SC Questions & Answers

by **Wrapper** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 1:27 pm

Terms like "roleplay" and "gameplay" are not allowed because they violate Rule 4. They refer to players behind the nation, and they implicitly refer to NS as a game. For additional information on what in-game terms are confirmed legal and illegal, consult the Compendium of Mod Rulings, particularly the legal/illegal terms section.

by **Aureumterra** » Tue Dec 25, 2018 1:36 pm

Kuriko wrote:
Aureumterra wrote:https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=456182

I recently drafted this proposal and feedback I’ve gotten suggest that I cannot refer to “Roleplay” as such. However, reading over the rules, the closest thing I can find is to not refer to NS as a game

Can anyone confirm this? And if possible, some feedback on how to word the proposal differently to fit with rules?

Rule 4 prohibits certain words from being used, such as Roleplay, and can be found in the mod rulings thread Here. Most times to get around the fact Roleplay is an illegal term people word it differently, such as saying things like "dedication to international relations" and stuff. You want to write it from an IC perspective, not an OOC perspective.

Wrapper wrote:Terms like "roleplay" and "gameplay" are not allowed because they violate Rule 4. They refer to players behind the nation, and they implicitly refer to NS as a game. For additional information on what in-game terms are confirmed legal and illegal, consult the Compendium of Mod Rulings, particularly the legal/illegal terms section.

Thanks for the feedback, I’ve edited it to comply

by **Cheeksam** » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:20 am

Hello. If a region is passworded by the founder, is liberated by the SC, then the founder ceases to exist, does the liberation stand?

by **Tinhampton** » Thu Jan 03, 2019 7:52 am

Cheeksam wrote:Hello. If a region is passworded by the founder, is liberated by the SC, then the founder ceases to exist, does the liberation stand?

The badge stands, but the Liberation would never have worked in the first place, owing to the fact that they are inapplicable to founder-imposed passwords.

by **Bears Armed** » Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:25 am

Tinhampton wrote:
Cheeksam wrote:Hello. If a region is passworded by the founder, is liberated by the SC, then the founder ceases to exist, does the liberation stand?

The badge stands, but the Liberation would never have worked in the first place, owing to the fact that they are inapplicable to founder-imposed passwords.

But in that situation the Liberation does mean that if a delegate removes the the founder's password (Can they do that?) they can't then set a new one of their own choice...

by **Kuriko** » Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:02 am

Bears Armed wrote:
Tinhampton wrote:The badge stands, but the Liberation would never have worked in the first place, owing to the fact that they are inapplicable to founder-imposed passwords.

But in that situation the Liberation does mean that if a delegate removes the the founder's password (Can they do that?) they can't then set a new one of their own choice...

Correct. If a delegate or Regional Officer alters a founder placed password in any way the liberation kicks in. So that means if a region is founderless, has a liberation, but also has a founder placed password the liberation won't take effect. But if the region is founderless, has a liberation, and has a delegate or RO that changes the founder placed password the liberation will immediately nullify the password.

by **Minoa** » Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:28 am

Does anyone have an image of the World Assembly Security Council chamber?

At the moment we have to use a stock image off Wikimedia Commons to represent the WASC. :lol:

by **Frisbeeteria** » Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:13 am

Minoa wrote:Does anyone have an image of the World Assembly Security Council chamber?

If we did, it would look something like this. We have a LOT of members. Regions would probably have to share a pod each.

by **Aclion** » Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:33 pm

Frisbeeteria wrote:
Minoa wrote:Does anyone have an image of the World Assembly Security Council chamber?

If we did, it would look something like this. We have a LOT of members. Regions would probably have to share a pod each.

Depends. If we only need to accommodate the delegations of nations that participate in the discussions it could look like this.

by **Minoa** » Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:44 pm

Frisbeeteria wrote:
Minoa wrote:Does anyone have an image of the World Assembly Security Council chamber?

If we did, it would look something like this. We have a LOT of members. Regions would probably have to share a pod each.

I guess I will have to stick with the UN Security Council stock image, as something like the layout of the Galactic Senate in Star Wars is far past the threshold of realism … at least from my point of view. Thanks anyway.

by **The Blaatschapen** » Fri Jan 11, 2019 4:38 pm

Aclion wrote:
Frisbeeteria wrote:If we did, it would look something like this. We have a LOT of members. Regions would probably have to share a pod each.

Depends. If we only need to accommodate the delegations of nations that participate in the discussions it could look like this.

My delegation is always there, even if not saying anything. I demand a piece of meadow.

by **Newark Aristocracy** » Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:20 am

Is it Possible to repeal a Repal?

by **Kuriko** » Mon Feb 04, 2019 7:23 am

Newark Aristocracy wrote:Is it Possible to repeal a Repal?

No, repeals of legislation are permanent and cannot be repealed themselves.

by **Montenbourg** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:47 am

I propose the creation of a map at https://atwar-game.com/

For Roleplaying purposes.

My user: Montenbourg

by **Borovan3** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:11 am

Montenbourg wrote:I propose the creation of a map at https://atwar-game.com/

For Roleplaying purposes.

My user: Montenbourg

That's not how it works

We don't use maps for this

by **Fredmenton** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:53 pm

Why aren’t you people doing anything

by **Borovan3** » Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:17 pm

Fredmenton wrote:Why aren’t you people doing anything

this isn't II the mechanics of sc are limited and people just get commends and condemns.

by **Fredmenton** » Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:11 am

I know but why aren’t you commending and condemning or repealing or Liberating

by **Wrapper** » Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:01 am

Fredmenton wrote:I know but why aren’t you commending and condemning or repealing or Liberating

You don’t like it, go write a proposal.

by **Chowkaria** » Sun Feb 17, 2019 5:16 pm

Can third-party issues (fixing/restoring Discords/forums after raids) be used as valid clauses in commendations?

by **Kuriko** » Sun Feb 17, 2019 5:26 pm

Chowkaria wrote:Can third-party issues (fixing/restoring Discords/forums after raids) be used as valid clauses in commendations?

No, all of that would violate the SC rules since its pertaining to electronic entities. If you could figure out a way to word it without it referencing an electronic entity maybe, but I'm not sure if you can do so with discord. This should be in the SC questions thread btw.

by **Lord Dominator** » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:45 am

"Repairing the damage to critical region infrastructure.." perhaps?

by **Chowkaria** » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:43 pm

Lord Dominator wrote:"Repairing the damage to critical region infrastructure.." perhaps?

Seems plausible, thanks

by **Lord Dominator** » Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:15 pm

You're welcome I guess

by **Blood Wine** » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:59 am

Is R3 specific enough to disallow "HEREBY, condemn Antifa." vs "HEREBY, condemns Antifa."

SC Questions & Answers

On Commendations

Who is online