Rule 4, formerly 'Split from Commend "A Mean Old Man".'

[Callisdrun]

This thread has shown me, through the tone taken by many on here, that a great many GPers have nothing but contempt for RPers.

[Ardchoille]

#071: Minority Group Demands Language Recognition [Pragmas; ed:SalusaSecondus]

The Issue
A group several thousands strong hailing from a remote, isolated corner of the World Assembly is staging a massive demonstration on the front steps of your capitol. They demand that their local dialect be recognized as an official language.

The Debate
1. Urgench, your Minister of Culture, has nothing but disdain for the demonstrators. "The language of the World Assembly is as important to our national identity as our history is. A truly erudite individual uses perfect grammar and refuses to speak as those ruffians do." Your Finance Minister is quick to chime in as well, "If business is required to print every road sign, instruction manual, and fast-food wrapper in two languages, it would increase everybody's overhead. That means higher prices for the person in the street."

2. "Smarker, but ee's gone blongie 'round the clonger! Trandy in the blang warked a newtie on the Cheebers, quaff me a duggle if it's brine. Sorky, hang our trandy high!" says Astarial, speaking for the demonstrators, in an apparently rousing response that draws a cascade of cheers. After a few uncomfortable minutes with a professional translator, you find the speaker said, "I respectfully disagree with the Minister. Multilingualism has brought stability to richly-cultured nations such as Brancaland; indeed, I challenge you to provide a single counterexample. I encourage this government to adopt a policy of multilingualism throughout the World Assembly!"

3. NERVUN, a radical opposition member who seems to tag along to every demonstration he can find, has his own proposal. "The language barrier is keeping us all apart. What the World Assembly needs is a new identity defined by a new language that we can all agree on. That's unity without favoritism."

You’re a cruel wumman, Nai. I bet, if Nerv and I don’t surrender before this barrage of satire, you’ll bring on the haikus. But if you try any more diagrams on us I swear I’ll haul you up before the Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Mods, so I will!
Back to the burning question:

Because the gender of the persona posting through the nation is almost always public in Gameplay, using "they" is a marker of ignorance, as if the proposal author couldn't be bothered to find out even the most basic element of the target's identity.

I get that. But you're looking at the proposal as-- I dunno -- your property? Anyway, obviously, written from your viewpoint. But it won’t be read from your viewpoint. My job is to look at it as what it will (hopefully) become: the WA's property, an on-the-books resolution. It will be viewed, will come to vote and be voted on, by non-Gameplayers as well: people who don't read @@nationname@@ as a person. There will also be others who might guess it's aimed at a person, but don't know the person involved and don't want to know, because the person's gender has no relevance to the virtue or villainy of their nation -- ie, nothing to do with the vote.

The Macmillian Dictionary defines she as "used for referring to a nation, a ship, or a car, when it has already been mentioned or when it is obvious which one you are referring to."

This might imply that all nations are feminine, but that still is a gender.

I’ll see your dictionary and raise you a Real-World Reference, Tzors. Somehow I don’t think this convention is really right for the SC --

Todd McCloud has worked hard for her region. She …

So, on to another point Nai raised:

The difference between what you just described and what we want is that RP'ers have to move OUT of their in-game world in order to talk that way. I.e., they are NO LONGER PLAYING THE GAME when they start to talk about godmoding or statwanking.

You know how RPers don't understand Gameplayers? Well, I'm afraid this is one of those points where Gameplayers don't understand RPers.

Ever wondered why, despite the stickies and the constant watchfulness of GPers, players insist on posting in the Gameplay forum about, "Hey! Wanna join my great new FT alliance?" or "How do I start a war?" or discussion about "How is it godmoding to go to Condition Red, when he told me straight out at school that he was going to invade tonight?"

It’s because they figure that “game” plus “play” must be about how they play their game. For them, Eras’s sticky is just, well, odd:

This is a place to talk about stuff that *ACTUALLY* happens on the NS site, in the game.

"Well, I’m on the NS site – it says nationstates.net, right? And I actually did post in a thread. Why can’t I talk about it here?"

I know this sort of thing drives GPers to screams of frustration, because HotRod and I heard a few from Crazy Girl when we were first modded, until she got us trained. But for RPers who haven’t had the privilege of meeting CG, anything they do on the official forums is “playing the game”. The nation page is just the thing they log in through -– like the door to a room. They might chat on the RMB or answer issues, and those are “playing the game” too, but Gameplay doesn’t touch them unless their region is raided. During an earlier series of arguments, someone -- you, maybe? -– commented that, for the GAers, the GA forum is like their region is to Gameplayers. It’s like that for many other forums, too. They don’t have to move out of their in-game world to talk about OOC things. They start threads on them, and that’s “playing the game”. You said once that RPers “shouldn’t” want to talk about such things as roleplay, godmoding, statwank, continuity and the rest. But they do: it’s their “player behind”. They need to be told they can’t. “Not completely OOC” makes sense to them. “Talking about the game as if it's a game while still playing the game” makes sense, I would hope (since you wrote it) to Gameplayers. (To a forumite, that could be read as posting in a thread, while chatting to someone else standing nearby about how NS works.)

