Advertisement
by Hamagatama Zenshi » Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:27 pm
by Jey » Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:38 pm
New Leicestershire wrote:We still have not forgiven the Imperial Japanese Navy for the sinking of HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse, nor for the mistreatment of prisoners of war from Commonwealth nations by Japanese forces in the period 1941-45. Our WA proxy shall vote against.
David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire
by New Leicestershire » Fri Aug 21, 2009 3:45 pm
The Sedge wrote:New Leicestershire wrote:We still have not forgiven the Imperial Japanese Navy for the sinking of HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse, nor for the mistreatment of prisoners of war from Commonwealth nations by Japanese forces in the period 1941-45. Our WA proxy shall vote against.
David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire
This being Feudal Japan, its rather before any of the Real-World (and hence irrelevant anyway) events which you're talking about.
by MarauderIIC » Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:13 pm
But a "Liberate" proposal type was implemented. Although, you're right, it's not condemnation. But it allows public opinion to influence the game. And I'm pretty sure that the admins aren't totally stupid, surely they had some idea of what would happen.Todd McCloud wrote:It is a part of the game and has never been publically condemned by moderators or admin. So the ability to call it wrong is off the table: it is legal, and a part of the game. After all, without raiding, defenders such as yourself would be out of a job.
by Face Dancers » Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:50 am
NOTING that the invasion of the region by Catlandatopia, Fox Rite, The Cathedral, and Blades of Conquest led to the imposition of a secret password and the ejection of Feudal Japan's innocent members;
FURTHER NOTING that the former residents of Feudal Japan currently reside in Tokugawa Japan and still desire to return to Feudal Japan;
by Naivetry » Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:12 am
Hamagatama Zenshi wrote:*snip*
Resistance remains active in the region of Feudal Japan, 355 days after its occupation by Catlandatopia invaders. The last resistant, Kinjou Tennou KoZ, is making a brave last stand against the imposter delegate. The influence of our emperor is so great that the invader will require at least another month to acquire total control inside Feudal Japan. While we have been pleased by the success of our resistance, we must acknowledge that defeat is inevitable. We must always remember this sad and traitorous attack.
In the 637 days that have trickled by I have not received a single request from the "natives" to return to their region, a request I would gladly grant provided they did not make any attempt to circumvent my power.
by Travancore-Cochin » Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:58 am
Todd McCloud wrote:They do not stop raiding, but they discourage raiding. When a region is refounded, the general course most raiders follow is to password when pretty much all defenders have had their chance to re-take the region and all but 0-2 natives are left. This raid was no different - it followed that path - this was not a password-grab. Now, defenders get a second chance, like an extra life, but soon they will be invincible - once a password is gone, a password cannot be placed back onto the region until the resolution is repealed. So they can keep trying, without end, running through the region like ravenous wolves. Given enough time, they will win and implement their own form of imperialism upon that region. But, of course, that is perfectly okay. This is an unfair advantage, in that it has now tipped the scales in favor of defenders. I am equally against tipping the scales to raiders, because I believe the two groups need each other to survive.
Todd McCloud wrote:I believe the distinction comes in the definitions of griefing and raiding. There was ample time for the natives and defenders to work in the region - over a year to be precise. Yet nothing happened. In the past year, only 3-4 have been in that region: two CTE'd, one was banned, and the fourth person I am unsure of. But there was time. And the raiders have 'played nice', no one was breaking any rules, etc. This is just giving the defenders a 'second chance', but more precise, an unlimited amount of chances. It is very troubling.
by Bears Armed » Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:08 am
Hamagatama Zenshi wrote:I'm not nearly as active as I used to be on Nation States but I check in enough to make sure Feudal Japan is doing all right.
*(snip)*
Feudal Japan is my responsibility, mine as an individual, Catland just made it possible. I will continue to safe guard Feudal Japan as a delegate should
by Martyrdoom » Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:58 am
The Sedge wrote:Martyrdoom wrote:Inflatable Gandalfs wrote:If griefing is a problem, the admins could have handled it by simply junking the Influence system, instead of overly complicating things by appointing the WA referee over region-griefing. I maintain these "Liberations" are a waste of the WA's valuable time and resources, and thus vote against.
Exactly. Either have influence or don't. The thing is the WA isn't exactly a referee in these circumstances. It's now a mechanism used by 'defenders' to legitimise their own invasions of regions.
I don't see the argument there. Influence is a good system, and saves the mods from having to rule on every invasion, and the Liberation resolutions deal with its one flaw. Why should it be a straight choice between 'influence with no liberation resolutions' or 'no influence'? And defining liberations used to restore regions to native control as 'invasions'... come off it. Don't tell me you really can't see the difference between someone taking the delegacy of a region to kick out the natives, and someone taking the delegacy to kick out the invaders so that the region can be handed back to the natives.
by The Sedge » Sat Aug 22, 2009 5:03 am
Martyrdoom wrote:Firstly, liberations should'nt be about restoring 'natives' to control - it's merely about removing delegate imposed-barriers, nothing more and nothing less. When that's the aim its an inherent WA-police action. Secondly, liberations to restore native control are by definition part of an invasion. Thirdly, I don't see the difference because there's no motive in the code - invaders which are ejected are still 'natives' technically.
