The Rejected Times

[KaelThas Quilor]

Many other regions boycotted the conference held by lazarus. Both events were certainly not equal which is how you are treating them. The lazarus one was held by a controversial regime and by more controversial people.

Actually -- and much to my chagrin at the time -- the attendees of the regional sovereignty conference were remarkably diverse in comparison to the attendees of the independence conference. There were defenders, regions that could be classified as independent or non-aligned, and even a couple of imperialist regions at the regional sovereignty conference, despite my best efforts to ensure that only defenders would be attending. Several allies of The South Pacific attended, and the host region was their ally, so choosing not to attend because some allies were boycotting would have expressed a clear preference for those allies over attending allies. Instead, The South Pacific sought compromise, making clear it would withdraw its attendance if things went in an anti-independent direction, and was shot down.

The independence conference, by contrast, included only independent and imperialist regions, and not even all of those were invited -- for reasons that remain unclear to this day. Osiris and The West Pacific, for example, were not initially invited, though this was later rectified and both ended up attending, as far as I know. Other regions that could be considered independent or at least independent friendly, such as The East Pacific, were ignored. Is it an accident that EPSA defends more than most of these other "independent" regions' militaries and The East Pacific was ignored? You'll all insist that it was, but I fail to see why else they wouldn't have been invited.

So, yes, some regions boycotted the regional sovereignty conference, but that was to be expected given the political turmoil at the time and the fact that conference was much more open to attendance from a broad spectrum of regions. Europeia was quite selective in who it invited to the independence conference, which virtually assured that it would be non-controversial and viewed as a success. That's fine and all, but there's something to be said for diversity and hearing contrasting views rather than echoes.

An Independence conference isn't going to invite Defenders and non-Independents, Cormac. Just common sense. (I can't speak directly to the inclusion of TEP, but saying that the Independence Conference wasn't diverse because it didn't invite defenders is like saying a Communist convention isn't diverse because it didn't invite a bunch of capitalists)

[Onderkelkia]

Indeed, it was inevitable that the attendees at a conference around a loosely defined concept like regional sovereignty would include a more diverse set of regions (if still weighted in general to those unsympathetic to Independence and Imperialism) than a conference around Independence. I do not know the basis on which Europeia invited regions, but its statement on The South Pacific's host status indicated that it approached TSP, Balder and The North Pacific first to attend. It is entirely natural that the Independence Convention was attended by only those regions which identified officially as Independent.

"How dare the representatives of your sovereign region attend a glorified conversation wherein other representatives might express a viewpoint on regional policy that conflicts with ours!"

The problem is the anticipated co-host of the Independence Convention giving credence to a simultaneous conference which was promoting a rival concept.

That hardly suggests a commitment to Independence which was sufficient to have warranted the status of co-host in the convention.

[The Rejected Times]

Issue XXXIII | February 14, 2015.

Index

"A Date with Cupid," by Unibot.
"The Zhaucauozian Affair: "Misinformation", Not Malice, To Blame," by Gruenberg.
"Eastern Europe: Postscript on Gameplay Implications," by Communist Europe / Warzone Codger.
"Cha-Ching! TRR signs treaty with Capitalist Paradise," by Unibot.
"Technically at Fault," by Cormac Stark.
"Scotland liberated from the UK," by Unibot.
"'Statement by Members' System Introduced in TRR Assembly," by Kogvuron.
"Proposal Category System Creaking At The Seams?," by Gruenberg.
"Threat of RIA Coup from LWU," by The Church of Satan.
"Understanding Refactoring," by Dr George.
"The Black Hawks Strike Texas!" by Unibot.
"LEO Analysis of Francoism," by Nasania.
"Traveller's Journal: One Big Island," by Hubovnia.

---

A Date with Cupid
FEATURE | UNIBOT, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Unibot interviews NationDates’s Most Mischievous Adolescent Matchmaker...

It’s been almost nine years since NationDates, a young start-up matchmaking service, rose to prominence and crashed unexpectedly – a collapse of cataclysmic proportions which brought the website to a screeching halt: The Great Disk Space Disaster of 2006. After its “Chief Minister of Hookups” was sacked indiscreetly, NationDates would fade into the millennial consciousness along with the rest of a blurry cocktail of unsuccessful E-commerce which the early noughties had gobbled through like office-party eggnog.

Enter Cupid, one of NationDates’s most dedicated employees, self-described “love analyst” – a doe-eyed schoolboy barely out of his diapers (they like their analysts young and smarmy these days!), cut from the same cloth as Nate Silver, or … no, that really is a diaper. Christ. Besides the choice of attire though, he had seemed like a fantastic person to interview for Valentine’s Day– who else would know the insides and outsides of the match-making industry better than Cupid himself? He was easier to reach than I would have expected. His agent happily directly me to the man himself.

As I soon found out, though, the collapse of NationDates had brought on hard times even for the match-maker himself…

It was an awkward affair at the start – meeting him, that is. I had sat down to conduct an interview with him at his flat that Saturday morning – “well, they call it flat, but it’s not much of a flat, more like an extended cupboard,” he explained, adding “rent’s a bugger here,” as he sat down on his couch, lighting a cigar, ashes dropping on his open bare chest. Cupid lived in a rather notorious part of Wysteria – the projects – a place for underemployed entertainers, roleplayers and (often) termites. It was the natural place for him to live, though, in his mind. “I said to the woman at the counter: ‘like Wisteria, the plant?’ and she said, ‘yeah, like plant’ and I was sold on Wysteria right then and ‘ere,” he said, “Wisteria, symbol of enduring love. Cupid, maker of enduring love. Couldn’t be a better fit, amiright?” He sighed. “Not that it’s all been glitz and glamour though. It’s been rough times for me and for the whole love industry in NationStates, for that matter – not even that refactoring nonsense will save us. I mean, sure Wysteria’s got its share of economic powers like The Grendels, I’ll give you that, but if you look harder, you’ll see they’ve got teddy bears on the street begging for food for cuddles – and you know you’re in trouble when even them teddies are on the dole. Those hairy bastards are usually the most employed this time of year; valentine’s staples, they are.”

Crunching down on a bowl of cinnamon sweets and heart-o-grams, he’d soon interpret my staring eyes as hunger (bless) and offer to share at one point – “want some, I get ‘em for free?” I shook my head; first, an aside: is it still a sweet if it is spicy, or are ‘sweets’ only sweet? And second, why are all of the Valentine’s Day candies, the grossest, mouth-drying of the lot? I bothered to ask the second question. “They partner up with the soda industry, yeah,” he explained. “Everyone always needs something to wash down that cinnamon, powdery crap with. The big winners of the day are always, in order: first, the card companies and the florists, then the soda companies and then the dry cleaners – people always forget ‘em, but that’s a lot of ‘LBDs’ that need cleaning, you hear me-?”

But what about poor Cupid? Where did he come into of this? “Nah, I’m a cliché. Besides the imps, they don’t even want touch me. I got rid of my bow ages ago to throw off the rumors that I was a defender, but the image has stuck; no matter how hard I try, I can’t help but get accused of being a merryman or a ranger or another one of those other do-gooders,” he explains. “That’s no good for a guy like me. When you’re in the love industry, you need to get yourself in the market and the imps are where the market is, as far as I’m concerned. All those monarchies, weddings and big fat families – Anumias, Cerebellas, Somersets – that’s a lot of boney hides to strike with the love-bug, if you know what I mean.” I didn’t, but I let him continue. “But, I get by, ‘suppose, I work part-time on the cruise-ships through the ten-thousand islands – newlyweds mostly – bit of an entertainer. The love boat. I like to think that I spice things up a bit around there,” he said with a laugh, turning around to show me the sunburns on his (rather hairy) back.

He was excited about the possibility of a new Sinker, though. “A woman game-created region would be great for business!” he said. “I keep hearing Persephone being tossed around, though I’m still hoping for Venus. That’d be flipping great, no? Pitch that for me. ‘Venus’. It could be like ‘the Las Vegas of the sinkers’. Tacky weddings, champagne and rolling good times, am I right or am I right?” He wasn’t particularly amused when I suggested The Rejected Realms might have already had claim to the ‘sin city’ patent, and, sensing the interview was getting cold, I asked a new question: why did NationDates fail? “Bah, that was a onetime gig – always knew that’d fail,” he said, blowing smoke rings. “There was no enthusiasm on the part of the leadership for that service – they were running it out of the back-office of NationStates. We were like ‘The Ropers’ to ‘Three’s Company’, ‘Torchwood’ to ‘Doctor Who’ – we were a, what’s the word-?” Spinoff, I said. “Yeah, that’s it: spinoff! And nobody keeps around a spinoff. Nope! Poor Stanley was stuck between a rock and a Don Knotts, if you know what I mean”. Not a frigging clue, but as an interviewer, sometimes you need to just nod your head charitably. I had asked what his favourite matches were. “Football?” Couples, that is. He nodded. “I’m proud of Tsrill and Fudgetopia, plus Sedgistan and Crazygirl – come on, can’t beat that; had to use armour-tipped arrows on that Sedge fellow. Tougher bugger, but I got him in the end. Hah! 'In the end'. Get it? Though, you and Rachel make a fine couple too.” I shook my head. “You’re not a couple? You’ve gotta be. Fooled me! I was sure you two were married. The way you’re always squabbling and crowing about!”

