Recruitment adspam suggestion.

[Go Go Gadget Defender]

The only argument brought forth by the pro-spam crowd is that GCRs deserve harassment for existing..

No, the argument brought forth is that the feeder regions exist for new nations to be founded into, and therefore act as a recruiting pool for other regions. Suggesting it should be banned as 'harassment' or because it's 'unfair' for GCRs shows a complete failure to understand the reason for the feeder regions existing.

An argument based on the fact that RMB adspam is generally not effective would be on firmer ground, as in most cases it is true, though there are some regions that have prospered from it (eg OBI), and others that have gained something (whether nations or attention) from it. It remains the only low-cost way of advertising that is widely seen by new nations (though suppression has reduced that) - if you want it gone, suggest a replacement that is as easy to do.

For someone who has long complained about the restrictive nature of the recruiting rules in NS, attempting to get another aspect of it banned seems rather hypocritical.

Not all forms of advertising are annoying; personal adverts are much better than adverts which interrupt a community.

Furthermore a lot of my recruitment challenges were to challenge Moderation's hypocrisy. One second you'd hold this:

That involves contacting individual players who you know are already involved in the WA, whose stance & opinions you know, who you know may be interested in joining, and who likely know you too, as against spamming the inboxes of everyone in a region.

The next second you're giving me a warning for contacting " individual players who you know are already involved in the WA, whose stance & opinions you know, who you know may be interested in joining, and who likely know you too" about joining a WA Organization, just because Sanctaria posted on an RMB and said 'thanks for the invite'.

You take another blow below the belt and I sock you another, understand?

Adspam can be replaced with ten min of recruitment telegrams. I'd suspect its no more effective then thirty telegrams sent.

[Augustus Este]

How about we just ban RMB advertising all together?

It doesn't work anyway, unless your goal in posting it is to annoy the natives.

[Glen-Rhodes]

How about we just ban RMB advertising all together?

Because the next thing that'll happen is that feeder delegates and influential feeder gameplayers will complain about advertising altogether. Before you know it advertising will only be legal through some kind of sanctioned 'advertising page,' so that nobody has to deal with 'spam.'

I'm not usually a fan of slippery-slope arguments. But with censorship, it's always a slippery slope.

[Ballotonia]

Presently, the way adspam is used means that UCRs are legally allowed to use adspam to harrass feeders, but feeders are not allowed to repay the favor. This is clearly unequal and unfair.

UCRs and GCRs are not intended to be equal, and so there is nothing unfair about it. GCRs exist to serve a specific game function (for feeders: where new nations are founded), and this also means allowing the posting of recruitment messages on the GCR RMBs.

Ballotonia

[Bears Armed]

It doesn't work anyway, unless your goal in posting it is to annoy the natives.

Speaking as somebody who used it to recruit for a region that I'd founded back in my early days in NS, it does work to a limited extent... or did back then, anyhows... and considering how few responses TGs also get, for somebody who currently doesn't have much time available in which to build their region (and maybeso hopes to recruit one or more people who'd be willing to help with that) it might actually be the better option.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

The only argument brought forth by the pro-spam crowd is that GCRs deserve harassment for existing..

No, the argument brought forth is that the feeder regions exist for new nations to be founded into, and therefore act as a recruiting pool for other regions. Suggesting it should be banned as 'harassment' or because it's 'unfair' for GCRs shows a complete failure to understand the reason for the feeder regions existing.

An argument based on the fact that RMB adspam is generally not effective would be on firmer ground, as in most cases it is true, though there are some regions that have prospered from it (eg OBI), and others that have gained something (whether nations or attention) from it. It remains the only low-cost way of advertising that is widely seen by new nations (though suppression has reduced that) - if you want it gone, suggest a replacement that is as easy to do.

For someone who has long complained about the restrictive nature of the recruiting rules in NS, attempting to get another aspect of it banned seems rather hypocritical.

I wouldn't necessarily call it widely seen, and I haven't even -started- telling people about this topic, so I no recruit for nazis yet.

