16,999 vs. 1: The DCM

[The Republic of Lanos]

If I do remember, that was what was planned for NS2, right?

No idea. I stopped paying attention to NS2 when they started charging mods to use advanced features rather than just comping us.

Back on topic, looking forward to this new method of hamstringing the WA to satisfy one player's dissatisfaction. Should be good!

*checks* Nope, no #OccupyWA hashtag...yet.

[Jagalonia]

Lets see...Secretive strategy, check.
Evil mastermind, check.
Good guy....Seems to be lacking, we'll just put him as defeated.

Whelp, there's only one remaining legitimate response to the OP.

[Demirysis]

Lets see...Secretive strategy, check.
Evil mastermind, check.
Good guy....Seems to be lacking, we'll just put him as defeated.

Whelp, there's only one remaining legitimate response to the OP.

(Image)

[Viritica]

You guys can continue talking no your own, but I have a forum to build, recruiting to do, and followers to organize. It also looks like fewer people are posting on this thread, so I'll just wrap up my thoughts.

I am very condfident in my plan, and I see no reason for it to fail. Most of the WA will probably be repealed and render the WA pointless. When enough players realize that the WA can no longer do anything the population of WA members will drop, giving me even more power over the WA and causing it to collapse even faster. After that the WA will only be relevant in invading and defending, and so few players will be a part of it that the WA will have to be changed or replaced by Max so my tactics against it no longer work. But that probably won't happen. What is most likely is that the WA will just be stopped for a few years, I'll claim victory and leave, and then my followers will get board and go find something else to do.

Even if I cannot completely stop the World Assembly, I know my strategy will have a larger effect than any other attempt on the WA/UN in NS history.

Once invaders learn my first tactic it will be near impossible for liberations to get passed, and TBR and TBH will be able to invade very large regions and hold them for months at a time. When the rest of NS figures out how the invaders are accomplishing so great feats the WA will implode. A new kind of raiding will emerge, and the WA will grind to a halt. Resolution Writers will be up in arms and will have to join with the defenders for the cause of passing legislation.

Then defenders will learn my second tactic and the WA will instantly become full of more spies, liars and consperitors than ever before, and looked down on by the rest of NS. I do not have any idea what will happen after that, but everyone will remember The DCM and how much grief it caused the WA.

The WA's not gonna collapse. It's built into the game. You can't get rid of it. The most you can do is try and block any legislation it passes.

[Swkoll]

So your plan is to create tons of 3 nation regions and spam the WA with repeals, won't work.

[The Republic of Lanos]

So your plan is to create tons of 3 nation regions and spam the WA with repeals, won't work.

Not only that, you can't repeal WA#1. Game mechanics makes this impossible.

[Frisbeeteria]

C'mon, folks - he said it was a NEW idea and not illegal. Let's give Galiantus a chance to put up or shut up. After all, it might actually BE a new idea.

[Rick Rollin]

You guys can continue talking no your own, but I have a forum to build, recruiting to do, and followers to organize. It also looks like fewer people are posting on this thread, so I'll just wrap up my thoughts.

I am very condfident in my plan, and I see no reason for it to fail. Most of the WA will probably be repealed and render the WA pointless. When enough players realize that the WA can no longer do anything the population of WA members will drop, giving me even more power over the WA and causing it to collapse even faster. After that the WA will only be relevant in invading and defending, and so few players will be a part of it that the WA will have to be changed or replaced by Max so my tactics against it no longer work. But that probably won't happen. What is most likely is that the WA will just be stopped for a few years, I'll claim victory and leave, and then my followers will get board and go find something else to do.

Even if I cannot completely stop the World Assembly, I know my strategy will have a larger effect than any other attempt on the WA/UN in NS history.

Once invaders learn my first tactic it will be near impossible for liberations to get passed, and TBR and TBH will be able to invade very large regions and hold them for months at a time. When the rest of NS figures out how the invaders are accomplishing so great feats the WA will implode. A new kind of raiding will emerge, and the WA will grind to a halt. Resolution Writers will be up in arms and will have to join with the defenders for the cause of passing legislation.

