Founderless Dispatch IV: 20% of Our Board are Raiders

[Cormactopia Prime]

Don't do it, Dakota. Helping the artists formerly known as the FRA hold onto people and turn them into more defenders is bad.

haven't you also been a defender at various times? you're one to lecture people about switching alignments

even so, cosmos r cool

Dakota doesn't appear to have switched alignments, unless I've missed something?

Also worth noting no matter which alignment I was, I never liked the FRA. One of my few consistencies!

It just seems a little odd for a current official of the Council of the Hawks, not to mention the Delegate of the only raider GCR, to be assisting the FRA's successor "in spirit" in the retention of members through organizing social and cultural events. Couldn't Osiris and TBH benefit from that extra effort instead of the FRA?

To be clear, though, it's not Dakota's motives I'm concerned with -- it's yours, and the rest of the defenders who really run the show there. That said, if I were a senior official serving under Dakota in Osiris or another member of the Council of the Hawks I don't think I'd love this. Happily though, I am nothing in this game anymore, so they can feel free to do what they want. It's just a little odd and I've never known the kind of defenders affiliated with Founderless to be this welcoming of raiders unless they think they stand to gain something, like oh, I don't know, a high profile defection from an enemy region's leadership or a Sinker they didn't have before. I'd hate to see Dakota put in a bunch of effort for people who are really just being manipulative because of what they think they might be able to get out of this.

[Numero Capitan]

Cormac, I don't think you need to worry about Dak being unwittingly lured into an alignment change through socialising and niceties.

Most of my era FRA always maintained good relationships with IC 'enemies' and socialised with them or worked well with them in other regions. There has been a TBH presence on the Founderless server nearly since day one and its a positive thing that friendships within the game transcend military gameplay.

But sure everyone is evil and untrustworthy and manipulative and we should all hate each other for reasons we're convinced must exist in the shadows

Also worth noting no matter which alignment I was, I never liked the FRA.

Last time you let us know that you didn't like anyone here, but you seem to like swinging by for an extra chance to hate us all again.

[Karputsk]

The FRA's brand of moralism has always been grounded in the basic belief that regions have a right to self determination, and unlike other Defenders we have always maintained that Raiders are players not unlike ourselves. Given that, I don't think it's a stretch for us to be welcoming Raiders as valued members of the community. In certain instances there are bound to be conflicts of interest but as I and others discussed with Dakota - this was always something that could be managed. Especially since her office (Social Director) is distinct from the running of the Rangers and Intelligence corps. Ultimately we're glad to have her and I'm excited to see what she brings to the role.

Of course, members of the peanut gallery (especially Cormac) are going to suspicious and cynical of our motives, but ultimately I think members of the region are better placed to make that sort of judgement. Dakota was welcomed to the Board because she is a good candidate and we're at a critical initial stage in our development. Beyond that I don't think we need any ulterior motives to explain the decision.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Cormac, I don't think you need to worry about Dak being unwittingly lured into an alignment change through socialising and niceties.

I'm not worried about it, but only because Dakota isn't that easily manipulated -- not because I think any of you wouldn't do it. It's happened plenty, on both sides. I'm more worried about how the rest of you will treat Dakota if eventually you don't get whatever it is you're wanting out of this.

Most of my era FRA always maintained good relationships with IC 'enemies' and socialised with them or worked well with them in other regions. There has been a TBH presence on the Founderless server nearly since day one and its a positive thing that friendships within the game transcend military gameplay.

But sure everyone is evil and untrustworthy and manipulative and we should all hate each other for reasons we're convinced must exist in the shadows

Maybe that's true of your era, maybe it isn't, I really have no idea. I can only speak from my own experience, and during my era whenever the FRA was pretending to be nice to raiders and work with them in mutually shared regions like British Isles, they were usually actually doing things like getting their friends to come in and vote stack so they could take over the region and such, and sending in infiltrators to take over the governments of raider regions and disrupt them from within like in Ainur. I never knew the FRA to be anything other than calculating and out for its own gain. If that differs from your era, fine and dandy, but the FRA of my era wasn't an actual friend to any raider (except Sedgistan) or any raider region, period, and anytime they pretended to be there was something in it for them.

Also worth noting no matter which alignment I was, I never liked the FRA.

Last time you let us know that you didn't like anyone here, but you seem to like swinging by for an extra chance to hate us all again.

