No such thing as Natives?

[All Wild Things]

The topic has come up on two embassy threads today, so it must be worth it's own thread. Do natives exist?

The real world definition of native, is "a person born in a specified place or associated with a place by birth, whether subsequently resident there or not."
Our nations are 'birthed' in the feeders. So I guess you can be native to a feeder.
Nations can be refounded in sinkers. Maybe you can claim to be native to a sinker?
But nations emigrate to user-created regions. Even the founders. If you look at a typical activity log for a new founder, it reads something like:
- <nation> was founded in <feeder>
- <nation> founded the region <region>
- <nation> relocated from <feeder> to <region>

Opinions?

[YoriZ]

In my opinion, a native nation is a nation that is a local resident of a region. It is a nation known by other nations in the region and it has a certain amount of influence. Comparing the noun native with birthplace or the circumstances in which a nation was founded, has an old-fashioned feel and a more or less colonial European outlook that does not comply with the meaning it has in Nationstates for nations like my own.

[Lord Dominator]

In my view, you are a native to whatever region(s) you consider home and consider you a member of such region.

One can be a native of any region, there is no difference between Feeders/Sinkers/TRR and all other regions in that regard.

[Xoriet]

Without natives, there would be no native tears. Raiders would be bankrupt. Don't do that to the poor raiders. They have to earn their pay just like the rest of us.

[Native Tears]

Without natives, there would be no native tears.

Can confirm.

[All Wild Things]

Without natives, there would be no native tears.

Can confirm.

Lol!

In my opinion, a native nation is a nation that is a local resident of a region. It is a nation known by other nations in the region and it has a certain amount of influence. Comparing the noun native with birthplace or the circumstances in which a nation was founded, has an old-fashioned feel and a more or less colonial European outlook that does not comply with the meaning it has in Nationstates for nations like my own.

OK, so you think people can self-identify as a native of a region. How would you spot a native of another region?
For example, defenders may think they're saving natives from being ejected by raiders. How would a defender identify who was a native, and who wasn't?

Edit:
Here's an example: Klossy. They've made no RMB posts, and no forum posts. They show no activity other than logging in over the past 113 days. They've been resident for 137 days. I don't see that they ever resided anywhere else. Are they a native?

[Lord Dominator]

If they don't act against the region, sure.

Now if they're trying to suddenly claim to be a native when refound stuff is going on, I'd be more suspicious.

[Almonaster Nuevo]

AFAIK there is a game definition : - a nation which has more influence in that region than in any other.

[Frattastan IV]

For example, defenders may think they're saving natives from being ejected by raiders. How would a defender identify who was a native, and who wasn't?

"A nation which takes up residence in a region without the intention of furthering the goals and aims of a foreign force" (which represents a cosmopolitan view of what constitutes a native, of course).
But yes, it's a controversial topic and it can be hard to come up with a universally-accepted definition. You're going to hear many different definitions just in this topic. In practice, though, in most cases you'd have no doubts: YoriZ is a native of Anarchy, Lord Dominator a native of Forest, Almonaster of Canada, etc.

Here's an example: Klossy. They've made no RMB posts, and no forum posts. They show no activity other than logging in over the past 113 days. They've been resident for 137 days. I don't see that they ever resided anywhere else. Are they a native?

That's a highly dubious situation because that nation's appearance and activity doesn't seem compatible with a "genuine" nation. Random custom fields, not answering issues since the day of their founding, barely logging in, no sign of interaction with the rest of the region, etc. Would anyone play NS like that? No. It's a puppet that was created for the sole purpose of taking up residence in the region. Defenders would have to figure out the reason behind that, but unless it's your own puppet (since the region is your storage) it's unlikely they would meet any definition of native.

AFAIK there is a game definition : - a nation which has more influence in that region than in any other.

That was somewhat controversial when it was introduced, I believe, and I haven't seen it applied outside of polls anyway.
There was also the previous definition under the griefing rule, although it involved a fair amount of moderator judgement.