An awkward silence just won’t do in an interview, but it continued on for a moment as Cupid fed his pet goldfish – “Name’s ‘Nessie’. Like the Baldie king, god bless, and the Loch Ness, clever yeah? Couldn’t afford a dog. He’s a good pet though,” he lamented. “They told me he was a rare breed, from them ‘exotic waters’ off of Port Thel. Bloody scam, that. Herman said they farm them in the public loos, five blocks west of ‘ere!” He laughed, slapping his thigh. I’ve learnt over the years that when an interviewee appears to not want to talk about something from the past, you talk about their present work. He lit up when I asked – they always do. “I’m doing a recital. Local stuff. Nothing much. But I play a mean piano and dance too. That reminds me though, I’ve gotta practice!” It was there that I would have to end the interview – Cupid needed the rest of the morning to prepare his rendition of The Foundation’s “Build me up, Buttercup” and I needed to leave before the bastard got that rubbish stuck in my head for a month. Nonetheless, Cupid had made for a charming interview that morning; his reflections on the state of the love industry in NationStates suggested that, perhaps, all was ‘not so well’ for his line of work.

From all of us here at The Rejected Times: have a sweet and lovely Valentine’s Day, or at least a spicy, and/or tacky, sexy or not-lonely one.

If you’re feeling depressed, just think: you’re not a chronically underemployed, diaper-wearing man-child, moonlighting as a cruise-ship entertainer for people infinitely happier than you. Anything is better than that. Well, besides the free cruise food, of course.

---

The Zhaucauozian Affair: "Misinformation", Not Malice, To Blame
COMMENTARY | GRUENBERG, SENIOR REPORTER

The invasion by The Black Riders of a small region would not normally occasion much in the way of comment: even the Riders' own terse news reports cover such daily raids in bulk summaries. But the recent raid on Zhaucauozian Friendship (hereafter referred to as ZF because it's a bugger to spell) has threatened to blow up into a much bigger controversy after the gameplayers involved in the invasion launched an accusation of improper moderator conduct against the region's deposed delegate, dragging the highest levels of NS administration into an internal inquiry.

ZF is a small, social region mostly inhabited by players with links to the UN/WA game, including two who subsequently became moderators, Ardchoille and Kryozerkia, the latter serving as delegate through her puppet Three Weasels. Originally founded by famous early gameplayer Qaaolchoura, the region had long been troubled by raiders as a stereotypical small, founderless target. After an invasion in 2014 was eventually overturned with help from friends in Antarctic Oasis and International Democratic Union, the region's members managed to repel the invader delegate and refound the region, choosing Ardchoille to serve as custodian. With the delegate functions returned to non-executive, ZF was once again safe from raids and could return to its peaceful state, mostly consisting of idle RMB chatter about cheese and weasels.

However, Ardchoille's prolonged inactivity towards the lattered stages of 2014 caused her nation to CTE, thereby automatically restoring the executive delegacy, and this was not reset when Ardchoille briefly revived her nation. The region thus became a target again despite having an active founder, and a small invasion force of The Black Riders, led by Coraxion through his puppet Rehosah, seized the region on 22 January, immediately overwriting the flag, RMB and tags, suppressing posts, and closing and opening embassies, as is common R/D custom in such raids.

It was then that Kryozerkia was alleged to have misused her moderator powers. Coraxion observed that despite Rehosah continuing to serve in the delegacy, the deposed Three Weasels nation - Kryozerkia's puppet - was able to close the embassy request with The Black Riders and begin to reverse other actions taken by the raiders. Given there had been no change in the delegacy since Rehosah's elevation, this should not have been possible, and given nothing done by the raiders appeared to violate any existing gameplay rules, there did not appear to be any cause for Kryozerkia to make use of her moderator powers.

Subsequently, Ardchoille (against whom there appears to be no allegation of any wrongdoing) was able to return to the game and exercise her - legitimate - powers as Founder to restore the region and put up a password. Three Weasels has been returned to the delegacy, which has in turn been reset to non-executive function - insulating the small, peaceful region from the worst effects of raiding - and ZF has even got a snazzy new flag out of the whole incident. But while the ZF natives who want nothing to do with the raiding/defending game may see a return to calm and order, other reverberations from the events of the intervention rumble on.

Reporting the incident in Moderation, Coraxion made note of the incident and requested an explanation. Initially, responses were not positive: while the usual requests were made to file the information by GHR, Farnhamia and Dread Lady Nathicana - in a subsequently deleted post - both suggested they could see nothing wrong and appeared to confuse Kryozerkia's action with those of a Founder, betraying a disturbing lack of understanding of basic gameplay from game moderators. The thread was locked, and eventually, game admin [violet] stepped in to confirm that Kryozerkia had "been stood down as a Game Moderator pending the outcome of an investigation", while temporarily retaining moderator privileges so as to be able to post in the moderator discussion forum.

The involvement of admin suggested the seriousness of the case. A moderator has not been removed for improper actions since Stephistan over ten years prior, yet it was difficult to see what other course of action could be taken should Kryozerkia indeed be found to have meddled with the gameplay system for her region's benefit. The alleged actions represented a fundamental betrayal of trust, a sign that the moderators believe themselves above the gameplay law all other players abide by. Such arrogance has come to be associated with Kryozerkia in her capacity as an aloof WA moderator who does not deign to post in the forums and whose rulings have to be passed on second hand, but the actions alleged to have taken place seemed to have gone far beyond even that.

Fortunately - for Kryozerkia, at least - such drastic action was not deemed necessary. After the review of the affair was completed, the disciplinary outcome was limited to a "formal reprimand", the actual ramifications of which appear somewhere between hazy and non-existent, with Kryozerkia delivering a brief apology: "I fucked up". She blamed the incident on unspecified "misinformation". Her game moderator powers were then restored. Further explanation was provided by Reploid Productions, emphasising that Kryozerkia's actions were not "malicious" and simply reflected "misunderstanding of the situation".

With another moderator, Lunatic Goofballs, chiming in to profess his initial confusion about the situation - clarified by Mallorea and Riva, one of the few R/D players represented among the current moderator corps, but also the most junior - perhaps the biggest takeaway is the surprisingly widespread ignorance of basic gameplay conventions among even experienced moderators: four separate game moderators all appeared not to fully understand what had transpired. Even as some of the R/D players involved in the raid admitted their satisfaction with the resolution of the situation, they were found in less humour as a reminder on scripting rules - which prohibit "one click" scripts to suppress/unsuppress all RMB posts - sparked accusations that moderators were trying to clamp down on gameplay as a result of the raid. And so a brief opportunity to restore relations between players and game staff ends largely as it began: with misunderstanding, suspicion, and barely concealed mistrust on both sides.

---

Eastern Europe: Postscript on Gameplay Implications
OPINION | COMMUNIST ERASER, JOURNALIST



Communist Eraser (also known as Warzone Codger) shares his thoughts on the invasion of his region, Eastern Europe...

Eastern Europe was recently invaded by UIAF and allies which mercifully lasted only a week and has now been returned more or less intact and life is back to normal. One of the effects in the aftermath was forcing the return of former delegate and regular 'gameplayer' Communist Eraser (Codger) back to Eastern Europe. The obligation to return was an unfortunate acknowledgment that founderless regions need to be aware of gameplay implications, the difference it makes to the stability of the region and perhaps a signal to what we as gameplayers should do to bring the rest of the game with us.

Understanding the invasion

The reasons for invading Eastern Europe was apparently due its embassy and relations, however tenuous, with Lazarus, a FRA region which the UIAF is at war with. I am sketchy on the details and this is from a known gameplayer somewhat familiar with its style of politics. Imagine how the average resident perceives it; People who otherwise have no interaction with gameplay suddenly sees they got invaded, their posts suppressed and they don't know why. The WFE reveals nothing and the delegate has no notification. In Gameplay logic this doesn't matter as is really a move between UNIF and FRA, two parties who already understand the rules of the game. Eastern Europe is just a location where it is played. As a gameplayer, I understand this and could guide the region to the right mindset to coping with it. However to most residents caught unaware, the only things they take out of it was random chaos, annoyance and a sense of powerless to respond.

This has major differences to the stability of the region. I understand the situation and it gives me control over my own actions and therefore stability. For example, I know they'll probably leave eventually. I know they probably won't refound, so there's no existential threat to the region. This calms the region a lot. I know not to over-react since it's not personal. I know how to get the region going again to business as usual after they are gone and the appropriate precautions to take to make it less likely to happen again. Unfortunately this means founderless regions have to be run by gameplayers.