Then defenders will learn my second tactic and the WA will instantly become full of more spies, liars and consperitors than ever before, and looked down on by the rest of NS. I do not have any idea what will happen after that, but everyone will remember The DCM and how much grief it caused the WA.

How are the gains better than the costs? Yes, I believe that if an absurd amount of stupid nations were to support you your plan could work, but have you even thought this plan through?

[Wisconsin7]

C'mon, folks - he said it was a NEW idea and not illegal. Let's give Galiantus a chance to put up or shut up. After all, it might actually BE a new idea.

Yeah, let's see if he can actually do anything. Or actually, if he has a new plan, if it doesn't break any laws, violate the game mechanics, and if he can actually get enough people to get it done. And, since I'm sure a lot of plans to take down the WA involve this, let's also make sure that it doesn't violate any known laws of physics.

[New Rogernomics]

Yes, but I don't support it.

"I don't like the WA, but I support it, and hold membership", is the option I would have included in the poll, don't have to be particularly fond of something to accept it or take part in it. That's at least how I take the WA, with a grain of salt.

Edit: So I voted, "Yes, I support it.".

[Subgeniustan]

I support eliminating the WA and/or rendering it powerless, although I don't know anything more about Galiantus's plan than anyone else. But I am very anti-WA and want to get rid of the World Assembly (only reasons I am in it are to help choose who is WA Delegate for my region, and to undermine it from within by any means necessary). I know next to nothing about this plan, but I share the same goal of Galiantus: getting rid of the WA. So if that is what his plan will do, I support it 100%, REGARDLESS of whether it succeeds or fails. I have chosen my side in the pro-WA vs. anti-WA conflict, and now it's time to start the fight. There are MANY anti-WA nations and regions in this game of NationStates. If we unite and can come up with a workable plan, we can achieve our goal of defeating the WA (the WA may still exist after being defeated, but just be powerless by that point). All who oppose the WA must coordinate our anti-WA activities together if we want any hope of defeating that tyrannical New World Order one-world government of NationStates!

Remember:
1) Only WA member nations have a say in choosing the leader of a founderless region. If you don't want the region you live in ruined, sometimes joining the WA is necessary. Joining the WA is necessary for both invading and defending. So while WA membership is supposedly "voluntary", nations that don't join the WA don't have ANY say in who controls regions unless they found their own regions. Thus, WA membership is something that is coercively forced on nations that wish to have a say in how their regions are governed. WA membership should not be necessary in choosing who in your region gets regional administrative powers.
2) The WA violates national sovereignty of all the nations which are coerced into membership in the WA, through its resolutions. These resolutions affect regional stats in unpredictable ways for people trying to manage nations. It really detracts from the ability to govern a nation however you see fit, something that ought to be integral to NationStates. Yet if you decide to opt out of the WA to govern your nation however you see fit, you lose the ability to have any influence in who your region's WA Delegate is. It is a Catch-22.
3) WA votes are not democratic. It is not one nation, one vote. Instead, the delegates from the largest regions can have hundreds or thousands of votes. Also, only delegates with a certain number of WA endorsements are allowed to submit resolutions. This is all biased to favor established regions with lots of members, and give them the most power. It makes smaller regions, many of which don't have WA Delegates, have very little power with regard to the WA. Yet small regions are the regions that are most vulnerable to being taken over through hijacking of the WA Delegate position. It is the WA that makes it possible to invade a region and take it over, through the existence of the "WA Delegate" position. Both invaders and defenders combat to control regions via WA Delegates. This is not in the best interests of the regions or the nations of NationStates.
4) WA "liberations" are infringements upon regional autonomy, and allow the WA to remove a password long enough for a pro-WA nation to become WA Delegate for a region, then the WA turns around and repeals the "liberation" once whoever the WA WANTS in control of the region is in control. This allows the WA to dominate founderless regions through its imperialism.

