, but also make the majority of regional delegates getting fed up with the - as threatened by some - deluge of repeals for every existing resolution.

If that is what will actually happen, it would further devalue what still remains of the GA's roleplayed integrity, taking all of the fun out of playing the GA game, except for those that are planning to do it for shits and giggles.

I'd rather see a clean start than have everything be washed down the toilet in a shameful implosion.

Whether anyone can convince [violet] and Max and all the other high-ups to actually do this, I don't know. But I wanted to raise this chance as an alternative to what's happening now.

I think it's a good idea, and the new ruleset provides a good catalyst. I think it's a natural tendency for the GA to get stale. It's been, what, 8 years? Does anybody have any data on activity then versus now?

You know, it would allow for new players and old alike to get a chance to explore areas or subject matters they may never get to otherwise. I wasn't around for the old collapse of the UN but I imagine a blank canvas heralded new possibilities for players back then, it would bring a fresh element to those who play the WA end of the game and feel it may be getting stagnant or difficult to go new routes.

I'd be in favour of it.

I think a passing resolution on a restart should be needed if it is ever seriously considered.

I'd be in favour of a restart just for the craic tbh but it's not a panacea for all the problems being discussed in the rules thread.

Well, if we're gonna destroy the GA rules, might as well take the whole thing down with them. At least then our resolutions will be safe from flagrant lies.

If that is what will actually happen, it would further devalue what still remains of the GA's roleplayed integrity, taking all of the fun out of playing the GA game, except for those that are planning to do it for shits and giggles.

The GA's roleplay culture had been in serious retrogress for years.

Nope.

It is enticing, but you do realize the current rules would still stand? There's not much good in destroying years of work when the rules still remain shit.

It might actually entice more people in when the stock answer of "this is already covered in COCR" won't apply anymore.

Bananaistan wrote:It might actually entice more people in when the stock answer of "this is already covered in COCR" won't apply anymore.

Until, of course, someone passes CoCR mk. II.

As a player, I would not like to see this happen. Not only do I view this as an overreaction to the rule changes, but I also don't see the benefit. All this would do is open it up to rehashed versions of existing resolutions (including CoCR, to refute Banana's argument), even though there are still subjects we haven't covered yet.

Just because the sexy topics of genocide, nukes, and discrimination are covered doesn't mean there aren't huge swathes of international law ready for work. Christ, I only covered the rules of war and counterfeiting about 18 months ago! There are huge areas of environmental, technological, and economic law that have yet to be touched. Slamming the reset button because of a lack of topics is bloody braindead in light of all the actual evidence.

The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper wrote:As a player, I would not like to see this happen. Not only do I view this as an overreaction to the rule changes, but I also don't see the benefit. All this would do is open it up to rehashed versions of existing resolutions (including CoCR, to refute Banana's argument), even though there are still subjects we haven't covered yet.

I am opposed to this, although as WA resolutions require greater specialization of knowledge to write (i.e. as the obvious topics are legislated on), the community will shrink and become more exclusive. Most players cannot write resolutions right now because they don't have knowledge over more technical subjects like the environment, legal right, etc. There certainly are benefits.

EDIT: write instead of right
EDIT 2: Wow, right instead of write too lol

Separatist Peoples wrote:Just because the sexy topics of genocide, nukes, and discrimination are covered doesn't mean there aren't huge swathes of international law ready for work. Christ, I only covered the rules of war and counterfeiting about 18 months ago! There are huge areas of environmental, technological, and economic law that have yet to be touched. Slamming the reset button because of a lack of topics is bloody braindead in light of all the actual evidence.

It's been 8 years since the slate was wiped clean due to UN cease and desist. Surely it would generate significant activity if the new generations that have arisen in the past decade can get a stab at all the topics that have already been legislated on?

It's not really about whether or not there are topics that can still be written about. Though I challenge your assertion that there are really that many when it comes to topics that people think are *worth* writing about. When you write a single resolution on the laws of war -- a topic that spans tomes IRL -- you're left writing about relative minutiae afterwards.

It's more about, to me anyways, whether or not a clean slate following a major rules overhaul would be beneficial for long-term activity. I think it would.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:It's been 8 years since the slate was wiped clean due to UN cease and desist. Surely it would generate significant activity if the new generations that have arisen in the past decade can get a stab at all the topics that have already been legislated on?

It's not really about whether or not there are topics that can still be written about. Though I challenge your assertion that there are really that many when it comes to topics that people think are *worth* writing about. When you write a single resolution on the laws of war -- a topic that spans tomes IRL -- you're left writing about relative minutiae afterwards.

It's more about, to me anyways, whether or not a clean slate following a major rules overhaul would be beneficial for long-term activity. I think it would.

^Why I'm in favor.

EDIT: We should, however, keep all SC condemnations and commendations. Those actually passed, more often than not, were deserved by their recipients.

Sciongrad wrote:I am opposed to this, although as WA resolutions require greater specialization of knowledge to write (i.e. as the obvious topics are legislated on), the community will shrink and become more exclusive. Most players cannot write resolutions right now because they don't have knowledge over more technical subjects like the environment, legal right, etc. There certainly are benefits.

EDIT: write instead of right
EDIT 2: Wow, right instead of write too lol

And? Should our hard work be thrown out just because new players were unable or unwilling to learn about a topic? My background is in environmental science and, soon, intellectual property law. I've never been in the military, nor either had family in the military, yet I managed to pass comprehensive legislation on the rules of war. I was armed with Wikipedia and a copy of the Hague convention.