You'd be better off having an advertisement page where each region can have a piece written up about themselves, with a link to said advertisement page in the welcoming telegram you receive from NationStates upon foundation. Criteria for what pieces the new player wants to see could be narrowed down through the selection and/or elimination of unwanted factors of regions, and the new tags system is perfect for that. Regional pieces could be "featured within the system" and regional size would have no impact on what order regional pieces would be shown to a player (maybe 5 a page). This system would be vastly and utterly superior to spamming feeder RMBs, as it would require even less effort to set up a piece than it would to RMB recruit, while simultaneously removing the need for RMB advertisements at all. The only drawback I can see is the fact that a game admin would have to sit down and actually code the feature, but I'm guessing this would be about as difficult to create as a blog page with a couple of extra nifty search functions.

[Mahaj]

How about we just ban RMB advertising all together?

No. It can work with the right message if a certain group of people is looking for said message. For example, I was looking for a new start in a region and the RMB message was "a new region, a new start,..." so I jumped on it.

[Glen-Rhodes]

You'd be better off having an advertisement page where each region can have a piece written up about themselves, with a link to said advertisement page in the welcoming telegram you receive from NationStates upon foundation.

Oh, look. It's already happening! Imagine if all the ads on the internet were only on one page, and you got the link from your ISP when you activated your connection. Wouldn't that just be wonderful? Getting rid of all those pesky ads all over the place! Destroying the effectiveness and purpose of advertisements is a small price to pay, right?

[Unibot II]

G-R, you're not making a distinction between different types of advertisement; the internet has been obliterating the older form of advertisement: interruptive advertising and replacing it with constructive advertising (stuff that is presumably useful to the viewer like Google Adwords), shock and awe -- word of mouth (the most effective advertisement style) and whathaveyou. RMB spam is like the equivalent of pop-up ads for NS; they're more of a nuisance than they are actually beneficial to the advertiser. You couldn't run Facebook on pop-up ads, it wouldn't pay for itself and its membership would go down.. way down -- for example.

[Glen-Rhodes]

RMB ads are not the equivalent of pop-up ads. They aren't disruptive, nor are they flashy, on average. I don't find your comparison to be very good at all.

What's happening here is very clear to me. GCR people have successfully labeled all forms of advertising as spam. Since it's now considered spam, which is universally detested, GCRs have gotten away with banning RMB ads altogether. This despite the fact that GCRs are the sole source of new players, which is who ads are for.

It's not surprising that the next step would be to target TG ads. I don't have a lot of faith that anybody will want to protect TG ads. The pattern here is to demonize and then ban. Sooner or later, advertising will be a thing of the past, as will start-up UCRs. Censorship is always a slippery slope.

[The Most Glorious Hack]

Better idea: ban the feeders from having delegates. Then there'd be no figureheads to complain about regional recruiting!

[Unibot II]

RMB ads are not the equivalent of pop-up ads. They aren't disruptive, nor are they flashy, on average. I don't find your comparison to be very good at all.

What's happening here is very clear to me. GCR people have successfully labeled all forms of advertising as spam. Since it's now considered spam, which is universally detested, GCRs have gotten away with banning RMB ads altogether. This despite the fact that GCRs are the sole source of new players, which is who ads are for.

It's not surprising that the next step would be to target TG ads. I don't have a lot of faith that anybody will want to protect TG ads. The pattern here is to demonize and then ban. Sooner or later, advertising will be a thing of the past, as will start-up UCRs. Censorship is always a slippery slope.

Now that's scaremongering plain and simple, adspam is not the sole source of new players -- telegram recruitment is a good chunk of new players flooding into UCRS... but adspam is different than telegram recruitment. Adspam is the disruptive posts by recruiters on regional RMBs.. the comparison I made between pop-ups and region adspam is a fine comparison.. you're just avoiding the analogy because you know it dismantles your argument -- the internet is moving away from the kind of intrusiveness that pop-ups had and its improved the effectiveness of ads.. not decreased the effectiveness.

You're saying it's a slippery slope but like most slippery slopes, you're trying to make a pattern based on one instance of behavior and "censorship" implies the victim is the recruiter when regions are the victims of adspam -- you're just playing with connotations and making leaps and bounds within logic that shouldn't be assumed.

[Hileville]

RMB ads are not the equivalent of pop-up ads. They aren't disruptive, nor are they flashy, on average.

I would argue with you on that point. RMB ads are found to be disruptive by GCR communities. I as Delegate of TSP have had numerous people complain about RMB ads like GGR and Sliver Lake was a more recent complaint as well as a few others. When you have an ad that is excessive in length or formatting it harms the regional community. It clutters our RMB and disrupts the discussion of the region which we should have the right to have just like UCR's.

GCR people have successfully labeled all forms of advertising as spam. Since it's now considered spam, which is universally detested, GCRs have gotten away with banning RMB ads altogether.

RMB advertising is not as successfull as TG advertising and when you have regions that know this and post advertisements because they know it gets the community angry you have a problem. That is why advertisers like GGR have earned themselves a zero tolerance policy in TSP for disrupting the community and attacking our community while posting their ads.

[Mahaj]

RMB ads are not the equivalent of pop-up ads. They aren't disruptive, nor are they flashy, on average.

I would argue with you on that point. RMB ads are found to be disruptive by GCR communities. I as Delegate of TSP have had numerous people complain about RMB ads like GGR and Sliver Lake was a more recent complaint as well as a few others. When you have an ad that is excessive in length or formatting it harms the regional community. It clutters our RMB and disrupts the discussion of the region which we should have the right to have just like UCR's.

But GCR's are gifted new nations, a right which UCR's don't have. The intent of feeders being places for new nations to be born, with these feeders not having to do any recruiting, putting up with advertisements is the price to pay. If an add is too long, suppress it, send them a telegram letting them know. See if they have allies that are willing to let them know what they're doing is bad, I don't really care. But I would be opposed to a ban on adspam.

[Hileville]

I am not saying I support a full ban on all ads Mahaj. What I am saying is that the system is flawed and the argument that they don't disrupt the community is outrageous. You cannot say that GCR's deserve to have their community disrupted just because we are graced with new nations being "gifted" to us. There are a lot of new nations that leave based on the first TG they received. There needs to be a differnt way that is less dissruptive to the feeders community for advertisers to get their message across.

[Ballotonia]

Better idea: ban the feeders from having delegates. Then there'd be no figureheads to complain about regional recruiting!

I like your way of thinking! How about also making them 'exit only' ? All may leave, but none may enter? (recruiters would be new nations born into the feeder they spam up, of course) And without a Delegate, there should be a standardized WFE urging new nations to seek out a new home elsewhere. The flag could be a 'nuclear contamination' symbol, further urging nations to seek a new home. And that would also mean there's no longer a need for having multiple feeders. One should suffice.

As for the recruitment spam debate... I see it as part of the purpose of a feeder to welcome nations into the game and direct them elsewhere. Recruitment spam is simply a part of that function. A good point was made earlier about suppressing posts in feeders undermining that function.

Ballotonia

[Improving Wordiness]

That is a better idea...I like the idea of nations being born into a playpen type of region. Reverse hotel california

[Warzone Codger]

Could we at least give this to Warzones for starters?

I don't get the bonus of new nations yet I have to endure RMB spam again and again. Though some are beginning to realise that it's far less likely to work when it's coming a region who also recruited its members..

Even in the normal case where you aren't trying to build a region and are just playing to hold it as long as possible, why should the victors of an official NS activity, who's home region put in resources to win it have to share their space with others who did nothing?

[Nullarni]

I like your way of thinking! How about also making them 'exit only' ? All may leave, but none may enter? (recruiters would be new nations born into the feeder they spam up, of course) And without a Delegate, there should be a standardized WFE urging new nations to seek out a new home elsewhere. The flag could be a 'nuclear contamination' symbol, further urging nations to seek a new home. And that would also mean there's no longer a need for having multiple feeders. One should suffice.

As for the recruitment spam debate... I see it as part of the purpose of a feeder to welcome nations into the game and direct them elsewhere. Recruitment spam is simply a part of that function. A good point was made earlier about suppressing posts in feeders undermining that function.

Yeah, I like this a lot. I doubt it would actually happen, because the Pacifics have always been around and I imagine more than a few people are a little attached to them.

It would really improve the WA... Or at least make it a bit more democratic. With the last resolution that passed, the WA Delegates from the five feeders made up about 12% of the vote... That's kind of significant.

[Hileville]

Better idea: ban the feeders from having delegates. Then there'd be no figureheads to complain about regional recruiting!

I like your way of thinking! How about also making them 'exit only' ? All may leave, but none may enter? (recruiters would be new nations born into the feeder they spam up, of course) And without a Delegate, there should be a standardized WFE urging new nations to seek out a new home elsewhere. The flag could be a 'nuclear contamination' symbol, further urging nations to seek a new home. And that would also mean there's no longer a need for having multiple feeders. One should suffice.

As for the recruitment spam debate... I see it as part of the purpose of a feeder to welcome nations into the game and direct them elsewhere. Recruitment spam is simply a part of that function. A good point was made earlier about suppressing posts in feeders undermining that function.

Ballotonia

Worst idea ever. The feeders have communities just like UCR's do.

[SunRawr]

Better idea: ban the feeders from having delegates. Then there'd be no figureheads to complain about regional recruiting!

I like your way of thinking! How about also making them 'exit only' ? All may leave, but none may enter? (recruiters would be new nations born into the feeder they spam up, of course) And without a Delegate, there should be a standardized WFE urging new nations to seek out a new home elsewhere. The flag could be a 'nuclear contamination' symbol, further urging nations to seek a new home. And that would also mean there's no longer a need for having multiple feeders. One should suffice.

As for the recruitment spam debate... I see it as part of the purpose of a feeder to welcome nations into the game and direct them elsewhere. Recruitment spam is simply a part of that function. A good point was made earlier about suppressing posts in feeders undermining that function.

Ballotonia

I really like this idea for the most part! I don't see it happening, but I like it.

I also agree with the second part. Perhaps feeders shouldn't have the suppress feature?

[Ginet]

Worst idea ever. The feeders have communities just like UCR's do.

^This! While I disagree with the OP's suggestion, some of the proposals from the other side are even worse. Yes, GCRs are different from UCRs, and there's a good reason for spam to be legal, but they are also communities, and we deserve a way to defend our RMBs. Perhaps we need a whole different recruiting method that's as easy as RMB ads, but less intrusive.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Better idea: ban the feeders from having delegates. Then there'd be no figureheads to complain about regional recruiting!

I like your way of thinking! How about also making them 'exit only' ? All may leave, but none may enter? (recruiters would be new nations born into the feeder they spam up, of course) And without a Delegate, there should be a standardized WFE urging new nations to seek out a new home elsewhere. The flag could be a 'nuclear contamination' symbol, further urging nations to seek a new home. And that would also mean there's no longer a need for having multiple feeders. One should suffice.

As for the recruitment spam debate... I see it as part of the purpose of a feeder to welcome nations into the game and direct them elsewhere. Recruitment spam is simply a part of that function. A good point was made earlier about suppressing posts in feeders undermining that function.

Ballotonia

Are you being serious? Or is that just some over the top sarcasm that got lost in translation?

[Glen-Rhodes]

I would argue with you on that point. RMB ads are found to be disruptive by GCR communities.

I contend that those people are complaining for the sake of complaining. The only thing RMBs are good for, if you have a large region, is advertising. But I have a feeling this debate has happened already and nothing is going to change by having it again.

The fact is that GCRs are the only places for recruiting, and GCR leaders have consistently sought to make advertising harder in their respective regions. What is the endgame, here? From my viewpoint, GCR leaders believe they deserve all the same privileges as UCRs.

RMB advertising is not as successfull as TG advertising and when you have regions that know this and post advertisements because they know it gets the community angry you have a problem. That is why advertisers like GGR have earned themselves a zero tolerance policy in TSP for disrupting the community and attacking our community while posting their ads.

This is a point I see all the time, and it couldn't be more wrong. Who cares if RMB advertising isn't as successful as TG advertising? Receipts from my local grocery store come with ads on the back. Advertising is a numbers game. The idea is to advertise wherever you can and as much as you can. GCR RMBs have always been a place to advertise, until somebody got the idea that GCRs are the equivalent of UCRs.

[Hileville]

The only thing RMBs are good for, if you have a large region, is advertising.

Really? In some regions there is conversation that occurs with the people who are citizens of that region.

The fact is that GCRs are the only places for recruiting, and GCR leaders have consistently sought to make advertising harder in their respective regions. What is the endgame, here? From my viewpoint, GCR leaders believe they deserve all the same privileges as UCRs.

Do you actively participate in any of the GCR's?