[Lord Dominator]

I'd most definitely agree that the influence measure is hardly a good one. For the most part, any given raider puppet has so low influence that the points for a given occupation will probably hit that metric within a few updates, depending on the raider piler count. And as much as I would find it amusing to be able to be a 'native' of an occupied region within a few updates, I don't think any non-raiders would agree with that sentiment.

[Galiantus III]

I would say that the definition of "native" depends heavily on what kind of region you are talking about. For GCRs, a true native would be any player that chose to stay there after founding their first nation there. For a UCR, natives would be residents successfully recruited to the region. This isn't to say that regional migrants have no right to the region, but natives do have a primary right to the region, collectively, and only extend that right to immigrants via their naturalization policies. I am an immigrant to Lazarus, but I support the native government and have been naturalized as a citizen. I could hardly call myself a native, but I would also argue any coup on Lazarus is a violation of my right to reside there safely.

I also think native status naturally applies to founders, as well as any group of players who voluntarily move to a region in support of an active founder.

So to summarize: exactly who counts as a native is often extremely fuzzy, and is more exclusive than typically thought. However, that doesn't mean people with good intentions don't have similar standing with natives in the regions where they reside, and the term can be more safely applied to groups than individuals.

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Natives certainly exist. Natives shouldn't be applied the real world definition to meet its purposes. However finding out if a nation is a native or not, is difficult. Is it a sleeper? A resident? The only person knows is the player behind that nation and quite say, if a person ONLY has one nation and it is a main nation,excluding joke nations and through good and bad times, whether the person is ejected by horrible people or he ends up doing nothing in the game, that qualifies as being a native.

[Apulita]

I think the term native in the Nationstates sense is applied wildly differently than the term's RL use. To me, natives are regional residents who take part in a region's culture and society. Be that taking part in regional government, being active on a regional RMB, whatever aspects are important to the region in particular.

[Milozoldyck]

To OP:

I endorse Fratt's answer to your question, and think you should give it somewhat special attention while perusing the replies in this thread.

[Bowzin]

Natives in the terms of NationStates can be compared to a permanent resident I guess, someone who has citizenship if the region offers it and who has been in the region for some amount of time and who doesnt plan on leaving that region. A native should also be pretty involved in the region. Now alot of things still need to be defined, like how long should someone be part of a region and to what extent do they need to get involved, so discuss away

[Malphe]

I think the term native in the Nationstates sense is applied wildly differently than the term's RL use. To me, natives are regional residents who take part in a region's culture and society. Be that taking part in regional government, being active on a regional RMB, whatever aspects are important to the region in particular.

This.

I would say that the definition of "native" depends heavily on what kind of region you are talking about. For GCRs, a true native would be any player that chose to stay there after founding their first nation there. For a UCR, natives would be residents successfully recruited to the region.

Alright, so I've been in TNP for well over two years but I was founded in TP, where I only stayed for a couple weeks. So I'm not a native of TNP, I shouldn't have as much of a say as somebody who was founded there?

[Solorni]

I think in real life and in NS that the term native invokes the idea of inferiority. One only has to think about how European powers justified their colonies by proclaiming how they were "civilizing" the "natives". In many ways, likely unintentional... I think some of the rhetoric regarding helping natives seems to fit a little too closely with this theme. So the rhetoric of "native" in NS is often a bit cringy to me and seems inadvertently similar to how people will want to do charity work in "poor" African countries but less so at home because of the long emotional memory of those civilizing missions.

[Malphe]

I think in real life and in NS that the term native invokes the idea of inferiority. One only has to think about how European powers justified their colonies by proclaiming how they were "civilizing" the "natives". In many ways, likely unintentional... I think some of the rhetoric regarding helping natives seems to fit a little too closely with this theme. So the rhetoric of "native" in NS is often a bit cringy to me and seems inadvertently similar to how people will want to do charity work in "poor" African countries but less so at home because of the long emotional memory of those civilizing missions.

TBH I've never seen the term native in that way. Maybe some people use it to talk down to people by referring to them as natives but I've never caught onto it.