"Anyone" is a stretch. I just don't like most people!

[Varanius]

...is this whole argument really about Dakota joining the board? And I thought GP was petty before

[King HEM]

Dakota was welcomed to the Board because she is a good candidate and we're at a critical initial stage in our development. Beyond that I don't think we need any ulterior motives to explain the decision.

"Initial stage of your development" a year later after founding?

[Alfonzo]

Lol what are these reactions.

Dakota is managing the government not defender army of founderless. It's really not that much of a foreign concept

[Karputsk]

Dakota was welcomed to the Board because she is a good candidate and we're at a critical initial stage in our development. Beyond that I don't think we need any ulterior motives to explain the decision.

"Initial stage of your development" a year later after founding?

I mean, a year for a UCR in a game in which the likes or Europeia and XKI have been around for 13+ years doesn't seem all that long?

Even still, it's more accurate to describe us as being a few months into the second effort to develop and grow the region, and we've had quite a bit of success this time around. For example we've reached triple digits and maintained that for a while despite some issues in the last couple of weeks, welcomed several homegrown natives to our discord, made several comminques and updates which have consistently been some of the most upvoted dispatches etc etc.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Lol what are these reactions.

Dakota is managing the government not defender army of founderless. It's really not that much of a foreign concept

When you manage social and cultural projects, you're basically helping with retention of members, which is to say Dakota is helping Founderless retain the defenders who will go out at noon and midnight and defend against and liberate raids conducted by TBH and Osiris.

If Dakota is comfortable with that, and others in TBH and Osiris are comfortable with it, so be it. I don't have any skin in this anymore. It's just bizarre to me that the game has evolved in such a way that people are not only not concerned about being so thoroughly integrated with game opponents that they're literally helping them retain more members to build their armies, but folks like yourself don't even understand that's what's happening because for many people the game is not the game anymore. I'm not saying Dakota can't do whatever, this is just an observation on my part about the degree to which gameplay has lost any meaningful definition.

Again though, y'all do you. It's just bizarre and at this point I'm unsure why gameplay is a thing. Seems like more of a backdrop for socializing than a game.

[Jar Wattinree]

Wasn't that the argument two, three years ago? Nothing new?

[Tim-Opolis]

I think Dakota is gonna do an awesome job! I remember the FRA was one of the first IRC channels I branched out to when I started exploring outside of the Raider MSN Bubble bubble back in the day, and I really loved the friendly community and culture that it maintained. From what I've seen, Founderless replicates a lot of that same energy in its Discord culture, and I think Dakota's only gonna help make it a more fun place for folks of all alignments to hang out!

[Cormactopia Prime]

Wasn't that the argument two, three years ago? Nothing new?

What's new, to me at least, is that some people don't seem to even have comprehension of why this might be a problem from a gameplay perspective.

It's one thing to not care -- that was more the issue in the past -- and another for gameplay to be so advanced in its decay that newer players now don't even really fully understand the concept that raiders and defenders are opponents. They can be amicable opponents, sure, but joining each other's regions and helping each other retain members with fun social and cultural activities goes well above and beyond being amicable with your opponents.

Seems some newer players on both sides don't grasp anymore that they even are opponents, and to me that's the new thing. But by all means, feel free to carry on if for some reason you folks like spending your time this way. It just leaves some of us who were involved when gameplay was an actual game scratching our heads in search of a point to any of what y'all are doing now. That some of those involved with Founderless are veteran players who are very much used to this being a game, with clear opponents who don't integrate with each other, tells me their motives are probably more gameplay-related than they seem.

[The Moonstar]

Lol what are these reactions.

Dakota is managing the government not defender army of founderless. It's really not that much of a foreign concept

When you manage social and cultural projects, you're basically helping with retention of members, which is to say Dakota is helping Founderless retain the defenders who will go out at noon and midnight and defend against and liberate raids conducted by TBH and Osiris.

If Dakota is comfortable with that, and others in TBH and Osiris are comfortable with it, so be it. I don't have any skin in this anymore. It's just bizarre to me that the game has evolved in such a way that people are not only not concerned about being so thoroughly integrated with game opponents that they're literally helping them retain more members to build their armies, but folks like yourself don't even understand that's what's happening because for many people the game is not the game anymore. I'm not saying Dakota can't do whatever, this is just an observation on my part about the degree to which gameplay has lost any meaningful definition.

Again though, y'all do you. It's just bizarre and at this point I'm unsure why gameplay is a thing. Seems like more of a backdrop for socializing than a game.

Bruh. Literally from Day One that Falc made a discord and some of us oldies joined in, Raider aligned people joined on their own volition. Heck I was a member of LWU when that happened. I really hope you're not going by my joke as some sort of impression some of us want to "attempt" to turn a Raider to Defender (for Founderless).

I had to leave El Wu, to work with Founderless. My goal was to help both non tagging raiding and to help get another defender group off the ground. I don't know about you or others, but I much prefer a lot of diversity for Gameplay. While TBH does do non tag raids, they do tagging more often and are doing well as they are. TGW is doing well on it's own too. Note that I am not mentioning GCR based groups, but strictly organizations and regions that are UCR. I was also moonlighting with the Legio to bash fash during that time. Though now I had taken a hiatus from the game and when I came back I have not been involved in NSMGP.

Maybe, Dakota likes this group and would like to see more competition. She doesn't need to turn fenda for it, if she ever does then that is something more on her own volition I would think. Outside a joke like I made earlier in the thread, I doubt anyone cares if she helps or not. Maybe TBH would, but I have no idea if they care or not. Maybe they wouldn't mind having competition with Founderless rather than just TGW and the same old RRA/TSP Sunscreen Force/Libcorders?

Who knows? I think you're thinking into it a bit much. Anyways, how are you? Hope you're doing alright.

[FiHami]

When you manage social and cultural projects, you're basically helping with retention of members, which is to say Dakota is helping Founderless retain the defenders who will go out at noon and midnight and defend against and liberate raids conducted by TBH and Osiris.

If Dakota is comfortable with that, and others in TBH and Osiris are comfortable with it, so be it. I don't have any skin in this anymore. It's just bizarre to me that the game has evolved in such a way that people are not only not concerned about being so thoroughly integrated with game opponents that they're literally helping them retain more members to build their armies, but folks like yourself don't even understand that's what's happening because for many people the game is not the game anymore. I'm not saying Dakota can't do whatever, this is just an observation on my part about the degree to which gameplay has lost any meaningful definition.

Again though, y'all do you. It's just bizarre and at this point I'm unsure why gameplay is a thing. Seems like more of a backdrop for socializing than a game.

Bruh. Literally from Day One that Falc made a discord and some of us oldies joined in, Raider aligned people joined on their own volition. Heck I was a member of LWU when that happened. I really hope you're not going by my joke as some sort of impression some of us want to "attempt" to turn a Raider to Defender (for Founderless).

I had to leave El Wu, to work with Founderless. My goal was to help both non tagging raiding and to help get another defender group off the ground. I don't know about you or others, but I much prefer a lot of diversity for Gameplay. While TBH does do non tag raids, they do tagging more often and are doing well as they are. TGW is doing well on it's own too. Note that I am not mentioning GCR based groups, but strictly organizations and regions that are UCR. I was also moonlighting with the Legio to bash fash during that time. Though now I had taken a hiatus from the game and when I came back I have not been involved in NSMGP.

Maybe, Dakota likes this group and would like to see more competition. She doesn't need to turn fenda for it, if she ever does then that is something more on her own volition I would think. Outside a joke like I made earlier in the thread, I doubt anyone cares if she helps or not. Maybe TBH would, but I have no idea if they care or not. Maybe they wouldn't mind having competition with Founderless rather than just TGW and the same old RRA/TSP Sunscreen Force/Libcorders?

Who knows? I think you're thinking into it a bit much. Anyways, how are you? Hope you're doing alright.

"TSP Sunscreen Force"

Yes, we in TSP like to defend your right to proper skincare. Make sure to wear SPSF 30+ sunscreen, and reapply every hour or so! That way you can have fun in the sun safely without worrying about pesky raiders!

Also, in all seriousness, to the... rest of the thread in general... Are we really going crazy over a raider overseeing a cultural division in a defender region? I mean, it's really not a big deal at all, especially with the nature of cultural things in NationStates, that I have observed. Some events, of course, might cater more to the raider side, some more to the defender side... but what's wrong with wanting to build up strong, healthy communities in regions? The people trust Dak to be acting in good faith, and there's literally nothing about her that I could see as coming across in bad faith, about anything ever, really. Why question Founderless about their Director of Culture?

From what I can tell, the momentum of NationStates is being swept towards building up communities, strong culture, mutual cooperation despite differences in alignment. Which, I can honestly get behind, that is my perogative as a defender myself, because prospering communities, friendly interactions with others in other regions, that's honestly a fun in itself. Being proud of others' accomplishments despite ideological differences.

Gameplay changing doesn't mean that it's losing its definition. If there's anything I've learned since I joined the game in May 2019, it's that gameplay always changes. Who knows? Maybe some big villain will rise one day that causes us all to fragment, that's cool. But while the game is in a more culturally-focused mood, why not ride the wave, strengthen our communities mutually, no judgement if a raider decides to help out a defender-aligned region culturally.

Enemies on the battlefield, friends off the battlefield. Culture stuff is off-battlefield. no reason to bar anyone from helping others out with culture stuff.

Congrats to Dakota for getting to be Director of Culture, and to the rest of the Founderless Board of Directors, and here's to a good term! <3

(Edit: Apparently I forgot to switch to my account, FiHami the first time. Second time's a charm?)

[Guy]

Wasn't that the argument two, three years ago? Nothing new?

What's new, to me at least, is that some people don't seem to even have comprehension of why this might be a problem from a gameplay perspective.

It's one thing to not care -- that was more the issue in the past -- and another for gameplay to be so advanced in its decay that newer players now don't even really fully understand the concept that raiders and defenders are opponents. They can be amicable opponents, sure, but joining each other's regions and helping each other retain members with fun social and cultural activities goes well above and beyond being amicable with your opponents.

Seems some newer players on both sides don't grasp anymore that they even are opponents, and to me that's the new thing. But by all means, feel free to carry on if for some reason you folks like spending your time this way. It just leaves some of us who were involved when gameplay was an actual game scratching our heads in search of a point to any of what y'all are doing now. That some of those involved with Founderless are veteran players who are very much used to this being a game, with clear opponents who don't integrate with each other, tells me their motives are probably more gameplay-related than they seem.

I don't think it's particularly novel for players of one alignment to join, and contribute to, regions of the other alignment. At the beginning of my gameplay career (~2010) There were invaders in United Kingdom (back then it was a member of the FRA), and there were defenders in Europeia.

Otherwise, I agree with what Karp said above.

[Falconias]

I'd hate to see Dakota put in a bunch of effort for people who are really just being manipulative because of what they think they might be able to get out of this.

You're entitled to your own opinions of course Cormac, but this is the one sentence I have a problem with. I'm not sure if it's more insulting to Founderless (because you are suggesting we are manipulating Dakota - an extremely strong-willed player - into doing something for us) or more insulting to Dak (because you are suggesting that she was either duped, manipulated or otherwise somehow didn't act on her own freewill).

In either case, as others have said, NationStates has changed. You said it yourself:

It's just bizarre and at this point I'm unsure why gameplay is a thing. Seems like more of a backdrop for socializing than a game.

Isn't that the fundamental principle of this game? Socially-driven, player-controlled political simulation? If people are on NationStates for the pure gameplay, competitive aspect, they will burn out quickly because the mechanics are limited. This is a socially-founded game.

This may be a shock to some people - apparently Cormac - but Founderless (and the FRA before it) aren't just a bunch of salty blowhards sitting around scheming up ways to destroy raiders. That would be an emotionally exhausting way to play a game for as long as I have. We - especially the "new" Founderless, as the "old" FRA was a bit more serious - like to keep things light. The core leadership of our group all has been in the game for a very long time and have extensive IRL, OOC responsibilities - NS is more of a fun social activity for us than it is a time investment like it used to be.

As such, it's really not a stretch for us to ask - and welcome - a raider to our team in a social role. We really like Dakota, we don't care she's a raider, she brings life and personality to the group, and she's a great fit.

[Goobergunchia]

I don't think it's particularly novel for players of one alignment to join, and contribute to, regions of the other alignment. At the beginning of my gameplay career (~2010) There were invaders in United Kingdom (back then it was a member of the FRA), and there were defenders in Europeia.

I vaguely remember discussing allowing invaders to participate on the RP side of Nasicournia in like 2004 or 2005. And we were traditionally pretty paranoid about security.