The embassy with Lazarus

Even a a gameplayer, I did not fully appreciate the possible consequences of having an embassy with Lazarus. I originally set up the embassy because I was good friends with Milograd and the region was communist. This is irrelevant to UNIF gameplay logic which only sees any relations with Lazarus from the 'friend of FRA / target for us' perspective.

However this is extremely important from the region point of view. For most non-gameplayers the main consideration for embassies was whether they are thematically alike and whether the two regions like each other. Even on themes, it is usually very superficial. Third party implications don't register in their thinking, so from the region POV it is pointless attacking them for violating it. Someone will argue ignorance is no excuse, but that doesn't change the ineffectiveness of communicating the message initially - which is the ultimate goal you want to achieve unless the aim is simply point scoring between Gameplayers, UNIF and FRA and want openings to justify make the biggest impacts possible.

On the influence of Imperialism

Imperialism as a gameplay style concerns itself with expanding a region's influence over other regions, and opposing competing gameplay influence. It is illogical however that Imperialism makes so much effort on the latter at the expense of the former. There is a preoccupation to be the flashiest and showiest, to spite the enemy rather than acheive your own goals.

Eastern Europe takes the role of a "sideshow". UNIF exploits an error EE is not aware of with the aim of spiting FRA. Political interaction with EE over the error, the gameplay implications for the embassy is minimal before and during the invasion. One thinks Imperialism is about influencing the target region to acheive your gameplay objectives, but it deliberately ignores the region's point of view, that most decisions are not made with gameplay in mind. If influence is the goal, first step should really be making regions aware of gameplay implications. The pragmatic gameplay logic checks out, even if the moral one doesn't once the region is made aware of it - large active region with lots of updates, vs small semi-active founderless region and an embassy that is not *that* important.

Then, at least the very least, if the invasion comes, it can say they've earned it.

---

"Cha-Ching!"
Capitalist Paradise signs new treaty with TRR.
COMMENTARY | TRR STAFF



The Rejected Realms has signed a new treaty with Capitalist Paradise. The Rejected Realms - Capitalist Paradise Pact pertains to mutual recognition of each region’s state sovereignty and promotes cultural, military and intelligence cooperation. There are also provisions included which require non-aggression and a commitment to mutual defense.

The alliance comes as a brave new initiative for both regions. For Capitalist Paradise, this new alliance signals a large turnaround for Capitalist Paradise who had become increasingly “isolationist” over the years – their last treaty was with Eastern Islands of Dharma, a defunct International Federalist region. For The Rejected Realms, on the other hand, this treaty serves as a new opportunity to develop a stronger relationship with NationStates’ capitalist and libertarian community abroad.

“While concerns over the treaty were expressed in both regions, the residents have shown that benefits for collaboration do outweigh those concerns,” says Acario. “It has been more than five years since the last treaty interregional treaty for Capitalist Paradise. In those years the region has been strongly isolationist avoiding interactions with regions beyond its borders. As such this treaty does mark a reversal in Capitalist Paradise to become more involved in those regions with which we shared an embassy."

Certainly however, there is a historical context to this diplomatic relationship. Several years previous, Capitalist Paradise was invaded by the Black Hawks (and fellow goons and pickelhaubes incorporated) – a terrible event for Capitalist Paradise; as the occupation continued, Capitalist Paradise would be forced to reach out to the international community for help and assistance. The Rejected Realms Army (RRA) was, incidentally, the only army to attempt to defend Capitalist Paradise against the initial invasion. Frattastan, RRA Commander, was awarded The Order of Capitalism, the region’s highest honours, by the Capitalist Paradise government for his valiant efforts.

Acario was positive about their region's new relationship and its future development.

“The residents have expressed a desire to open up channels of communication and a flow of ideas with The Rejected Realms and so Capitalist Paradise will open the RMB to residents of embassies,” says Acario. “In time hopefully our two regions can develop strong relations based on the foundations established in this treaty.”

The treaty passed in Capitalist Paradise, 17-4 and similarly, 16-1 in The Rejected Realms.

---

[The Rejected Times]

Technically at Fault
Admin Inaction is Hurting NationStates
COMMENTARY | CORMAC STARK, SENIOR JOURNALIST

"As always, they'll get added when they get added, and not a moment sooner. We have no hard or soft targets on the timing of any of these." - Frisbeeteria, 13 February 2014
"I'd like to see some of these changes myself, but they'll happen if/when they happen. Not a moment sooner." - Frisbeeteria, 19 September 2014
"Don't ask stupid questions." - Sedgistan, 15 October 2014
"It will be done when it's done, and it will be announced when it's done." - Mousebumples, 18 January 2015
"[T]he reality is that some of these are still a long way off." - Sedgistan, 01 February 2015

These are a few examples of the callous, dismissive responses by moderators to questions in regard to the progress of announced technical changes to military gameplay. On the other hand, at least the moderators respond; administrators are nowhere to be found when these questions are raised. It has been more than two years since NationStates administration convened the R/D summit in response to even earlier concerns about the flaws in military gameplay expressed by defenders, invaders, and natives alike. It has been a year and a half since Sedgistan announced changes that would be made as a result of that summit, only one of which -- GCR influence decay, only tangentially related to the summit -- has actually been implemented. It has been years upon years since administrators introduced regional influence as the "solution" to problems related to military gameplay, abolished the region griefing rules, and left regional communities on their own to deal with the destructive aftermath that has ensued.

It is time to acknowledge, finally, that regional influence was a "solution" that eased the workload of moderators, not a solution for regional communities -- which have since become targets for invasion. Regional influence has only legalized the destruction of vulnerable regions and permanent displacement of their communities. It is also time to acknowledge that the R/D summit failed in its goals, as the radical and complicated changes announced are apparently still to be implemented in the far distant future, if at all. Meanwhile, as we've awaited these changes for years, defender morale and numbers have been decimated, and more native communities than ever fall victim to destructive invasions and annoying tag raiding. The number of regions currently tagged by The Black Riders, alone, number over five hundred.

NationStates administrators and moderators might see this, might understand the frustration when we hear "it will be done when it's done," if they weren't so disconnected from the realities of military gameplay. We recently saw this disconnect between staff and players starkly illustrated when Kryozerkia accidentally abused her moderation powers in detagging her home region, Zhaucauozian Friendship, not because she intended to abuse her powers but because she didn't even understand how military gameplay works. In the subsequent controversy over that situation, other moderators displayed a similar fundamental lack of understanding.

Meanwhile, as we await massive changes that now seem as likely as the revival of the mythical unicorn species, other more modest and presumably easier to implement suggestions are completely ignored. It is time for [violet] to start seriously considering and implementing changes that would have a real impact now. Rate limitation on RMB post suppression, while a welcome change now that [violet] has announced plans to implement it, should have been on the agenda in 2012. Somebody from administration really needs to get around to at least responding to a suggestion made five months ago to change the default setting for region creation from "on" to "off" for WA Delegates having executive controls. And it is time for administrators to look at reasonable proposals to rein in tag raiding even beyond the default setting proposal, as the 2012 introduction of artificial update variance is no longer having any effect with invaders adapting and defender priorities shifting to more achievable defenses and liberations.

We all appreciate the work that NationStates administrators and moderators do, and we all understand that they are an all-volunteer staff. Many of us enjoy the other technical innovations that administration has implemented, including the new telegram system, dispatches, and the new Rift skin. Nonetheless, upset players weren't leaving NationStates because their telegram inboxes were full or the skin they were using didn't have a modern look and functionality. Upset players do leave because of the destruction that results from invasion, and the game's technical conditions have rendered consistent defending undesirable and virtually impossible for many, leaving regional communities without relief that everyone once took for granted. It is time for us to concede, more than two years after the summit, that the blame for the damage being done to regional communities and to the overall game does not rest with invaders alone. NationStates administration shares in the blame for that damage, and for the negative experiences that many players have had because of it. Administrators will continue to share in the blame until substantive change becomes a priority, and not just something that will "happen if/when it happens."

---

Scotland Liberated from the UK
…And Alex Salmond had nothing to do with it.
COMMENTARY | UNIBOT, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF


"The WPAF, for the first time in... I actually have no idea how long it's been since we participated in a liberation," jokes Llamas.

Scotland has been liberated against the United Kingdom by an open, perhaps even surprising coalition of defender forces which included The Rejected Realms Army, Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army, Fort Triumph Marshal Service, Renegade Islands Alliance Special Forces, Spiritus Defense Force, Taijitu Citizen's Militia, United Defenders League and additionally, The West Pacific Armed Forces. If anything this liberation reminds us that there is a first time for everything: this mission was the first liberation for several of its participants – some of these were new recruits from the Rejected Realms Army, but others too were older veterans from the West Pacific Armed Forces which had, under the leadership of Llamas, participated in the Scottish Liberation which stands in stark contrast with their recent involvement in the invasion of Cascadia. In a candid statement, Llamas suggested that future defense missions may lie in the West Pacific Armed Forces's future.