So, basically, the WA is an imperialist one-world government that imposes its will directly upon all of its member nations and indirectly on all nations in founderless regions through the WA Delegate system of regional governance. There is only ONE way to avoid WA tyranny and imperialism: living in a region with an active founder who denies administrative access to any potential WA Delegate, and keeping your nation out of the WA. Keeping your nation out of the WA is not enough, because its vile and evil reach also reaches to the WA Delegate system, even affecting some regions that do have active founders, since not all founders are wise enough to deny administrative access to WA Delegates. If you are not the founder of the region you are in, and your founder goes away, there is nothing you can do to stop this. The only way to be GUARANTEED freedom from WA tyranny NO MATTER WHAT is to found your own region, disable WA administrative access, and keep your nation out of the WA. However, this is counterproductive, because then every nation would be in a separate region, undermining the system of regions of NationStates.

Here is a list of basic reforms I humbly suggest to the World Assembly to make it a VOLUNTARY and DEMOCRATIC system:
1) Rename the position of WA Delegate to Prime Minister, President, or something else that has more of a regional government sound, is not a higher position than "Founder", and does not refer to the WA at all.
2) Allow ALL nations in a region to vote for the Prime Minister/President/whatever position (the renamed WA Delegate position, which is in charge if the Founder is not around anymore, or if the Founder allows them to also have administrative control).
3) The WA should operate by the principle "one nation, one vote", and treat all member nations equally. All member nations should have the right to submit draft resolutions and vote on them. ONE NATION, ONE VOTE!
4) WA resolutions should not alter the stats of member nations. Member nations should be able to control their stats by voting on issues. The WA should just be for role-playing and not have any actual power.

I'm not including getting rid of "liberations" on the list, because getting rid of them would probably create more problems than it would solve. If the WA is reformed with those 4 reforms, the "liberations" shouldn't be too much of a problem, so it would be good to keep them around just in case they are needed as a last resort.

And obviously condemnations and commendations aren't an issue for me, as they are just for roleplaying purposes and have no effect on anything. I am fine with allowing condemnations and commendations since they have no effects. Resolutions shouldn't be binding either. If you look at the REAL United Nations General Assembly, you'll see that its resolutions are ALL non-binding and are ceremonial only, with no real power, exactly as things should be.

Basically, these reforms should make the World Assembly more like the real-world United Nations General Assembly, with more limited powers.

However, as long as such reforms are not enacted through changes to the game code, I am staunchly opposed to the World Assembly and will combat it, in alliance with everyone else opposed to it such as the nation of Galiantus. The World Assembly, as currently set up, detracts from the gameplay of NationStates and the game would be better off if its tyranny were overthrown. It doesn't seem there is any momentum among the administrators of the game to make any changes to how the system works, such as the reforms I have suggested, so within the existing system, combating the World Assembly in accordance with the plans of Galiantus appears to be the best possible strategy at overthrowing this tyrannical system of imperialism.

[Hjornis]

Here is a list of basic reforms I humbly suggest to the World Assembly to make it a VOLUNTARY and DEMOCRATIC system:
1) Rename the position of WA Delegate to Prime Minister, President, or something else that has more of a regional government sound, is not a higher position than "Founder", and does not refer to the WA at all.
2) Allow ALL nations in a region to vote for the Prime Minister/President/whatever position (the renamed WA Delegate position, which is in charge if the Founder is not around anymore, or if the Founder allows them to also have administrative control).
3) The WA should operate by the principle "one nation, one vote", and treat all member nations equally. All member nations should have the right to submit draft resolutions and vote on them. ONE NATION, ONE VOTE!
4) WA resolutions should not alter the stats of member nations. Member nations should be able to control their stats by voting on issues. The WA should just be for role-playing and not have any actual power.