That’s why I keep reacting as if these two sentences do the same thing. Mine will achieve an effect on forum players. Yours will (I hope, since you wrote it) achieve the same effect on Gameplayers. That’s also why I keep saying that, if anyone is more disadvantaged, it’s RPers, because Gameplayers’ language is mostly already compliant. What the RPers will have to do, if they want to talk about these OOC things, is show, not tell –- as Kandarin did in “condemning” DFD for her nation’s eviliciousness, when in fact he was commending her-the-player for her RP skill.

Honestly, I think the more we talk about the theory, the more words we generate to misquote and misunderstand. So I’d like to leave this thread alone tomorrow and get back to the practical examples, so proposal writers can get back to doing their job and churning out something else to discuss. To do that, I’ll need a bit of co-operation –- like, no flareups. I don’t want to stifle anyone who’s really got something new to say, but please, guys, if you’ve already posted, take a break, and if someone’s riled you, leave it till you cool down, ‘kay?

[The Blaatschapen]

You’re a cruel wumman, Nai. I bet, if Nerv and I don’t surrender before this barrage of satire, you’ll bring on the haikus.

2nd time at least that people talk about Haikus, time for me to actually try and lighten the mood with one:

rule number four stands
third wall block stops proposals
mods find middle ground

[TurtleShroom]

*snip brilliance snip*

Thank you.

---

From here, I see but three methods of terminating this war.

• ONE. The moderators edit that post and wipe out Rule Four, pleasing such great people as Mean Old Man.
  
• TWO. Summon the great Max Barry himself and have him, in all his authority, tell us what's what.
  
• THREE. Destroy the Bloc by turning the WA into a one-man one-vote system. Delegates can still approve and propose legislation and such, but everyone has exactly ONE vote. Endorsements serve the sole purpose of gaining Influence and of electing new WA Delegates.
  
• FOUR. Wait for Violet.

[Glen-Rhodes]

... [Turn] the WA into a one-man one-vote system. Delegates can still approve and propose legislation and such, but everyone has exactly ONE vote. Endorsements serve the sole purpose of gaining Influence and of electing new WA Delegates.

I vote this one.

[Unibot]

if you keep insisting on calling dissidence, 'uncooperative', I don't think anything is going to get accomplished, Ard.

Actually, I think that dissidence is by its very nature "uncooperative". You don't want to cooperate, as you have plainly stated many times.

Because there is nothing to compromise but the thing that we want to protect, so its impossible to be cooperative without losing our end of the 'compromise'. It's the principle we're fighting, the specifics I could care less about.

First, that's not the effect of rule 4, as evidenced by Topid's Sampler and the involvement of several moderators. Second, it is categorically unfair to single out Ard as you have done repeatedly now. She is in a difficult position, as she has to try to satisfy the requirements of the game's creator with its players, and all the while keeping things civil and on an even keel. As I have said earlier, though perhaps not to you directly, Unibot, it is personally unfair to single her out, knowing that she has to keep her comments restrained while you can push to the limit.

First, what dimension that resolutions are written in will have an effect on how debate threads run, technically Rule IV doesn't have effect debate threads, but in reality it will. If you take away OOC resolutions, you isolate people from the SC who want to post in OOC, because the majority will post in the dimension of the resolution (as it happens traditionally in the SC) and the minority will have a smaller, dwindling debate between themselves in their dimension.. unless they join the majority. As for pressuring Ard, that's why I contacted the Site Admin, Krio, and as far as I know, the person he's going to talk to about it is Ard so the whole dahm thing went full circle (well, what the fuck did I expect?)

I can feel it in my bones they're just waiting for me to blow up like a balloon that's been slowly blown into for the last two months, so they can quickly ban me.. so if there's anyone here who has to restrain themselves, and toe the line of the law, its me and my colleagues. I'm already seeing the signs of mods trying to discredit our opinions and our methods of peace protest as radical and unreasonable, so any sort of outburst of flamebaiting will quickly be used against us, I assume.

As I stated in that 'rant', many roleplayers are still going to avoid gameplayer threads because the nominee doesn't concern them, and removing a couple of personal pronouns isn't going to change that, and many gameplayer threads are going to still avoid roleplayer C&Cs because they don't concern them. In the original Security Council, people who could respect how the nominee played the game, tried to keep their posts in the dimension that the resolution was written in... if people can't respect how the nominee plays the game, then what are they going to contribute to a debate thread? Reams of 'I don't like your style of play' Crap, which we've had enough in these halls ..

Irrelevant.

No it isn't, its one of the many overlooked problems with trying to implement Rule IV, it just won't work! It doesn't solve the problems it set out to do.

Secondly, can't you at least admit that you're making one group of people go out of their way to satisfy these stipulations, and making one group of people go out of their way to hide the language of their culture to make it accessible to roleplayers. While, others don't have to go out of their way at all to satisfy these stipulations, they don't have to hide the language of their culture behind anything. Why wouldn't that one group feel isolated?

Even if Ard were to concede this, plenty of groups "feel isolated" when a rules change takes place. The wiser and more adaptable of those learn to work with the moderation staff to minimize the perceived negative effects of those changes, and in some cases, look to see if there are positive impacts as well.

We're saying there are very little positive impacts of Rule IV : a small group of players will be able to post regularly without having to respect the nominee, bravo, fantastic implementation considering the hefty costs.

[Whamabama]

This thread has shown me, through the tone taken by many on here, that a great many GPers have nothing but contempt for RPers.

You have said that before, and I will repeat my answer. We don't hold any resentment, hold no anger. or wish you to go away.

If I hated roleplayers, and wanted them gone. I would have to leave my own region, where there is a group of RPers have migrated to us even though we have always been a dedicated GP region. However in both my region, and in NS, "more the better"

[Krioval]

if you keep insisting on calling dissidence, 'uncooperative', I don't think anything is going to get accomplished, Ard.

Actually, I think that dissidence is by its very nature "uncooperative". You don't want to cooperate, as you have plainly stated many times.

Because there is nothing to compromise but the thing that we want to protect, so its impossible to be cooperative without losing our end of the 'compromise'. It's the principle we're fighting, the specifics I could care less about.

Right. So you're being uncooperative. Just admit it, move on, and stop trying to claim you're doing the opposite of what you're actually doing. Moving on.

First, what dimension that resolutions are written in will have an effect on how debate threads run, technically Rule IV doesn't have effect debate threads, but in reality it will. If you take away OOC resolutions, you isolate people from the SC who want to post in OOC, because the majority will post in the dimension of the resolution (as it happens traditionally in the SC) and the minority will have a smaller, dwindling debate between themselves in their dimension.. unless they join the majority. As for pressuring Ard, that's why I contacted the Site Admin, Krio, and as far as I know, the person he's going to talk to about it is Ard so the whole dahm thing went full circle (well, what the fuck did I expect?)

You seem to be in a very small minority of people who actually seem to think that OOC discussion will disappear from the debate threads in the SC. In fact, plenty of GA threads have OOC and semi-IC posts, and many posts that look IC are sufficiently ambiguous ("I think you should change clause 3 to say...") that they could be either from RP'd ambassadors or from the players directly. As somebody who has spent plenty of time working in the GA, you have to know this.

As for "pressuring Ard", of course the admins punted back to her. She's been on hand for all things rule 4, now with a great deal of assistance. Did you honestly think that you were sufficiently special as to override the entire process thus far? Besides, as this post in the OSRS indicates:

From the OSRS

Admins, including Max Barry, are not moderators: they are not involved in rulings, including appeals. If you bypass this process and go directly to admin, they will almost certainly toss it back at the mods, or simply ignore it. Admins will only be involved in cases involving changes to the game framework, or serious claims of moderator abuse; e.g. that would require a moderator to be stood down. In this case, admins will be alerted by mods.

Thus it is entirely appropriate for any admin contacted regarding rule 4 to redirect back to the mods, especially if the admins have already signed off on rule 4 in general. Site rules don't change just because a disgruntled player contacts an admin.

I can feel it in my bones they're just waiting for me to blow up like a balloon that's been slowly blown into for the last two months, so they can quickly ban me.. so if there's anyone here who has to restrain themselves, and toe the line of the law, its me and my colleagues. I'm already seeing the signs of mods trying to discredit our opinions and our methods of peace protest as radical and unreasonable, so any sort of outburst of flamebaiting will quickly be used against us, I assume.

Heh, yeah. The mods have nothing better to do with their time than to cause grief for individual players - especially Ardchoille, who cackles evilly every night about the number of players she's set up for the banhammer. As for restraint, you seem to go out of your way to generate drama, especially when conciliatory words are uttered on either side or a compromise seems to be within reach. Fine, you don't want to compromise. Fair enough, but have the decency to stand out of the way of those who do without trying to repeatedly sabotage the process. If the mods really wanted to suppress all discussion, I would have guessed that you'd have seen the end of "Unibot", "Unibotian WA Mission", "Stash Kroh", and any of your other puppets long ago. They've been incredibly fair, especially given their status as unpaid volunteers. Just cut the histrionics.

[Topid]

Right. So you're being uncooperative. Just admit it, move on, and stop trying to claim you're doing the opposite of what you're actually doing. Moving on.

so its impossible to be cooperative

He did.

You seem to be in a very small minority of people who actually seem to think that OOC discussion will disappear from the debate threads in the SC.

I'm not concerned with the debate threads. That's not what most see.

And I don't want to touch the rest.

[Astarial]

The thing that I have the hardest time understanding is this concept of unintelligibility on the part of "Gameplayers."

I never said anybody was asking me to write in a roleplay style. I said that GPers cannot understand RP C&Cs, and yet, RPers not being able to understand GP C&Cs is held up as a reason GPers need to sit down and shut the fuck up. I am inquiring as to the difference.

Cannot understand, or refuse to?

RP C&Cs are nonsense to me. You are commending or condemning someone for using their imagination. This smacks of lying. So I butt the hell out and let that community make its own judgement calls.

But this arbitrary argument of "we don't have any idea what you're talking about" is just silly- you understand, you just don't involve it in your holistic concept of "The Game."

Please point to where, exactly, I have ever said that Gameplay is the entirety of the game.

Being as I have never said that, you are factually incorrect.

I maintain: Why must I change my language to appease your sensibilities, when your language offends mine equally much?

~~

During an earlier series of arguments, someone -- you, maybe? -– commented that, for the GAers, the GA forum is like their region is to Gameplayers. It’s like that for many other forums, too. They don’t have to move out of their in-game world to talk about OOC things. They start threads on them, and that’s “playing the game”. You said once that RPers “shouldn’t” want to talk about such things as roleplay, godmoding, statwank, continuity and the rest. But they do: it’s their “player behind”. They need to be told they can’t. “Not completely OOC” makes sense to them. “Talking about the game as if it's a game while still playing the game” makes sense, I would hope (since you wrote it) to Gameplayers. (To a forumite, that could be read as posting in a thread, while chatting to someone else standing nearby about how NS works.)

Ard, my love, Nai did not mean physically move, she meant mentally. You cannot mentally be in your RP persona and also be arguing about godmodding. They are entirely separate (unless your persona is themself an RPer, but pbbbbt).

You can (and almost must) be within your GP persona to talk about feeders, about endorsements and endorsement caps, about delegates and invasions and defenses.

So comparing godmodding (RP-OOC) with GP-IC terms, any of them, is not an equivalency.

[Unibot]

You seem to be in a very small minority of people who actually seem to think that OOC discussion will disappear from the debate threads in the SC. In fact, plenty of GA threads have OOC and semi-IC posts, and many posts that look IC are sufficiently ambiguous ("I think you should change clause 3 to say...") that they could be either from RP'd ambassadors or from the players directly. As somebody who has spent plenty of time working in the GA, you have to know this.

Why do you think that SC regulars want the SC to become the GA? We would be playing in the GA if we wanted to participate in the GA.

As for "pressuring Ard", of course the admins punted back to her. She's been on hand for all things rule 4, now with a great deal of assistance. Did you honestly think that you were sufficiently special as to override the entire process thus far? Besides, as this post in the OSRS indicates:

From the OSRS

Admins, including Max Barry, are not moderators: they are not involved in rulings, including appeals. If you bypass this process and go directly to admin, they will almost certainly toss it back at the mods, or simply ignore it. Admins will only be involved in cases involving changes to the game framework, or serious claims of moderator abuse; e.g. that would require a moderator to be stood down. In this case, admins will be alerted by mods.

Thus it is entirely appropriate for any admin contacted regarding rule 4 to redirect back to the mods, especially if the admins have already signed off on rule 4 in general. Site rules don't change just because a disgruntled player contacts an admin.

No it makes perfect sense that Max would go back to consult her, Its just a little frustrating that he said he would check into it, and there's been no reply, I did ask him if that he made up his mind that the SC should be IC and Rule IV should stay, that it would be very very good for the Security Council for [violet] to make an appearance to herald it. Because otherwise there is going to be a lot of regulars who are still painfully holding on for a SC that is free from Rule IV.. hearing it for the source will hurt, but in the end, will save us months of frustration and agony. We can move on from this quicker if our last ray of hope is extinguished. I know for a fact that this last week in limbo has been downright depressing for me... and for all I know, Max popped over to the mods, asked what's up, and Ard told him we were all being unreasonable like she's telling us now.. and that was that. It's very frustrating, that's all, Krioval.

Heh, yeah. The mods have nothing better to do with their time than to cause grief for individual players - especially Ardchoille, who cackles evilly every night about the number of players she's set up for the banhammer. As for restraint, you seem to go out of your way to generate drama, especially when conciliatory words are uttered on either side or a compromise seems to be within reach. Fine, you don't want to compromise. Fair enough, but have the decency to stand out of the way of those who do without trying to repeatedly sabotage the process. If the mods really wanted to suppress all discussion, I would have guessed that you'd have seen the end of "Unibot", "Unibotian WA Mission", "Stash Kroh", and any of your other puppets long ago. They've been incredibly fair, especially given their status as unpaid volunteers. Just cut the histrionics.

I do think feel the 3WB is getting grieved by players and mods, considering they're a peaceful protest that is using the democratic system legitimately to get their voice heard.

[Krioval]

Right. So you're being uncooperative. Just admit it, move on, and stop trying to claim you're doing the opposite of what you're actually doing. Moving on.

so its impossible to be cooperative

He did.

I was actually referring to Unibot's comments in this post. You are correct, however, that Unibot has since clarified.

You seem to be in a very small minority of people who actually seem to think that OOC discussion will disappear from the debate threads in the SC.

I'm not concerned with the debate threads. That's not what most see.

Fair enough, but I was specifically addressing the issue of the forum threads. So far, I have seen no evidence that IC/OOC posts will be policed any differently in the forums, which seemed to be a concern of Unibot's, and an unfounded one at that.

As far as people only reading resolution text, people have been complaining about that since time immemorial. Actually, most people don't read much further than the title, in my experience. "But why would you want to repeal a resolution that allows stem cell research?" Did you read the text?! Then you'd see, under the "argument" section, my rationale. [/flashback]

And I don't want to touch the rest.

I don't blame you one bit. Good luck with your namesake sampler.

[Krioval]

Why do you think that SC regulars want the SC to become the GA? We would be playing in the GA if we wanted to participate in the GA.

The SC regulars want the SC to become the GA? That's new. I'm going to guess you meant that *GA* regulars want the SC to become the GA - a totally false statement for reasons that follow:

1. Dude, were you out the entire time the GA/SC split was being negotiated? Most GAers really aren't interested in the SC, to the tune of them (and plenty of GPers) working to separate the chambers. Go figure.

2. See 1.

As for "pressuring Ard", of course the admins punted back to her. She's been on hand for all things rule 4, now with a great deal of assistance. Did you honestly think that you were sufficiently special as to override the entire process thus far? Besides, as this post in the OSRS indicates:

No it makes perfect sense that Max would go back to consult her, Its just a little frustrating that he said he would check into it, and there's been no reply, I did ask him if that he made up his mind that the SC should be IC and Rule IV should stay, that it would be very very good for the Security Council for [violet] to make an appearance to herald it. Because otherwise there is going to be a lot of regulars who are still painfully holding on for a SC that is free from Rule IV.. hearing it for the source will hurt, but in the end, will save us months of frustration and agony. We can move on from this quicker if our last ray of hope is extinguished. I know for a fact that this last week in limbo has been downright depressing for me... and for all I know, Max popped over to the mods, asked what's up, and Ard told him we were all being unreasonable like she's telling us now.. and that was that. It's very frustrating, that's all, Krioval.

Max doesn't care what you think, much in the same way that President Obama doesn't care what I think. He's probably not intervening because he, and the rest of the admin staff, are busy. Further, since they don't tend to jump in except when making coding changes to the game, it is entirely in keeping with NS's organization to leave rule enforcement to the moderation staff. Again, go figure.

It seems a little strange that you conjure up a strong relationship with Max, to the point of expecting a response to your message within a week, and then turn around and claim that the moderators are looking for an excuse to delete you. They can't both be right (though they certainly can both be wrong).

I do think feel the 3WB is getting grieved by players and mods, considering they're a peaceful protest that is using the democratic system legitimately to get their voice heard.

1. NS is not a democracy.

2. 3WB is attempting to wield power to block certain types of voting. This pisses some people off. They have every right to lay into 3WB as 3WB has to lay into anybody else.

3. Players are griefing you? I certainly hope that you've reported that through the proper channels.

4. Mods are griefing you? I certainly hope that you've reported that through the proper channels.

[Euroslavia]

Uni, let's be honest here. This protest hasn't been fully peaceful. I'm speaking about both sides. There's been sniping back and forth all over the place throughout this forum, especially when certain topics dive into a discussion of Rule 4 when it originally had nothing to do with it in the first place (Prime example being the Condemn DFD thread).

And Krioval is right, if you feel that the moderators (or players for that matter) are doing any sort of griefing, report it.

[Unibot]

Why do you think that SC regulars want the SC to become the GA? We would be playing in the GA if we wanted to participate in the GA.

The SC regulars want the SC to become the GA? That's new.

I wasn't saying they do, I was asking why you thought that. Because your post seemed to indicate that we should enjoy having our forum debates resemble GA debates.

No it makes perfect sense that Max would go back to consult her, Its just a little frustrating that he said he would check into it, and there's been no reply, I did ask him if that he made up his mind that the SC should be IC and Rule IV should stay, that it would be very very good for the Security Council for [violet] to make an appearance to herald it. Because otherwise there is going to be a lot of regulars who are still painfully holding on for a SC that is free from Rule IV.. hearing it for the source will hurt, but in the end, will save us months of frustration and agony. We can move on from this quicker if our last ray of hope is extinguished. I know for a fact that this last week in limbo has been downright depressing for me... and for all I know, Max popped over to the mods, asked what's up, and Ard told him we were all being unreasonable like she's telling us now.. and that was that. It's very frustrating, that's all, Krioval.

Max doesn't care what you think, much in the same way that President Obama doesn't care what I think. He's probably not intervening because he, and the rest of the admin staff, are busy. [/quote]

You're probably right, Ard seems pretty busy, and so does NERV, that doesn't help my nervousness, Krioval, though -- and I don't claim to have any personal relationships with Max, I've talk to him like twice by email, I'd call that a good Site Admin, first and foremost, before a personal friend.

I do think feel the 3WB is getting grieved by players and mods, considering they're a peaceful protest that is using the democratic system legitimately to get their voice heard.

1. NS is not a democracy.

But the WA is... which was what I was referring to.

2. 3WB is attempting to wield power to block certain types of voting. This pisses some people off. They have every right to lay into 3WB as 3WB has to lay into anybody else.

And that's why I've been hesitant to report anything, but as I feel like the 3WB attacks have escalted since the defeat of the last resolution, I'll keep an eye out and report it the next time.

Thanks Euro, by the way. But by peaceful protest, I mean the Third Wall Bloc is using the World Assembly legitimately, when players post here on the forums and snipe at one another, they don't do so in representation of the Third Wall Bloc (at least not legitimately), they do so because they believe in some very heavy beliefs that are been threatened. The Third Wall Bloc is a reminder to those individuals that they are not alone, but it is not some entity that encourages flamebaiting and offtopic posts.. at least in my opinion.. which is the thing about the Third Wall Bloc. No one player is the leader of the Third Wall Bloc, so no one can really say what the 3WB can and can't do.. other than the members themselves. Many Third Wall Bloc members and myself saw the Condemn DFD proposal as a direct challenge to us... put it together, UCR delegate + commendation for another UCR delegate + two months of Rule IV = trouble for the 3WB. Thus, it was quite relevant to the thread, because the discussion wouldn't have been relevant here, because it would have pertained to the resolution, and the author's motives not Rule IV in general.

[Glen-Rhodes]

But the WA is... which was what I was referring to.

What kind of democracy is the World Assembly? If anything, the World Assembly is essentially a plutarchy by design, where the currency is endorsements. I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the imagined democratic principles of this organization -- that democracy stuff pretty much stops where roleplay ends and game design begins.

[Ardchoille]

I do think feel the 3WB is getting grieved by players and mods, considering they're a peaceful protest that is using the democratic system legitimately to get their voice heard.

I had hoped to devote my limited NS time to more pressing matters, but I feel obliged to clarify some points here before tempers flare and this thread is dragged off-topic.

3WB is a voting bloc. Voting blocs are permitted in the WA (both chambers). Voting blocs are expected in the WA. Voting blocs are legitimate.

Players are permitted to organise against a voting bloc. Players are expected to organise against a voting bloc. Organising against a voting bloc is legitimate.

Mods do not intervene in either the formation of voting blocs or opposition to them. Voting blocs are a player affair.

Voting blocs are permitted to announce the reason for the formation of their bloc. Such announcements, if phrased in a manner consistent with the rules, are legitimate. Voting bloc members,spokesmen or supporters may not troll or flame other players.

Players are permitted to comment on said reasons. Such comments, if phrased in a manner consistent with the rules, are legitimate. Players may not troll or flame voting bloc members, spokesmen or supporters.

Traditionally, a voting bloc examines each proposal and considers it on its merits. For example, a voting bloc may decide to vote against all proposals that reduce national sovereignty. Proposals that do not reduce national sovereignty would be approved, or simply ignored -- ie, the voting bloc would abstain from voting. It is possible for some proposals to gain the approval of a voting bloc.

3WB announced its intention to block all proposals, regardless of their content. The implication is that the bloc will do so without considering individual proposals on their merits.

It is not griefing for players to form, and state, the opinion that blocking proposals without regard to their content is not a legitimate form of operation. The opinions must, however, comment on the action, not the personal characteristics of the actor or actors.

It is griefing to do this:
Griefing: Harrassing a nation because of what they did or said. This often manifests when one player follows another around in thread after thread, abusing and flaming the target nation. Note that this is distinct from Region Griefing.