Defenders praised the cooperation involved.

“It was great to work with all of the military forces involved in that liberation, and it was particularly nice to see TWPAF participating in liberation efforts,” says Cormac Stark, freelance defender. “I think it shows that when regions join together for liberations there is still a lot we can achieve.”

In real life, Scotland helped form the United Kingdom voluntarily, of course, through the Acts of Union of 1707; but in NationStates, the United Kingdom had a different idea: invade Scotland and declare its supremacy over the region. The invasion by the United Kingdom marks a distinct political turn for the region as its military policy has increasingly become imperialist – indeed, United Kingdom has since left the Founderless Regions Alliance and recently entered into the “Treaty of Argyll” with the Land of Kings and Emperors, an established imperialist region at war with the Founderless Regions Alliance. This serves as a disappointing turnaround for a historically defender region; they would hold a referendum, nonetheless, in July 2014 to choose an independentist military policy, 78.3% to 21.7%.

The region itself, Scotland, has been a regular victim of invasions over the past two years. The region was invaded last year during March by the North Pacific Army, in conjunction with The United Imperial Armed Forces and The Black Riders – plus an invasion from Sicarius, in addition to a piled occupation organised the year previous by The New Inquisition (March is a bad month for NS’s Scots, apparently) and of course, a series of “tag raids” from The Black Riders. Having seen its share of invasions over the past few years, it appears as though a liberation will only come as temporal relief for the so-called “dead region,” often likened to Christmas as a perpetual conflict zone.

---

'Statement by Members' System Introduced in TRR Assembly
COMMENTARY | KOGVURON, SENIOR REPORTER

Last week saw the introduction of the "Statement by Members" system in the Assembly of The Rejected Realms. 'Statements by Members' provide an opportunity for Assembly members to speak their mind on a topic that they feel is important. The system was created in The Rejected Realms in the hopes of spurring legislative activity, as well as providing citizens the opportunity to discuss current events in NationStates.

Delegate Unibot, the force behind the system's implementation, said "I just thought it seemed like a smashing idea!" while sipping his coffee at an ungodly hour. "Really, we don't consider a lot of changes to our laws, so I figured it be a good way to encourage the use of the Assembly as a legislative body. I've always loved Hansards. Paralimentary transcripts. So I set out one evening to copy the Hansard format, down to the "Times New Roman" font for this new system for The Rejected Realms. Member statements is a practice from Canadian parliamentary practice. Every legislative session begins with statements from members - things they want to bring to the attention of the house. Birthdays, historic dates, petitions, and current issues. It seemed like something that rejects, I felt, would want to do in our Assembly." Citizen Cormac was pleased with the system's introduction, saying, "I think it was a great idea - it gives citizens an opportunity to speak their minds, and to raise issues that might be important to them but not require any specific action from the Assembly. That helps bring others' attention to the issue as well, and if Assembly action is needed later people will be better informed."

The system was already seen widespread use, some serious, and some sarcastic. Delegate Unibot used the system to inform Assembly members that policy matters in his nation were now being decided by the entire region, while RRA Commander Wopruthien sardonically commended The LKE Intelligence Service for allowing a member of NAZI Europe to become Prime Minister. Delegate Unibot was pleased with the activity that the system has seen, saying "The thing with rejects is that they're such a creative, intelligent bunch. You offer an opportunity like this and you never really know what you're going to get - but then you do it and you get the most wonderful responses." He added, "There will be a lot 'here, heres' to come, me thinks." The system is an exciting opportunity for citizens to share their ideas while becoming more involved in regional affairs.

---

Proposal Category System Creaking At The Seams?
OPINION | GRUENBERG, SENIOR REPORTER

The deletion of "On Universal Jurisdiction" (qv. TRTXXXII), which at time of writing had been resubmitted passed with a comfortable mandate, has highlighted an ongoing problem with the General Assembly. The proposal category system - whereby to be legal, a proposal has to be assigned to a specific category and have in-game effects broadly commensurate with that, such as a Human Rights proposal increasing civil freedoms or an Educational proposal increasing education spending - has become so unwieldy and difficult to understand that it is in danger of discouraging participation, especially from new players.

The category system has always been something of an uneasy fit. NationStates is a game designed around forcing people to confront the difficult or unexpected consequences of their decisions: most issues end up with exaggerated or unanticipated effects. Developing one's nation in a favoured way may end up with extremely high tax rates, crippling crime problems, or zero defence budgets. To an extent, the proposal category system is intended to mirror this: the newer categories in particular come with guarded warnings that, for example, dispersing international aid will increase tax rates, or advancing tort reform privilege corporations over people.

But this runs counter to what has evolved as the aim of the GA game: to write good, well rounded international law suitable for a large number of widely disparate nations. Resolution authors are exhorted by the moderators to post drafts to the forums and go over them with a fine tooth comb to weed out possible loopholes; yet at the same time, they have to shackle their proposals to a mechanical category that is more or less designed to be cumbersome. It means, for example, that it is impossible for the WA to promote both the environment and the economy, because all Environmental resolutions have a default negative economic impact.

The topic areas available for legislation are also problematic. International development has been the prevailing concern of international organizations in recent years, yet there is no "development" category for legislators to use (and those that do promote human, social or environmental ends, as mentioned, have zero or negative economic impact). Economic regulation is also extremely difficult, given the regulatory category Social Justice has the bizarre requirement of mandating welfare and even healthcare spending as well as restricting economic freedoms, while Environmental has no "Mild" option available, meaning any general environmental law ends up with the dreaded All Businesses hit to the world economy.

Furthermore, while the NSUN/WA evolved to become an organization devoted to international law, some of the proposal categories seem decidedly domestic in scope, such as Recreational Drug Use, Gambling, and Gun Control. These categories have produced very little success - a combined 5 resolutions out of over 550 passed have come from these categories - and those proposing resolutions on legalising marijuana or banning handguns are routinely told by WA regulars that such matters are "not an international issue": to which they might reasonably respond, then why does the category exist at all?

New categories have failed to invigorate the system. Several years ago, Education & Creativity and Advancement of Industry were added with four Areas of Effect each: but of those, only two, Education and Cultural Heritage, have ever received significant attention, with the others barely used at all. At present there is only a single active Advancement of Industry resolution, itself a rehash of an NSUN proposal passed years ago. The new International Health category was also added last year amid great fanfare. The WA is yet to even vote on a single resolution making use of it; the new Fishing and Agriculture Environmental subcategories have also been unused.

The category system has become so confusing and complicated as to be beyond the understanding of even experienced WA players, while at the same time proving a worrying disincentive to participation from new players with a good idea but no way to make use of it. The practice of "shoehorning" - forcing a proposal into a category for political purposes, even if the text doesn't really match the category - has also become popular. Previously Human Rights and Free Trade were popular categories; currently the vogue is to jam just about any proposal into International Security by including some nebulous enforcement requirement.

But, much as reform is needed, the WA needs a proposal category system of some sort. Abolishing categories altogether would leave an organization whose mission is already extremely vague - the WA has no real statement of purpose beyond "improving the world one resolution at a time" - completely bereft of any sense of itself. Anything could be considered, meaning wasted time voting on pointless domestic issues not suitable for international law; equally, resolutions could become groaning omnibuses, such as the ill-fated Law of the Sea passed in the NSUN's messier days, crossing myriad categories. Removing categories would also sever the WA from any remaining connection to the game mechanics.

A more complicated - likely too complicated - option would be to employ "Resolution Editors", similar to the Issue Editors who process the effects of daily issues. That would allow much greater nuance in determining the effects of resolutions, but it would also place a huge burden on them, having to keep up with a new resolution every four days. It would also lead to charges of politicisation, and risk having players in a position to make resolutions they dislike have unfavourable outcomes. Perhaps the simplest solution would be to open a dialogue between game staff and players about which categories currently work, which don't, and which could be added. But the recent history of the WA has not been one of much engagement between game staff and players: indeed, a forum post by a moderator in the GA section is currently about as rare as a workable Gun Control proposal.

---

Threat of RIA Coup from LWU
COMMENTARY | THE CHURCH OF SATAN, SENIOR REPORTER



Tangaroan Islands, Security Officer of Renegade Islands received a tip that Tabaqui of Lone Wolves United was planning to take the delegacy of Renegade Islands. The RIASF, via mass message, were alerted of the pending attack, along with regional founder Shizensky. Not long after, the RIASF, as ordered, withdrew from all missions and endorsed the delegate, HumanSanity. After the whole thing was sorted out, Shizensky sent a mass telegram to the region, which he posted as a dispatch.

