Regions should regulate how nations answer issues: A Guide

by **Codger** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 8:53 pm

This is originally from a conversation in #neutral_ground with Dali, Sev and Rach and I am posting here for so there is wider discussion.

Regions have tried sort all sorts of methods for community building, engagement and control, but an idea that is severely underused is regions making a policy on how they should answer their issues. Any attempts at it are at a broad Nation Classification level (e.g. Everyone must be a dictatorship) or at most, based on a census stat (e.g. must be above X in Civil Rights or Cheerfulness). This is ok, but only useful if you are making a very specialised region of nations that fit that criteria, compared the variety of 1000+ issues in the game.

"Everyone should be able to answer issue they way they like!". Sure, but by doing that you have opted out of engaging with the activity most players/nations are doing. Making an issue answering policy is way to bring engagement to these players directly and if there is conflict, if there are discussion, there is community.

Tools Required

1. The Issues Spoiler Thread (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88)

This thread lists every issue in the game with Dilemmas and responses. Pick an issue from the list and decide which are acceptable and unacceptable responses to it for your region.

2. The Issue Results Effect lines page (http://www.mwq.dds.nl/ns/results/issues.html)

This page created by Trotterdam lists the resulting effect line that appears in the nation's happenings after answering an issue. Use this page to know what effect lines to look for from acceptable/unacceptable responses from your region's issue policy.

3. The Activity Feed or API.

Found at the top of every region page, the activity feed shows all the changes happening in the region. Use this to monitor your region to ensure people are answering correctly. You can filter it to only show 'laws' (issue responses) so it is easier to manage. In the activity feed, watch for nations showing effect lines from forbidden issue responses. How the region wants to respond to that is up to you.

Tech-savvy player can use build tools to retrieve this using the API, using shards like https://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/ap ... filter=law to view law changes in the region. If we are lucky someone could build a tool that combines all this for us.

Example 1 - Anti-coup policy for The South Pacific

I am an old fart and I remember that Sedge couped TSP in 2011. To add insult to injury, according to some, he also wrote an issue based on those events and incorporated it in the game as Issue #287 (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88#267).

All option except option 1 advise the player to support that coup or be launch a coup yourself. If I were TSP, I would make a policy requiring all nations answer 1 for this issue and track this by using the methods mentioned above. Besides the fun of making an issue policy, it is an opportunity to players to learn about the regions culture, history and government.

Example 2 - Cheap chocolate at all costs for The West Pacific

Home to Darkesia, The West Pacific is known for its love of chocolate (and hatred for marsupials, but I couldn't find a related issue). Issue #842 is an issue related to chocolate (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88&start=25#842)

#842: @@LEADER@@ And The Chocolate Factory [Marilyn Manson Freaks; ed: Candlewhisper Archive]

The Issue
Local chocolate factory Wenko’s Candy Universe was busted by the police last night. Authorities discovered that it was only able to produce its tasty treats at low, low prices due to a workforce that was comprised of illegal immigrants from Zompaboodaland, a battle-ravaged country that has been mired in a decades-long civil war. The ill-treated workers had been smuggled into @@NAME@@ with the promise of work, and were being forced to “work off their cost of passage.”

The Debate
1. A group of men each as tall as your knee stumble into the room and break into song. “Zoompo-boodo-zippity-zoo, master feeds us terrible food. Zoompo-boodo-zippa-dah-deeeeee, if you are bad he will whip ye! What do you get when you eat like a cat? An eating disorder, and that is that! I don’t like the taste of it!” The Zompa Boodas hand you a petition asking for all illegal immigrants to be granted amnesty and citizenship, before they are shoveled into a wheelbarrow by your security guard, in order to remove them from your office.

2. “WHAAAAAT?” inquires madman factory owner, Willy Wenko. “These claims are preposterous! My little helpers have their own lives, families, and free will. Furthermore, I pay them plenty!” He turns to the last three little workers still in your office, handing two of them a piece of chocolate each, but grabbing the third around the throat. “So you thought it was a good idea to tell tales, huh? NO RATIONS FOR A WEEK! Ahaha, sorry, that was just a little joke... I beg you, allow me to keep our little factory family together, and let the magic of Wenko Chocolates keep bringing smiles to little children’s faces! For the kids, @@LEADER@@, the kids!”

3. “Are you kidding me? This is a no-brainer!” exclaims Immigration Officer Charles Bucket, whose fearless infiltration of the factory was instrumental in busting open the Wenko case. “It is obvious this purple-hatted lunatic was exploiting these people! How would you like it if you were kidnapped by some rich weirdo to work in their factory forever? We need to ship these little folk home immediately!”

