Regional 'opt-out' for R/D? [Gameplay/Proposal]

[Grenartia]

1. I was just trying to criticize the implication on Del's part that all RPers should make the deal.

2. I wasn't demanding. I was just saying what I believe would resolve this problem the best.

It's not quite that. I think we should at least take matters into our own hands instead of waiting for Admin to make a special case for us (which they won't and, if we're being honest, maybe even shouldn't do). And I do think it's selfish when people say "Well, I don't want to be involved with it at all, so there!" because there are plenty of regions who RP who do not have the luxury of principle. And make no mistake: It is a luxury. I've heard mention of RPer solidarity. Some solidarity: "It's not my problem so I'd rather just do nothing, save impotent whining, than actually help those who need it."

And if RPers were willing to band together and do something, the Concordat would be unnecessary. But I've seen more apathy among RPers than among the votership in Chicago. And what's most annoying is that it's not just regular apathy, that can be overcome. It's apathy with purpose. "I want nothing to do with R/D so I refuse to dedicate two or three minutes of my time each week to helping Regions that are not as well-defended as mine." It's shameful. Absolutely shameful. And they say it with such pride, too. It always baffles me how someone can make detrimental and selfish inaction seem so damn patriotic. Always baffles me. But, whatever.

Allow me to explain my apathy, and my pride of it. First. We shouldn't HAVE to involve ourselves in R/D. RP is just as legitimate as R/D, so one shouldn't be interfering with another. Second. If my solution were enacted, there would be no NEED for a "Concordat". Third. We view R/D as childish.

[Delmonte]

It's not quite that. I think we should at least take matters into our own hands instead of waiting for Admin to make a special case for us (which they won't and, if we're being honest, maybe even shouldn't do). And I do think it's selfish when people say "Well, I don't want to be involved with it at all, so there!" because there are plenty of regions who RP who do not have the luxury of principle. And make no mistake: It is a luxury. I've heard mention of RPer solidarity. Some solidarity: "It's not my problem so I'd rather just do nothing, save impotent whining, than actually help those who need it."

And if RPers were willing to band together and do something, the Concordat would be unnecessary. But I've seen more apathy among RPers than among the votership in Chicago. And what's most annoying is that it's not just regular apathy, that can be overcome. It's apathy with purpose. "I want nothing to do with R/D so I refuse to dedicate two or three minutes of my time each week to helping Regions that are not as well-defended as mine." It's shameful. Absolutely shameful. And they say it with such pride, too. It always baffles me how someone can make detrimental and selfish inaction seem so damn patriotic. Always baffles me. But, whatever.

Allow me to explain my apathy, and my pride of it. First. We shouldn't HAVE to involve ourselves in R/D. RP is just as legitimate as R/D, so one shouldn't be interfering with another. Second. If my solution were enacted, there would be no NEED for a "Concordat". Third. We view R/D as childish.

1: We shouldn't have to you, you're right, but saying that doesn't change the fact that your inaction allows RPing regions to meet with a poor fate.
2: No shit, Sherlock. Also, if humans didn't need to drink water, we wouldn't need water. And if we didn't need to eat food, we wouldn't need food. Etc. etc.
3: Again, selfish. It's not childish if it's costing REAL people, writers, their ability to write. What an ignorant thing to say.

[Grenartia]

Allow me to explain my apathy, and my pride of it. First. We shouldn't HAVE to involve ourselves in R/D. RP is just as legitimate as R/D, so one shouldn't be interfering with another. Second. If my solution were enacted, there would be no NEED for a "Concordat". Third. We view R/D as childish.

1: We shouldn't have to you, you're right, but saying that doesn't change the fact that your inaction allows RPing regions to meet with a poor fate.
2: No shit, Sherlock. Also, if humans didn't need to drink water, we wouldn't need water. And if we didn't need to eat food, we wouldn't need food. Etc. etc.
3: Again, selfish. It's not childish if it's costing REAL people, writers, their ability to write. What an ignorant thing to say.

1. Perhaps...
3. Implying childish actions can't negatively affect others. Also, its all the more reason for a more permanent solution to the problem to be enacted.

[Delmonte]

1: We shouldn't have to you, you're right, but saying that doesn't change the fact that your inaction allows RPing regions to meet with a poor fate.
2: No shit, Sherlock. Also, if humans didn't need to drink water, we wouldn't need water. And if we didn't need to eat food, we wouldn't need food. Etc. etc.
3: Again, selfish. It's not childish if it's costing REAL people, writers, their ability to write. What an ignorant thing to say.