The point is that nations that unite is stronger than nation that stand alone. This is the way in RL and such are the way in NS. Number 3 could be argued and I am leaning towards agreeing with you, but this is something the members of WA should deside. And number 4 I disagree with, yu cant seek the protection of the rest and dont follow the rules. What I sugest is that we create a new WA (a new new UN of sorts). Then member nations can choose witch to join. This will in turn turn of of them to be more to the left and the other to be more to the right politicaly and you can choose the one you feel most conected to

[Sichuan Pepper]

If I had to take a guess at how he plans to do this....hmmm
-Right now he will be researching all the big voter regions (highest WA counts) on their forum to see if they take a regional vote on how the delegate votes on resolutions.
-He will then work out the average WA nations he needs in each region to influence the forum vote.
- Next he needs to recruit enough people to insert into each region

I doubt invaders will contribute as they need mobile WA's and he would be counting on the regions not checking voters are WA.
So....region heads check your voters are currently WA and stay that way in order to Vote on WA matters.

That's a stab in the dark of course I could be wrong.

[Sedgistan]

Subgeniustan, suggest game changes in the Technical forum, not here.

[Jagalonia]

C'mon, folks - he said it was a NEW idea and not illegal. Let's give Galiantus a chance to put up or shut up. After all, it might actually BE a new idea.

Yeah, let's see if he can actually do anything. Or actually, if he has a new plan, if it doesn't break any laws, violate the game mechanics, and if he can actually get enough people to get it done. And, since I'm sure a lot of plans to take down the WA involve this, let's also make sure that it doesn't violate any known laws of physics.

What if it violates an unknown law of physics....?

[Hjornis]

f it doesn't break any laws, violate the game mechanics, and if he can actually get enough people to get it done. And, since I'm sure a lot of plans to take down the WA involve this,.

we already know what he will do. He will try to get suport and then repell all the reselutions one by one.

[Bears Armed]

If I had to take a guess at how he plans to do this....hmmm
-Right now he will be researching all the big voter regions (highest WA counts) on their forum to see if they take a regional vote on how the delegate votes on resolutions.
-He will then work out the average WA nations he needs in each region to influence the forum vote.
- Next he needs to recruit enough people to insert into each region

I doubt invaders will contribute as they need mobile WA's and he would be counting on the regions not checking voters are WA.
So....region heads check your voters are currently WA and stay that way in order to Vote on WA matters.

That's a stab in the dark of course I could be wrong.

Meh.
Some of the WA regulars already have [non-WA] puppets in a number of those regions each in order to influence their delegates' votes....

[Sponn]

I honestly don't really like the WA gameplay-wise, but what you're attempting to do is ridiculous. Stop it.

[Sedgistan]

I support eliminating the WA and/or rendering it powerless, although I don't know anything more about Galiantus's plan than anyone else. But I am very anti-WA and want to get rid of the World Assembly (only reasons I am in it are to help choose who is WA Delegate for my region, and to undermine it from within by any means necessary). I know next to nothing about this plan, but I share the same goal of Galiantus: getting rid of the WA. So if that is what his plan will do, I support it 100%, REGARDLESS of whether it succeeds or fails. I have chosen my side in the pro-WA vs. anti-WA conflict, and now it's time to start the fight. There are MANY anti-WA nations and regions in this game of NationStates. If we unite and can come up with a workable plan, we can achieve our goal of defeating the WA (the WA may still exist after being defeated, but just be powerless by that point). All who oppose the WA must coordinate our anti-WA activities together if we want any hope of defeating that tyrannical New World Order one-world government of NationStates!