We are on the Internet. Lack of specialization can be overcome very easily.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:Just because the sexy topics of genocide, nukes, and discrimination are covered doesn't mean there aren't huge swathes of international law ready for work. Christ, I only covered the rules of war and counterfeiting about 18 months ago! There are huge areas of environmental, technological, and economic law that have yet to be touched. Slamming the reset button because of a lack of topics is bloody braindead in light of all the actual evidence.

It's been 8 years since the slate was wiped clean due to UN cease and desist. Surely it would generate significant activity if the new generations that have arisen in the past decade can get a stab at all the topics that have already been legislated on?

It's not really about whether or not there are topics that can still be written about. Though I challenge your assertion that there are really that many when it comes to topics that people think are *worth* writing about. When you write a single resolution on the laws of war -- a topic that spans tomes IRL -- you're left writing about relative minutiae afterwards.

It's more about, to me anyways, whether or not a clean slate following a major rules overhaul would be beneficial for long-term activity. I think it would.

So, in your analogy, one can repeal the law. Repeals are still an option. Wiping the slate clean would flush a lot of hard work for no reason other than a lack of creativity.

The rules have not changed such that passing new legislation is fundamentally different. The only major difference is how repeals currently work and the opening of an entirely new field of laws with the removal of the No Army rule. This does not necessitate a clean slate because this is not changing the entire landscape of the game.

Separatist Peoples wrote:And? Should our hard work be thrown out just because new players were unable or unwilling to learn about a topic? My background is in environmental science and, soon, intellectual property law. I've never been in the military, nor either had family in the military, yet I managed to pass comprehensive legislation on the rules of war. I was armed with Wikipedia and a copy of the Hague convention.

That's not my point. Players like you are extraordinary - the vast majority of players do not have the patience or desire to read through the Hague Convention just to write a resolution. That type of effort isn't required when passing a resolution against slavery or genocide. But I agree with you fundamentally - I'm against scrapping the GA, even if the new rules make it unplayable.

I don't think maintaining a dusty trophy shelf should be a primary reason to avoid ever resetting the GA.

I simply think, after basically a decade, new people should get the chance to have the debates us old players got to have thanks to the last reset. Not all of these resolutions are bad and have merit for repeal. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't help long-term activity to let those debates happen again.

Frankly, all resolutions should expire after a couple years, if you ask me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm with Sep. Just because all the obvious topics are taken doesn't mean we should restart the GA.

Kaboomlandia wrote:I'm with Sep. Just because all the obvious topics are taken doesn't mean we should restart the GA.

Nobody in this thread has made that argument, fyi.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:I don't think maintaining a dusty trophy shelf should be a primary reason to avoid ever resetting the GA.

I simply think, after basically a decade, new people should get the chance to have the debates us old players got to have thanks to the last reset. Not all of these resolutions are bad and have merit for repeal. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't help long-term activity to let those debates happen again.

Frankly, all resolutions should expire after a couple years, if you ask me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with Glen Rhodes' sunsetting idea. I'm sure there are a ton of kids who come on here and think "I've got a great idea for a convention against genocide" only to be told anything they want to propose is in conflict/duplication with an act passed almost a decade ago. Many acts are not perfect but good is the enemy of great and the fear of something after the repeal, from whose bourn no traveler returns, must give us pause, and rather live with those ill resolutions we have than fly to others we know not of.

I'm sorry, I kind of Shakespeare'd there... If we could rework game mechanics so that all laws auto repeal after a year or two, I think we would see a WA renaissance with lots of new players and ideas. That's something I would support.

I'm not one for the "all our hard work gone!!" argument. Come on now, it's a game. One of us pretends to be a potted plant. While I'm proud of some of my prior accomplishments in this game I think I could stomach having them removed if it fosters the community and isn't based on some stupid bull shit about jellyfish being microscopic organisms without a central nervous system.

So, so sorry, but I'm obviously still bitter about that...

Its all irrelevant. There is no need to restart unlike the last time, and Max has been pretty damn clear on the matter.

Separatist Peoples wrote:Its all irrelevant. There is no need to restart unlike the last time, and Max has been pretty damn clear on the matter.

There was no need to start over last time, either. All previous resolutions could have been grandfathered in. Max can also say whatever he wants. We can still advocate a clean slate!

Sandaoguo wrote:

Separatist Peoples wrote:Its all irrelevant. There is no need to restart unlike the last time, and Max has been pretty damn clear on the matter.

There was no need to start over last time, either.

All of the resolutions said "United Nations," so yeah, there was some reason to start over. But look, I was against it last time, I'm against it now. It's a non-starter, and besides, having to start over was pretty time-consuming last time. There were all those basic "rights" resolutions we had to get passed again, there were like 10 resolutions that were just copies of old UN resolutions that the authors wanted to re-institute for the WA (which gets repetitive, believe me, and don't think it's not going to happen again, because it will), and finally, we had just finished an arduous months-long process to repeal/replace those awful anti-slavery laws that were in place in the UN, and then the switchover occurred like two months later, and we had to do it all over again. The war crimes stretch in the WA was a pretty long, agonizing process as well, encompassing like half a dozen resolutions from 2014-15...you really want to go through the same thing again after another switchover?