NationStates

Posted: **Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:06 am**

The Security Council,

Believing it necessary to inform the greater public on how nations attempt to collect signature artworks of other nations in order to protect collectors and minimize disputes,

Recognizing that the collecting of signature artworks, even with the help of advanced tools, can be extremely time-consuming and arduous,

Defining, for the purpose of this resolution,

Card Farming – the process in which nations puppet, enslave, or administer other nations in order to collect their artwork, generally with the aim of increasing reserves of bank.
Transfer – artwork being bought and sold with the intention of moving bank between nations controlled by the same administration.
Heist – when a nation attempts to steal bank from another nation, typically during transfers, by placing a lower ask than the amount being transferred.
Pull Event – an event in which nations attempt to duplicate artwork by matching an ask above market value and placing repeated, rapid, and increasing bids while card farming.

Understanding that in order to build a collection, a nation must obtain bank, usually through card farming, and that bank, once pooled on secondary nations, must be transferred to the nation building the collection,

Noting that during a transfer, there is considerable risk of being heisted, and that this risk can change depending on a variety of factors, which, for the benefit of the public, have been outlined below,

Asserting that nations are entitled to the fruits of their labor, and that the practice of heisting does not align with the mission of this Council,

Hereby declares the following guidelines for collectors:

Article I. Reducing Risk

Transfers are best conducted during times of low market activity.
Avoid conducting transfers during pull events, which can disrupt the event and increase the chances of having the transfers heisted.
Artworks of higher scarcity make for better transfers, decreasing the chances of having heisters obtain a copy of the artwork being used.
Have several copies of an artwork before conducting transfers with it.
The greater the amount of bank attempting to be transferred over a single exchange, the greater the risk of heisters obtaining a copy of the artwork.
For large transfers, start the auction with a low risk bid, generally around market value, and wait towards the end of the auction before attempting to move large sums of bank, thus limiting the amount of time heisters can intervene.

Article II. International Cooperation

When possible, members of regional and non-regional organizations having to do with the exchange of artwork, henceforth referred to as “guilds,” should refrain from heisting and advise against the practice.
Guilds are encouraged to craft agreements, publish literature, and issue their own guidelines regarding heisting in an attempt to build a safer market space.
Guilds are encouraged to organize against heisters, and use whatever means available on the market to corral the threat.

Article III. Communication

When subject to a heist, nations should make an effort to end the dispute by communicating with the heister.
When a heist originates from a region with a guild, the guild should facilitate communication between the parties involved when requested and practical.

Posted: **Thu Jul 22, 2021 2:33 am**

Looks absolutely fine with regards to fitting in the Declarations category.

Good proposal. I was hoping to see some Declarations like this from the Cards community.

Posted: **Thu Jul 22, 2021 5:02 am**

On clause III of article I, do you really mean "higher rarity"? I get what you mean if you're trying to say rarity as how many people own the card, but it could be confused with the six game-established rarities - and most transfers happen with commons or uncommons, which are the lower rarities.

Perhaps use "artworks owned by as few nations as possible"?

Posted: **Thu Jul 22, 2021 6:44 am**

Giovanniland wrote:On clause III of article I, do you really mean "higher rarity"? I get what you mean if you're trying to say rarity as how many people own the card, but it could be confused with the six game-established rarities - and most transfers happen with commons or uncommons, which are the lower rarities.

Perhaps use "artworks owned by as few nations as possible"?

"higher scarcity" ?

Posted: **Thu Jul 22, 2021 11:43 am**

The article numbers are inconsistent. The first section has Roman numerals and the last two use numbers.

Posted: **Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:46 pm**

I'll support this proposal should it achieve quorum.

Posted: **Sat Jul 24, 2021 12:52 am**

Giovanniland wrote:On clause III of article I, do you really mean "higher rarity"? I get what you mean if you're trying to say rarity as how many people own the card, but it could be confused with the six game-established rarities - and most transfers happen with commons or uncommons, which are the lower rarities.

Perhaps use "artworks owned by as few nations as possible"?

I meant the six game-established rarities. Even though most transfers happen on uncommons and commons, it is my understanding that a card is harder to pull the more rare it is. However, I did forget about scarcity. I've included both rarity and scarcity in clause three.

Posted: **Sat Jul 24, 2021 5:47 am**

Debussy wrote:
Giovanniland wrote:On clause III of article I, do you really mean "higher rarity"? I get what you mean if you're trying to say rarity as how many people own the card, but it could be confused with the six game-established rarities - and most transfers happen with commons or uncommons, which are the lower rarities.

Perhaps use "artworks owned by as few nations as possible"?

I meant the six game-established rarities. Even though most transfers happen on uncommons and commons, it is my understanding that a card is harder to pull the more rare it is. However, I did forget about scarcity. I've included both rarity and scarcity in clause three.

Now the clause creates a sort of contradiction though. The higher the rarity is, the fewer cards with high scarcity there are. Scarcity is mostly tied to a nation ceasing to exist and its card being harder to be found. But nations whose cards have higher rarities are more likely to have spent more time in the game and thus have less chance of ceasing to exist.

So, while it may indeed be harder for someone to pull your transfer and try to heist it if you use a higher rarities, you will see that almost nobody uses these cards because almost none of them have the same level of scarcity as commons, thus making it more likely to be heisted due to existing owners before the transfer. It is a way more riskier way than using a common card with one or two owners, that has the lower chance someone finds it in a pack and the even lower chance someone tries to heist (since lots of card farmers will not heist other people they know).

TL;DR: I'd say "higher scarcity" only, otherwise the clause gives some advice that contradicts what most existing card guides and resources do.

Posted: **Mon Jul 26, 2021 11:49 am**

I think you submitted this with too short of a drafting period - I would have loved to give some critiques but barely managed to glance at it with how busy I've been. That being said, good luck with the proposal and a short draft is better than none at all!

Posted: **Fri Aug 06, 2021 5:09 am**

This feels like legislation, then again the rules on declarations are vague and lenient so I really don't think I can take a stand here. Not that my opinion holds any weight or significance here.

Posted: **Fri Aug 06, 2021 5:45 am**

Cappedore wrote:This feels like legislation, then again the rules on declarations are vague and lenient so I really don't think I can take a stand here. Not that my opinion holds any weight or significance here.

This bit makes it fine:

Hereby declares the following guidelines for collectors:

None of the following clauses are binding. It's just the SC advising that they be followed.

Posted: **Sun Aug 08, 2021 12:37 am**

Following discussions with TWP’s cards expert (Hi Gio) I can happily report that I will be recommending a “For” vote to TWP’s Delegate.

Posted: **Sun Aug 08, 2021 7:00 am**

Heisting is cool, opposed.

Posted: **Sun Aug 08, 2021 11:43 am**

I apologize for not replying to this topic sooner so my feedback could be incorporated. Nevertheless, I thought there were a few serious flaws this this proposal, which I posted on TSP's OWL RMB but wanted to cross-post here. Hopefully, if this is defeated and the author chooses to revise/resubmit (which I would encourage), some of this feedback can be incorporated.

Posted: **Sun Aug 08, 2021 2:33 pm**

HumanSanity wrote:I apologize for not replying to this topic sooner so my feedback could be incorporated. Nevertheless, I thought there were a few serious flaws this this proposal, which I posted on TSP's OWL RMB but wanted to cross-post here. Hopefully, if this is defeated and the author chooses to revise/resubmit (which I would encourage), some of this feedback can be incorporated.

I disagree with almost all of your feedback there.

Posted: **Sun Aug 08, 2021 8:01 pm**

The Europeian Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against the Security Council declaration, "Convention On Heisting".
Its reasoning may be found here.

Posted: **Sun Aug 08, 2021 9:30 pm**

We vote against as our arts are salvaged or saved from the monstrous nations who were or are still hell bent on exterminating those who follow old religions. e will never cooperate with monsters responsible for destruction of culture and will never share any artwork which many forsake anyways.

Posted: **Mon Aug 09, 2021 9:43 am**

Debussy wrote:
HumanSanity wrote:I apologize for not replying to this topic sooner so my feedback could be incorporated. Nevertheless, I thought there were a few serious flaws this this proposal, which I posted on TSP's OWL RMB but wanted to cross-post here. Hopefully, if this is defeated and the author chooses to revise/resubmit (which I would encourage), some of this feedback can be incorporated.

I disagree with almost all of your feedback there.

There is certainly value in a robust drafting process and incorporating the feedback that one receives in it.

That value is absent here, and the consequence is reflected in the vote status.

Posted: **Mon Aug 09, 2021 10:16 am**

Debussy wrote:
HumanSanity wrote:I apologize for not replying to this topic sooner so my feedback could be incorporated. Nevertheless, I thought there were a few serious flaws this this proposal, which I posted on TSP's OWL RMB but wanted to cross-post here. Hopefully, if this is defeated and the author chooses to revise/resubmit (which I would encourage), some of this feedback can be incorporated.

I disagree with almost all of your feedback there.

Why?

Posted: **Mon Aug 09, 2021 6:52 pm**

The United Regions Alliance recommends that nations vote against this resolution. https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1579316

Posted: **Wed Aug 11, 2021 1:10 am**

Regardless of the outcome, I just wanted to say thank you for writing this proposal. I'm fairly new, and it helped me better understand some of the mechanics and terminology of card collecting.

Posted: **Fri Aug 13, 2021 12:18 am**

"Convention Against Heisting" was defeated 9,591 votes to 2,121. (18.11% support)

NationStates

[FAILED] Convention Against Heisting

[FAILED] Convention Against Heisting