Remember:
1) Only WA member nations have a say in choosing the leader of a founderless region. If you don't want the region you live in ruined, sometimes joining the WA is necessary. Joining the WA is necessary for both invading and defending. So while WA membership is supposedly "voluntary", nations that don't join the WA don't have ANY say in who controls regions unless they found their own regions. Thus, WA membership is something that is coercively forced on nations that wish to have a say in how their regions are governed. WA membership should not be necessary in choosing who in your region gets regional administrative powers.
2) The WA violates national sovereignty of all the nations which are coerced into membership in the WA, through its resolutions. These resolutions affect regional stats in unpredictable ways for people trying to manage nations. It really detracts from the ability to govern a nation however you see fit, something that ought to be integral to NationStates. Yet if you decide to opt out of the WA to govern your nation however you see fit, you lose the ability to have any influence in who your region's WA Delegate is. It is a Catch-22.
3) WA votes are not democratic. It is not one nation, one vote. Instead, the delegates from the largest regions can have hundreds or thousands of votes. Also, only delegates with a certain number of WA endorsements are allowed to submit resolutions. This is all biased to favor established regions with lots of members, and give them the most power. It makes smaller regions, many of which don't have WA Delegates, have very little power with regard to the WA. Yet small regions are the regions that are most vulnerable to being taken over through hijacking of the WA Delegate position. It is the WA that makes it possible to invade a region and take it over, through the existence of the "WA Delegate" position. Both invaders and defenders combat to control regions via WA Delegates. This is not in the best interests of the regions or the nations of NationStates.
4) WA "liberations" are infringements upon regional autonomy, and allow the WA to remove a password long enough for a pro-WA nation to become WA Delegate for a region, then the WA turns around and repeals the "liberation" once whoever the WA WANTS in control of the region is in control. This allows the WA to dominate founderless regions through its imperialism.

So, basically, the WA is an imperialist one-world government that imposes its will directly upon all of its member nations and indirectly on all nations in founderless regions through the WA Delegate system of regional governance. There is only ONE way to avoid WA tyranny and imperialism: living in a region with an active founder who denies administrative access to any potential WA Delegate, and keeping your nation out of the WA. Keeping your nation out of the WA is not enough, because its vile and evil reach also reaches to the WA Delegate system, even affecting some regions that do have active founders, since not all founders are wise enough to deny administrative access to WA Delegates. If you are not the founder of the region you are in, and your founder goes away, there is nothing you can do to stop this. The only way to be GUARANTEED freedom from WA tyranny NO MATTER WHAT is to found your own region, disable WA administrative access, and keep your nation out of the WA. However, this is counterproductive, because then every nation would be in a separate region, undermining the system of regions of NationStates.

Here is a list of basic reforms I humbly suggest to the World Assembly to make it a VOLUNTARY and DEMOCRATIC system:
1) Rename the position of WA Delegate to Prime Minister, President, or something else that has more of a regional government sound, is not a higher position than "Founder", and does not refer to the WA at all.
2) Allow ALL nations in a region to vote for the Prime Minister/President/whatever position (the renamed WA Delegate position, which is in charge if the Founder is not around anymore, or if the Founder allows them to also have administrative control).
3) The WA should operate by the principle "one nation, one vote", and treat all member nations equally. All member nations should have the right to submit draft resolutions and vote on them. ONE NATION, ONE VOTE!
4) WA resolutions should not alter the stats of member nations. Member nations should be able to control their stats by voting on issues. The WA should just be for role-playing and not have any actual power.

I'm not including getting rid of "liberations" on the list, because getting rid of them would probably create more problems than it would solve. If the WA is reformed with those 4 reforms, the "liberations" shouldn't be too much of a problem, so it would be good to keep them around just in case they are needed as a last resort.

And obviously condemnations and commendations aren't an issue for me, as they are just for roleplaying purposes and have no effect on anything. I am fine with allowing condemnations and commendations since they have no effects. Resolutions shouldn't be binding either. If you look at the REAL United Nations General Assembly, you'll see that its resolutions are ALL non-binding and are ceremonial only, with no real power, exactly as things should be.

Basically, these reforms should make the World Assembly more like the real-world United Nations General Assembly, with more limited powers.

However, as long as such reforms are not enacted through changes to the game code, I am staunchly opposed to the World Assembly and will combat it, in alliance with everyone else opposed to it such as the nation of Galiantus. The World Assembly, as currently set up, detracts from the gameplay of NationStates and the game would be better off if its tyranny were overthrown. It doesn't seem there is any momentum among the administrators of the game to make any changes to how the system works, such as the reforms I have suggested, so within the existing system, combating the World Assembly in accordance with the plans of Galiantus appears to be the best possible strategy at overthrowing this tyrannical system of imperialism.

