NATION

PASSWORD

Re-designation of the "Sinker" regions

Bug reports, general help, ideas for improvements, and questions about how things are meant to work.
User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Re-designation of the "Sinker" regions

Postby Lenlyvit » Tue Dec 19, 2017 6:41 pm

I saw a conversation about this in another thread the other day in GP, and thought about it quite a bit. Although TRR is currently designated as a sinker, there are some (probably a really small number, so this may be a stupid idea) who think that the term "sinker" does not fit it. I thought it would be a neat idea to bring it up and see where it goes.

My/other peoples ideas:

Catcher, termed and coined by Reploid Productions because TRR catches all of the rejected nations in NS.

Tenderer, which means to take care of. TRR takes care of the nations that are cast out of their homes during raids, and they also take care of the rejects of the regions.

Reject, coined basically just for TRR :p. Its full of rejects after all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyways, those are just some kick-off examples. Feel free to tell me I'm a loon.
Last edited by Lenlyvit on Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:27 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
Flanderlion
Minister
 
Posts: 2018
Founded: Nov 25, 2013
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Flanderlion » Tue Dec 19, 2017 6:58 pm

I like Catcher, the mechanics of TRR are completely different from the 3 Sinkers.
As always, I'm representing myself.
Information
Wishlist

User avatar
United Massachusetts
Minister
 
Posts: 2574
Founded: Jan 17, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby United Massachusetts » Tue Dec 19, 2017 7:01 pm

I like Reject.

User avatar
Jar Wattinree
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1298
Founded: Dec 14, 2016
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Jar Wattinree » Tue Dec 19, 2017 7:01 pm

But there's only one TRR, and so a separate unique tag would be meaningless. Now, the Sinker tag has use because there are many Sinkers. The tags are to find a region you like, not as a badge of how unique it is.

User avatar
Greater vakolicci haven
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18659
Founded: May 09, 2014
Anarchy

Postby Greater vakolicci haven » Tue Dec 19, 2017 7:03 pm

I think sinker is wrong for trr, because it well...isn't a sinker. But I don't know what else I'd call it.
Join the rejected realms and never fear rejection again
NSG virtual happy hour this Saturday: join us on zoom, what could possibly go wrong?
“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” - Thomas Jefferson
“Silent acquiescence in the face of tyranny is no better than outright agreement." - C.J. Redwine
“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles." - Jeff Cooper

User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lenlyvit » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:13 pm

I actually prefer either reject or catcher. Both are catchy and fit TRR well :p I also agree with some that Sinker does not fit TRR, and even though its just one region tags are there to tell people what a region is like. I'm for a new tag designation to better label TRR other than Sinker, something which it is not on the account that dead nations do not respawn there.
Last edited by Lenlyvit on Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 4796
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Fauxia » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:36 pm

I think sinker is wrong, but a tag is kinda meaningless, tbh... I still think there should be a GCR tag...
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.
Sandaoguo wrote:GP is a den of cynics and nihilists
My opinions do not represent any NS governments I may happen to be in (yeah right), any RL governments I may happen to be in (yeah right), the CIA, the NSA, the FBI. the Freemasons, the Illuminati, Opus Dei, the Knights Templar, the Organization for the Advancement of Cultural Marxism, Opus Dei, or any other organization. Unless I say they do, in which case, there is a nonzero chance.

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6369
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Unibot III » Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:03 pm

TRR is a sinker. :( Everybody else just isn't doing it right.
Last edited by Unibot III on Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
Org. Join Date: 25/05/2008 | Former Delegate of TRR | Gameplay Alignment: -18 / -13
Unibotian Factbook // Collected works // The Gameplay Alignment Test //
Proudly Authored 9 GA Res., 14 SC Res. // Commended by SC#78

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
✯ Duty is Eternal, Justice is Imminent: UDL

User avatar
The Church of Satan
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1564
Founded: Apr 15, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby The Church of Satan » Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:19 pm

I prefer Reject but I could settle for Catcher. I do agree though that TRR isn't a sinker. Lazarus, Balder and Osiris, being sinkers, have one thing in common that defines the nature of there purpose. They are where nations resurrect. TRR however is not such a place. So it is by definition not a sinker.
The Rejected Realms: Former Delegate | Former Vice Delegate | Longest Consecutively Serving Officer in TRR History - 824 Days

Chanku: This isn't an election it's an assault on the eyes. | Ikania: Hear! The Gospel of... Satan. Erh...
Yuno: Not gonna yell, but CoS is one of the best delegates ever | Ever-Wandering Souls: In the liberal justice system, raiding-based offenses are considered especially heinous. In The South Pacific, the dedicated defenders who investigate these vicious felonies are members of an elite squad known as the Council on Regional Security. These are their proscriptions. DUN DUN.

