NSG Senate Lobby [NSG Senate]

[Seelelander]

I'm against the WA requirement because as a gameplayer, I rarely have WA membership on my NSG Senate account.

You wouldn't need to. You could just tell the Admins which nation you had in the WA.

That is always changing and wouldn't solve the problem. You could just change your WA nation again and again.

[Great Nepal]

I dont have a WA nation, because I am never involved in game play stuff and frankly it is unnecessary. Even if few people are cheating, statistically that is insignificant unless they farm hundreds of nations for a month.

[Seelelander]

Not only that but once again.

You can Change a WA nation. Having or not having a WA nation would not be a way to read IP.

Also it is overtly intrusive. As I said.

[Mike the Progressive]

How would we ever know?

For sure? Probably not.

But we'd have stronger and stronger suspicions as evidence accumulates.

From what? Where would we get these suspicions? What evidence? Can you check people's IP addresses in NS?

quote]And if you know anything about gameplay, you'd understand people use multiple puppets all the time deceptively.

And if mods can't disclose it, then that must mean that that can only become known through, yes, "stronger and stronger suspicions as evidence accumulates."

So...you've just answered your own question, with your own example.[/quote]

Again, what suspicions? What evidence?

[Seelelander]

Mike, you can Change your WA nations. To enforce that one's WA doesn't change would mess with Gameplayers. To say that it HAS to change would mess with RPers. You are better off leaving things as they are.

[Mike the Progressive]

Not only that but once again.

You can Change a WA nation. Having or not having a WA nation would not be a way to read IP.

Also it is overtly intrusive. As I said.

So what? The goal is to have moderators check IP addresses, which they do with WA nations. This is the only way to ensure that I or you or anybody else doesn't have puppets in the Senate or in a party.

And it's hardly intrusive. No more say than asking your ban record on the senate application.

[Soviet Canuckistan]

I'm against the WA requirement because as a gameplayer, I rarely have WA membership on my NSG Senate account.

You wouldn't need to. You could just tell the Admins which nation you had in the WA.

That changes like 10-20 times per week

[Seelelander]

No, what is intrusive is that it will INHIBIT other things you do in NS.

It will either restrict gameplayers from switching their WA nations. Or it can end up forcing RPers to changing their WA. Neither of which is satisfactory for those who actually participate in NS using other things with their nation. Are you not listening to my actual claims here?

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

For sure? Probably not.

But we'd have stronger and stronger suspicions as evidence accumulates.

From what? Where would we get these suspicions?

Presumably, through the same basic categories of behavior (similar language, times/days posting, sides of an issue) that give rise to suspicions of puppetry in other contexts. You know, the suspicions that you have to be able to establish anyway before the mods will consider it worth their time to look in and give a definite yes/no if it's in a context that makes it an actionable offense.

[Great Nepal]

For sure? Probably not.

But we'd have stronger and stronger suspicions as evidence accumulates.

From what? Where would we get these suspicions? What evidence? Can you check people's IP addresses in NS?

To make any sizeable dent in stats, you would require atleast 20ish puppets. 20ish nations with similar founding dates, who are usually on at similar time and always vote in identical manner will raise few eyebrows to say the least.

[Mike the Progressive]

From what? Where would we get these suspicions?

Presumably, through the same basic categories of behavior (similar language, times/days posting, sides of an issue) that give rise to suspicions of puppetry in other contexts. You know, the suspicions that you have to be able to establish anyway before the mods will consider it worth their time to look in and give a definite yes/no.

But they won't give a definite yes/no, that's my point. Mods cannot/do not disclose that information....

[Seelelander]

Nor should they, it's why it's not broadcast anyway, it's privacy issues, which you should respect.

[Mike the Progressive]

From what? Where would we get these suspicions? What evidence? Can you check people's IP addresses in NS?

To make any sizeable dent in stats, you would require atleast 20ish puppets. 20ish nations with similar founding dates, who are usually on at similar time and always vote in identical manner will raise few eyebrows to say the least.

Oh please. People use multiple puppets of varying sizes with different themes all the time. I mean all it would take is creating one nation every couple of days, and having it apply for the senate and you'd have no way of knowing otherwise.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Presumably, through the same basic categories of behavior (similar language, times/days posting, sides of an issue) that give rise to suspicions of puppetry in other contexts. You know, the suspicions that you have to be able to establish anyway before the mods will consider it worth their time to look in and give a definite yes/no.

But they won't give a definite yes/no, that's my point. Mods cannot/do not disclose that information....

I made an edit roughly simultaneous to your post to give some context and clarification on that point.

For example, reports of WA multis, posting around ban, DOSed individuals returning, etc.

[Mike the Progressive]

Nor should they, it's why it's not broadcast anyway, it's privacy issues, which you should respect.

Yes. Which is why if senators were required to have a nation in the WA, you wouldn't have to worry about checking IP addresses yourselves, because mods already do that and delete nations that try to have multiple WA accounts.

[Seelelander]

Follow my Logic. Let's pretend instead of being the nice lass I am, that I am an asshole.

I have a bunch of puppets.

I want to wank in NS Senate. So, I choose a puppet to make my WA nation. Register to the Senate and point at my WA nation. Then, I change my WA nation a week from now.

"I am GAMEPLAYING!"

So I make another nation and use another puppet as my WA. How will you know it is me?

[TaQud]

I'm against the WA requirement because as a gameplayer, I rarely have WA membership on my NSG Senate account.

I think you use your puppets (for UDL and WA stuff) IIRC

[Great Nepal]

To make any sizeable dent in stats, you would require atleast 20ish puppets. 20ish nations with similar founding dates, who are usually on at similar time and always vote in identical manner will raise few eyebrows to say the least.

Oh please. People use multiple puppets of varying sizes with different themes all the time. I mean all it would take is creating one nation every couple of days, and having it apply for the senate and you'd have no way of knowing otherwise.

We will see the patten eventually, and people do that because numbers aren't that high. Plus, who is lame enough to waste two months farming puppets for a game?

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Tell me: how do we know, absent official mod word, that, as you put it, "people use multiple puppets all the time deceptively" in Gameplay?

Or do we have official mod word? In which case, how was enough suspicion aroused to make it worth their while to investigate?

[TaQud]

Tell me: how do we know, absent official mod word, that, as you put it, "people use multiple puppets all the time deceptively" in Gameplay?

Or do we have official mod word? In which case, how was enough suspicion aroused to make it worth their while to investigate?

i doubt the mods are going to care about our RP so much they have to tell us who is who...(IMO)

[Mike the Progressive]

Oh please. People use multiple puppets of varying sizes with different themes all the time. I mean all it would take is creating one nation every couple of days, and having it apply for the senate and you'd have no way of knowing otherwise.

We will see the patten eventually, and people do that because numbers aren't that high. Plus, who is lame enough to waste two months farming puppets for a game?

Dude, people do a lot of strange shit in gameplay.

[Seelelander]

Nor should they, privacy issues.

[Mike the Progressive]

Tell me: how do we know, absent official mod word, that, as you put it, "people use multiple puppets all the time deceptively" in Gameplay?

Or do we have official mod word? In which case, how was enough suspicion aroused to make it worth their while to investigate?

i doubt the mods are going to care about our RP so much they have to tell us who is who...(IMO)

Yes, because they won't. Which is my point. So if I had ten nations, none of them did anything against the rules, I could technically keep those ten puppets and the mods can't say a thing. Even if you had suspicions, "mounting evidence" yadda yadda yadda, because it's RP the mods cannot disclose if those nations are owned by the same person or not. Meaning there's no way, aside from the WA and off-site forums, of knowing if one or two nations or more are owned by the same person in the senate.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

Tell me: how do we know, absent official mod word, that, as you put it, "people use multiple puppets all the time deceptively" in Gameplay?

Or do we have official mod word? In which case, how was enough suspicion aroused to make it worth their while to investigate?

i doubt the mods are going to care about our RP so much they have to tell us who is who...(IMO)

I feel you're missing the context here.

My basic argument is that until such time as it actually appears that puppetry becomes a problem here, right now MTP's suggestion is instruction creep: a solution in search of a problem.

Mike responded asking, how will we know if it's a problem? After all (and as you yourself, TaQud, just pointed out) the mods won't tell us who is who.

I explained that while we can't know for sure, there are certainly patterns of behavior that can lead to suspicions--and indeed, those suspicions can become strong and solid enough that it can be used as a basis for moderator investigation in cases where the puppetry is an actionable offense. They obviously wouldn't get involved here, but the point is that pattern-based detection can indeed provide quite strong and valid suspicions (because otherwise the mods wouldn't consider it a valid reason to put forth the time and effort to investigate in those cases where it is their concern)--and when and if we start having those suspicions, then it becomes worth our time to consider what to do about it.

[Mike the Progressive]

i doubt the mods are going to care about our RP so much they have to tell us who is who...(IMO)

I feel you're missing the context here.

My basic argument is that until such time as it actually appears that puppetry becomes a problem here, right now MTP's suggestion is instruction creep: a solution in search of a problem.

Mike responded asking, how will we know if it's a problem? After all (and as you yourself, TaQud, just pointed out) the mods won't tell us who is who.

I explained that while we can't know for sure, there are certainly patterns of behavior that can lead to suspicions--and indeed, those suspicions can become strong and solid enough that it can be used as a basis for moderator investigation in cases where the puppetry is an actionable offense. That obviously wouldn't be the case here, but the point is that pattern-based detection can indeed provide quite strong and valid suspicions--and when and if we start having those suspicions, then it becomes worth our time to consider what to do about it.

Lovely. It's not a problem or at least we don't think so, so don't worry about it till after it does become a problem. Fuckin' a man. Fuckin' a.