NATION

PASSWORD

Question on nation/region naming

Who needs it, who got it, who hands it out and why.
User avatar
Tzorsland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 826
Founded: May 08, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Question on nation/region naming

Postby Tzorsland » Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:40 am

Now that this thread has made it clear that people cannot make SC proposals with regions / nations that were created with non PG-11 wording, I have a concern that this can be used and abused by people who would want to avoid the interference of the SC alltogether. Basically this is saying that if you want to have your region free from any attempt at liberation, condemnation or commendation, you just need to put non PG-11 wording into the name.

This probably has a greater potential impact on nation names, since these can be used to propose, endorse and give regional delegate votes to resolutions, the first example is permanently kept on the record of the resolution. The question I have is: Does this PG-11 wording for SC proposal titles in effect require a PG-11 requirement on the creation of nation and region names?
"A spindizzy going sour makes the galaxy's most unnerving noise!"
"Cruise lightspeed smooth and slient with this years sleek NEW Dillon-Wagoner gravitron polarity generator."
AKA Retired WerePenguins Frustrated Franciscans Blue Booted Bobbies A Running Man Dirty Americans

User avatar
Katganistan
Senior Game Moderator
 
Posts: 30990
Founded: Antiquity
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Katganistan » Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:16 pm

If you create a nation with an inappropriate/obscene name, it gets deleted because we can't change nation names without causing armageddon.

If you create a region with an inappropriate name, it'll get changed. And you may be warned.

If you have a question as to whether a name is allowable, it probably isn't.

User avatar
Kalibarr
Minister
 
Posts: 2241
Founded: Sep 05, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Kalibarr » Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:21 pm

So Shitty Proposal Writing Shouldn't Exist?

User avatar
Corporate Embassy 7
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Jan 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Corporate Embassy 7 » Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:37 pm

I asked this question a while ago. I received the answer that it should not be used in a SC resolution, but was told nothing of whether the region should be deleted or not.

If it's really this huge a problem, I can just move my puppet out.

User avatar
Tzorsland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 826
Founded: May 08, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tzorsland » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:51 pm

I want to make it clear that I have no qualms with the region of Shitty Proposal Writing. After all, it's a one nation region just sitting there. I'm sure that it will never make it to the top region list in a given ranking or even worse be nominated for region of the day. (OK, I'm getting off topic here, this is not the place to point out how many places on Nation States have more exposure to potential students than just the title of the SC proposals.)

And I don't see the potential for non PG-11 regions to go founderless, be invaded and have an actual need for liberation, assuming that every person who founded such regions knew that their nation could never be liberated in the first place.

I do worry about some raiding region being named "Shitty Raiders" and thus find safe haven in a region that can never be condemned.
"A spindizzy going sour makes the galaxy's most unnerving noise!"
"Cruise lightspeed smooth and slient with this years sleek NEW Dillon-Wagoner gravitron polarity generator."
AKA Retired WerePenguins Frustrated Franciscans Blue Booted Bobbies A Running Man Dirty Americans

User avatar
Tzorsland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 826
Founded: May 08, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tzorsland » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:58 pm

Katganistan wrote:If you create a nation with an inappropriate/obscene name, it gets deleted because we can't change nation names without causing armageddon.


The problem is, Kat, is that there is a huge difference between "PG-11" and "inappropriate/obscene" and its the former that is being the criteria for the SC resolutions. This is clear when considering the word "Shitty."

Would you, for example, delete the nation name "Shitty Undergarments?" It doesn't sound inapproporate or obscene to me.

User avatar
Romanar
Diplomat
 
Posts: 624
Founded: Feb 15, 2006
Corporate Police State

Postby Romanar » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:41 pm

Tzorsland wrote:
Katganistan wrote:If you create a nation with an inappropriate/obscene name, it gets deleted because we can't change nation names without causing armageddon.


The problem is, Kat, is that there is a huge difference between "PG-11" and "inappropriate/obscene" and its the former that is being the criteria for the SC resolutions. This is clear when considering the word "Shitty."

Would you, for example, delete the nation name "Shitty Undergarments?" It doesn't sound inapproporate or obscene to me.


It seems to me that if "Shitty Undergarments" can't be cleaned up, it should be deleted.

:rofl:

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:57 pm

Calm down, Tzors. If any region or nation is named in such a fashion that it deserves DEAT, it gets DEAT. It's not going to survive to become the object of a C&C. If by chance it has managed to escape mod notice, it's certainly going to get it, and die, when a C&C about it comes to the floor.

The "PG-11 titles" rule applies, as we both know, to General thread titles. My post gives AMOM advice on a mildly contentious detail of an SC proposal that was still open to change; "Shitty Proposals" was a region-of-convenience, easily abandoned. I sought the advice of an American-speaking mod on the name's impact in that dialect. We concluded that, since it could be easily changed, it might as well be: a recommendation based on mod discretion, context and circumstances.

To clarify still further, the original proposal was deleted on grounds of content, not title.
Last edited by Ardchoille on Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4306
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby A mean old man » Sat Jan 30, 2010 12:59 pm

Ardchoille wrote:To clarify still further, the original proposal was deleted on grounds of content, not title.


The original proposal "Condemn Shitty Proposal Writing" could not have been deleted, as it was never submitted.
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia

User avatar
Ardchoille
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 9842
Founded: Apr 18, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Ardchoille » Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:12 pm

Touche. :oops: Sorry: "... if submitted, would have been rejected".

I should certainly allow you the kudos for having had enough sense to draft before submitting, as all too many people don't bother, with the result that they submit illegal proposals and get a WA-prop warning on their nation.
Ideological Bulwark #35
The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest. -- Edward Gibbon on the schismatic Pope John XXIII (1410–1415).

User avatar
A mean old man
Senator
 
Posts: 4306
Founded: Jun 27, 2008
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby A mean old man » Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:28 pm

Well, I did break my own personal "MUST DRAFT" rule with this most recent one, however I had reviewed it enough on my own for it to be legal and pass-able (obviously...).

But yeah, I had enough sense to know that that one called for a drafting and a mod ruling. I really didn't expect to submit it, anyway - as the l33tsp33krz say, it was mostly "for teh lulz."
A: SC#16 - Repeal "Liberate The Security Council"
A: SC#26 - Commend The Joint Systems Alliance
A: SC#30 - Commend 10000 Islands
A: SC#37 - Condemn NAZI EUROPE
A: SC#38 - Repeal "Condemn NAZI EUROPE"
A: GA#149 - On Expiration Dates
C: SC#58 - Repeal "Commend Sedgistan"
A: SC#62 - Repeal "Condemn Swarmlandia"
C: SC#63 - Commend Ballotonia
A: SC#65 - Condemn Punk Reloaded
C: GA#163 - Repeal "Law of the Sea"
A: SC#72 - Repeal "Commend Mikeswill"
C: SC#74 - Condemn Lone Wolves United
C: SC#76 - Repeal "Condemn Thatcherton"
A: SC#81 - Repeal "Condemn Anthony Delasanta"
C: SC#83 - Condemn Automagfreek
C: SC#84 - Repeal "Liberate Islam"
C: SC#111 - Commend Krulltopia


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Moderation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gallade, New Frenco Empire, The Huskar Social Union, Vassenor

Advertisement

Remove ads