User avatar
Mount Seymour
Envoy
 
Posts: 251
Founded: Mar 25, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Mount Seymour » Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:12 pm

And if TRR took to sardonically joking about other sinkers' categorization, would it then be the Catcher in the Wry? :P
The Pacific Alpine Commonwealth of Mount Seymour
a.k.a. Somyrion, Aumeltopia
Security Council #212
Issue #640

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6369
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Unibot III » Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:49 pm

The Church of Satan wrote:I prefer Reject but I could settle for Catcher. I do agree though that TRR isn't a sinker. Lazarus, Balder and Osiris, being sinkers, have one thing in common that defines the nature of there purpose. They are where nations resurrect. TRR however is not such a place. So it is by definition not a sinker.


But 'sink' does makes a lot of sense for TRR. We're the place that everything else drains into.

If you want to rename anything it should be Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder. The term, "sinker" doesn't make all that much sense for respawning. You don't sink into them, you rise from them.

The term was created to describe TRR. Osiris and Balder are far newer. And Lazarus wasn't a fully functioning GCR until long after TRR had an established government. Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder just came to use the term, whether it's an accurate description of their regional mechanics or not.

My personal thought is, the terms should stay. We're all sinkers. But changing TRR specifically is stupid when it's the only sinker region that actually acts as a 'sink.' And for whom, the term, 'sinker' was created for. I also suspect the push to remove TRR from sinkerhood has more to do about today's geopolitics than anything else - TRR's presence is as inconvenient for the rise of a 'sinker nationalism' as we were for Francoism. My sense is we're witnessing the slow rise of a new ideological force that's calling for a 'sinker unity' around authoritarianism, invaderism and (arguably) useritism. Renaming TRR would just intervene in Gameplay politics.
Last edited by Unibot III on Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.
[violet] wrote:I mean this in the best possible way,
but Unibot is not a typical NS player.
Milograd wrote:You're a caring, resolute lunatic
with the best of intentions.
Org. Join Date: 25/05/2008 | Former Delegate of TRR | Gameplay Alignment: -18 / -13
Unibotian Factbook // Collected works // The Gameplay Alignment Test //
Proudly Authored 9 GA Res., 14 SC Res. // Commended by SC#78

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
✯ Duty is Eternal, Justice is Imminent: UDL

User avatar
Minoa
Senator
 
Posts: 4905
Founded: Oct 05, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Minoa » Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:32 am

A Fallback region may be a more appropriate term, as in “a region that the nations fall back on if they are ejected”.

As for the regions where revived nations start, I would call them the Respawn regions, as in “a region where newly-revived nations respawn”.
Mme A. d'Oiseau, B.A. (State of Minoa)

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 20412
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:38 am

Perhaps, for all four of them, 'Retreats'?
The Confrederated Clans (and other Confrederated Bodys) of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Population = just under 20 million. Economy = only Thriving. Average Life expectancy = c.60 years. If the nation is classified as 'Anarchy' there still is a [strictly limited] national government... and those aren't "biker gangs", they're traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies', generally respected rather than feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152, 1474.

User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lenlyvit » Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:07 am

Unibot III wrote:
The Church of Satan wrote:I prefer Reject but I could settle for Catcher. I do agree though that TRR isn't a sinker. Lazarus, Balder and Osiris, being sinkers, have one thing in common that defines the nature of there purpose. They are where nations resurrect. TRR however is not such a place. So it is by definition not a sinker.


But 'sink' does makes a lot of sense for TRR. We're the place that everything else drains into.

If you want to rename anything it should be Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder. The term, "sinker" doesn't make all that much sense for respawning. You don't sink into them, you rise from them.

The term was created to describe TRR. Osiris and Balder are far newer. And Lazarus wasn't a fully functioning GCR until long after TRR had an established government. Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder just came to use the term, whether it's an accurate description of their regional mechanics or not.

My personal thought is, the terms should stay. We're all sinkers. But changing TRR specifically is stupid when it's the only sinker region that actually acts as a 'sink.' And for whom, the term, 'sinker' was created for. I also suspect the push to remove TRR from sinkerhood has more to do about today's geopolitics than anything else - TRR's presence is as inconvenient for the rise of a 'sinker nationalism' as we were for Francoism. My sense is we're witnessing the slow rise of a new ideological force that's calling for a 'sinker unity' around authoritarianism, invaderism and (arguably) useritism. Renaming TRR would just intervene in Gameplay politics.

Bears Armed wrote:Perhaps, for all four of them, 'Retreats'?

Alright, so now it seems we are getting into the realm of possibly re-designating all four of the "sinker" regions so ill update the thread name to show that. Unibot's statement rings true on TRR being more like a "sinker" than the other sinkers, yet I still don't believe it accurately describes TRR and I don't think "sinker" is the correct term for the others either. Mayhaps a new designation, or a compromise, on all of them? TRR is full of the rejected nations of NS, so perhaps either the designation Reject or, to have a compromise, the designation Reject Sinker? As for the others, maybe the designation Reviver or Revival Sinker. This would more clearly state what they are, but not get rid of what they have been known as since they were created.

Edit: fixed a typo
Last edited by Lenlyvit on Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
Minoa
Senator
 
Posts: 4905
Founded: Oct 05, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Minoa » Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:16 am

Lenlyvit wrote:
Unibot III wrote:
But 'sink' does makes a lot of sense for TRR. We're the place that everything else drains into.

If you want to rename anything it should be Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder. The term, "sinker" doesn't make all that much sense for respawning. You don't sink into them, you rise from them.

The term was created to describe TRR. Osiris and Balder are far newer. And Lazarus wasn't a fully functioning GCR until long after TRR had an established government. Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder just came to use the term, whether it's an accurate description of their regional mechanics or not.

My personal thought is, the terms should stay. We're all sinkers. But changing TRR specifically is stupid when it's the only sinker region that actually acts as a 'sink.' And for whom, the term, 'sinker' was created for. I also suspect the push to remove TRR from sinkerhood has more to do about today's geopolitics than anything else - TRR's presence is as inconvenient for the rise of a 'sinker nationalism' as we were for Francoism. My sense is we're witnessing the slow rise of a new ideological force that's calling for a 'sinker unity' around authoritarianism, invaderism and (arguably) useritism. Renaming TRR would just intervene in Gameplay politics.

Bears Armed wrote:Perhaps, for all four of them, 'Retreats'?

Alright, so now it seems we are getting into the realm of possibly re-designating all four of the "sinker" regions so ill update the thread name to show that. Unibot's statement rings true on TRR being more like a "sinker" than the other sinkers, yet I still don't believe it accurately describes TRR and I don't think "sinker" is the correct term for the others either. Mayhaps a new designation, or a compromise, on all of them? TRR is full of the rejected nations of NS, so perhaps either the designation Reject or, to have a compromise, the designation Reject Sinker? As for the others, maybe the designation Reviver or Revival Sinker. This would more clearly state what they are, but not get rid of what they have been known as since they were created.

Edit: fixed a typo

I don't think we need fancy terms to disambiguate between TRR (where ejected nations go) and the other three regions (where reactivated nations respawn). ;)
Mme A. d'Oiseau, B.A. (State of Minoa)

User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lenlyvit » Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:21 am

Minoa wrote:
Lenlyvit wrote:
Alright, so now it seems we are getting into the realm of possibly re-designating all four of the "sinker" regions so ill update the thread name to show that. Unibot's statement rings true on TRR being more like a "sinker" than the other sinkers, yet I still don't believe it accurately describes TRR and I don't think "sinker" is the correct term for the others either. Mayhaps a new designation, or a compromise, on all of them? TRR is full of the rejected nations of NS, so perhaps either the designation Reject or, to have a compromise, the designation Reject Sinker? As for the others, maybe the designation Reviver or Revival Sinker. This would more clearly state what they are, but not get rid of what they have been known as since they were created.