Option 2 allows the nation to support Willy Wenko make cheap tasty chocolate for the nation, ignoring work conditions and human rights concerns. As the chocolate loving and devilishly oppressive :twisted:

region, The West Pacific could make it regional policy for all nations to support Option 2.

-------------

What does everyone think of the idea? What are some issue polices your region should want to enforce? Discuss!

by **Klorgia1** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 8:56 pm

Personally, I don't think a region should have that level of control on those who deem it fun in the game. But considering their are many regions which already ask for specific nation groups (dictatorships, for example), it wouldn't be that hard to do it indirectly.

If their fine with alienation, that is.

by **Kaystein** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:03 pm

Codger wrote:"...What does everyone think of the idea?..."

by **Karteria** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:06 pm

Klorgia1 wrote:Personally, I don't think a region should have that level of control on those who deem it fun in the game. But considering their are many regions which already ask for specific nation groups (dictatorships, for example), it wouldn't be that hard to do it indirectly.

If their fine with alienation, that is.

I tend to agree. While this is a unique proposal, I think it's best suited for larger regions. A lot of the fun for newer players, and players in general, stems from answering issues, and such regional control could turn potential recruits away. Smaller regions would have a tough time withstanding the impact.

This is all assuming that such a policy controls a large portion of the issues – however, if you selected only a few, I don't think it would be a big deal.

by **The Shire of Hobbits** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:17 pm

Love this idea.

And a new region tag could be added (Issue Enforcer?) to notify potential residents what sort of region they would be getting involved with.

by **Kaystein** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:39 pm

I would love to see an issues guide to tell me what general changes could possibly happen from picking an option in my issue. I loathe the idea of being told what permanent option to choose by some mook who has little regard for how I want to develop my nation, and this being some requirement to be a part of a community that could die off at any moment thanks to ~~griefing the game~~ "invasion gameplay".

From what I can tell, this is the same opinion of this game's overall community, because I have yet to see one of the large regions actively promote "Issue enforcement" or whatever nonsense this is.

Whoever has the gall to dredge this "idea" up from the local sewer as something actually worthwhile should try to drag it's rotting corpse across their own community first, so they can feel embarrassed when their fellow players laugh at them for bringing up this terrible, terrible idea.

by **Codger** » Fri Feb 22, 2019 9:58 pm

Kaystein wrote:I would love to see an issues guide to tell me what general changes could possibly happen from picking an option in my issue.

The main page of the link I posted has that:

http://www.mwq.dds.nl/ns/results/

Go the individual issue page and it shows the estimated stat changes, based on recording 100s of nation's. I didn't link to it in my OP has it is very spoiler.

by **Lord Dominator** » Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:00 am

This is an actually entertaining, if probably fairly infeasible in large regions, idea here Codger.

by **Marilyn Manson Freaks** » Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:14 am

Full support.

I feel that the only place without this should be TRR as banjected nations are sent there. This could work in every other region.

by **Codger** » Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:38 pm

Lord Dominator wrote:This is an actually entertaining, if probably fairly infeasible in large regions, idea here Codger.

It would be much more fun in large regions, with the idea that though you think your single issue answer won't be noticed among the 6000 nation's in a feeder, but actually your all seeing regional government is watching. Always watching and can pinpoint you out exactly who and when they answered incorrectly.

Marilyn Manson Freaks wrote:Full support.

I feel that the only place without this should be TRR as banjected nations are sent there. This could work in every other region.

Thanks Manson.

---------

I don't think an issue policy is draconian at all, unless you try to micromanage everything with a policy for all 1500 issues. Showing that the region stands for something and sticking to it (unlike WA resolutions which are passed and forgotten) outweighs the costs.

Also dang it GP, doesn't anyone here actually run regions instead of just harnessing them for interregional politics? Is it so hard to get a discussion going?

by **Lord Dominator** » Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:46 pm

Codger wrote:
Lord Dominator wrote:This is an actually entertaining, if probably fairly infeasible in large regions, idea here Codger.

It would be much more fun in large regions, with the idea that though you think your single issue answer won't be noticed among the 6000 nation's in a feeder, but actually your all seeing regional government is watching. Always watching and can pinpoint you out exactly who and when they answered incorrectly.

I was more thinking in an ability to accurately inform all of the nations in a region.

by **Bowzin** » Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:34 pm

I think this could work quite well.
Assuming each issue policy would need to pass the regions respective legislation and such, there wouldn't be too much control, and in democratic regions, people could vote against policies they don't like. It would create more activity in the legislative side and possibly bring some issue players into communities more.