[Frattastan IV]

I think in real life and in NS that the term native invokes the idea of inferiority. One only has to think about how European powers justified their colonies by proclaiming how they were "civilizing" the "natives". In many ways, likely unintentional... I think some of the rhetoric regarding helping natives seems to fit a little too closely with this theme. So the rhetoric of "native" in NS is often a bit cringy to me and seems inadvertently similar to how people will want to do charity work in "poor" African countries but less so at home because of the long emotional memory of those civilizing missions.

Ah, but then independent ("the sovereignty of others is subordinate to my interests"), invader (which frequently relishes in 'purging natives' and see other regions and their inhabitants as mere means to achieve 'fun') and imperialist rhetoric (which claims superior rights to others and used to practice the open 'colonisation' of regions) would be even worse.

Your reading is incorrect because defenders, by large:
(1) recognise that natives have agency (the right to rule their own regions);
(2) would see themselves as natives of their own home regions; defending is a natural consequence of coupling the principle of self-determination with the principle of equality ("I defend you because I recognise that you and I have the same rights to rule our regions").
This kind of 'moralism' is incompatible with the patronising rhetoric of a 'civilising mission' that was used by imperialist powers in the real world.

[Aclion]

A native is a nation with more influence in a region then any other region.

[All Wild Things]

Lots of interesting views!

I would say that the definition of "native" depends heavily on what kind of region you are talking about. For GCRs, a true native would be any player that chose to stay there after founding their first nation there. For a UCR, natives would be residents successfully recruited to the region.

Alright, so I've been in TNP for well over two years but I was founded in TP, where I only stayed for a couple weeks. So I'm not a native of TNP, I shouldn't have as much of a say as somebody who was founded there?

I'm not sure that Galiantus was saying you should have less of a say, just that you wouldn't have the label "native".
That one of the things I like about the idea of citizenship. There's a clearly defined list of nations that have citizens rights and responsibilities.
Solorni's view is very interesting. The idea that natives can be seen as inferior. When you're getting ejected by invaders, and are unable to organise an effective defence,
(been there!) you are military inferior. And that does get you the sympathy vote from defenders, and in Security Council Liberations. Defenders might be protecting the right of others to self sovereignty, but they must be aware that they are militarily superior.
The idea that natives were being protected contributied to people supporting the Liberations of Boston and Christmas. But there were no people in those regions making a contribution at the time. Just silent puppets, possibly answering their issues. I guess that's another plus for citizenship. If citizens are getting ejected, clearly something bad is happening. If nations like Klossy are getting ejected, we as a community should be able to ignore it. But it's harder to, as we see the nation get ejected, and assume they qualify as a native.

Edit:

A native is a nation with more influence in a region then any other region.

Nah. A sleeper puppet can have lots of influence in a region. Gut feeling says they shouldn't count as native.

[Lord Dominator]

@Fratt & Malphe, personally I saw Solorni's thoughts as closer to thinking the term has unfortunate implications or the like, rather than accusing either side of using derogatorily.

[Apostate]

I have only done r/d for a short while, and not recently. I am certainly not one of the wizards and or witches of this type of play, but my thought on the subject is that there is no native. Just residents of a region with various lengths of stay (influence) regardless of intentions. Someone mentioned governmental granted citizenship, but I assume crafty peeps can get right round that too! I am a simple person and think the gameplay mechanic of influence is the only way to demonstrate “ownership” or right to exist in the region. Thus I have always viewed raiding and defending a seperate, distinct act aside from regional membership, length of stay, size, or intent. I hope I am making my point clearly but I am worried I am not.

[Unibot III]

I think the OP’s point is quite clever, indeed under RL understandings of the word, there is limited potential for indigenous society in NationStates.

Practically speaking, in NS Gameplay we use ‘native’ colloquially to meam someone with a legitimate stake in a region and its self-rule; this is to say, a “resident” or a “participant” of a region who resides in good faith, or more exclusively “a citizen.” If you don’t believe regions have a right to self-determination, the question of who or what is a native becomes academic since the concept of “native” in NS serves to articulate the group that possesses a legitimate claim to govern.

Fratt’s perspective here most closely resembles my own.

[Of crazed]

From my point of view, the natives are evil.