1. Perhaps...
3. Implying childish actions can't negatively affect others. Also, its all the more reason for a more permanent solution to the problem to be enacted.

1: Good, you've proven that roleplayers are a reasonable breed.
3: A solution which does nothing to those whose regions are being raided right now. When their RMB's where they write/plan writing and WFE's get messed up, you should explain to them that the reason you can't help them is because it's not a permanent solution. I'm not going to.

[Grenartia]

1. Perhaps...
3. Implying childish actions can't negatively affect others. Also, its all the more reason for a more permanent solution to the problem to be enacted.

1: Good, you've proven that roleplayers are a reasonable breed.
3: A solution which does nothing to those whose regions are being raided right now. When their RMB's where they write/plan writing and WFE's get messed up, you should explain to them that the reason you can't help them is because it's not a permanent solution. I'm not going to.

The other main reason I'm against your stopgap solution, is because its just that. A stopgap. One that might be used to justify NOT providing a more permanent solution.

[Evil Wolf]

Hey, if it works, it works.

[Delmonte]

1: Good, you've proven that roleplayers are a reasonable breed.
3: A solution which does nothing to those whose regions are being raided right now. When their RMB's where they write/plan writing and WFE's get messed up, you should explain to them that the reason you can't help them is because it's not a permanent solution. I'm not going to.

The other main reason I'm against your stopgap solution, is because its just that. A stopgap. One that might be used to justify NOT providing a more permanent solution.

First of all, I only foresee it being necessary until provisions which are already being planned are put in place. Second, no, it wouldn't do that. As evidenced by the fact that it is currently in place and isn't doing that. The fact that you raised this objection defeats itself.

Hey, if it works, it works.

Precisely.

[Grenartia]

Hey, if it works, it works.

Again, forcing us to play your subgame is NOT a longterm solution.

[Delmonte]

Hey, if it works, it works.

Again, forcing us to play your subgame is NOT a longterm solution.

But it helps people who need it now! This lofty principle is not more important than preserving writing. At least, to me, and, I would hope, to any writer.

[Grenartia]

The other main reason I'm against your stopgap solution, is because its just that. A stopgap. One that might be used to justify NOT providing a more permanent solution.

First of all, I only foresee it being necessary until provisions which are already being planned are put in place. Second, no, it wouldn't do that. As evidenced by the fact that it is currently in place and isn't doing that. The fact that you raised this objection defeats itself.

What? I don't know what the "it" you're referring to is.

Again, forcing us to play your subgame is NOT a longterm solution.

1. But it helps people who need it now! 2. This lofty principle is not more important than preserving writing. At least, to me, and, I would hope, to any writer.

1. I understand that. But its the equivalent of duct taping a hole in the roof.

2. I agree. And duct tape is marginally better than a hole in the roof. But that doesn't mean that once you put the duct tape on the roof that its fixed.

[Blade Founder]

THe RP game is the Subgame, not the R/D part of the game. The RD part of the game uses the mechanics built into the game itself. The RP subgame is simply people playing pretend for hours at end. Before we allow NationStates to be subjected to another player participation destroying modification (like Influence), let us be honest about what is what.

Really, at this point, if a game were to be created the way NS was created initially, it would be an entirely different game. If Someone can do that, please let me know.

[Arumdaum]

Hey, if it works, it works.

Similarly, getting rid of R/D entirely would also work.

So what?

[Blade Founder]

If that happens, I am done with this game.

[Arumdaum]

Again, forcing us to play your subgame is NOT a longterm solution.

But it helps people who need it now! This lofty principle is not more important than preserving writing. At least, to me, and, I would hope, to any writer.

Ah, yes, the thing you'd want to do is mess with other people's writing and merely strengthen what kills it.

[Arumdaum]

If that happens, I am done with this game.

And?..

[Ainin]

The RP subgame is simply people playing pretend for hours at end.

Is that not the point of a nation simulation game?

[Arumdaum]

Founderless roleplaying regions have a method of protection that requires nothing of them. They can seek protection under the Concordat. We already have one such region under our protection and they are enthusiastic with being able to go unpassworded and be completely safe.

Except, your deal with the devil inherently forces RPers to participate in R/D. Having to side with raiders is just as bad as having to raid and as having to side with/become defenders.

Give us associations (or something like them), make it against the rules to raid them, and everything will be fine.

Why do I feel like Delmonte was already a raider prior to this?..

I'm not a raider. I'm a defender.

To me? You are no different. Your game against raiders spill upon our regions and impugn on our games.

You could easily play your game with the Raiders without having to involve us, third parties who are not interested in your game, you know.

Numerous defenders are only defenders to offset what raiders do, rather than to play a game.