Using the puppet nation "erinacea", Tabaqui came to our region and stayed under the radar. Upon arrival, outside forces moved in and endorsed him. As this was happening, Tabaqui traded endorsements with the natives. Luckily for Renegade Islands, however, Tabaqui blabbed too much and dug his own grave. North Pacific citizen, Yrkidding, whom Tabaqui had approached to join in the raid, decided instead to play along and gather information. At first Tabaqui was reluctant to tell him who the target was, but of course he would have to at some point and did just that as shown in the IRC logs provided by Yrkidding:

<Yrkidding>: So why should I bother then?
<Tabaqui>: because if I don't get enough endorsements I will fail in my task
<Tabaqui>: and I don't want to be a failure
<Yrkidding>: What's your task?
<Tabaqui>: To capture the delegacy of RIA

Yrkidding, a relatively new player, when asked why he was recruited for the raid could only surmise that "he was looking to recruit some newer people to the idea of raiding." Yrkidding has only been playing NationStates for less than a year. Going into detail, he told me of what transpired between them.

"At first he asked if I could help him with something," says Yrkidding. "I decided to try and be nice at help him out. What he wanted was an endorsement in another region, Renegade Islands. I must've sounded pretty skeptical at that point, but realizing he was trying to raid, I decided to play dumb and play along with him to see what I could figure out. He then asked me to move my puppet nation to their region and register on their forums. I did so, feeling pretty confident that I wouldn't find anything useful to him, and even if I did I could always withhold that from him."

"At one point during the conversation, I showed feigned "interest" into joining his raiders and said that later on he might link me to their forums in exchange for applying to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of TNP and becoming their ambassador to LWU. Not really much of a bribe when LWU is a ghost town. I never even considered helping him, though it was fun to play along and lead him on. I've become very fond of The North Pacific in my time here and I've become dedicated to keeping this region safe, having heard stories of the tyranny and mischief brought on by rogue delegates and sudden coups. I decided to tip off the Renegade Islands because I wouldn't want a coup to happen to my own region and I wouldn't want that to happen to another innocent region either. He told me he wanted to do this because he wanted to be seen as someone who can 'have an effect on the game'. He also said 'If I don't execute a raid, I lose the distinction of being a raider, my region loses its distinction, its great reputation crumbles."

Honestly, it seems Tabaqui put too much effort into persuading Yrkidding. I mean, his region losing distinction because he didn't participate in a raid? Way to put on the pressure Tabaqui. After Yrkidding's job was done, he cut communications with Tabaqui and reported to McMasterdonia about the incident. No word yet on how McMasterdonia feels about the event in question. Shizensky contacted Evil Wolf about the attempt. According to him he had no knowledge of the attack. We're inclined to believe that due to the inactivity of Lone Wolves United. So it is confirmed that the attack was orchestrated by perhaps the very last active soldier in LWU.

Tabaqui stopped by Renegade Island's IRC channel recently (a bit of a surprise really and frankly he was an unwelcome guest) but I took the time to speak with him about this. He's eager to learn who sold him out (surprise Tabaqui!) but really, he trusted people he didn't know, new players whose reaction to his plan is entirely unpredictable. Tabaqui evidently orchestrated the raid for "the prestige obviously..." He admitted to planning a raid on Glorious Nations of Iwaku as well but had to call it off. He also tried to enlist the help of The Black Riders, but they declined because "a region with a founder is not a legitimate target." If only other raiders made this kind of mistake more often, I bet a lot of people would be happy, heh. Nonetheless it's good to know TBR has the good sense to know when something is pointless. Thanks guys, we at Renegade Islands appreciate it.

In the end, Tabaqui was banned from Renegade Islands. Although he had the audacity to ask if he could be a candidate in the region's delegate elections. Honestly, you think you would be allowed!? Well, all's well that ends well. Thank you Shizensky, Tangaroan Islands, Yrkidding and Tabaqui for your comments. Yrkidding, I have a good feeling about you. Do The North Pacific proud.

---

Understanding Refactoring
FEATURE | DR GEORGE, GUEST COLUMNIST

Dr George, one of Philosophy 115's foremost issue experts, discusses the effects of refactoring...


I had been aware for some time that it was possible to juggle the budgetary books in NS. Let me explain: for most nations, you have a military and a police force and a wide variety of departments and social works, and all that is relatively expensive, so you pay a lot in taxes to protect your citizens from crime and from foreign nations and to educate them and to provide them with social services. Some nations, however, have one or more categories that they spend 0% of their budget on so they can maximize their contributions to other parts of the budget; furthermore, it was fairly easy for those nations to have a lot of specialized spending and still achieve a 0% tax rate. How could they do that? The game apparently assumed that EVERYONE had a relatively equalized budget and thus these nations were able to do some fairly massive spending by taking it away from the areas in which they already had no spending. By choosing to cut all taxes and also to cut from areas that were already at 0% of the budget, these nations were able in essence to reach into an empty piggy bank and pull out free money.

Refactoring has changed all that. An example will suffice, I think. I have two very different nations in two very different regions, who I will call simply A and B. A has been a classic example of a nation exploiting the loophole above. A's priorities are particularly Education and the Environment. Having done so much spending on both, A consistently does very, very well in Smartest, Most Cultured, Best Environment, Best Weather, Most Popular Tourist Destination, and the like. A has a well-funded national healthcare system and free college education for all. A floats back and forth between Anarchy and Civil Rights Lovefest, has approached having all three categories at 100%, and actually has a fairly large economy, but it is a very specialized economy, largely Publishing, IT, and the like.

In other industries--especially the polluting industries--A is near the bottom of the heap. In most categories, A spends 0% of its budget; without a military, police force, or prison system, A has a Crippling crime rate, but also a massive piggy bank from which to do all of its social spending. B is a Corporate Police State with a 100% (Frightening) economy, but nearly 0% in Civil Rights and Political Freedoms. B has a wonderful economy for a nations its size, which it achieved in large part by savaging its environment and deregulating its industries, removing all worker, consumer, and environmental safeguards. B prioritizes Commerce, Law & Order, and secondarily Religion, but spends at least a little on almost everything. B has a sizable police force and military and a 0% crime rate, but only does well in economic categories and social categories like Stupidest. Before refactoring, A had a 0% tax rate and B had a 60%+ tax rate. After refactoring, A suddenly had to pay for all that education, culture, and healthcare and refactored to a tax rate well over 60%, while B's tax rate went from above 60% into the low single digits, as it provides almost no social services.

I know of another nation (not one of mine), C, that has similar priorities to A, but did not exploit the above loophole and thus had a tax rate of 100% for the many years I have known it. C's tax rate went from 100% down to about 98%. That, I think, is the more normative experience in refactoring; your tax rate goes up or down a few percentage points, but nothing terribly noticeable. For nations at the outlying extremes, though, like A and B, refactoring has had a significant effect. A is busily trying to reduce his tax rate, but I think it will probably now come out of his massive educational system. For the first time ever, B, too, is trying to eliminate his tax rate, in part to spite A.

---

The Black Hawks Strike Texas!
Blatant trolling resets NewTexas’s Tenure
COMMENTARY | UNIBOT, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF


“As the saying goes, stuff happens. Oh well,” writes NewTexas.

Shameless in their actions, The Black Hawks departed Texas in droves after trolling Texas and its community; leaving its mark on the region within mere moments by reversing the result of nearly a decade of community life and strength. Leading The Black Hawks was their brazen general, Jakker, alongside support from The Black Riders, The United Imperial Armed Forces and Ainur; the invader forces stormed Texas and endorsed Studly Penguins (a long-time native) and raised his endorsements above NewTexas, native delegate. NewTexas (known colloquially as Big Tex) had been delegate of Texas for a constant period of 3776 days – but even this date is misleading because Big Texas’s delegacy tenure was reset with “The Great Disk Space Disaster of 2006,” which, if accounted for, makes NewTexas in all actuality, the longest serving delegate in NationStates. To clarify: Studly Penguins was not a willing accomplice of the invaders and had not colluded with them.

Big Tex spoke with The Rejected Times. He noted that he had been online during the invasion.

“We were on and looking around and in mere seconds were blindsided,” explains Big Tex, “We have done it to invaders countless times. It is a little different being on the other side of the coin. It was quite a twist endorsing the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, our second in command.”

To some extent, the invasion comes as a relief to Big Tex, however.

“In the overall scheme of things, it was not a big deal,” admits Big Texas, “Actually, we are almost happy it is over. We can rest assured in the knowledge that we are still the longest serving Delegate in The World. It is just not consecutive. So what? When we lost the Delegacy for two days due to the The Great Disk Drive crash 10 years ago, we "lost" 592 days dating back to 2003 that are not even showing. We have voted on 1012 Resolutions. No one can take away that.”

While some called the practice barbaric as it damaged a tenure within the region which could never be reversed, others called the act, a “cop-out” for the invaders, as the attack on a non-executive foundered region using an innocuous native lead was effectively pointless and easily dismissed. Meanwhile, other players too have celebrated the tactic – praising the forced end of the long reigns of other delegates as a kind of “healthy destability” to NationStates.

The Black Hawks would later unseat Architeuthis in the United States, ending his tenure as delegate for over 3304 days; interestingly, Architeuthis has ties to ancient invaderdom (specifically, the Farkers and the so-called “French Pirates”).* But nowadays, he is better recognised as the author of the infamous “HIPPOS ARE BIG” joke UN resolution. Although Mikeswill’s connections with DEN appear to have kept his tenure intact from this new practice thus far, clearly historic ties to invaderhood is not enough to protect most native delegates from a similar fate, as Architeuthis learned.

Nevertheless, a similar attempt to upheaval Forest would be stopped by defenders; there the native delegate has lead for over seven years which most certainly makes them a “juicy” target for invaders and fellow 'tenure-wreckers'. Defenders from TITO, among others, would lead a force of a dozen soldiers to prevent the ongoing invasion – a remarkable victory which was even praised by invaders such as Ever-Wandering Souls and Koth. Better luck next time-? Perhaps not.

* “Francos was part of the group. He wasn't known for it, like Ackbar or Juxtapositions or Architeuthis, but he was a brother. “ (Mammothistan)

---

LEO analysis of Francoism
FEATURE | NASANIA, EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Nasania analyses Francoism...

On September 1, 2003 an individual by the name of Francos Spain inaugurated the New Pacific Order, an authoritarian government which gave the world an ideology, Francoism. What is this ideology and what does it stand for?

Francoism classifies the world into two classes: the oppressive Userites and oppressed Feederites and parallels Marx's bourgeoisie and proletariat. Francoism advocates the worldwide overthrow of the userites through class consciousness and revolution by the feederites. However, Francoism departs somewhat from marxism in describing what happens after the revolution. After the revolution, the feederites have to establish a 'democratic autocracy' which derives from a Hobbesian conception of the world where people have to give up freedom to an autocrat in order to escape a chaotic state of nature.

On the surface, Francoism appears to be some form of Revolutionary marxist nationalism that arose in the Pacific by Francos Spains' followers. However, how communist is Francoism? Let's analyze it with LEO. What is LEO? LEO is an acronymn standing for Liberty, Equality, Order, and is a theory of political ideologies devised by Professor York of Texas Mountain View College. The theory breaks down ideology into three basic 'brands' based on key values. These ideologies are Anarchism, Communism and Fascism and the key values are respectively; liberty, equality, and order. Each of these ideologies have moderate variants of which are Libertarianism, Socialism, and Conservatism.

How does this relate to known classification systems? In economics you know these ideologies as Capitalism (liberty), Socialism (equality), Corporatism (order). In Sociology there is Interactionism (individualist branch), Conflict Theory (equality), and Structural Functionalism (order). In politics, they are Confederation, Democracy, and Autocracy. In political cultures it is Individualism (Liberty), Moralism (Equality), Traditionalism (Order). Montesquieu also comes close to the three part system when he characterizes Aristocracy (moderation), Republic (Virtue) Monarchy (honour), though he adds a fourth term called Despotism (fear). There have been also other attempts at categorizing ideologies. The Political Triangle comes close to LEO, but doesn't clearly delineate the center or account for anti-positions.

Finally, there is the Gameplay Alignment Test which has two axes and has four ideologies (Raiderism, Cosmopolitanism, Defenderism, Regionalism.) Francoist people, such as Unlimited and Feux, are scored as Regionalist on that test, so while we analyze Francoism with LEO, we can also compare LEO to the Gameplay Alignment Test.

Francoism officially views the world with a marxist lens, so it would make sense if it scored high on Equality rhetoric, the value of communism. However, they actually score high on Order rhetoric, the value of fascists, nationalists and conservatives. In 'An Introduction to Francoism' the positive scores were L=24% E=18% O=58% Ideologue Liberal Conservativism, and its negative scores were L=9% E=9% O=82% so it most despises Fascism. Overall L=28% E=21% O=51% Liberal Conservative. This reflects the revolutionary rhetoric, where they are attacking the Userite order, and wish to replace it with their own feederite order. The article “Proper Francoist Thought” also scores conservative. L=24% E=34% O=41%.This article is actually rather moderate, almost centrist. This is probably because it is attempting to appeal to a broad audience and details the separate policy focuses within the document. 'Five Days that Shook the World'(L=17% E=33% O=50%) is naturally going to be conservative as its focus is glorifying the revolution and is attempting to secure legitimacy for the regime. 'A Primer on Francoism'(L=33% E=18% O=49%) and the Charter(-L=5% E=32% O=63%) also indicate a preference for Order. The Hobbesian 'Meaning of Freedom' is probably the most telling about the underlying ideology of the Francoists. In that paper, the francoists argue for individuals to surrender some freedom to an autocrat in order to prevent the chaotic state of nature, where it is the war of all against all and individual personal security is absent. Its Positive score is L=30% E=18% O=52% Ideologue Liberal Conservative. Negative Score is L=70% E=13% O=18% Right-wing Anarchism. Overall score is L=17% E=20% O=63% Hardline Egalitarian Conservatism. Why the secondary egalitarianism? This reflects the Francoists' insistence on a kind of comradesque unity within the ranks. Since liberty is Francoism's least preference, libertarianism(probably Left-wing in particular) is its worst enemy. Overall Francoism scores as conservative with a slight bent to socialism(L=24%, E=25%, O=51%)

In conclusion, it would seem that Francoism's closest RL ideology is actually some form of Nationalism. This isn't too much of a surprise. Regions function much like Nations in Real Life, and Francoism is highly focused on the furthering the Regional interest. They also are focused on legitimacy of the regime and are concerned with security issues primarly. This is likely because of the ADN war in its early years, when many regions attacked the NPO and nearly overthrew the Francoists. There is also the fact the pacific was subjected to coups in the early years. Just before the August Revolution, Theodoc had already overthrown some NationalStalinist regime within a month. The inherent instability of the early Pacific would explain the focus on Order. Francoists own organization was known as the New Pacific Order after all for most of its existence. This history has left its legacy in their endorsement limit being so low.

So what was Francos Spain's ideology? Despite being the founder of the New Pacific Order, and namesake of a major political ideology, he was rather apolitical. It was the early days of NationStates, so political ideologies were only just starting to emerge, but we can deduce some basic assumptions that led to the ideology of Francoism. In this discussion, we can determine he was at the very least, a communitarian. We also know that he wasn't an extreme egalitarian per se. When we consider his statements on opponents, anti-anarchy statement, and his occasional egalitarianism, he was likely an egalitarian conservative. Basically a more egalitarian version of modern francoists and was considerably to the left of most today. He had a much lower liberty rating though. (L=2%, E=44%, O=54%) He likely would have scored no higher on regionalism than TNP delegate McMasterdonia. What this likely means to LEO and the Gameplay alignment test is that Regionalism is likely akin to nationalism, and we could predict that Cosmopolitanism must have a low order score. Of course how far can LEO apply to NationStates? We have to consider there are other dimensions in the world besides liberty, equality, and order; and some ideologies can't be adequately explained in LEO. The ideocube used for a nation's government classification is an example of a system with three other dimensions. Also we must consider where the focus of one's ideology lies. Such nuances can differentiate ideologies from each other. One may apply egalitarianism in military affairs while applying establishmentarianism in civil affairs with an overall communitarian outlook.

Finally we must consider community identity. Some people may be ideologically the same, but due to personal reasons, will never form a political alliance. LEO is a useful tool in political analysis, but is certainly not the only tool we can use. We should always consider other models to get a more complete picture of the world.

---

Traveller's Journal
Review of One Big Island
FEATURE | HUBOVNIA, EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

One Big Island

After leaving the Roleplayer Coalition, I decided to go to One Big Island. It was a rather welcoming region, but their flag was a little intimidating! I have to say very little happened on the Regional Message Board and I didn't really have much to do. However, the regional polls were quite imaginative though, their most recent being, "Favourite type of Meat?". If you're wondering: it seems as though a majority in the region like to eat fish.

Not much roleplaying occurred in the region, which was a little disappointing.

Rating: ★★ out of ★★★★★

Well, there was very little activity, so new nations are probably going to get bored after a while. Disappointing. Still, the polls were fun to vote in and their flag is amazing! The residents were also very friendly.

Next Edition: Illuminati.

---

"TALE OF TWO THRONES," written and illustrated by Unibot.

[KaelThas Quilor]

Interesting issue. As usual, the little digs you make against your opponents are annoying, but expected. Well written as always - but also, too long. Shorter issue next time.

[Solorni]

I enjoyed Cormac's article but the article on Francoism for example was extremely disappointing

[The Dark Star Republic]

Ugh, this is why someone else needs to copy edit my articles >_<

[KaelThas Quilor]

The problem I have with Cormac's article is tone of the article about raiding and his apparent belief that it was somehow wrong for the mods to find a way to reduce their workload and remove the subjectivity of the previous rules.

Plus, as much as I hate the moralism Cormac is bringing into the conversation, I think that the 'blame', in so far as it exists, belongs with the raiders, and the mods don't have any blame. Its not their fault that people are quitting the game over a raid. That's the person's fault (or at best, a raiders fault.) Moreover, none of the proposed reforms from the summit that he's magically expecting to appear now, would have solved the "problems" raiding causes in the context of Cormac's discussion.

And, to borrow an argument common to defenders, R/D is not the only part of the game. The various reforms put into place on TGs and so on help every player in the game. R/D reforms help raiders, defenders, others who engage in military gameplay, and those people who insist on living in Founderless regions. That's still a small slice of the game.

[Cormac Stark]

The problem I have with Cormac's article is tone of the article about raiding and his apparent belief that it was somehow wrong for the mods to find a way to reduce their workload and remove the subjectivity of the previous rules.

I don't think anyone is surprised by the tone toward raiding. Is anyone surprised by the tone toward raiding? No? Didn't think so.

In regard to your second point, regional influence was a solution for moderators, but for residents of vulnerable regions it actually made things much worse by legalizing the destruction of their regions and displacement of their communities. That, certainly, is accurate. I do believe that was the wrong call to make. I should note, however, that the call was made by site administration, not moderation -- though the latter were supportive. So it's not that I'm saying mods were in the wrong, I'm saying admins were.

Plus, as much as I hate the moralism Cormac is bringing into the conversation, I think that the 'blame', in so far as it exists, belongs with the raiders, and the mods don't have any blame. Its not their fault that people are quitting the game over a raid. That's the person's fault (or at best, a raiders fault.) Moreover, none of the proposed reforms from the summit that he's magically expecting to appear now, would have solved the "problems" raiding causes in the context of Cormac's discussion.

Well, certainly the lion's share of the blame does lie with raiders. But admins have had years to do something about the worst excesses of raiding and they have failed to act on even modest suggestions. At some point, they're to blame too. Again, though, admins, not mods.

Some of the summit reforms would have increased the capacity for defender participation, assuaged defender demoralization, and given the Security Council new tools against raids. They definitely would have had an indirect but very real impact on the excesses of both griefing raids and tag raids by reducing raider success rates and making damage that is now routine for raids more difficult to accomplish.

And, to borrow an argument common to defenders, R/D is not the only part of the game. The various reforms put into place on TGs and so on help every player in the game. R/D reforms help raiders, defenders, others who engage in military gameplay, and those people who insist on living in Founderless regions. That's still a small slice of the game.

Of course R/D isn't the only part of the game, but it's the only part of the game in which players are essentially harassed and trolled by other players, totally against their will and without moderator intervention. That warrants a greater response from site administration than, basically, we'll get to it if and when we get to it. I'm not concerned about changes to make things better for raiders or even defenders, but rather regional natives who are confused and upset by raids.

[Solorni]

Of course R/D isn't the only part of the game, but it's the only part of the game in which players are essentially harassed and trolled by other players, totally against their will and without moderator intervention. That warrants a greater response from site administration than, basically, we'll get to it if and when we get to it. I'm not concerned about changes to make things better for raiders or even defenders, but rather regional natives who are confused and upset by raids.

Accusations of trolling go in moderation or should be filed via a GHR.

[Cormac Stark]

Of course R/D isn't the only part of the game, but it's the only part of the game in which players are essentially harassed and trolled by other players, totally against their will and without moderator intervention. That warrants a greater response from site administration than, basically, we'll get to it if and when we get to it. I'm not concerned about changes to make things better for raiders or even defenders, but rather regional natives who are confused and upset by raids.

Accusations of trolling go in moderation or should be filed via a GHR.

I don't think I can file a GHR against every raider in NationStates, can I?

Though that's an interesting idea for a protest movement.

[Common-Sense Politics]

@Cormac: When you go back and forth, do your defender comrades require you to apologize for the "destruction", "trolling", "hurrass[ment]", and "confus[ion]" you yourself have participated in time and again before they allow you a soapbox from which to decry it? I enjoy reading TRT and I like you personally. I just can't fathom how TRT chose literally the least credible person in the NS world to write this important article.

[Cormac Stark]

@Cormac: When you go back and forth, do your defender comrades require you to apologize for the "destruction", "trolling", "hurrass[ment]", and "confus[ion]" you yourself have participated in time and again before they allow you a soapbox from which to decry it? I enjoy reading TRT and I like you personally. I just can't fathom how TRT chose literally the least credible person in the NS world to write this important article.

The article was my idea after having a discussion with somebody regarding how long technical changes have taken, so naturally, I wrote it. The Rejected Times generally allows any citizen who signs up to actually participate, as free speech and free press are fairly important to The Rejected Realms. That's the sort of thing one can expect from actually free regions -- Europeia should try it sometime.

[Common-Sense Politics]

The article was my idea after having a discussion with somebody regarding how long technical changes have taken, so naturally, I wrote it. The Rejected Times generally allows any citizen who signs up to actually participate, as free speech and free press are fairly important to The Rejected Realms. That's the sort of thing one can expect from actually free regions -- Europeia should try it sometime.

Okay now, let's not get erroneous with the back and forth. You know very well speech isn't restricted in Europeia any more than it is anywhere else. If you're going to make a statement like that, you need to qualify it. It's only fair.

[Cormac Stark]

Okay now, let's not get erroneous with the back and forth. You know very well speech isn't restricted in Europeia any more than it is anywhere else. If you're going to make a statement like that, you need to qualify it. It's only fair.

A former Senator of Europeia, I have been declared persona non grata and had vile comments said about me and others I associate with on your off-site forum, for an article in the last edition of TRT that was critical of Europeia. If the state treating someone as a traitor and criminal for writing a critical op-ed in a newspaper isn't restricting free speech and press, I don't know what does qualify as restricting free speech and press these days.

[Common-Sense Politics]

Okay now, let's not get erroneous with the back and forth. You know very well speech isn't restricted in Europeia any more than it is anywhere else. If you're going to make a statement like that, you need to qualify it. It's only fair.

A former Senator of Europeia, I have been declared persona non grata and had vile comments said about me and others I associate with on your off-site forum, for an article in the last edition of TRT that was critical of Europeia. If the state treating someone as a traitor and criminal for writing a critical op-ed in a newspaper isn't restricting free speech and press, I don't know what does qualify as restricting free speech and press these days.

Were you a citizen of Europeia at the time of this designation, Cormac? No, you were not and are therefore not privileged to any rights not already defined by legislation for non-citizens. No one has made any effort to suppress your speech. Your speech has been and is out of Europeia's power or prerogative to suppress. This characterization you're attempting is disingenuous. You are simply no longer welcome in our community as a result of behavior that was deemed amenable to PNG status by the current administration, a decision I personally disagree with.

[Solorni]

Okay now, let's not get erroneous with the back and forth. You know very well speech isn't restricted in Europeia any more than it is anywhere else. If you're going to make a statement like that, you need to qualify it. It's only fair.

A former Senator of Europeia, I have been declared persona non grata and had vile comments said about me and others I associate with on your off-site forum, for an article in the last edition of TRT that was critical of Europeia. If the state treating someone as a traitor and criminal for writing a critical op-ed in a newspaper isn't restricting free speech and press, I don't know what does qualify as restricting free speech and press these days.

Ironically, HEM threatened me to take me to court for calling Lethen a sexist after he made a sexist comment on the forums. It's really weird that he didn't try to extend his belief in good behaviour to those calling you out. Really weird :/

[Ambrella]

@Cormac: When you go back and forth, do your defender comrades require you to apologize for the "destruction", "trolling", "hurrass[ment]", and "confus[ion]" you yourself have participated in time and again before they allow you a soapbox from which to decry it? I enjoy reading TRT and I like you personally. I just can't fathom how TRT chose literally the least credible person in the NS world to write this important article.

The article was my idea after having a discussion with somebody regarding how long technical changes have taken, so naturally, I wrote it. The Rejected Times generally allows any citizen who signs up to actually participate, as free speech and free press are fairly important to The Rejected Realms. That's the sort of thing one can expect from actually free regions -- Europeia should try it sometime.

And here I thought this was going to be a good day for us. You were declared PNG for consistent and extensive slandering of the Republic. Since you were not a citizen, a PNG declaration was the only way to deal with your ilk.

[King HEM]

A former Senator of Europeia, I have been declared persona non grata and had vile comments said about me and others I associate with on your off-site forum, for an article in the last edition of TRT that was critical of Europeia. If the state treating someone as a traitor and criminal for writing a critical op-ed in a newspaper isn't restricting free speech and press, I don't know what does qualify as restricting free speech and press these days.

Ironically, HEM threatened me to take me to court for calling Lethen a sexist after he made a sexist comment on the forums. It's really weird that he didn't try to extend his belief in good behaviour to those calling you out. Really weird :/

[Common-Sense Politics]

A former Senator of Europeia, I have been declared persona non grata and had vile comments said about me and others I associate with on your off-site forum, for an article in the last edition of TRT that was critical of Europeia. If the state treating someone as a traitor and criminal for writing a critical op-ed in a newspaper isn't restricting free speech and press, I don't know what does qualify as restricting free speech and press these days.

