Ghant wrote:Libraria and Ausitoria wrote:There are two different arguments here: the first is the one all of us have been arguing about, the second is the one Inyursta has been arguing about. The first is whether freedom of navigation is an OOC convention; the second is whether it is an IC convention. I have not been discussing whether something is an IC convention OOCly because we all already know it isn’t an IC convention. You think I’m arguing it is an IC convention; I’m not arguing that, I’m arguing it’s an OOC convention which has nothing to do with the fact it's not an IC convention.
It is really very obvious that freedom of navigation is an OOC convention. Let us start from the basis that what is an OOC convention is completely and utterly decided by what goes on IRL, in the real world. Freedom of navigation has been enforced by first the Pax Britannia and then the Pax Americana for most of the last two fucking centuries since the victory of the Manchester school of trade. It is now a custom as set in stone as the British Constitution (another binding convention); and I don’t care what fantasy world you live in IRL, but in modern international policy making it is a given standard, even if there are a few places that attempt to flout it. It is almost the height of ignorance to suppose it is not an OOC convention, although given modern education perhaps that is understandable.
I'd argue that talking about what's kosher in RL doesn't exactly translate to IC. This isn't RL, this is a collaborative fiction site. Keyword there: fiction. NS is hardly different from something like Dungeons & Dragons or a work of fictional literature canon. Hence, what people should be asking here is: "what does the player who exercises creative agency over the pertinent creative material think?"
I seem to recall reading somewhere (I could be mistaken) that the region Inyursta is in, is more or less that player's creative material. Therefore, arguing what is and isn't acceptable in his creative canon is a moot point. As far as I'm concerned, if Inyursta says that his region, in which he exercises creative agency, possess flying dolphins, then by God, there's flying dolphins in that region's waters.
My other point is that for many players, such as myself, who don't recognize RL history ICly, something like an international waters convention doesn't exist, because it never happened in the in-game universe canon. The UN doesn't exist ICly, according to my canon, because I don't recognize RL history ICly. So on and so forth.
Indeed, the reason this argument is still going on is because a player's creative agency isn't being respected (Inyursta) and another player (Libraria) is attempting to impose roleplaying conventions on his creative material. Not only is that not fair, but it is against common roleplaying courtesy and etiquette. Instead, what Libraria should be talking about is "hey Inyursta, what would you like to do? Since this is your creative material that we are talking about?"
I've been following this argument for nearly as long as it's been going on, and that's ultimately the conclusion that I've come to. Libraria trying to shove a square peg into a round hole. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. The result is always going to be the same. Inyursta has made it clear what's acceptable, and what's not, within his roleplaying setting. So if Libraria cannot respect and abide by the decisions made by Inyursta regarding his creative material, I recommend he just don't write with him, and if Libraria cannot accept how he decides to roleplay international waters in the region in which he exercises creative agency, then he shouldn't recognize it OOCly. Problem solved.
The voice of sanity intervenes. As an unbiased observer, I strongly advise you guys to take this advice.
.gif)