FURTHER NOTING that the former residents of Feudal Japan currently reside in Tokugawa Japan and still desire to return to Feudal Japan;
AWARE that the nations formerly resident in Feudal Japan can return to their region only through the intervention of the Security Council;
by Martyrdoom » Sat Aug 22, 2009 5:29 am
The Sedge wrote:Martyrdoom wrote:Firstly, liberations should'nt be about restoring 'natives' to control - it's merely about removing delegate imposed-barriers, nothing more and nothing less. When that's the aim its an inherent WA-police action. Secondly, liberations to restore native control are by definition part of an invasion. Thirdly, I don't see the difference because there's no motive in the code - invaders which are ejected are still 'natives' technically.
Liberation resolutions are, in reality, about restoring native control in regions - if you read the text of this resolution, you'll find that the proposal is justified in terms of allowing the natives back to their region:FURTHER NOTING that the former residents of Feudal Japan currently reside in Tokugawa Japan and still desire to return to Feudal Japan;
AWARE that the nations formerly resident in Feudal Japan can return to their region only through the intervention of the Security Council;
Liberations may be a response to invasions, but they're not part of an invasion, just the reaction to one. Yes, there isn't a motive in the code, but that doesn't mean that game players can't act ethically - and the ethical position here would be to return Feudal Japan to the nations who built it up into a great region, rather than allowing it to rot in the hands of the griefers who gloat about having destroyed a region, and about having driven hundreds of people away from NationStates.
by The Sedge » Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:17 am
Martyrdoom wrote:The text of this resolution is illegal and invalid in my eyes in anycase. But liberations, I humbly beg to differ, are not, in my opinion, primarily about restoring 'native control'. They are essentially neutral - remove the password and keep it off. "A resolution to strike down Delegate-imposed barriers to free entry in a region". That's it. If not it retrospectively illegalises the prior invasion which was a truly legal act, unless I've missed the memo that stated raiding has been banned.
I personally don't like 'ethics' going near games, but no, the ethical position would be to 'return' Feudal Japan, not to some clique who claim the region for themselves, but to the nations of NS: re-institute free-entry for everyone so they can come and go as they please.
That said, what's the betting that when the lilberation is a success a password subsequently goes up in the name of 'security'?
by Martyrdoom » Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:54 am
by Todd McCloud » Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:54 am
Travancore-Cochin wrote:Todd McCloud wrote:They do not stop raiding, but they discourage raiding. When a region is refounded, the general course most raiders follow is to password when pretty much all defenders have had their chance to re-take the region and all but 0-2 natives are left. This raid was no different - it followed that path - this was not a password-grab. Now, defenders get a second chance, like an extra life, but soon they will be invincible - once a password is gone, a password cannot be placed back onto the region until the resolution is repealed. So they can keep trying, without end, running through the region like ravenous wolves. Given enough time, they will win and implement their own form of imperialism upon that region. But, of course, that is perfectly okay. This is an unfair advantage, in that it has now tipped the scales in favor of defenders. I am equally against tipping the scales to raiders, because I believe the two groups need each other to survive.Todd McCloud wrote:I believe the distinction comes in the definitions of griefing and raiding. There was ample time for the natives and defenders to work in the region - over a year to be precise. Yet nothing happened. In the past year, only 3-4 have been in that region: two CTE'd, one was banned, and the fourth person I am unsure of. But there was time. And the raiders have 'played nice', no one was breaking any rules, etc. This is just giving the defenders a 'second chance', but more precise, an unlimited amount of chances. It is very troubling.
So, just because there was ample time for defenders to have freed the region, banjecting natives, putting an invisible password and destroying the region is suddenly not griefing? I beg to disagree. I still believe that however legal it may be, it is still inherently wrong. The liberation proposal makes it so that the community gets to decide whether it's right or wrong, and whether action should be taken, if it was wrong.
by Andrewboy » Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:59 am
by Bears Armed » Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:12 am
Todd McCloud wrote: This has been clearly the case: a check on Feudal Japan shows such behavior on both sides of the fence. But this is totally okay for the 'natives' and clearly wrong for the raiders. Because natives, like defenders, can do no wrong, despite being historically just as 'bad' as raiders.
Todd McCloud wrote:The raiders here did their job, harassed initially,
by Andrewboy » Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:36 am
by Cocodian » Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:28 am
Bears Armed wrote:Todd McCloud wrote:The raiders here did their job, harassed initially,
"job"?!? Were they paid &/or invited to do this by either the region's long-term residents or the game's management? 'Raiding' (in NS) is no more a legitimate "job" than (in RL) housebreaking, or mugging!
If an armed robber breaks into your RL home, and you use force to defeat him, would you seriously think that he had a right to protest against your actions on the grounds that he was "just doing his job"?
by Veilyonia » Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:58 am
Todd McCloud wrote:What many people fail to realize is griefing is a two-way street. In order for it to continue in a region, the other side must participate in it too, or at least some form of harassment. This has been clearly the case: a check on Feudal Japan shows such behavior on both sides of the fence. But this is totally okay for the 'natives' and clearly wrong for the raiders.
Because natives, like defenders, can do no wrong, despite being historically just as 'bad' as raiders. The raiders here did their job, harassed initially, but obviously the fire was returned. So then *both sides* regress down the path of griefing in my eyes. This is why I believe cries of harassment or griefing become in material - both sides were doing that to the max, if I recall.
by Progressive Union » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:29 am
by Meekinos » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:31 am
Progressive Union wrote:Can I ask why this came two years after the FEUDAL JAPAN region was invaded?
by Act-a-fool » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:35 am
by Airport Motor Lodge » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:41 am
Act-a-fool wrote:i wish the WA got the chance to vote on issues that i actually give a shit about.
by Yamamoto Kansuke » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:41 am
by Progressive Union » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:58 am
Andrewboy wrote:i still fail to see hy there has been a password on feudal japan in the first place
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement