Lenlyvit wrote:I wouldn't call two votes for and two votes against in TNP as a unanimous against vote.
My mistake. On my mobile browser, I apparently opened the window for Repeal: “Minimum Standard Of Living Act”, which was 0-7.
Advertisement
by Refuge Isle » Tue Aug 30, 2022 9:41 am
Lenlyvit wrote:I wouldn't call two votes for and two votes against in TNP as a unanimous against vote.
by Unibot III » Tue Aug 30, 2022 10:12 am
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
by Minskiev » Tue Aug 30, 2022 10:37 am
Lenlyvit wrote:I've made a revision to the draft in order to fix the wording, although I'm unsure if that's the kind of wording everyone is looking for?
by Bhang Bhang Duc » Tue Aug 30, 2022 10:52 am
Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.
RiderSyl wrote:If an enchantress made it so one raid could bring about world peace, Unibot would ask raiders to just sign a petition instead.
Sedgistan wrote:The SC has just has a spate of really shitty ones recently from Northumbria, his Watermelon fanboy…..
by Hustlertwo » Tue Aug 30, 2022 11:59 am
by Lenlyvit » Tue Aug 30, 2022 12:26 pm
Minskiev wrote:Lenlyvit wrote:I've made a revision to the draft in order to fix the wording, although I'm unsure if that's the kind of wording everyone is looking for?
Would revise "Taking a stance of being for any Liberation resolution that the native population has given their explicit permission to be passed or passed by they themselves." to "Supporting only the Liberation resolutions that the relevant native population has given their explicit permission to be passed."
Sorry for your troubles. I really do sympathize, this was kind of brutal.
Lile Ulie Islands wrote:Withdrawn...again?
Hustlertwo wrote:If something takes this many drafts to avoid causing riots, it seems like it's not worth pursuing. What are the odds it can even pass?
by Lenlyvit » Tue Aug 30, 2022 12:28 pm
by Xanthal » Tue Aug 30, 2022 12:56 pm
by Unibot III » Wed Aug 31, 2022 7:54 am
If a threatened historical region does not have a native community that is sufficiently active and engaged to express an opinion- explicit or implied- about its fate, it is not the responsibility of outsiders to intervene nor is it their responsibility to forbear. The region is an abandoned lot, a castle with an empty throne. In that respect, Unibot is correct. Raiders recognize such regions for what they are and will happily take them. If they mean to intervene successfully, Defenders would be wise to share that understanding. I would much rather an outsider take control who had a vision for redevelopment than a raider who just wanted another trophy for their shelf. What I do not support is using defenders or Liberation to keep those regions in limbo without expending the effort to make them viable communities again. That's like saving an old building from being torn down and then leaving it to rot. It's not preservation, it's blight.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
by Xanthal » Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:26 am
Unibot III wrote:What I envision a historical society doing is more or less what players did in Christmas. The only other options for regions in Christmas’ situation are letting the regions exist in some kind of sad password limbo, or face occupation, destruction, or the possibility of a refound.
I’ll be the first to admit it’s not an ideal answer, the ideal answer is that the regions themselves organically take steps to rebuild their regions. I remember when the initiative in Christmas was launched, it was unconventional and it didn’t square nicely with the ethics that defenders operated on, but I think there has since emerged a common understanding that that was the best response that could have been taken for everyone including Christmas.
As the game matures and time passes, I feel that the ethics surrounding regional and community preservation will have to change — we’re getting to the point where historically significant regions have been dormant or dead for much longer than they were operational, and there may be no survivors and any remaining survivor may be unavailable for comment, with no clear will going forward for the region. And the inheritance of these regions by residents may be mostly arbitrary as the public memory of these regions fade and original members CTE. When I first started defending, the oldest founderless regions were about six years old, today the oldest founderless regions are approaching their twentieth anniversary. My question, in a philosophical sense, is who constitutes the intestate for a historically or culturally significant region? I think the intestate may devolve back to the international community at large as an international responsibility.
by Lenlyvit » Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:10 am
Xanthal wrote:Unibot III wrote:What I envision a historical society doing is more or less what players did in Christmas. The only other options for regions in Christmas’ situation are letting the regions exist in some kind of sad password limbo, or face occupation, destruction, or the possibility of a refound.
I’ll be the first to admit it’s not an ideal answer, the ideal answer is that the regions themselves organically take steps to rebuild their regions. I remember when the initiative in Christmas was launched, it was unconventional and it didn’t square nicely with the ethics that defenders operated on, but I think there has since emerged a common understanding that that was the best response that could have been taken for everyone including Christmas.
As the game matures and time passes, I feel that the ethics surrounding regional and community preservation will have to change — we’re getting to the point where historically significant regions have been dormant or dead for much longer than they were operational, and there may be no survivors and any remaining survivor may be unavailable for comment, with no clear will going forward for the region. And the inheritance of these regions by residents may be mostly arbitrary as the public memory of these regions fade and original members CTE. When I first started defending, the oldest founderless regions were about six years old, today the oldest founderless regions are approaching their twentieth anniversary. My question, in a philosophical sense, is who constitutes the intestate for a historically or culturally significant region? I think the intestate may devolve back to the international community at large as an international responsibility.
Agreed. Also, bonus points for making me look up a word. I remain not wholly convinced of the premise for this proposal, but if it's happening then let's try to do it right. Maybe I'll dare to dream that what we do here can provide the basis for re-opening SPACE.
As a native with a longstanding attachment to my own region, and in light of my extensive history dealing with defenders and raiders, I'll be among the first to jump to the defense of native rights. Unfortunately, the business of preservation being to keep something around as long as possible, success inevitably means you become more and more distant from the originators of the thing you're preserving. The proposal should acknowledge that where no clear native will exists, someone is empowered to make choices. A framework for that process would be welcome.
I'd also like it if we shifted our articulated goal from "preservation" to "conservation." The former is about keeping something unchanged. The latter is about keeping it vital and perpetuating it. We should be giving these regions a future that honors their past, not trapping them in the past.
by Xanthal » Wed Sep 07, 2022 12:21 pm
Lenlyvit wrote:The only qualm I have in empowering others to make a decision where no native community exists anymore is who will have that power? It’s not so easy on an international stage to just say “so and so should decide these regions fates”, that would ultimately lead to a lot of fighting I think. I could try to fit conservation into the resolution somewhere, although I’m unsure where to put it, maybe in the bullet points? I’ll have to think on it.
by Lenlyvit » Wed Sep 07, 2022 4:45 pm
Xanthal wrote:Lenlyvit wrote:The only qualm I have in empowering others to make a decision where no native community exists anymore is who will have that power? It’s not so easy on an international stage to just say “so and so should decide these regions fates”, that would ultimately lead to a lot of fighting I think. I could try to fit conservation into the resolution somewhere, although I’m unsure where to put it, maybe in the bullet points? I’ll have to think on it.
You can pass a resolution that avoids the controversial aspects of this topic, but that doesn't avert the controversy; it just kicks the can down the road. Regions without clear native leadership are the ones that can benefit the most from your resolution, but only if you provide a basis for helping them.
Stepping back on the Liberation issue was the right call, but it's also left your proposal light on substance. You could pass it as is and put another feather in your cap, but it's not going to have any real impact. A framework for intervention has the potential to make a real difference by empowering concerned players to take coordinated action.
by Xanthal » Wed Sep 07, 2022 11:38 pm
by Lenlyvit » Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:12 am
Xanthal wrote:Segregating it would be advisable, to emphasize the special circumstances to which such actions are applicable. Perhaps after the end of the current text with a preamble to the effect of "In the event no legitimate native leadership of a Historical Region exists, the Security Council sanctions et cetera, et cetera."
by Lenlyvit » Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:13 pm
by Xanthal » Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:38 pm
by Lenlyvit » Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:02 am
Xanthal wrote:I don't hate it, but I think we can do better. I don't know how much of a hurry you're in at this point, but I'm going to have a ton of free time next week if you're interested in collaborating.
by Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands » Wed Sep 14, 2022 5:58 pm
by Lenlyvit » Wed Sep 14, 2022 7:01 pm
Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands wrote:I think the whole draft would be better if you delved into the history of some of these regions and show why they're so significant aside from just being old, and just reduce all the stating this society that to a singular clause at the end to fulfill the operative clause requirements.
by Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands » Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:05 pm
Lenlyvit wrote:Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands wrote:I think the whole draft would be better if you delved into the history of some of these regions and show why they're so significant aside from just being old, and just reduce all the stating this society that to a singular clause at the end to fulfill the operative clause requirements.
I don't have any room to do that. As it sits now, the proposal has 4,573 characters. That's 427 characters short of the limit of 5,000 characters. That's not enough room to delve into any regional history, let alone all of the regions I've listed. If you have some way to do it without losing content in the proposal I'm all ears, but I don't see a way myself. The whole premise around this resolution is the age of the regions in question and conserving them and their histories.
by Xanthal » Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:56 pm
by Unibot III » Wed Sep 21, 2022 3:01 am
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
by Lenlyvit » Thu Sep 29, 2022 5:46 pm
Observes that a resolution should be written after the passage of this one in order to outline the creation of an interregional historical society referenced above since such guidelines cannot be included within this resolution.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement