[DRAFT] Commend The East Pacific

[Unibotian WA Mission]

Now remove the word "feeder" and you've got it. You don't need it.

NOTES that The East Pacific is a region that has not been liberated by the World Assembly, and yet it is physically impossible for its Delegate to impose barriers to free entry.

I'd fiddle with that wording, myself, and I don't see why OmD's original description needs changing, but if you want that phrasing, drop "feeder".

Why can't we use the word, feeder? Where is the stigmatization? The line that we can't cross? If we can legally define it, we should be able to call it whatever we want.

[Ardchoille]

Not when you're using definitions in this fashion, to get words that talk about the game as a game into proposals. It's too easy to move on to "Defining roleplaying as ..." "Defining the proper way to play this game as ..." "Defining moderators as ..." (I don't think I'd better look at that one).

There's a long discussion in the Topid's Sampler thread. Go read it so we don't have to repeat it, 'mkay? This prop is about TEP and this discussion is hauling it off topic.

[Unibot]

MODEDIT: "polka-dotted cockroaches" ...

... ate Unibot's post.

This is a mod legality ruling. The use of "feeder" in the fashion Unibot has been encouraging in the proposal of which Oh my Days is the author would be illegal under Rule 4.

[Oh my Days]

Defines a "Feeder" or "Feeder Region" as a region that has not been liberated by the World Assembly, and yet is physically impossible for a Delegate to impose barriers to free entry in;

Sorry to nitpick, but you can't password a warzone, either. I think that a place where new nations spawn is the best definition. /pedant

The only remaining issue that I see, is should there be more commentary in the proposal about how TEP's achievements are special, because it's a feeder. In my opinion, there shouldn't be, as I think the detail should go in the thread and campaign telegrams.

[Todd McCloud]

Defines a "Feeder" or "Feeder Region" as a region that has not been liberated by the World Assembly, and yet is physically impossible for a Delegate to impose barriers to free entry in;

Sorry to nitpick, but you can't password a warzone, either. I think that a place where new nations spawn is the best definition. /pedant

The only remaining issue that I see, is should there be more commentary in the proposal about how TEP's achievements are special, because it's a feeder. In my opinion, there shouldn't be, as I think the detail should go in the thread and campaign telegrams.

Wouldn't it be best to include the achievements of a region that differentiates it from just being a feeder in general in the C&C and not inn the telegram?

[Southern Bellz]

I don't think the reasons listed makes TEP more worthy than any other democratic region.

[Darkesia]

I don't think the reasons listed makes TEP more worthy than any other democratic region.

Agreed.

The trouble lies in needing to acknowledge that a feeder is different from other regions. We seem to be unable to do that without treating the game like it's a game and, as I understand it, that is a serious infraction of the game's rules.

Snarkyness aside, here are some of the things that make a feeder democracy politically and socially different from other regions.

First of all, true democracy in a feeder is all smoke and mirrors. That doesn't make it any better or worse than other regional democratic systems. It's just a fact. A feeder's population is enormous. Only a tiny fraction of those people (nations - if you insist) participate in the community which centers itself in the off site forum. A delegate in a feeder is "elected" via endorsements in-game. The consent of that tiny fraction of people in the community is completely unnecessary. Certainly it makes it easier and gives everyone a nice fluffy feeling, if there is some sort of "group hug" in the form of an election on the forum. However, as most feeders can attest, it's a simple matter of number of endorsements when it all comes down to it.

Now, in order to hold that seat for any length of time, it is very necessary to have a team to help watch your back. This is most easily accomplished by co-opting the current forum community via their consent. While The Empire in TEP tried to do this by using heavily stylized characters and a roleplay style format on a new forum, they were socially and politically rejected by the "natives" of the region. However, it should be noted that the seated delegate in a feeder, even an unpopular one, is usually heavily supported by the endorsements of uninvolved players/nations. It's not easy to overthrow a "rogue" delegate and usually requires lots of inter-regional political maneuvering. Please note how they are called "rogues" despite only disagreeing with the forum community which is a tiny portion of the WA nations and an even smaller portion of all of the nations in the region.

So... Saying that you want to commend TEP for it's open democratic government is an extremely unclear statement to anyone who knows feeder politics and to anyone who doesn't know feeder politics it's not exactly a unique trait worthy of commendation. And you can't exactly explain all that without using in-game terminology. In fact, I'm rather proud of myself for not saying "endo-tart" at all. >.> Oops.

As for "allowing different communities to co-exist." I am assuming this is in reference to their efforts to accommodate the TEP RP world along side the gameplay world. But that is only because I am familiar with TEP and their ongoing struggle to mesh the two communities. Anyone standing outside of this can only see it as something more along the lines of 10KI's internal political parties (if they still do that). And thus they won't see it as a reason to support the commendation. Again we can't describe what we want to say, because it acknowledges the game as a game and having different play styles.

Sorry for the long post. I will stop now. Promise.

[TannerFrankLand]

I am having a little trouble understanding why we can't say all of that in a resolution. Take the term 'feeder' and replace with 'a pacific' and feeders replace with 'the pacifics'.

It would be perfectly fine to say: "Understanding the Pacifics have a much harder time maintaining a stable democratic region due to their enormous size, large amount of uninvolved nations, and huge pools of influence,"

[Darkesia]

I am having a little trouble understanding why we can't say all of that in a resolution. Take the term 'feeder' and replace with 'a pacific' and feeders replace with 'the pacifics'.

It would be perfectly fine to say: "Understanding the Pacifics have a much harder time maintaining a stable democratic region due to their enormous size, large amount of uninvolved nations, and huge pools of influence,"

Because regions like West Pacific and North Pacific etc aren't feeders. They are founded regions which copied the names... if they still exist (no, I am not going to go look for them.)

[TannerFrankLand]

I am having a little trouble understanding why we can't say all of that in a resolution. Take the term 'feeder' and replace with 'a pacific' and feeders replace with 'the pacifics'.

It would be perfectly fine to say: "Understanding the Pacifics have a much harder time maintaining a stable democratic region due to their enormous size, large amount of uninvolved nations, and huge pools of influence,"

Because regions like West Pacific and North Pacific etc aren't feeders. They are founded regions which copied the names... if they still exist (no, I am not going to go look for them.)

Yes they exist. But that's not the point. We know what the Pacifics mean too (so does almost everyone reading the resolution), just like "the feeders". If we wanted to play that game I'm sure if there is not now there has been a region called the Feeders.

[Ballotonia]

Just describe function without insisting on giving it a label. So, something like:

UNDERSTANDING that since many new nations start their existence in The East Pacific the region contains an enormous number of nations, with most of these nations being uninvolved and uninterested in participating in a regional community.


Ballotonia

[Darkesia]

That's not bad. Although, IMO, it won't fix the problems with this particular commend, it is a very useful definition to file away for future application.

[Todd McCloud]

I am having a little trouble understanding why we can't say all of that in a resolution. Take the term 'feeder' and replace with 'a pacific' and feeders replace with 'the pacifics'.

It would be perfectly fine to say: "Understanding the Pacifics have a much harder time maintaining a stable democratic region due to their enormous size, large amount of uninvolved nations, and huge pools of influence,"

Because regions like West Pacific and North Pacific etc aren't feeders. They are founded regions which copied the names... if they still exist (no, I am not going to go look for them.)

Yes they exist. But that's not the point. We know what the Pacifics mean too (so does almost everyone reading the resolution), just like "the feeders". If we wanted to play that game I'm sure if there is not now there has been a region called the Feeders.

But how can we assume everyone knows what the 'pacifics' are if we can't assume they know what 'feeders' are? I know I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but yeah.

I think it's best to have a little more specifics as well, to be honest. We don't need to name people or specific events, but stuff that defines TEP, over the past 1.5-2 years or so, when it really started taking off. I don't really want to say what should or should not be in there, but it seems that I can afford to have a little input here and there

Good work to OMD and company for being flexible and working for this commendation XD

[Unibot]

Defines a "Feeder" or "Feeder Region" as a region that has not been liberated by the World Assembly, and yet is physically impossible for a Delegate to impose barriers to free entry in;

Sorry to nitpick, but you can't password a warzone, either. I think that a place where new nations spawn is the best definition. /pedant

Fucking warzones, screwing up my definition.. go for it, if you can get away it.

The Security Council,

NOTING The East Pacific's status as a "feeder" region, where new nations are spawned;

'are spawned' may be grammatically correct. I'm not sure, I think it is supposed to be 'new nations spawn;' which looks odd too.

So, I'd recommend swapping 'spawned' to 'founded' which is the term that the game uses.

RECOGNISING the difficulties this status brings, as the region has a high turnover and must deal with adspam;

What is a high turnover? (I actually know..)

Included Adspam, but define it as constant interruptions by advertisers to the Regional Civil Headquarters which impedes constructive conversation. Or something like that...

SHUDDERING at TEP's past as an Empire, controlled by an elite few;

Controlled by who? I'd prefer after you said, 'elite few', that you listed who were these nations.

'SHUDDERING' is also a very odd preamblatory verb , I'd recommend 'SHOCKED by ' or 'DISMAYED by'.

LAUDING the fantastic work that has transformed TEP into a democracy;

What 'fantastic' work? Who, What, When, How.

PRAISING the open style of Government, which follows the Executive, Legislative and Judicial structure laid out in the region's Concordat;

Okay.

DELIGHTING in the friendly and welcoming atmosphere that TEP upholds;

Awful choice in preambltory verb, just slight better than 'FROLICKING' . A lot of regions have a friendly and welcoming atmosphere. I suppose you could describe how this atmosphere is upheld.

APPLAUDING the inclusive manner which Todd McCloud and subsequently Lady Edea have maintained whilst stewarding the region, resulting in TEP's transformation from least active to most active "feeder" region, since the fall of the Empire;

The quotations around feeder aren't necessary. And when was this fall? A date would be nice.

ADMIRING the variety in TEP, where roleplayers and gameplayers exist happily side by side;

That's got to be non-rule-four compliant.

HOPING that a Security Council Commendation will spur them on to achieve even more;

We're bribing regions to do more of what we should expect from good regions?

I started writing a guide to the Security Council before Rule IV, and this exhert may help clarify my concerns about this clause to you. Enjoy.

[..] Back when I first began my career in the World Assembly before the creation of the Security Council, when Lake Security Council was just primordial ooze and dinosaurs roamed the land, I drafted for the General Assembly, a resolution that went by many names (Clean Energy Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Toaster Act..), but essentially it was an environmental proposal that created a financial and economic incentive for updating national energy programs to be more environmentally sustainable. Shortly after, my colleague in the World Assembly, insisted that there was a philosophical flaw in providing an incentive for doing what should be expected of member-nations. In future years I've watched other new authors post almost identical drafts to the General Assembly, sometimes (if you're lucky) you'll even see the same colleague of mine, correcting the poor bloke's flaw.

If we're to apply this philosophy to the Security Council, we should already know that we should not commend a nominee as an incentive for contributing marvelous things [or in this case, more marvelous things]. While it is not generally expected of everyone to be like a nominee for a commendation, because we do not expect everyone to be as marvelous of a contributor.. is this limit of expectation, the boundaries of supererogation, or is it an illusion? Perhaps our own self-serving bias is manipulating our perspective on the limitations of our moral obligation (I'm no Kandarin or Goober, but luckily 'I don't have to be' if I pretend that what they do is above and beyond what should be expected of everyone.). Maybe all regions should be like a nominee, that is secure, democratic and integrable or whatnot... and so once again, we must ask why we're providing an incentive to do what is expected of us all? It cannot be moral for an institution such as the Security Council that is founded on the ideals of interegional goodwill, to expect us to not do what is right, to not have the capacity for trust. Fortunately, the admins were nice enough to provide us with a description of the proposal category, and it suggests that the intent of commendations is recognition.. but the description says nothing about providing an incentive.

[/quote]

[Oh my Days]

Defines a "Feeder" or "Feeder Region" as a region that has not been liberated by the World Assembly, and yet is physically impossible for a Delegate to impose barriers to free entry in;

Sorry to nitpick, but you can't password a warzone, either. I think that a place where new nations spawn is the best definition. /pedant

Fucking warzones, screwing up my definition.. go for it, if you can get away it.

The Security Council,

NOTING The East Pacific's status as a "feeder" region, where new nations are spawned;

'are spawned' may be grammatically correct. I'm not sure, I think it is supposed to be 'new nations spawn;' which looks odd too.

So, I'd recommend swapping 'spawned' to 'founded' which is the term that the game uses.

RECOGNISING the difficulties this status brings, as the region has a high turnover and must deal with adspam;

What is a high turnover? (I actually know..)

Included Adspam, but define it as constant interruptions by advertisers to the Regional Civil Headquarters which impedes constructive conversation. Or something like that...

SHUDDERING at TEP's past as an Empire, controlled by an elite few;

Controlled by who? I'd prefer after you said, 'elite few', that you listed who were these nations.

'SHUDDERING' is also a very odd preamblatory verb , I'd recommend 'SHOCKED by ' or 'DISMAYED by'.

LAUDING the fantastic work that has transformed TEP into a democracy;

What 'fantastic' work? Who, What, When, How.

PRAISING the open style of Government, which follows the Executive, Legislative and Judicial structure laid out in the region's Concordat;

Okay.

DELIGHTING in the friendly and welcoming atmosphere that TEP upholds;

Awful choice in preambltory verb, just slight better than 'FROLICKING' . A lot of regions have a friendly and welcoming atmosphere. I suppose you could describe how this atmosphere is upheld.

APPLAUDING the inclusive manner which Todd McCloud and subsequently Lady Edea have maintained whilst stewarding the region, resulting in TEP's transformation from least active to most active "feeder" region, since the fall of the Empire;

The quotations around feeder aren't necessary. And when was this fall? A date would be nice.

ADMIRING the variety in TEP, where roleplayers and gameplayers exist happily side by side;

That's got to be non-rule-four compliant.

HOPING that a Security Council Commendation will spur them on to achieve even more;

We're bribing regions to do more of what we should expect from good regions?

I started writing a guide to the Security Council before Rule IV, and this exhert may help clarify my concerns about this clause to you. Enjoy.

[..] Back when I first began my career in the World Assembly before the creation of the Security Council, when Lake Security Council was just primordial ooze and dinosaurs roamed the land, I drafted for the General Assembly, a resolution that went by many names (Clean Energy Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Toaster Act..), but essentially it was an environmental proposal that created a financial and economic incentive for updating national energy programs to be more environmentally sustainable. Shortly after, my colleague in the World Assembly, insisted that there was a philosophical flaw in providing an incentive for doing what should be expected of member-nations. In future years I've watched other new authors post almost identical drafts to the General Assembly, sometimes (if you're lucky) you'll even see the same colleague of mine, correcting the poor bloke's flaw.

If we're to apply this philosophy to the Security Council, we should already know that we should not commend a nominee as an incentive for contributing marvelous things [or in this case, more marvelous things]. While it is not generally expected of everyone to be like a nominee for a commendation, because we do not expect everyone to be as marvelous of a contributor.. is this limit of expectation, the boundaries of supererogation, or is it an illusion? Perhaps our own self-serving bias is manipulating our perspective on the limitations of our moral obligation (I'm no Kandarin or Goober, but luckily 'I don't have to be' if I pretend that what they do is above and beyond what should be expected of everyone.). Maybe all regions should be like a nominee, that is secure, democratic and integrable or whatnot... and so once again, we must ask why we're providing an incentive to do what is expected of us all? It cannot be moral for an institution such as the Security Council that is founded on the ideals of interegional goodwill, to expect us to not do what is right, to not have the capacity for trust. Fortunately, the admins were nice enough to provide us with a description of the proposal category, and it suggests that the intent of commendations is recognition.. but the description says nothing about providing an incentive.

[/quote]

Sorry, that's not actually the version to go forward now. Because I don't like it when you can't see the original version. I put it in a spoiler on the second page, but this is what I want to submit:

The Security Council,

ADMIRING the diverse environment of The East Pacific, where different communities are encouraged to work together;

APPLAUDING its extremely open democracy, where all may take part;

ENCOURAGED by the vibrant and friendly community in TEP;

PRAISING the strong government, where the executive, legislature and judiciary all work in an open manner with the citizenry;

ASSERTING that TEP thoroughly deserves an official Commendation, particularly for its welcoming attitude to new nations;

HEREBY Commends The East Pacific.

[Unibot]

Defines a "Feeder" or "Feeder Region" as a region that has not been liberated by the World Assembly, and yet is physically impossible for a Delegate to impose barriers to free entry in;

Sorry to nitpick, but you can't password a warzone, either. I think that a place where new nations spawn is the best definition. /pedant

Fucking warzones, screwing up my definition.. go for it, if you can get away it.

The Security Council,

NOTING The East Pacific's status as a "feeder" region, where new nations are spawned;

'are spawned' may be grammatically correct. I'm not sure, I think it is supposed to be 'new nations spawn;' which looks odd too.

So, I'd recommend swapping 'spawned' to 'founded' which is the term that the game uses.

RECOGNISING the difficulties this status brings, as the region has a high turnover and must deal with adspam;

What is a high turnover? (I actually know..)

Included Adspam, but define it as constant interruptions by advertisers to the Regional Civil Headquarters which impedes constructive conversation. Or something like that...

SHUDDERING at TEP's past as an Empire, controlled by an elite few;

Controlled by who? I'd prefer after you said, 'elite few', that you listed who were these nations.

'SHUDDERING' is also a very odd preamblatory verb , I'd recommend 'SHOCKED by ' or 'DISMAYED by'.

LAUDING the fantastic work that has transformed TEP into a democracy;

What 'fantastic' work? Who, What, When, How.

PRAISING the open style of Government, which follows the Executive, Legislative and Judicial structure laid out in the region's Concordat;

Okay.

DELIGHTING in the friendly and welcoming atmosphere that TEP upholds;

Awful choice in preambltory verb, just slight better than 'FROLICKING' . A lot of regions have a friendly and welcoming atmosphere. I suppose you could describe how this atmosphere is upheld.

APPLAUDING the inclusive manner which Todd McCloud and subsequently Lady Edea have maintained whilst stewarding the region, resulting in TEP's transformation from least active to most active "feeder" region, since the fall of the Empire;

The quotations around feeder aren't necessary. And when was this fall? A date would be nice.

ADMIRING the variety in TEP, where roleplayers and gameplayers exist happily side by side;

That's got to be non-rule-four compliant.

HOPING that a Security Council Commendation will spur them on to achieve even more;

We're bribing regions to do more of what we should expect from good regions?

I started writing a guide to the Security Council before Rule IV, and this exhert may help clarify my concerns about this clause to you. Enjoy.

[..] Back when I first began my career in the World Assembly before the creation of the Security Council, when Lake Security Council was just primordial ooze and dinosaurs roamed the land, I drafted for the General Assembly, a resolution that went by many names (Clean Energy Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Toaster Act..), but essentially it was an environmental proposal that created a financial and economic incentive for updating national energy programs to be more environmentally sustainable. Shortly after, my colleague in the World Assembly, insisted that there was a philosophical flaw in providing an incentive for doing what should be expected of member-nations. In future years I've watched other new authors post almost identical drafts to the General Assembly, sometimes (if you're lucky) you'll even see the same colleague of mine, correcting the poor bloke's flaw.

If we're to apply this philosophy to the Security Council, we should already know that we should not commend a nominee as an incentive for contributing marvelous things [or in this case, more marvelous things]. While it is not generally expected of everyone to be like a nominee for a commendation, because we do not expect everyone to be as marvelous of a contributor.. is this limit of expectation, the boundaries of supererogation, or is it an illusion? Perhaps our own self-serving bias is manipulating our perspective on the limitations of our moral obligation (I'm no Kandarin or Goober, but luckily 'I don't have to be' if I pretend that what they do is above and beyond what should be expected of everyone.). Maybe all regions should be like a nominee, that is secure, democratic and integrable or whatnot... and so once again, we must ask why we're providing an incentive to do what is expected of us all? It cannot be moral for an institution such as the Security Council that is founded on the ideals of interegional goodwill, to expect us to not do what is right, to not have the capacity for trust. Fortunately, the admins were nice enough to provide us with a description of the proposal category, and it suggests that the intent of commendations is recognition.. but the description says nothing about providing an incentive.

[Darkesia]

I'm thinkin' that until someone comes up with a brilliant way to describe feeder politics without discussing the game, feeder commends are out.

Sorry kids. I know you all want this badly, but feeder politics are firmly gameplay venues and there is no way around it.

[TannerFrankLand]

I'm thinkin' that until someone comes up with a brilliant way to describe feeder politics without discussing the game, feeder commends are out.

Sorry kids. I know you all want this badly, but feeder politics are firmly gameplay venues and there is no way around it.

There is nothing wrong with this description. All the information you described is there.

[Darkesia]

Agreed. But somehow it doesn't fix the problems.

[Oh my Days]

Agreed. But somehow it doesn't fix the problems.

What are the problems then? More importantly, how can I fix them?

[Darkesia]

What are the problems then? More importantly, how can I fix them?

I don't think they can be fixed. Though I don't think it's due to skill.

NOTING the fact that The East Pacific allows different communities to co-exist;

That's just silly. Every region allows different communities to co-exist. Even regions that are solely based on wrestling, have different factions within them. it's just basic group dynamics.

I understand you are trying to congratulate them for their earnest attempts at meshing their RP and GP communities. But you aren't allowed to say that. What you are left with is silliness.

IMPRESSED by the way in which it became a democracy;

I am not really sure what you mean here. As I pointed out above, Feeder Democracies are not "real."
Are you implying that you like the way they just set up the forum and went at voting? If that's the case, isn't that what every single other regional democracy did?

ENCOURAGING the increased activity in The East Pacific;

So now any region with increased activity is worthy of a commend?

PRAISING its strong government;

How is it strong? What is your criteria for a strong government? Is it stronger than any other regional government or any other feeder government for that matter?

HOPING that a Commendation will help them do even better in future;

Ok...?


I'm not trying to be a killjoy. It's just that this doesn't say anything about TEP and what makes it a wonderful place (and it is a wonderful place).

[Ardchoille]

<snip>
I understand you are trying to congratulate them for their earnest attempts at meshing their RP and GP communities. But you aren't allowed to say that. What you are left with is silliness.
<snip>
I'm not trying to be a killjoy. It's just that this doesn't say anything about TEP and what makes it a wonderful place (and it is a wonderful place).

My emphasis there, because I want to use Darkesia's phrasing. It would be completely R4 compliant to say,

"The East Pacific has earnestly attempted to mesh communities that have traditionally been separate from, and even at odds with, each other."

Or even. "TEP has succeeded in meshing ..."

But that doesn't say "roleplay" and "gameplay". And I can't say "roleplay" and "gameplay".

Righto. In all these "I can't say X" dilemmas, try asking "What does X do?"

For example, what do roleplayers do? Basically, they write stories. Sometimes they illustrate them. So it would be fair to call them the "artistic" or "creative" community. If TEP's roleplayers are good at it and enjoy interacting, it would be fair to call them a "vibrant" community.

What to gamepayers do? From what various people have said in threads, there seems to be a blending (sometimes a specialising) of region building, intra-and inter-regional diplomacy and defending or raiding. (Sure, there's more to it than that. But there's more to RP than telling stories, too. Bear with me, I'm trying for the basics.)

Okay. Now I'm not sure whether you mean TEP tries to get gameplayers to take part in roleplayers' stories, or roleplayers to adjust their roleplay to reflect regional events, such as new alliances, military challenges, etc. Whatever, it somehow encourages the differing communities without making one feel less favoured than the other. So ...

NOTING that TEP encourages a vibrant creative community which supports the government in its political, diplomatic and military undertakings.

Or turn it around so it emphasises the gameplay angle:

NOTING that TEP's widespread military, diplomatic and political activities take place with the enthusiastic support of its arts community.

Too restrictive? Too "roleplayed"? How's about,

NOTING that TEP's wise and inclusive policies have overcome lingering disagreements (OR "deep-seated rivalries", OR "mistrust and misunderstanding") between previously opposed sections of the community.

But that still doesn't say "roleplay" and "gameplay". It's not clear to anyone reading that it means "roleplay" and "gameplay".

No, it isn't. But what is clear is that two groups that normally don't interact are being encouraged to do so in TEP. That's one of things it's done that are worth commending. Then, in the debate thread, explain which groups have been encouraged to interact/integrate, why it was such a hard job and how it was done (ie, what those "wise and inclusive policies" were).

These suggestions won't be spot-on because I'm, surprise, surprise, not Oh my Days, I'm not a gameplayer and my main contact with TEP is to occasionally fall about laughing at Bluto's recruitment ads. The above are examples, not ukases.

[Ballotonia]

One thing I know for sure, problems won't be fixed if people don't WANT them to be fixed...

Thanks for the clarifications and suggestions, Ardchoille, IMHO it should be clear how to proceed. What's lacking most here is the willingness to do so.

Ballotonia

[Railroad Crossing]