NationStates

Posted: **Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:11 pm**

Arnhelm Declaration of Recruitment Standards

WHEREAS recent changes to the telegram system modify the previous balance between game-created regions and user-created regions;
WHEREAS it is necessary to protect the sustainable population growth of user-created regions into the longer term;

Definitions

(1) 'Declaration' refers to this document, the Arnhelm Declaration of Recruitment Standards.

(2) 'Signatory' is defined as any region which has signed and ratified the Declaration, or any component regions of a super-regional entity which has signed and ratified the same.

(3) 'User-created region' is defined as any NationStates region which was at any point founded by a user or player, specifically excluding the regions of The Pacific, The North Pacific, The West Pacific, The South Pacific, The East Pacific, Lazarus, Balder, Osiris and The Rejected Realms.

(4) 'Recruitment' is defined as the sending of telegrams on the NationStates site to encourage nations to move regions or join an alliance of regions.

(5) 'Sending region' is defined as the region for which a nation is carrying out recruitment.

(6) 'Recipient region' is defined as the region in which the recipient of a recruitment message is resident.

(7) 'Satisfactory evidence' is defined as evidence which, on the balance of probabilities, reasonably supports a particular hypothesis.

(8) 'Registrar of Signatories' ('Registrar') is defined as the President of Europeia or nominee of the same.

Recruitment Standards

(9) No Signatory may recruit in another Signatory region without reasonable justification.

Reasonable Justification

(10) Application of Clause 9 shall be suspended when recruiting from regions that fulfil one or more of the following criteria:

a. knowing violation of the provisions of this Declaration; or,
b. in time of war between the sending region and the recipient region.

(11) Reasonable justification expires 3 days after there is satisfactory evidence that the relevant criteria cease to apply, or 30 days after there is no longer satisfactory evidence that the relevant criteria apply, whichever is the sooner.

Enactment

(12) Any user-created region is eligible to become a Signatory of this Declaration at any time.

(13) This Declaration shall take effect for each Signatory region on the date that it is signed and ratified by the same.

Residual Provisions

(14) The Registrar shall maintain an accurate, publicly accessible copy of the Declaration and an up-to-date list of Signatories.

(15) New Signatories must document signature and ratification of this Declaration by informing the Registrar within 48 hours.

(16) The Registrar shall forward details of any changes to the composition of the Signatories to all remaining Signatories within seven days.

List of Signatories:

- Council of Narnia (signed 11/2/13)
- The Land of Kings and Emperors¹ (signed 16/2/13)
- Kantrias (signed 16/2/13)
- Aluvean Seas (signed 18/2/13)
- The New Inquisition (signed 19/2/13)
- Social Liberal Union (signed 19/2/13)
- The United Federation (signed 21/2/13)
- Europeia (signed 25/2/13)
- The British Isles (signed 6/3/13)
- Nysa (signed 14/3/13)
- Ainur (18/3/13)
- United Peoples Front for Socialism (signed 24/3/13)

---
1. The Land of Kings and Emperors also signed and ratified the Declaration on behalf of its subsidiary regions, including: Norwood; Polis; Niso; Ilum; Maxonberg; The Land of Dragonia; Imperial Elite; Moldavia; Tartarus; Vienna; Red Liberty Alliance and Munster.

Following the UCR-UCR Conference, this is the document that we came up with.

This Conference was held on the Europeian forums and was attended by Delegates from a diverse group of regions.

The Declaration seeks to prevent recruitment amongst Signatories in order to preserve the ability of user-created regions to grow and maintain a population.

The sitting President of Europeia serves as the Registrar of the Declaration, and maintains a publicly accessible copy of the Declaration and a List of Signatories both here and in Europeia.

Any user-created region is eligible to sign the Declaration.

In order to join the Declaration, you need to sign and ratify it according to the Laws of your region.

Often, this means signature by the Head of Government and ratification by the legislature, but this varies amongst regions.

After this has been done, you need to inform the Registrar that you have joined the Declaration. There are two ways in which you can do this.

1) Telegram the Registrar's NationStates nation with the name of the region or regions which have signed and ratified the Declaration.
2) Post in this thread with the name of the region or regions which have signed and ratified the Declaration.

If a super-regional entity has signed the Declaration on behalf of its component regions, you must also list all of its component regions when you register as a Signatory.

Please note that when you inform the Registrar that you have signed and ratified the Declaration, you make a legally binding statement.

Please do not do this before performing signature and ratification according to the official procedures.

But then, you're officially a Signatory of the Declaration - congratulations! You'll need to make sure that your region is compliant with the Declaration, and remains compliant into the future.

Thank you!

Swakistek Alexander Anumia
President of Europeia
Former Registrar of the Arnhelm Declaration

Posted: **Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:47 pm**

It's pleasing to see that there is no size requirement.

