The thoroughly modern WA-where does that leave other nations

[Avalaun (Ancient)]

I suspect that this has most probably been address at sometime in the past, but I think that it is still germane, at least from a role-play point of view. Having looked through the sorts of issues that the WA has passed resolutions on, it seems to me that the general point of view is thoroughly modern. That is the WA passes resolutions and diplomacy is conducted in a way that is most appropriate for the late twentieth/early twenty-first centuries. My question is, where does this leave NationStates participants who wish to play their nations as set in other time periods, non earthly locales, etc. One example that immediately comes to mind is the discussion of an anti-piracy resolution. While that is quite appropriate for our times, as in a RP version of something like the Maersk-Alabama incident, where does that leave those players whose nations are set up entirely around a 17th/18th century pirate theme? It would seem to me that they either cannot participate in the WA at all, or they are forced into a hypocritical. self-contradictory state. An anti-slavery resolution is similar. From a modern perspective it is obviously and unarguably laudable. But what about someone who plays a nation that is a version of the Confederate States of America, or the Roman Empire, or some kingdom from a magical/fantasy setting where slavery exists? Does a resolution demanding racial equality mean that the king of Gondor has to allow orcs in his army? Do you see what I mean? It seems that the throughly modern approach of the WA’s resolutions create an intrinsic bias against participation by nations whose players imagine them as outside of the modern milieu.

[Ardchoille]

The nation of Cobdenia exists in a -- (whaddya callit) -- that means they're approximately on a timeline similar to 1930s England. The resolution-writing nation of Glog is, well, prehistoric. I think we had a high-minded Roman for a while. Some nations are far future tech, many are spacefaring at some level, some are mediaeval, some mix them all, according to their player's abilities.

As for our varied races, Bears Armed is populated by bears (and they're armed). We have sapient whales, canines from the far future, my own noble Cats, invisible Wabbits, a most imposing dragon (Mme Vermithrax Pejorative, one of the incarnations of my fellow mod, The Most Glorious Hack), foul-mouthed Dolphins, quite a few AIs of various kinds, Elves, Dwarves, Shelob Herself ... and Blasted Pirates is a nation, not an exasperated exclamation.

WA nations, however composed, are compliant to WA resolutions because

• the writers of resolutions try (should try) to make statements of the principles they want WA nations to observe, then leave it up to the member nations to do whatever's necessary to apply these principles in their nations. The "exhaustive detail" legislation is not the WA's concern. Think about a world body saying, "Equal rights", a national government saying "this is how this applies in all government departments", a local council saying "our garbage collection services must no longer exclude Minority X".
• They've discovered a loophole it the way the law is written and applied it in their nation (it's polite, if you're going to do this, to mention the loophole during the debate on the resolution so that others can ridicule or applaud it -- to see if you can get away with it).
• If it can't apply in your nation, then, okay, it can't. Limitations on, say, carbon emissions will mean nothing to you if your nation uses dilithium crystals or teleportation. That doesn't stop you from supporting or opposing them on grounds related to, say, your own nation's history with such things, or what you've learned from more advanced nations since coming to the WA, or any other RPd reason you choose.

Note that if a WA resolution passes with no loopholes and imposes something you think you simply can't live with, your choices are (a) withdraw from the WA (b) accept, adjust and carry on. Maybe RP an election, a revolution, the death of a leader or anything that will make it possible for your nation's policies to adjust. If you want to play a slave-holding nation, don't use that nation to join the WA -- send along a "Slaveholders' Puppet" nation instead and let it speak out against or try to repeal any resolutions involving slaveholding .

Note.too, the "reasonable nation" convention. It's not a rule, but it basically means you shouldn't just make up something and then godmode it into existence to make a resolution unacceptable. So you don't argue to restrict the building of nuclear power stations "because this will wipe out the entire planet of Gwillibs because Gwillibs live on emissions from nuclear power stations". Your reasons have to be ones that would be acceptable to any "reasonable nation".

You'll also be told that "compliance is mandatory". If you're a WA nation, your statistics will feel the effect of any successful resolution. While you're in the WA, you can't dodge it, so in that sense compliance is mandatory. The game coding doesn't make any adjustments for the way you RP your nation.

[Avalaun (Ancient)]

Thank you, for the feedback, Ardchoille. I do appreciate the points about godmodding, as I read them in the FAQ, as well. I still see a certain clash between the value system/outlook that the list of Resolutions I read typify, though, and the value systems/mindset of cultures in other times and places. I don’t know how the “noble Roman” you mentioned was able to square the circle on slavery, unless Rome as (s)he imagined it was fundamentally economically different from the Roman Republic or Empire of our history, because the economy of that culture was based on slavery. It wouldn’t be a problem for Avalaun to interact with the WA, as I envision it as a modern nation, but I have created a couple of other nations that just couldn’t be my WA nation, as their values are culturally incompatible with the WA resolutions. Unlike Avalaun, some of them are not very nice places, I’m afraid and I don’t see how a nation ruled by an evil Wizard or a tribe of plundering horse nomads could ever be compatible with the resolutions on slavery, habeus corpus, fair trial, humane treatment of prisoners, and the like. Perhaps though, there is some way I could roleplay them through a proxy, as you suggest. Is it permissible to create discussion threads for non-WA members like those nations and similar ones run by others to discuss resolutions and create protest positions that a proxy could then argue within the WA, or would I be required to create a separate forum for that, like some of the regions have done?

[Ardchoille]

I don’t know how the “noble Roman” you mentioned was able to square the circle on slavery, unless Rome as (s)he imagined it was fundamentally economically different from the Roman Republic or Empire of our history, because the economy of that culture was based on slavery.

By George, you've got it! A player with a Roman nation might start out with it based exactly on RW Rome. If he has it in the WA, however, and the WA passes an anti-slavery resolution, he then has to decide how his nation will react. Perhaps he could RP fast legal changes clashing with extremely slow changes in attitudes. Or RP the discovery of some vital resource, RP selling it to other nations, RP his state becoming extremely rich and then RP individual citizens employing nationals of another small, poor state who take over the practical role once occupied by slaves, with corresponding changes in the social and economic practices. If he did that he would have created an NS Roman nation, and that's exactly the point.

You set up your nation (Roman, Neanderthal, evil wizard) just the way you want it, and then RP the effects of WA decisions. This turns it into an NS Roman, Neanderthal, evil wizard, state. It's how some players get ideas for complex histories, diplomatic interactions, what have you.

I don’t see how a nation ruled by an evil Wizard or a tribe of plundering horse nomads could ever be compatible with the resolutions on slavery, habeus corpus, fair trial, humane treatment of prisoners, and the like.

I can see you haven't met the Urgenchi yet; though I gather they've given up plunder. I hope you don't meet my own evil wizard -- well, he's not evil, exactly, more indolent, and he doesn't rule, precisely, and he's not a wizard, he's a witch -- anyway, he's not someone to enjoy a beer with. These parts of nations are plainly not compatible; they change in ways that their players RP when they meet the outside world -- when their nation is confronted by all the other nations who also come here.

Perhaps though, there is some way I could roleplay them through a proxy, as you suggest. Is it permissible to create discussion threads for non-WA members like those nations and similar ones run by others to discuss resolutions and create protest positions that a proxy could then argue within the WA, or would I be required to create a separate forum for that, like some of the regions have done?

You can create as many forums as you like, they're no concern of NS (and they're a good way to get to know people). But you don't need to set up a separate forum to create proposals or discuss the one At Vote. You already have this forum. You (or your delegate) has a right to address the Assembly purely by virtue of being here, because any NS player can post on any NS forum. There are nations that, because of a shared computer in real life, don't have actual WA membership. That doesn't stop them sending along their finest (or their rejects) to haunt these halls. Some RP that these are observer delegations, others give them full status and leap joyfully into whatever diplomatic diversions are on offer.

And, of course, other players don't RP at all, but turn up in their own skins to take the abuse or kudos of whatever species happens to be ranting at the time. It's up to you how you play it, but lots of us have found it's fun if you do play it, and create a nation that's your own, but shaped by NS.

[Cobdenia]

As an abovementioned past tech nation (though a slight correction: Cobdenia is based on 1930's Indian Raj ), it usually isn't too difficult with well thought out legislation, which, as Archoille correctly states, rarely causes major problems, as they tend to be inclusive of technology (such as International Transport safety, in which I got round the problem by creating a committee which bases it's recomendation on, amongst other things, construction dates - i.e. a Sopwith Camel wouldn't need a black box), or have little relevence to technology (such as . Generally, my rule for RP purposes is to obey every resolution that I can physically do so, even if it seems incompatable, and find cunning (and hopefully amusing) wangles out of it. For example, one of the old UN resolutions insisted upon us researching alternative fuels. So, as the main fuel in Cobdenia is coal, the alternative fuel we researched was oil based fuels. Similarly, a resolution requiring us to make more use of hyrdrogen powered vehicles led to us converting our zeppelins from helium to hydrogen, with amusing and explosively tragic results. Zeppelin is now the main form of air travel in Cobdenia

Of course, there are some resolutions we can't go with, I just RP absolute confusion on the part of Cobdenians, followed by them just giving up and ignoring it. IT education act springs to mind.

Otherwise, whilst many things passsed by the old UN were law in Cobdenia, they weren't enforced; where as some can just be deemed irrelevent (such as wanting us to combat AIDS. If you have no AIDS, there's nothing to combat).

[Malikov]

If what this thread is what I think it is, then either nations stay out of the WA, and live in their own private bubbles, or the accept it, and evolve, or devolve as a nation, towards the more acceptable WA version of what nations should be like.

Malikov

[Rutianas]

If what this thread is what I think it is, then either nations stay out of the WA, and live in their own private bubbles, or the accept it, and evolve, or devolve as a nation, towards the more acceptable WA version of what nations should be like.

Malikov

Not sure what you're trying to say. Explain further?

[The Emmerian Unions]

If what this thread is what I think it is, then either nations stay out of the WA, and live in their own private bubbles, or the accept it, and evolve, or devolve as a nation, towards the more acceptable WA version of what nations should be like.

Malikov

Not sure what you're trying to say. Explain further?

Methinks he means that ALL WA nations should be an MT nation. Like FT goes down to MT level, or a Roman Emire type nation quickly goes up to MT level. It just won't happen. It's like saying that if a nation wants to join the RLUN they MUST be on the same tech level as say the US.

[Rutianas]

If what this thread is what I think it is, then either nations stay out of the WA, and live in their own private bubbles, or the accept it, and evolve, or devolve as a nation, towards the more acceptable WA version of what nations should be like.

Malikov

Not sure what you're trying to say. Explain further?

Methinks he means that ALL WA nations should be an MT nation. Like FT goes down to MT level, or a Roman Emire type nation quickly goes up to MT level. It just won't happen. It's like saying that if a nation wants to join the RLUN they MUST be on the same tech level as say the US.

Thought so.

Mmm. Not going to happen. It's just not going to happen. I'm FT. I will refuse to become MT just because someone else thinks I should. Now, if the mods declare the WA to be MT only, then yeah, I'll leave. But not for any other reason.

Sorry. I'm just gonna have to rain on anyone's parade that wants to write any proposal that'll harm FT nations.

[Ruzan]

Ruzan doesn't have the technical problems that Cobdenia does, since we are clearly Modern Tech. But we are not what you would call a "Western" nation. We see no ethical problem with slavery, or with hiring pirates, and the WA resolutions of those were very unpopular in Ruzan. However, our Emperor decided to stay in the WA (to the great bewilderment of many Ruzanians), so until he changes his mind, or the people get POd enough to overthrow him, we're stuck with these "modern" values.

[Malikov]

What I meant was, either you join the WA, and become more like the majority of nations in it, or you stay out of it. You've got two choices, and if you don't like it then suck it up. I'm sorry but thats the only way it can be...

Malikov

[The Emmerian Unions]

What I meant was, either you join the WA, and become more like the majority of nations in it, or you stay out of it. You've got two choices, and if you don't like it then suck it up. I'm sorry but thats the only way it can be...

Malikov

Uh, you could always get out. You cannot dictate how others play their nations. If they want to be a multi galatic nation or a Roman Empire-type nation, They can. There are NOT two choices. They can choose to do what they want to RP as.

[Rutianas]

What I meant was, either you join the WA, and become more like the majority of nations in it, or you stay out of it. You've got two choices, and if you don't like it then suck it up. I'm sorry but thats the only way it can be...

Malikov

You know, they say if you can't say something nice....

Uh, you could always get out. You cannot dictate how others play their nations. If they want to be a multi galatic nation or a Roman Empire-type nation, They can. There are NOT two choices. They can choose to do what they want to RP as.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Malikov]

I was specifically refering to nations that don't like the kinds of resolutions put forward by the WA. The way I see, is that the WA is an organization designed to add compexity to Nation States. its like a big telegram... you can vote on, and be a part of it... or you can dissmiss it, and not join. Their are only two choices. Unless you are constantly joining and leaving, because you don't like some resolutions, i which case it's your problem and no one else's.

Malikov

[Rutianas]

I was specifically refering to nations that don't like the kinds of resolutions put forward by the WA. The way I see, is that the WA is an organization designed to add compexity to Nation States. its like a big telegram... you can vote on, and be a part of it... or you can dissmiss it, and not join. Their are only two choices. Unless you are constantly joining and leaving, because you don't like some resolutions, i which case it's your problem and no one else's.

Malikov

That's not what you initially said.

Anyway, yeah, you deal with the resolutions, but the beauty of it is that you can actually debate the process. Very very very few get through without being debated here first. Those that deal with a specific tech level only are often reminded that there are varying tech levels here. Those that mention 'human' are often reminded that there's other races. Same with 'Earth'. Believe me, if we couldn't debate these, you wouldn't see me in the WA.

As for leaving because you don't like some resolutions? It's not their problem anymore when they leave.

[Malikov]

What I initally said was in reference to the lack of options available to nations who don't like the way the WA is run. There is no changing the WA at the present moment because, sadly, there are not enough Past-Tech, or Future-Tech nations to impose their veiw. I am truly sorry for any confusion I my have caused.

Malikov, Jordia

[Rutianas]

What I initally said was in reference to the lack of options available to nations who don't like the way the WA is run. There is no changing the WA at the present moment because, sadly, there are not enough Past-Tech, or Future-Tech nations to impose their veiw. I am truly sorry for any confusion I my have caused.

Malikov, Jordia

We do well enough in voicing our opinions. Resolutions should not be written with only one tech viewpoint. I'm not the only one who's vocal about it either.

[Cobdenia]

Indeed. With vagueness, comes strength, and avoidance of tech clashes