I could see this being a really cool idea for any decent sized region.

by **Kyoki Chudoku** » Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:53 am

I am RPer first and foremost. Now, this means I often forget to even answer issues. But even so, when I do so, I do so from the perspective of the nation’s rulership. Therefore, the idea that a regional government could outright force me to choose certain issue options is not one I support, as it would mean making IC decisions based on OOC factors in every such circumstance, whether I want to or not. Therefore, I disagree with this idea.

by **Fauxia** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:35 pm

This is not good.

In the first place, it’s hard to actually keep track of, but more importantly, people don’t necessarily answer issues seriously, and most people, especially random people not involved in gameplay, are not going to, for example, see that issue and think “oh this is Sedge gloating over couping TSP.”

Roleplaying as evil is fun sometimes, so having to keep at a certain rate of rights is stupid unless your region is completely based on an RP that would necessitate that, which is very few.

by **Codger** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:52 pm

It's literally

Click this: https://www.nationstates.net/page=activ ... filter=law

Ctrl+F: "the government encourages conflict arms sales". Click more to go back further in time.

Publically shame the nations that pop up.

Once you know which issue you want to enforce that's how simple it is.

-----

Regions should stand for something and be different, instead of desperately trying to be all things to everyone. I'm here to offer a new way to be different and the methods to do it.

by **Unibot III** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:50 pm

This reminds me of an old tech idea I had had called regional issues, where the collective decision of the region would have consequences for the entire region's residents.

by **Zegran** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:10 pm

Interesting. I’m not sure I’d want it game wide, but it would be interesting to have some regions do it.

by **Codger** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:03 am

I think my obsession to bring about a totalitarian surveillance state to a level never seen before is hampering my ability to sell this.

So let's look at it at another angle!

At the moment we have players who live in regions, and together as a region they form relations with other regions/organisations via embassies etc. Current thinking in foreign affairs has so far only been focused on the relationships between Player Run Regions and Organisations. I suggest it is time that Player Run Regions (PRR) also develop relations with Game (Issue) Run Regions (GRR).

The TRR Foreign Affairs Officer should to open relations with Bigtopia and form a treaty of cooperation as fellow rejects.

The Communist Bloc and The Internationale needs to declare solidarity with in-game communist counterparts, the East Lebatuckese!

The Player Run Region's (PRR) foreign relations with these Game Run Regions (GRR) could then determined via regional issue policy, where the PRR collectively decides whether to accept or reject the GRR's actions as they appear in certain issues and decide on the 'correct' answer to adopt. To make things easier, there is already a list recording the issues each GRR (Bigtopians, East Lebatuck and countless others) appears in.

by **DACOROMANIA** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:58 am

Thank you, Codger, your post helped me to update info in my NationStates Guide https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1165532 which I want to make it available to all NS players very soon.

However, I don't know how or what to write about your "Regional issues policy" while your idea is new. You should suggest me in a telegram what should I say in short words generally.

by **Kurnugia** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:42 pm

I love the idea of doing this. Would make it easier to have a region thematically coherent.

by **Bodger** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 1:36 am

Bumping this to blatantly cash in on the latest round of fash chatter.

Why are regions so willing to allow fash issue answerers? Fash is fash and region don't get to wipe their hands clean for harbouring fash just because the leader claim to not care about issues.

With over 1200 issues we can build an in depth profile or issue answering combination to determine if someone is fash. This isn't a broad brush like banning all 'bad' government types - this is incredibly nuanced based on the result of multiple detailed issue responses.

If people do want to be broad, then at the very least we have over 20+ census categories to set the acceptable ranges to help decide whether someone is fash. We are not basing on one or two stats, if you are failing multiple I think it's clear enough you are an issue answering fash.

by **Marxist Germany** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 1:54 am

Bodger wrote:Bumping this to blatantly cash in on the latest round of fash chatter.

Why are regions so willing to allow fash issue answerers? Fash is fash and region don't get to wipe their hands clean for harbouring fash just because the leader claim to not care about issues.

With over 1200 issues we can build an in depth profile or issue answering combination to determine if someone is fash. This isn't a broad brush like banning all 'bad' government types - this is incredibly nuanced based on the result of multiple detailed issue responses.

If people do want to be broad, then at the very least we have over 20+ census categories to set the acceptable ranges to help decide whether someone is fash. We are not basing on one or two stats, if you are failing multiple I think it's clear enough you are an issue answering fash.

If my puppet EA Corporations is fash, does that make me fash?

Regions should regulate how nations answer issues: A Guide

Regions should regulate how nations answer issues: A Guide

Who is online