Nice work.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:43 am**

Has no one else signed this? Really? :unsure:

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:52 am**

I imagine some regions need to go through a process of government approval. That can take a little time.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:57 am**

I expect that, too. I'm just surprised that no one else has gotten that far yet.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:04 pm**

Legislatures are incredibly, incredibly slow...

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:11 am**

So

The Blood Cave ratifies this and subsequently becomes a signatory

A rogue nation in TBC decides it wants to recruit indiscriminately and upsets some of the signatories - what next?

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:43 am**

Look, we get that you don't buy into this treaty. You can stop saying that,

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:26 am**

I personally feel that it's a little bit hypocritical of UCR's to come up with a treaty promising not to recruit from each other... but exclude the GCR's. I'm seriously tempted to start recruiting from regions that recruit from TSP. I love how anti-recruiting you guys got when it was your turn.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:43 am**

Cerian Quilor wrote:Look, we get that you don't buy into this treaty. You can stop saying that,

Au contraire mon brave, I think in principle the treaty is a brilliant idea, especially for the vested interests.

I am just concerned with the mechanics of how it will work, and how it will be enforced

Back to TBC scenario

The Signatories are less than happy about the TBC resident recruiting in there region but TBC officials claim he is not acting with their authorisation

Do the signatories demand that the culprit is dealt with internally or else they will deem TBC in breach of the Treaty? Do they demand that the guilty party is banjecyed? And if not, and a ensuing recruitment campaign against TBC does not remedy the situation, will The Signatories deem that military intervention is appropriate?

Putting such a treaty in place enhances the need for inter=regional diplomacy and negotiation, but the ramifications of what will happen when it is violated also need to be considered, both bu signatories and non-signatories.

Will recruitment TG's form the pretext for war?

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:28 am**

Belschaft wrote:I personally feel that it's a little bit hypocritical of UCR's to come up with a treaty promising not to recruit from each other... but exclude the GCR's. I'm seriously tempted to start recruiting from regions that recruit from TSP. I love how anti-recruiting you guys got when it was your turn.

Please explain how UCRs are to get new members then? We don't have the luxury of them spawning in our region every few minutes...

You do nothing to get those nations to add to your population. If you want them to stay and get involved, you have to recruit them just the same as we do by convincing them your region is the best.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:28 am**

Belschaft wrote:I personally feel that it's a little bit hypocritical of UCR's to come up with a treaty promising not to recruit from each other... but exclude the GCR's. I'm seriously tempted to start recruiting from regions that recruit from TSP. I love how anti-recruiting you guys got when it was your turn.

What, because we actually have to work to grow? I think it is perfectly fine to try and recruit from an, essentially, public region, which happens to be one of the only regions where new players start. Many communities would not exist if the feeders had their way and UCRs stopped existing, but that is one of the things that makes this game fun for so many people, and thus is good for NS. This treaty recognizes the hard work UCRs have to put into recruitment, and recognizes it is wrong to leech off of someone else's work.

We deserve the fruits of our labor, and the Feeders have absolutely no entitlement to the nations who join the game unless they put some effort into keeping new players interested in NS. I know the feeders try to get people involved in forum communities, and they have a right to the nations they convince to join their communities. But where there is no effort, there is no right. This treaty is not hypocritical in any way for excluding the feeders - perhaps the warzones should be allowed to join the treaty, if they form communities separate from the feeders and sinkers, and perhaps TRR should be considered, but it is perfectly consistant to exclude the feeders from this, when the feeders now have a new tool at their disposal for making war on UCRs of their choice, with pretty much no consequence for them.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:42 am**

There is this obsession with numbers within UCRs (I know, I've been in the middle of it), rather than actually thinking about the number of people sticking around and actually contributing to their region. GCRs do in fact have to work for those in the same way as UCRs do - if not harder (for now) as those new (impressionable and clueless) members are getting telegrams from other regions all the time.

If UCRs want to enter in to this, fair is nuff. But can this rhetoric about "protecting OUR precious members" go die in the corner where it belongs? Nations aren't -yours-, they're never -yours-, and the UCRs don't have it -harder- than the GCRs particularly, only in the sense that if activity drops off for a significant length in a GCR, it tends to pick up at some point because it's high profile, but that's pretty much it.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:55 am**

Belschaft wrote:I personally feel that it's a little bit hypocritical of UCR's to come up with a treaty promising not to recruit from each other... but exclude the GCR's. I'm seriously tempted to start recruiting from regions that recruit from TSP. I love how anti-recruiting you guys got when it was your turn.

You do realize that nations actually spawn in GCRs, but don't spawn in UCRs... right?

And that it takes work to build a region, and that involves recruitment, something you don't have to do... right?

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:09 pm**

Andacantra wrote:There is this obsession with numbers within UCRs (I know, I've been in the middle of it), rather than actually thinking about the number of people sticking around and actually contributing to their region. GCRs do in fact have to work for those in the same way as UCRs do - if not harder (for now) as those new (impressionable and clueless) members are getting telegrams from other regions all the time.

If UCRs want to enter in to this, fair is nuff. But can this rhetoric about "protecting OUR precious members" go die in the corner where it belongs? Nations aren't -yours-, they're never -yours-, and the UCRs don't have it -harder- than the GCRs particularly, only in the sense that if activity drops off for a significant length in a GCR, it tends to pick up at some point because it's high profile, but that's pretty much it.

Except how they do have it harder, because as has been pointed out several times new nations don't spawn in UCRs. UCRs have to recruit from GCRs, otherwise they won't have any nations. GCRs don't have that problem. I agree with you though that the new recruitment system and rules also make things harder for GCRs to recruit active members onto their forums, in that much UCR recruitment will now be instant. Yet UCRs still have it harder because they have to recruit just to get nations into the region; then they have to worry about getting them active. GCRs only have to worry about the latter.

In regard to the obsession with numbers in UCRs, I tend to agree it's a bit silly but it's an obsession perpetuated by many regions in this game -- including most GCRs who require a region to have 75-100 nations just to have an embassy. Right or wrong, number of nations translates to perception of power in NationStates. GCRs have a large number automatically. UCRs don't.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:34 pm**

The more regions you have in your region, it is likely you'll have more WA members, and thus, a larger pool to endorse that region's delegate. The region's delegate can then weigh in SC disputes in a powerful way. That is one power pathway, I'm sure there are others.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 5:03 pm**

Also the idea that GCRs have it harder than UCRs is obtuse--UCRs not only have to recruit but they have to welcome and to integrate members that way; GCRs only have to integrate their members into the community and keep them there, not win them first off. UCRs also have to beat out all the other UCRs in order to have the best message there and hope that members will take the initiative to move regions--and nowadays GCRs -are- welcoming members as fast as they're created like the recruiters so the UCRs have to also beat the GCR there.

It's hard to get people involved in any regional community but getting people there to start off with and looking all nice and big and being on the first page by numbers does give people an advantage. It's not hypocritical for the UCRs to get involved in something like this; not to mention..the GCRs started their own exclusive convention BEFORE the UCR one was announced..

EDIT: I'd actually argue that out of all the GCRs and even the UCRs The Rejected Realms has by far the most difficult time with recruiting because not only are they not getting new members but they're getting the shit from everywhere else and also because they can't recruit from other GCRs by like..insanely long tradition and because that'd be serious fuckery.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:45 pm**

Lyanna Stark wrote:Also the idea that GCRs have it harder than UCRs is obtuse--UCRs not only have to recruit but they have to welcome and to integrate members that way; GCRs only have to integrate their members into the community and keep them there, not win them first off. UCRs also have to beat out all the other UCRs in order to have the best message there and hope that members will take the initiative to move regions--and nowadays GCRs -are- welcoming members as fast as they're created like the recruiters so the UCRs have to also beat the GCR there.

I honestly did not know the feeders were that aggressive about recruiting. And it is a very good point that the UCRs still have to compete against each other within the feeders. I think maybe this treaty overlooked that - but then again, we had to do that before the change, so it's not like a problem we don't already deal with.

It's hard to get people involved in any regional community but getting people there to start off with and looking all nice and big and being on the first page by numbers does give people an advantage. It's not hypocritical for the UCRs to get involved in something like this; not to mention..the GCRs started their own exclusive convention BEFORE the UCR one was announced..

Lol. True.

EDIT: I'd actually argue that out of all the GCRs and even the UCRs The Rejected Realms has by far the most difficult time with recruiting because not only are they not getting new members but they're getting the shit from everywhere else and also because they can't recruit from other GCRs by like..insanely long tradition and because that'd be serious fuckery.

Well...if I was in charge of TRR, I know I would recruit from the other GCR's. Heck, with this change about to happen, I might start recruiting all the raiders just so we could have another TRR army! Really, though, I have to give it to the current residents of TRR: the region is, almost by definition, the most undesirable region in NS. The people who try to make it a better place rank up there with Codger on my list of the best people in NationStates.

Posted: **Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:40 pm**

Letoilenoir wrote:
Cerian Quilor wrote:Look, we get that you don't buy into this treaty. You can stop saying that,

Au contraire mon brave, I think in principle the treaty is a brilliant idea, especially for the vested interests.