Anyone who considers they have been griefed should assemble links to examples that support that assertion and submit them in the Moderation forum or, if they feel that confidentiality is required, through a Getting Help Request.

Note that in the past, repeating accusations of rule-breaking without substantiating those accusations has itself been considered rule-breaking. Similarly, tit-for-tat reporting has led to action against all the parties involved.

Right, that's the clarification. Now, for responses to posts:

I can feel it in my bones they're just waiting for me to blow up like a balloon that's been slowly blown into for the last two months, so they can quickly ban me..

Rhodomontade. If we wished to take any action against you, you have already provided us with an excuse, in that you have re-submitted, unchanged, a proposal that had been deleted by a mod. You have not been acted against; first, because it is a first offence; second, because during the running-in period of a new rule we are, habitually, lenient towards technical offences. In any case, the penalty would not be a ban, but the expulsion from the WA of the nation with which you committed the offence.

You have also made statements that it would be exceptionally easy to read as trolling, for example, this reply to Topid (which I have quoted in full to avoid the appearance of selective quoting):

And while we're on Rule IV... I do not want this thread to be a Rule IV debate. I realize many people will oppose this due to the current controversy. I don't even mind if you post here telling me you will oppose this due to rule IV. But I do not want all Rule-IV discussion that is unrelated to this proposal. If you want to argue with someone opposing this due to Rule IV do it elsewhere, not here. If you want to comment on Rule IV in more length than simply saying you oppose this because of it, do it someone else, not here.

If you don't want to create another thread on Rule IV, one: you shouldn't try to condemn a 3WB member then, and two: you shouldn't try to condemn any gameplayer for that matter with the unbearable Rule IV compliant language. It's disrespectful.

Opposed with all my lil' heart because of Rule IV.

Were I or any other mod intent upon punishing you for our own evil ends, the bolded part of that statement could have been read as a bullying threat that "Condemning my former associates is disrespectful and I will therefore spam your thread, which you have asked not be a Rule 4 debate, until it turns into a Rule 4 debate." Instead, the only action taken was to remove from the thread subsequent R4 comments by you and others that did not meet Topid's criterion. The mods have, even though occasionally with gritted teeth, tried to follow the example set by Max in the debates on the formation of the SC.

Gameplayers, please note: since the formation of the SC I do not remember kicking any player from the WA for submission of illegal SC proposals. The nature of the SC makes such expulsions unlikely, because C&Cs and Liberations are usually one-offs. Mistakes in SC proposals are usually of a minor technical nature, which may not even be recorded, or of a non-WA nature, such as flaming, and so not treated as a WA offence. The likelihood of, say, a Feeder delegate losing his WA nation is vanishingly small, because anyone cluey enough to reach the Delegacy would also be cluey enough to figure out how to submit a proposal without putting their Delegate nation at risk.

Ard, my love, Nai did not mean physically move, she meant mentally. You cannot mentally be in your RP persona and also be arguing about godmodding. They are entirely separate (unless your persona is themself an RPer, but pbbbbt).

You can (and almost must) be within your GP persona to talk about feeders, about endorsements and endorsement caps, about delegates and invasions and defenses.

Astarial, possum, I'm glad we're getting along so well. It's tiring being grumpy all the time.

I meant mentally, not physically, too. I play NS in my head (my doctor complains that I don't move from the computer often enough, damn your eyes, Max). And you're right, an RPd character couldn't talk about any of those things, so an RP player couldn't talk about their effects in NS while speaking as an RPd character -- but as a person who spends most of his time on NS RPing, as the player behind the character, he could. They would be OOC but, in the player's view, they would still be in-game, because he would still be on the forums. But players can't be completely OOC in proposals, because that would run counter to the verbal conventions of the game. To make an official-sounding SC proposal, they have to go at least a little bit IC. (Nearest similar style I can find is the one in Shopfronts, where the sale is supposedly being made by the nation's government.) They can go a little further if they want, but not all the way to direct speech; there has to be a minimum level.

From that perspective, much of Gameplay can be read as "a little bit IC" too, even if the individual GPer doesn't mean it that way. Of the list you gave, only "feeder" is an exclusively single-meaning word tied to the game. "Endorsement cap" might stretch it a bit, but "endorsement" causes no strain: "Australia endorses US stand"; "President endorses candidate"; "General endorses peace plan"; "@@nationname@@ endorses Delegate"... but this is really the sort of thing that belongs in the "Topid's Sampler" thread, which is where I'd promised to be anyway, so I'll take it there.

[NERVUN]

You're probably right, Ard seems pretty busy, and so does NERV

I'd like it known that I have been reading along, I haven't responded for three reasons. 1. First and foremost, I am busy learning. Nai was right, I wasn't here for the big blow up that was C&Cs and the SC's creation and I don't know enough about gameplay so in the hopes that learning more will help, I'm currently reading through a lot of different threads and archives.