+1 that is by far one of the best arguments against the WA I've seen yet.

[Galiantus]

Some pre-statistics from the survay:

70% of players have a nation in the WA. (17,312)
30% of players do not. (about 7420)
(if you're interested, about 24,700 people play NationStates)
(With 104,500 nations, each player has an average of 4.23 puppets)
(With 10,190 regions, there are 2.42 players per region)

58% of players like the WA,(14,326)
14% don't care, (3458)
28% don't like it. (6916)

Within the WA:(17,312)
68% of the WA supports the WA,(11,772)
8% of the WA does not care about the WA,(1385)
24% of the WA is against the WA.(4155)

Outside the WA:
36% like the WA, (2698)
28% Don't care about it,(2078)
36% Don't like it.(2698)

A better title for this thread would be "4155 vs. 11,999? Stop the WA."

[Socialdemokraterne]

Will someone please explain to me why the World Assembly, an institution for which participation is entirely voluntary and which has absolutely no effect whatsoever on non-participants, should be destroyed? I have never been a member of the WA, and I have barely even browsed its forum to see what it was doing. Its total impact on my region (Dansk) has been essentially zero. What is the freaking problem?

[Hjornis]

Will someone please explain to me why the World Assembly, an institution for which participation is entirely voluntary and which has absolutely no effect whatsoever on non-participants, should be destroyed? I have never been a member of the WA, and I have barely even browsed its forum to see what it was doing. Its total impact on my region (Dansk) has been essentially zero. What is the freaking problem?

becouse raiders can enter the region kick all the natives out and then lock it forever

[Equestrian States]

Will someone please explain to me why the World Assembly, an institution for which participation is entirely voluntary and which has absolutely no effect whatsoever on non-participants, should be destroyed? I have never been a member of the WA, and I have barely even browsed its forum to see what it was doing. Its total impact on my region (Dansk) has been essentially zero. What is the freaking problem?

becouse raiders can enter the region kick all the natives out and then lock it forever

Is that supposed to be an argument against the WA? The Security Council passes liberation resolutions for that very reason.

[Frisbeeteria]

Some pre-statistics from the survay:

70% of players have a nation in the WA. (17,312)
30% of players do not. (about 7420)
(if you're interested, about 24,700 people play NationStates)
(With 104,500 nations, each player has an average of 4.23 puppets)
(With 10,190 regions, there are 2.42 players per region)

58% of players like the WA,(14,326)
14% don't care, (3458)
28% don't like it. (6916)

Within the WA:(17,312)
68% of the WA supports the WA,(11,772)
8% of the WA does not care about the WA,(1385)
24% of the WA is against the WA.(4155)

Outside the WA:
36% like the WA, (2698)
28% Don't care about it,(2078)
36% Don't like it.(2698)

A better title for this thread would be "4155 vs. 11,999? Stop the WA."

So you just make up statistics and present them as facts? What survey? How did you arrive at your number of players?

If this is how your big plan works, i.e. by making shit up, you're wasting our time. I was hoping for something genuinely new, but it appears that this whole concept is just an elaborate troll.

[Galiantus]

Will someone please explain to me why the World Assembly, an institution for which participation is entirely voluntary and which has absolutely no effect whatsoever on non-participants, should be destroyed? I have never been a member of the WA, and I have barely even browsed its forum to see what it was doing. Its total impact on my region (Dansk) has been essentially zero. What is the freaking problem?

You don't have to be a part of the WA in order to be condemned, and the WA is not democratic, as much as people say. It is oliegarchic in nature, and helps no one, with the exception of liberations. Even then, liberations do not do that much good. Hundreds of regions are invaded, and dozens are captured for every liberation passed by the WA.

Invasions would not be possible if it was not for the WA. In order for founderless regions to control their region they must join the WA. Thus the WA imposes on nations in founderless regions join them or remain powerless in their own region.