Oh please, as the WA Delegate of a de facto founderless region that was also actually founderless for like a year or so, nowhere in there did I suggest that. The point is, why should I work with people who have absolutely nothing to do with what I do on NS, and only exist to bother and frustrate people? They shouldn't be raiding places like these in the first place.

But they are. And if this gets them to STOP, wouldn't THAT be justification for your "bothering"? I fail to see the hangup here. Something bad is happening. This has an excellent chance of putting an end to it.

"NO! THAT SOUNDS LIKE A HORRIBLE IDEA!"

What?

helping it doesn't stop it ;o

-snip-

You have 15 endorsements, you are safe from almost every raiding group.

Clearly, he wasn't talking about RP regions in general, and only himself and his own region.

[Delmonte]

Except, your deal with the devil inherently forces RPers to participate in R/D. Having to side with raiders is just as bad as having to raid and as having to side with/become defenders.

Give us associations (or something like them), make it against the rules to raid them, and everything will be fine.

Why do I feel like Delmonte was already a raider prior to this?..

How fucking dare you? Read my IC writing and tell me that that is not why I am here. Raiding is an abominable and immoral practice, but my principles do not deserve a place above the writing of others, and thus I descend into the muck.

But they are. And if this gets them to STOP, wouldn't THAT be justification for your "bothering"? I fail to see the hangup here. Something bad is happening. This has an excellent chance of putting an end to it.

"NO! THAT SOUNDS LIKE A HORRIBLE IDEA!"

What?

helping it doesn't stop it ;o

And complaining impotently doesn't even help it! So in a world where helping doesn't stop, you don't even help?

First of all, I only foresee it being necessary until provisions which are already being planned are put in place. Second, no, it wouldn't do that. As evidenced by the fact that it is currently in place and isn't doing that. The fact that you raised this objection defeats itself.

What? I don't know what the "it" you're referring to is.

It is the Concordat.

1. But it helps people who need it now! 2. This lofty principle is not more important than preserving writing. At least, to me, and, I would hope, to any writer.

1. I understand that. But its the equivalent of duct taping a hole in the roof.

2. I agree. And duct tape is marginally better than a hole in the roof. But that doesn't mean that once you put the duct tape on the roof that its fixed.

1: No, it's a stop-gap for a better measure: It's putting a tarp in place of a roof while you're building the actual roof.
2: Again, your metaphor is invalid, but duct tape being duct tape is still no reason to get your shit wet if you don't have to. I mean, really.

[Anemos Major]

I was under the impression that discussion (and really, by this point, rampant promotion) of this supposed 'Concordat' was supposed to stay in its relevant thread?

To be honest, I think both sides have said what they're going to say, and there's no sense letting a long stretch of repetition descend into flaming from that point onwards. Can we agree to keep the debate civil (or at least constructive) until the admin team have read through the arguments and have had the time to put in their two pennies worth?

[Chrinthanium]

Not an opt-out. Just more ways to potentially invade a region. By definition, an opt-out feature is a one-stop-shop for removing the specified function completely. (I.E. when you sign up for a service online and, with one click, can opt out of receiving e-mail newsletters and you never get one). Further discussion on this specific topic as linked to by Mad Jack will be reserved for the appropriate thread.

Here, I'm going to have to disagree with you, Chrinthanium. Although regional officers in of themselves, like every other game-play feature, can be potentially exploited, the fact is, every game-play feature that exists can be. That said, if you were to, say, combine that with a transferable Foundership (with provision to replace them internally in the event of CTE without designating a successor), and you could make regions pretty safe on the current model, probably removing the need to even password protect; the regional officers can replace the WAD as more-present regional moderators, while the Foundership can be transferred to keep those protections in-play, and allowing you to keep a non-exec WAD, keeping the region safe from pretty much anything beyond mild harassment on the RMB (which, frankly, the only way to take away that threat is to remove the RMB).

A transferable foundership is an idea I can get behind because it is the easiest one. Also, it would be nice to have that ability even in a non-R/D context because I could create a founder puppet and remove TheStonedSurfers from The Beach foundership. Then, the founder puppet can stay alive and be controlled by other players in the event that I should ever depart NS for any reason.

To address something that Evil Wolf hit upon earlier is that The Beach is very much raider proof, but that wasn't the reason for the non-executive delegate. The goal was more to protect from a coup than anything else. I remember the TSP Coup, and I didn't want to put my region through all of that. But, as a founder, particularly one with limited free time, I need help. The only other help I can get is from an executive delegate. If the delegate of The Beach is given regional administration powers, by your own words, you believe that gives your carte blanche to invade it and destroy all the work I am putting into the region. Your entire argument is that it's okay to do it because it's there. I'm sorry, but it's hard enough to build a successful region in NS without having to worry that everything you've done will be upset and torn asunder because some inconsiderate people have an itch to invade.

