[Discussion] Branding Rule Changes

[Tzorsland]

At the moment, yes, because they can't get regional advertisement pushed in under the guise of a "work group".

Advertisement? No one pays money to advertise in a publication practically NO ONE READS. That's got to be the biggest bullshit argument I've seen this year. First of all, a game play region would have to cooperate with a GA nation. They would have to design a resolution that would actually pass and they would have to convince that GA nation that they were really worth adding as a co-sponsor. Then the resolution would have to pass.

Do you think a Gameplay region would put that much effort into that nonsense? NO WAY!

[Araraukar]

to convince that GA nation that they were really worth adding as a co-sponsor.

Except that if the branding rule was deleted entirely, they wouldn't have to, they'd just slap the "working group" or whatever as the author, nevermind who did all the work. (Basically how New Dukaine's got a resolution on his name... )

Then the resolution would have to pass.

Gameplay regions mobilizing their WA nations to do something? I'm sure no-one's ever heard of that happening...

Do you think a Gameplay region would put that much effort into that nonsense? NO WAY!

So why would you want regions to be allowed as co-authors in the first place? If the regions that are going to be involved with GA are already involved with it and according to you nothing would change of the rules change was made, why is the rules change necessary?

[Imperium Anglorum]

SPEAKER: Questions to the Prime Minister Secretariat! Delegate Imperium Anglorum!

IMPERIUM ANGLORUM: Will the Prime Minister Secretariat confirm that changes will or have been made to the branding rule?

Joking aside, I've got a number of questions here. First, will the prohibition on regional or group puppets (e.g. InfoEurope, WA Charter Working Group, etc.) be lifted? Second, is the prohibition on the use of national long titles and or flags still in effect?

Third, how are these prohibitions, if either or both of them are still in force, justified under the new Branding rule's text, which reads: 'Proposal authors cannot list their names, pronouns ("I" or "we"), or use acronyms to circumvent this. However, they can and should credit their co-author(s), where contribution is notable or significant. Authors may list up to three co-authors.'

[States of Glory WA Office]

'Ear, 'ear!

[Araraukar]

Was the rule changed while I wasn't looking? Or are you just trying to restart the discussion/debate on it?

[Wrapper]

Was the rule changed while I wasn't looking? Or are you just trying to restart the discussion/debate on it?

Rule was changed when the entire rules package was updated early last year.

When we discussed the proposed changes to the rules a couple years ago, quite a bit of discussion was spent on the branding rule, and there was no clear consensus. The rule was loosened up to allow for multiple co-authors, including so-called "working groups". My understanding at the time was that you still cannot use proposals as recruiting tools, e.g. an acrostic saying "JOIN TBR" and such, nor could you spam the queue with such proposals, which would still be considered an OSRS violation and subject to moderation action.

As for the pretitles and flags, the current rule prohibits neither. Browse through the recent passed resolutions, and there are a few co-authors listed with flags. Using the long nation name could create a problem for an author though; if a co-author changes their pretitle to something spammy, that could get a proposal removed. Proceed at your own risk.

As I'm sure everyone is aware, GenSec is free to reinterpret or even change the rule, but moderation will still step in for OSRS issues.

[Araraukar]

Rule was changed when the entire rules package was updated early last year.

Yeah, but since then we had this: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=403450

That's the discussion I was asking if IA was trying to re-kindle. EDIT: Added the link to that to my earlier post here as well, to make that clearer.

[Bakhton]

I support increasing the max number to 5.

[Imperium Anglorum]

The rule was loosened up to allow for multiple co-authors, including so-called "working groups".

You mean to say that I could proposed legislation through a nation like InfoEurope?

My understanding at the time was that you still cannot use proposals as recruiting tools, e.g. an acrostic saying "JOIN TBR" and such, nor could you spam the queue with such proposals, which would still be considered an OSRS violation and subject to moderation action.

If the branding rule is about advertisements, which makes sense, given its name, why is the perspective prohibition included in this rule, rather than some other rule where it would make sense (like how it is in the SC)? Yea, yea, ha ha. GA-ers are supposed to hate the SC, I don't care.

As for the pretitles and flags, the current rule prohibits neither.

Excellent. Considering the current branding rule mentions nothing of the sort on coauthor requirements, it seems to me that 'The United Whatever Isles or Something of Eurathamania or something like that' could change their pre-title to 'The Join Our Region of The United Whatever...'.