I am just concerned with the mechanics of how it will work, and how it will be enforced

Back to TBC scenario

The Signatories are less than happy about the TBC resident recruiting in there region but TBC officials claim he is not acting with their authorisation

Do the signatories demand that the culprit is dealt with internally or else they will deem TBC in breach of the Treaty? Do they demand that the guilty party is banjecyed? And if not, and a ensuing recruitment campaign against TBC does not remedy the situation, will The Signatories deem that military intervention is appropriate?

Putting such a treaty in place enhances the need for inter=regional diplomacy and negotiation, but the ramifications of what will happen when it is violated also need to be considered, both bu signatories and non-signatories.

Will recruitment TG's form the pretext for war?

Does the treaty SAY tgs are a pretext for war? No.

No your scenario, first of all: Its not that complicated. this treaty is simple.

Second of all: If I knew someone was unauthorizedly recruiting for Kantrias, even from GCRs, I'd punish the person because it gets in the way of our recruitment strategy and message. Plus the risk of double-recruiting. If TBC makes the case that the person was unauthorized, but does not punish or stop them, then their case is pretty weak. If they do, well, most reasonable regions would accept that and move on.

The treaty does not prescribe or proscribe response to a signatory (or non-signatory) recruiting from them. This is a very simple treaty. If a signatory recruits from a signatory, they are no longer protected from other signatories. Any further response, by ANY signatory is entire voluntary to the signatory in question.

The treaty only does one thing: Signatories do not recruit from signatories. They are not a collective body in any other way. There is no supraregional organization created.

You are overcomplicating it.

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:22 pm**

A number of new Signatories have been added to the list, and we continue to invite all user-created regions to sign.

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 6:28 pm**

To anyone who thinks that GCRs are perfectly acceptable to include in a treaty such as this; please explain where the UCR signatories are expected to recruit from. If your answer is "other UCRs", be advised that the original point of this treaty is to block UCR recruitment. If this still does not somehow make sense to you, the door is in the corner of the topic, please ensure it gives you a nasty skull fracture on the way out. Thank you.

If any GCRs still think that they'll have a problem with gaining new members, pretend to have a large, well trained, "independent" military (just raid some white supremacists or something), and watch as raiders and defenders flock from all corners to attempt to swing that military to their own ideology. Ensure that neither side never really gains an advantage, and in the meantime, put the bloody vultures to work. It's worked brilliantly for The North Pacific and I'm sure it'll work for you, too.

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 6:44 pm**

Cerian Quilor wrote:Does the treaty SAY tgs are a pretext for war? No.

Sometimes what is NOT said is more important that what is said - anyone that signs up to this has a duty to understand what they are signing up for

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:11 pm**

Klaus Devestatorie wrote:To anyone who thinks that GCRs are perfectly acceptable to include in a treaty such as this; please explain where the UCR signatories are expected to recruit from. If your answer is "other UCRs", be advised that the original point of this treaty is to block UCR recruitment. If this still does not somehow make sense to you, the door is in the corner of the topic, please ensure it gives you a nasty skull fracture on the way out. Thank you.

If any GCRs still think that they'll have a problem with gaining new members, pretend to have a large, well trained, "independent" military (just raid some white supremacists or something), and watch as raiders and defenders flock from all corners to attempt to swing that military to their own ideology. Ensure that neither side never really gains an advantage, and in the meantime, put the bloody vultures to work. It's worked brilliantly for The North Pacific and I'm sure it'll work for you, too.

Shots fired :lol:

Posted: **Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:45 pm**

Klaus Devestatorie wrote:To anyone who thinks that GCRs are perfectly acceptable to include in a treaty such as this; please explain where the UCR signatories are expected to recruit from. If your answer is "other UCRs", be advised that the original point of this treaty is to block UCR recruitment. If this still does not somehow make sense to you, the door is in the corner of the topic, please ensure it gives you a nasty skull fracture on the way out. Thank you.

If any GCRs still think that they'll have a problem with gaining new members, pretend to have a large, well trained, "independent" military (just raid some white supremacists or something), and watch as raiders and defenders flock from all corners to attempt to swing that military to their own ideology. Ensure that neither side never really gains an advantage, and in the meantime, put the bloody vultures to work. It's worked brilliantly for The North Pacific and I'm sure it'll work for you, too.

Nonsense, the UDL abandoned the region once it became clear that they could not dominate the military

now only the true patriots of TNP remain.

GCRs if it bothers you so terribly, then begin recruiting from the UCRs who recruit from you. I would simply recommend that all regions send out welcoming tgs to new nations advising them to immediately block all other recruitment tgs...

Is there any word on further progress in any other major UCRs?

Posted: **Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:48 pm**

I would simply recommend that all regions send out welcoming tgs to new nations advising them to immediately block all other recruitment tgs...

I'm doing something like that. Me and every other Delegate when the mass telegram thing is up and running, Im sure.