And yes, I am also TheStonedSurfers, founder of The Beach... just so you know.

But Farfadillis, think of the RPers who might start a session in one of the Warzones! Sure it's not even remotely a smart move, but they have a right to RP wherever they want and those mean, terrible, nasty invaders have no right to destroy an RP community, even if it is firmly in the middle of a Warzone.

^ He's actually got a point, of sorts. If we start asking for something that approaches a blanket opt-out for RPing, the thing is RP'ers might start getting used as shields; if a couple of RP'ers happen to be in a non-RPing region, they might still cry foul about R/D. I'm not saying that's necessarily a thing that would happen, but there's a reason we need a solution of protection better than either being forced to involve ourselves in R/D or crying foul to the mods every time something happens. And why improving existing regional protection systems so that RP'ers aren't as inconvenienced by protecting themselves is probably the most-workable solution for both sides.

@ Some of the more-recently-arrived (to this thread) RP'ers:

As much as some of us (apparently) would love to see R/D go (I personally don't care if it continues, as long as I and others continue to be able to stay out of it), it's not really our place to decide whether R/D is or is not a valid subgame of NationStates. Max Barry's statements on the matter (and really, his is the opinion with the most weight) is that RP and R/D are equally valid. I get that R/D can inconvenience us in a way that RP cannot do back to R/D, and those of us who choose not to involve ourselves in it don't generally see the value in it, but that does not mean that it doesn't hold value for others. R/D has as much of a right to exist as RP (or any other subgame, for that matter). That said, it's not at all unreasonable for us to ask for expansions of existing protections that require less inconvenience from us in order to separate ourselves from R/D.

To use the game-room analogy from earlier, even if we want to be able to play risk in our corner in peace, that doesn't give us the right to do what R/D does and go over and flip over their chess boards because they're bothering us. NS is a playground, and we all have to coexist.

TL;DR: Those wanting to push R/D to extinction or severe restriction aren't going to win, and you're making the rest of us look bad. Let's stick to pushing for what we actually have a reasonable chance of getting, instead of biting off more than we can chew and needlessly antagonizing the other side.

Coexisting is fine if the R/D community can understand that not every region wants to be invaded. I have no idea how to solve that problem, though. Even with the potential new controls.

[Mad Jack]

The R/D community understands just fine that most regions don't want to be invaded. Raiders don't care about that.

[Grenartia]

THe RP game is the Subgame, not the R/D part of the game. The RD part of the game uses the mechanics built into the game itself. The RP subgame is simply people playing pretend for hours at end. Before we allow NationStates to be subjected to another player participation destroying modification (like Influence), let us be honest about what is what.

Really, at this point, if a game were to be created the way NS was created initially, it would be an entirely different game. If Someone can do that, please let me know.

No. They're both subgames (and by Max's own words, both are legitimate and valid). The real game here is answering issues. That's it. Everything else is a subgame. And lets be honest here. The game wasn't even MEANT to have R/D at first. R/D came after RP, even.

If you're going to say something, at least try to make sure its accurate.

[Mad Jack]

Similarly, the game wasn't meant to have RP, or even forums.

[Bears Armed]

Hey, if it works, it works.

Leaving aside the fact that effectively it still requires some players who would prefer to spend their NS time RPing diverting some of their time & effort into R/D instead after all, let alone any morality-based arguments, it would obviously only "work" for a relatively small proportion of regions... because after a while the raiders would decide that letting any more 'RP regions' sign up for this deal would reduce their choice of potential targets too greatly...

[Milograd]

THe RP game is the Subgame, not the R/D part of the game. The RD part of the game uses the mechanics built into the game itself. The RP subgame is simply people playing pretend for hours at end. Before we allow NationStates to be subjected to another player participation destroying modification (like Influence), let us be honest about what is what.

Really, at this point, if a game were to be created the way NS was created initially, it would be an entirely different game. If Someone can do that, please let me know.

No. They're both subgames (and by Max's own words, both are legitimate and valid). The real game here is answering issues. That's it. Everything else is a subgame. And lets be honest here. The game wasn't even MEANT to have R/D at first. R/D came after RP, even.

If you're going to say something, at least try to make sure its accurate.

Max says they're both valid, but he let's one side effectively disrupt the other and legally troll them at will.

His words don't match the realities of the game in practice from where I'm standing.