STOP pms for delegates

[South Norwega]

I've been considering making a toggle so you can only receive TGs from nations in your region or people you've sent TGs to (off by default; and, of course, circumventing that protection would be warn-worthy). What are your feelings on that?

How will regions recruit then, apart from spamming the RMB?

It'll be off by default. New Nations generally won't turn it off. Unless I misunderstood.

[Ananke]

Instead of having people cut off communication from most of the game, would it be possible to make the telegram inbox bigger? The tgs about WA resolutions might be less of a problem if it wasn't because people only have space for 20 tgs. I mean, I'm not a delegate, but if I don't check my inbox at least once a day I risk losing messages, since they get pushed out of my inbox by new ones so quickly.

[Usual People In Life]

I've been considering making a toggle so you can only receive TGs from nations in your region or people you've sent TGs to (off by default; and, of course, circumventing that protection would be warn-worthy). What are your feelings on that?

How will regions recruit then, apart from spamming the RMB?

It'll be off by default. New Nations generally won't turn it off. Unless I misunderstood.

As a former WA delegate of the now just about dead cheeselovakkia union, I think it could be that only WA delegates get this power, would that be too much coding for violet and pythag?

[Kandarin]

I've been considering making a toggle so you can only receive TGs from nations in your region or people you've sent TGs to (off by default; and, of course, circumventing that protection would be warn-worthy). What are your feelings on that?

Such an update would be a very harmful thing for the game. NSers have ways of negatively affecting each other even if they're not aware of what each other are doing, and the NS community has always suffered when players have been encouraged to isolate themselves. Those who want isolation have options available already, and I fear that many NSers would toggle the button after getting a few annoying telegrams and so miss out on things that would really be enjoyable for them.

Communication is the lifeblood of this game. While players always will and always should have the option of ignoring communication, anything that decreases the ability of players to communicate with one another is bad for the game.

[Usual People In Life]

I've been considering making a toggle so you can only receive TGs from nations in your region or people you've sent TGs to (off by default; and, of course, circumventing that protection would be warn-worthy). What are your feelings on that?

Such an update would be a very harmful thing for the game. NSers have ways of negatively affecting each other even if they're not aware of what each other are doing, and the NS community has always suffered when players have been encouraged to isolate themselves. Those who want isolation have options available already, and I fear that many NSers would toggle the button after getting a few annoying telegrams and so miss out on things that would really be enjoyable for them.

Communication is the lifeblood of this game. While players always will and always should have the option of ignoring communication, anything that decreases the ability of players to communicate with one another is bad for the game.

Kandarin has a point, I never ignore people in case they send a useful telegram

[Lady Selina Grey]

:palm:

I would suggest reading the rules before starting something like this. If you write that you do not want to receive TGs for WA proposals in your WFE, people can't contact you. So... [/problem]

Without TGing delegates the WA would die. No proposal makes quorum without it.

My national motto is “WA campaigners will be shot on sight.”, you still TG'd me about one of your proposals. And no, I am not changing the WFE in order for you guys to stop bothering me, why annoy all the residents with your BS?

[Glen-Rhodes]

My national motto is “WA campaigners will be shot on sight.”, you still TG'd me about one of your proposals. And no, I am not changing the WFE in order for you guys to stop bothering me, why annoy all the residents with your BS?

You know, the way I view it, the Delegate position is one of the World Assembly. If you don't like World Assembly members messaging you, then you shouldn't be a Delegate. The World Assembly cannot run without Delegates.

But, luckily for you, the World Assembly has its own campaigning regulations. One of which is to check the WFE for some kind "no proposal approval TGs" message. If the WFE is the only place campaigners are looking (because it's usually the only place they're told to look), it's quite easily possible that they will not see your national motto, considering how quick some of us fly through nation pages.

[Lady Selina Grey]

The way I see it, I became WAD because our founder CTE'd and wasn't revived until two days later and stayed WAD because the player went missing again immediately after reviving The Isle of Rose.

I am a good delegate, I check the proposal list, WA resolutions are voted on in accordance to the wishes of the residents of my region. Not that of the freaking campaigners.

My national motto is on my nation page, you need to be on my nation page in order to TG me.

I will not defile the Alliance of Queens' WFE because you campaigners assume I do not read the proposal list.

[Glen-Rhodes]

My national motto is on my nation page, you need to be on my nation page in order to TG me.

That doesn't mean we're going to see it. We're not looking for it.

I will not defile the Alliance of Queens' WFE because you campaigners assume I do not read the proposal list.

You assume that we have awesome psionic abilities that allow us to tell who checks and who does not check the proposals list. Sadly, this is not true.

[Lady Selina Grey]

My national motto is on my nation page, you need to be on my nation page in order to TG me.

That doesn't mean we're going to see it. We're not looking for it.

YOU SHOULD!

It is illogical to force to residents to have to deal with an unsightly message to you pains on the WFE, when you could just as easily read my motto.

[Glen-Rhodes]

YOU SHOULD!

It is illogical to force to residents to have to deal with an unsightly message to you pains on the WFE, when you could just as easily read my motto.

Why must we look in two places? Remember, you are the one reaping the benefits of our labor, not the other way around.

The bottom line is: campaigners are trained to look at the WFE. If you don't have a message in your WFE, don't be upset when you get a telegram.

[Lady Selina Grey]

If you don't have a message in your WFE, don't be upset when you get a telegram.

Don't be upset when you get a nasty TG back, because the warning is clearly visible.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Don't be upset when you get a nasty TG back, because the warning is clearly visible.

That's fine. I'd rather a nasty TG then a GHR, tbh.

[Topid]

If you don't have a message in your WFE, don't be upset when you get a telegram.

Don't be upset when you get a nasty TG back, because the warning is clearly visible.

You should work on your nasty TGs mate, they far from up to par on NS standards. I thought you seemed friendly.

Sorry buddy. I've never seen a WA delegate actually use his motto for that until now. But yes, GR is right, the fact that delegates can opt out of doing their job is rubbish. Unfortunately that's how it is, you've been added to my list. (Along with the other fellow which I talked to in this thread and STILL missed the line in the WFE! Soooorry Kitty!)

[Kalibarr]

When I campaign, which is rarely I only check mottos myself

[Rutianas]

Sorry buddy. I've never seen a WA delegate actually use his motto for that until now. But yes, GR is right, the fact that delegates can opt out of doing their job is rubbish. Unfortunately that's how it is, you've been added to my list. (Along with the other fellow which I talked to in this thread and STILL missed the line in the WFE! Soooorry Kitty!)

I don't see it as opting out of doing their job. I see it as opting out of getting spam that's cluttering their inbox. I'm checking the proposals list regularly, and anyone who bothers to look at our RMB would know that sending Swarming Cute Kittens campaign telegrams is pretty useless. We're democratic as to the Delegate vote. It's decided on majority. That's why I don't like having TGs cluttering SCK's inbox. As to filing GHRs, I only do that if the person persists in sending WA Campaign stuff to me.

[Mayor For Life]

...Communication is the lifeblood of this game. While players always will and always should have the option of ignoring communication, anything that decreases the ability of players to communicate with one another is bad for the game.

I agree that isolating oneself isn't in the best interest of the game. However, it might be useful to have a TG ban list for nations who pester you and fill up your TG box. If implemented, I suggest there might need need to be some exceptions:

Until recruiting is overhauled, UCR recruiters need TG access to nations in feeders. Not only would a TG ban be opt-in, it could expire in 14 days - or 28. You'd only be able to reinstitute a TG ban again when they send another TG.

WA Delegates and Founders need access to nations in their regions. Disallowing that would benefit neither raiders, defenders, nor regions who opt out of the military game.

Moderators need access to everyone or it would be the end of the world as we know it.

WA Delegates have accepted a role to consider WA proposals, so a "please support my proposal" TG shouldn't allow a TG ban. A separate WA proposal TG inbox might solve the issue. The game wouldn't have to "give" a new one to a new delegate, just assign access to the region's WA Delegate TG inbox in accordance with the most recent endorsement update.

Just thinking out loud here in a world of TMI.

[Rutianas]

There is a ban list. It's called ignore and I do put repeat offenders on ignore.

I could go for a separate inbox, but still, an active Delegate that actually reads proposals should be able to say 'Hey, I don't want these campaign TGs filling up my inbox'. These Delegates are not neglecting their duties as delegate. We are merely saying 'I don't want to deal with spam.' What I want to know is why people cannot seem to respect this view and say that I, as a delegate, must receive these unwelcome TGs in order to do my job? The people of my region seem to think I'm doing a good job since I've not been tossed out as delegate and I don't want to receive all the unwelcome spam.

The way I see it is that it's the Delegates choice as to which way to vote. Now, if they're active on the forum and read the arguments, chances are, they're making an informed decision. In some regions, spamming the Delegate is going to do about as much good as using spitwads to knock over a boulder. The Delegate is told how to vote by the majority. So trying to get one of those Delegates, like me, to change my vote is pretty useless. Again, why should I have to wade through spam that's going to get a '*points to the Regional WFE* response, unless it's a repeat offender, that gets added to the ignore list?

[Topid]

There is a ban list. It's called ignore and I do put repeat offenders on ignore.

I could go for a separate inbox, but still, an active Delegate that actually reads proposals should be able to say 'Hey, I don't want these campaign TGs filling up my inbox'. These Delegates are not neglecting their duties as delegate. We are merely saying 'I don't want to deal with spam.' What I want to know is why people cannot seem to respect this view and say that I, as a delegate, must receive these unwelcome TGs in order to do my job? The people of my region seem to think I'm doing a good job since I've not been tossed out as delegate and I don't want to receive all the unwelcome spam.

The way I see it is that it's the Delegates choice as to which way to vote. Now, if they're active on the forum and read the arguments, chances are, they're making an informed decision. In some regions, spamming the Delegate is going to do about as much good as using spitwads to knock over a boulder. The Delegate is told how to vote by the majority. So trying to get one of those Delegates, like me, to change my vote is pretty useless. Again, why should I have to wade through spam that's going to get a '*points to the Regional WFE* response, unless it's a repeat offender, that gets added to the ignore list?

There is no point in making campaigners check two places for every delegate they telegram, when delegates have a delete button that takes about 2 seconds to use... Campaigning is hard enough as it is, you could easily delete one telegram.

[Rutianas]

There is no point in making campaigners check two places for every delegate they telegram, when delegates have a delete button that takes about 2 seconds to use... Campaigning is hard enough as it is, you could easily delete one telegram.

Yes, I could, but if that one TG bumps another TG off that I needed to keep, for whatever reason, it's really irritating.

Spam is unwelcome communications. That's all there is to it. It's unwelcome. Don't do it. It's a simple concept. Really.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Spam is unwelcome communications. That's all there is to it. It's unwelcome. Don't do it. It's a simple concept. Really.

It's also a simple concept that when you're listed as a Delegate, you become a vital asset to the World Assembly. Ideally, you should expect TGs and campaigners should expect to be allowed to send them to you. Unfortunately we have a primitive private messaging system. (Tying it into phpBB's would probably be a good temporary relief, for the time between now and whenever the TG overhaul is finished... That might increase the database load x-fold, though.). So, luckily for you I suppose, we have WFE warnings that are supposed to prevent campaigners from sending a TG your way. Luckily for us, this hasn't put much a dent in the number of delegates we can lobby. But a visible ban list, targeted towards campaigners, would likely be devastating.

WA Delegates have accepted a role to consider WA proposals, so a "please support my proposal" TG shouldn't allow a TG ban. A separate WA proposal TG inbox might solve the issue. The game wouldn't have to "give" a new one to a new delegate, just assign access to the region's WA Delegate TG inbox in accordance with the most recent endorsement update.

This is a good idea.

[Rutianas]

No one has the right to mass TG people who have stated clearly that they do not wish to be TGed certain things, WA Delegate or not. It should be respected. The question of why it's not is beyond me.

EDIT: Also, I found this little gem in the OSRS. Mass-TGers need to be checking the WFE to make sure it's not illegal to send TGs to the Delegates anyway. Emphasis mine. Our Regional WFE does state that it's viewed as spam. Now, if I need to change that to stated 'don't send WA TGs', I will.

WA Advertising Spam: Region natives are welcome, even encouraged, to post discussions of WA proposals and resolutions on their regional message boards. WA business is part of the region and part of the game.

* Non-natives and region-hoppers are forbidden to post WA advertisements or requests for proposal approval outside of their native region.
* Note that the Pacifics, Lazarus, and the Rejected Realms do not receive special treatment here. WA approval requests have even less relevance in the feeder regions than they do in player-created regions, and are thus forbidden.
* Requests for proposal approval may be telegrammed to WA delegates, except where the region's World Factbook entry designates otherwise. More than one request per proposal may be considered spam and should be avoided.

[Glen-Rhodes]

EDIT: Also, I found this little gem in the OSRS. Mass-TGers need to be checking the WFE to make sure it's not illegal to send TGs to the Delegates anyway. Emphasis mine. Our Regional WFE does state that it's viewed as spam. Now, if I need to change that to stated 'don't send WA TGs', I will.

I've stated this numerous times.

[Topid]

EDIT: Also, I found this little gem in the OSRS. Mass-TGers need to be checking the WFE to make sure it's not illegal to send TGs to the Delegates anyway. Emphasis mine. Our Regional WFE does state that it's viewed as spam. Now, if I need to change that to stated 'don't send WA TGs', I will.

I've stated this numerous times.

Yup. No one is saying that is not the rule, just that the rule is way more harmful than beneficial.

[Picklepoo]

Its basicly like telemarketers...They never leave you alone.
But if you banned it then NS would be communist!