Ironically, HEM threatened me to take me to court for calling Lethen a sexist after he made a sexist comment on the forums. It's really weird that he didn't try to extend his belief in good behaviour to those calling you out. Really weird :/

You're really bringing this here, Rachel? Your attacks on Lethen border on hurrassment. In any case, a dispute brought before an open court is not suppression of speech, protected or otherwise.

[Solorni]

My apologies for taking issue with sexism and hypocrisy.

[Ambrella]

My apologies for taking issue with sexism and hypocrisy.

Before this thread gets derailed, this should probably be taken back where it came from.

[KaelThas Quilor]

The problem I have with Cormac's article is tone of the article about raiding and his apparent belief that it was somehow wrong for the mods to find a way to reduce their workload and remove the subjectivity of the previous rules.

I don't think anyone is surprised by the tone toward raiding. Is anyone surprised by the tone toward raiding? No? Didn't think so.

Did I say I was surprised by it? No. I just said I didn't like it. And no one will be surprised by it until you switch again.

In regard to your second point, regional influence was a solution for moderators, but for residents of vulnerable regions it actually made things much worse by legalizing the destruction of their regions and displacement of their communities. That, certainly, is accurate. I do believe that was the wrong call to make. I should note, however, that the call was made by site administration, not moderation -- though the latter were supportive. So it's not that I'm saying mods were in the wrong, I'm saying admins were.

Okay, fine, so the admins were wrong to remove the endless subjectivity and the massive workload that only led to things not being resolved anyway? So you'd rather we existed under the previous rules where defenders could get deleted ejecting a raider that managed to complain to the mods well? I mean, I suppose scorched earth tactics are all well and nice, but Influence solved many more problems than it created Because its not hard to protect a region from raids.

Plus, as much as I hate the moralism Cormac is bringing into the conversation, I think that the 'blame', in so far as it exists, belongs with the raiders, and the mods don't have any blame. Its not their fault that people are quitting the game over a raid. That's the person's fault (or at best, a raiders fault.) Moreover, none of the proposed reforms from the summit that he's magically expecting to appear now, would have solved the "problems" raiding causes in the context of Cormac's discussion.

Well, certainly the lion's share of the blame does lie with raiders. But admins have had years to do something about the worst excesses of raiding and they have failed to act on even modest suggestions. At some point, they're to blame too. Again, though, admins, not mods.

Some of the summit reforms would have increased the capacity for defender participation, assuaged defender demoralization, and given the Security Council new tools against raids. They definitely would have had an indirect but very real impact on the excesses of both griefing raids and tag raids by reducing raider success rates and making damage that is now routine for raids more difficult to accomplish.

The proposed reforms would have helped defenders, not natives. While a more active defender corps would reduce the amount of damage (arguably) raiders could do, they wouldn't have fundamentally decreased the number of people that left over a raid - an occupation raid would have been the same length and duration, and destructive raids would have been as destructive. Tag raids don't make anyone leave - its a freaking Tag raid. Defender demoralization has little to do with the technical rules when it comes to actual occupations. Technical changes could maybe stop a raid from happening, but that's a lot to ask for. The demoralization amongst defenders isn't a result of the technical environment. If you need technical changes to give you morale...well, its much the same as someone who needs a poster to motivate them to do their job.

And, to borrow an argument common to defenders, R/D is not the only part of the game. The various reforms put into place on TGs and so on help every player in the game. R/D reforms help raiders, defenders, others who engage in military gameplay, and those people who insist on living in Founderless regions. That's still a small slice of the game.

Of course R/D isn't the only part of the game, but it's the only part of the game in which players are essentially harassed and trolled by other players, totally against their will and without moderator intervention. That warrants a greater response from site administration than, basically, we'll get to it if and when we get to it. I'm not concerned about changes to make things better for raiders or even defenders, but rather regional natives who are confused and upset by raids.

The argument that raiding is trolling has been trotted out and proven false every time. If it was trolling, people would be punished. Nor is it harassment. Harrassment requires a personal interaction and personal level, and raiding is impersonal in almost all cases.

Moreover, the people who are exposed to raids are A) Not taking measures they can easily take, and B) a very small slice of the game. Most active players (not counting people in GCRs) are in foundered regions. Things that help the entire game take priority over helping a small slice of players that consistently refuse to help themselves.

No one should be getting upset by a raid in the degree you talk about. If they do - that is there problem. It is not the job of the mods to babysit people who don't educate themselves, don't help themselves and who take the game too seriously.

[Cormac Stark]

Okay, fine, so the admins were wrong to remove the endless subjectivity and the massive workload that only led to things not being resolved anyway? So you'd rather we existed under the previous rules where defenders could get deleted ejecting a raider that managed to complain to the mods well? I mean, I suppose scorched earth tactics are all well and nice, but Influence solved many more problems than it created Because its not hard to protect a region from raids.

You've clearly never had to re-found a region, if you think that it's not hard. Aside from the difficulty of getting everyone to migrate to a holding region, you also have to do it as quickly as possible during update -- which requires triggering, something the vast majority of players have no idea how to do -- to ensure that raiders don't snatch the re-found. And this is not even to mention that re-founding wipes the existing RMB, which for regions unlike those you frequent, regions you no doubt consider underdeveloped or irrelevant, may contain their entire history.

Yes, I would rather the previous griefing rules were in place rather than telling residents of founderless regions to either go through the difficult and destructive process of re-founding or learn to live with destructive raids. Your "game" is at the expense of their enjoyment of NationStates and the griefing rules prevented the worst of that, until they suddenly didn't.

That said, those rules aren't coming back so what I would really prefer is for admins to get serious about technical improvements, and that is hardly too much to ask.

The proposed reforms would have helped defenders, not natives. While a more active defender corps would reduce the amount of damage (arguably) raiders could do, they wouldn't have fundamentally decreased the number of people that left over a raid - an occupation raid would have been the same length and duration, and destructive raids would have been as destructive. Tag raids don't make anyone leave - its a freaking Tag raid. Defender demoralization has little to do with the technical rules when it comes to actual occupations. Technical changes could maybe stop a raid from happening, but that's a lot to ask for. The demoralization amongst defenders isn't a result of the technical environment. If you need technical changes to give you morale...well, its much the same as someone who needs a poster to motivate them to do their job.

In the post-influence era, helping defenders = helping natives. Defenders are the only relief available to natives of founderless regions, short of re-founding. The reason defender morale is, well, obliterated, is because defenders don't even have a realistic chance, in most cases, of defending regions or liberating them if they're sufficiently piled. Technical changes would give defenders a chance, and that is not too much to ask.

I take it you haven't familiarized yourself with the proposed summit changes or have forgotten them, but the idea that the changes won't do anything to shorten occupations or to curtail destructive raids is just wrong. Delegate-Elect and the Reformation SC category would help a great deal against occupations, if they're ever actually implemented.

The argument that raiding is trolling has been trotted out and proven false every time. If it was trolling, people would be punished. Nor is it harassment. Harrassment requires a personal interaction and personal level, and raiding is impersonal in almost all cases.

It hasn't been "proven false." That raiding does not meet the definition of trolling by administrators and moderators on this site doesn't mean it doesn't meet anyone else's definition.

Moreover, the people who are exposed to raids are A) Not taking measures they can easily take, and B) a very small slice of the game. Most active players (not counting people in GCRs) are in foundered regions. Things that help the entire game take priority over helping a small slice of players that consistently refuse to help themselves.

No one should be getting upset by a raid in the degree you talk about. If they do - that is there problem. It is not the job of the mods to babysit people who don't educate themselves, don't help themselves and who take the game too seriously.

Why is it taking the game too seriously to quit playing when a region you have put time and energy into is raided, you and every other native resident are ejected, and the region is re-founded -- obliterating the RMB, and replacing everything unique about the region with a WFE, flag, and tags boasting of the region's conquest? The reason that seems extreme to you is only because you have no respect for regions that don't place the bulk of their activity and history in an off-site forum, that instead choose to play the game exclusively on the actual site. Just because it isn't a concern for you in your elitist off-site forum ivory tower doesn't mean it shouldn't be a concern for anyone.

[Crazy girl]

Armour tipped arrows on Sedge, huh? Me thinks he'll agree it was probably the other way around

As for the old invasion rules, as someone who actually played at that time as a defender/invader, it was not always very clear cut, and at times even a gigantic mess figuring out who a "native" was, which a plant (either defender or raider) and often even unsuspecting players got deleted for not knowing the rules properly. It was far far far from perfect, and while I myself was not enthused about influence, I must say that in terms of enforcability it is a big improvement. No, the invasion rules are not coming back, and they shouldn't come back.