2. While reading through this stuff, I've been bouncing ideas off of Ard to see if we can find a way forward. This happens in the Mod areas for other Mods to add in on before we bring it forward.

And 3, and while not foremost, it is the most important, I got reminded that my most important position is not forum moderator for NationStates, it's not even the title of sensei, it's daddy. And after I found myself pushing my son off so I could respond to yet another long post about Rule 4... Well, I reminded myself (And something I think we all need reminding on) that this is just a game and while this drama seems to be very important, there are far, far more important things to deal with. So I am juggling as fast as I can, but I ask that we all be patient. After all, this has been going on for a few months now, just because we don't respond immediately doesn't mean the game is going to blow up. I'm fairly sure [violet] hasn't decided to change the code like that...

[Ardchoille]

I'm fairly sure [violet] hasn't decided to change the code like that...

*forum ASPLODES!!!!*

[Metania]

I am cautiously optimistic on what Nervun can think up, myself. While Ard has been trying hard at the situation, my feeling has been (for a while, at least) that this needed multiple mods to properly digest the massive walls of text this has been throwing around.

[Unibot]

And after I found myself pushing my son off so I could respond to yet another long post about Rule 4... Well, I reminded myself (And something I think we all need reminding on) that this is just a game and while this drama seems to be very important, there are far, far more important things to deal with. So I am juggling as fast as I can, but I ask that we all be patient. After all, this has been going on for a few months now, just because we don't respond immediately doesn't mean the game is going to blow up. I'm fairly sure [violet] hasn't decided to change the code like that...

*gives NERV a thumbs up*

Well, I might blow up, but that's okay.

[Euroslavia]

I am cautiously optimistic on what Nervun can think up, myself. While Ard has been trying hard at the situation, my feeling has been (for a while, at least) that this needed multiple mods to properly digest the massive walls of text this has been throwing around.

I've been reading these forums and any new posts/threads that've been thrown here for the past few months, concerning Rule 4. I've also been doing the same thing NERV's been doing, learning and brainstorming; however, I'm in line to be having surgery very soon due to a work injury, and can't sit at the computer desk for very long before my knee starts to flare up. My time on NS is very limited.

[Darkesia]

I wonder, if a mod or two could stand to spend a little time in GP land. Just to get to know us a little. I don't mean becoming an update raider/defender or tracker or spy or anything so time consuming. Come to the forums with a silly little throw away (WA)puppet. (A WA nation would help you understand just how much power that marker has in our world).
Chat on the RMB about the evils of marsupials. Join the Regional Assembly (or whatever the region's voting body is called). Run for office. Engage in internal regional politics. The inter-regional stuff is dead and rotting, but internally the regions still live.

It won't take up much time and it may give a little insight. I understand it won't be easy and you have little time to spend on such things. But it might be worth it to get some idea of where we are coming from.

Just an idea

[Minineenee]

I wonder, if a mod or two could stand to spend a little time in GP land. Just to get to know us a little. I don't mean becoming an update raider/defender or tracker or spy or anything so time consuming. Come to the forums with a silly little throw away (WA)puppet. (A WA nation would help you understand just how much power that marker has in our world).
Chat on the RMB about the evils of marsupials. Join the Regional Assembly (or whatever the region's voting body is called). Run for office. Engage in internal regional politics. The inter-regional stuff is dead and rotting, but internally the regions still live.

It won't take up much time and it may give a little insight. I understand it won't be easy and you have little time to spend on such things. But it might be worth it to get some idea of where we are coming from.

Just an idea

I was thinking of suggesting the same thing, but with an addition of "or, take time to read the histories on some of the regional forums... or both >_>" A feeder or two, a UCR...

For someone really trying to make an effort to understand (which I appreciate), it would probably make a difference.

*glitters Dark and gives her a cookie*

[Topid]

I wonder, if a mod or two could stand to spend a little time in GP land. Just to get to know us a little. I don't mean becoming an update raider/defender or tracker or spy or anything so time consuming. Come to the forums with a silly little throw away (WA)puppet. (A WA nation would help you understand just how much power that marker has in our world).
Chat on the RMB about the evils of marsupials. Join the Regional Assembly (or whatever the region's voting body is called). Run for office. Engage in internal regional politics. The inter-regional stuff is dead and rotting, but internally the regions still live.

It won't take up much time and it may give a little insight. I understand it won't be easy and you have little time to spend on such things. But it might be worth it to get some idea of where we are coming from.

Just an idea

Just to point out, Euro has spent a lot of time on the IRC with us...

And I don't blame the mods for being busy to participate in gameplay. There is always more moderating needing to be done than the moderators can do.