Sedgistan wrote:Martyrdoom wrote:Oh yeah he wasn't kicked was he, apologies: but it does seem reasonable to infer , especially with your disclosure . So you griefed the region to rectify the previous griefing? Right. But because you did its ok?
You obviously misunderstand griefing - no surprise since the concept of 'natives' eludes you too. I didn't Feudal Japan, because I didn't kick out any natives - only invaders.
You clearly mistunderstand it since:
(http://www.nationstates.net/page=influence)Obsoleted Rules
As mentioned above, "Invasion Griefing" rules have been abolished. The forum rules sticky has been updated to reflect this, with the following old rules removed:
* Deleted: A distinction was drawn between "invaders" and "natives," and different rules applied to each.
* Deleted: "Invader Delegates" were prohibited from ejecting more than a certain number (usually 10%) of residents, and required to unban them immediately afterward.
* Deleted: If an "invader Delegate" password-protected the region, she was required to distribute that password to residents via telegram.
* Deleted: Delegates were prohibited from ejecting residents in order to re-Found a region.
These rules no longer apply.
As a result, 'native' eludes everyone. You create definitions such as 'griefing'. I create and use definitions in the same manner, 'griefing' being a case in point as well. The strength of my definition - that a nation is native to the region where it currently resides - reflects the use of influence which underpins gameplay.