Edit: fixed a typo

I don't think we need fancy terms to disambiguate between TRR (where ejected nations go) and the other three regions (where reactivated nations respawn). ;)

I actually kind of disagree. TRR is both mechanically and gameplayish different from the other "sinker" regions. At the same time, the term "sinker" does not accurately describe what any of them are other than TRR as Unibot pointed out. Tags are designed to designate what a region is, what a region is about, and what a regions community stands for. Lazarus, Osiris, and Balder are regions where nations respawn whereas TRR is where the rejects go. Only three of the four "sinker" regions are the same, so why would you lop all four together under one tag? I like my compromise suggestion of Revival Sinker and Reject Sinker because it still ties the regions together with the word "sinker" but differentiates what kind of sinker they are.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
Flanderlion
Minister
 
Posts: 2018
Founded: Nov 25, 2013
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Flanderlion » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:39 am

I don't think I like the names Revival Sinker/Reject Sinker - doesn't have a NS flair. I do think they need differentiation. I personally think of Sinkers as Lazarus, Osiris and Balder, and Catcher (we've started referring to it as that offsite, but any name with a NS kind of flair works too) as TRR.
As always, I'm representing myself.
Information
Wishlist

User avatar
Guy
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1814
Founded: Oct 05, 2011
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Guy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:52 am

I am also fairly certain that TRR is the 'original' Sinker. TRR and Lazarus were certainly referred to collectively as 'the sinkers' until 2011, and were the original 'sister sinkers'. Our commonality with Lazarus was that we were both regions established nations 'fall into', which is still true. The other commonality we had was the lack of the ejection button, which was granted following the creation of Osiris and Balder.

Is that history worth throwing away in order to explain to everyone (if it wasn't already very clear from the naming regime) that TRR serves a different purpose from the other 3 Sinkers? I don't really think so. Since the new tag given to TRR isn't likely to be of any utility, the net effect is simply reducing the pool of Sinker regions to 3.
Commander of the Rejected Realms Army

[violet] wrote:Never underestimate the ability of admin to do nothing.

User avatar
Fratt
Attaché
 
Posts: 79
Founded: Mar 20, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fratt » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:53 am

TRR is a sinker. It's called like that because - as it was the case in Lazarus, before the creation of Balder and Osiris - nations cannot be ejected from it. It's a sink. Nations that end there cannot drop any further.

So it should not be renamed. If you think the tag has been lacking cohesion since Balder and Osiris were added, then it's the resurrection regions that should be renamed, not TRR.

However I'll note that, even if Balder and Osiris were created in 2011, I had never heard anyone call TRR anything but a sinker before late 2016 or so, five years later. This makes me agree with Unibot when he says that the reasons for a change of name are ideological, and not an 'obvious' consequence of different mechanics.
A spambot wrote:
You said that the NPO should not change it's core culture.

Literally everyone else, including the NPO, realizes and understands that NPO culture is the problem.
I'm sure these are the best towel warmers and it will come in handy here.
So you either don't realize that the NPO's core culture caused a war and the subversion of countless regions, or you just don't care.

User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lenlyvit » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:13 am

Guy wrote:I am also fairly certain that TRR is the 'original' Sinker. TRR and Lazarus were certainly referred to collectively as 'the sinkers' until 2011, and were the original 'sister sinkers'. Our commonality with Lazarus was that we were both regions established nations 'fall into', which is still true. The other commonality we had was the lack of the ejection button, which was granted following the creation of Osiris and Balder.

Is that history worth throwing away in order to explain to everyone (if it wasn't already very clear from the naming regime) that TRR serves a different purpose from the other 3 Sinkers? I don't really think so. Since the new tag given to TRR isn't likely to be of any utility, the net effect is simply reducing the pool of Sinker regions to 3.

Fratt wrote:TRR is a sinker. It's called like that because - as it was the case in Lazarus, before the creation of Balder and Osiris - nations cannot be ejected from it. It's a sink. Nations that end there cannot drop any further.

So it should not be renamed. If you think the tag has been lacking cohesion since Balder and Osiris were added, then it's the resurrection regions that should be renamed, not TRR.

However I'll note that, even if Balder and Osiris were created in 2011, I had never heard anyone call TRR anything but a sinker before late 2016 or so, five years later. This makes me agree with Unibot when he says that the reasons for a change of name are ideological, and not an 'obvious' consequence of different mechanics.

That's why I kind of came up with Revival Sinker for Lazarus, Balder, and Osiris while with TRR I put Reject Sinker. That way they're still known as Sinkers, but it adds a little more detail on what kind of sinker they are.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
Minoa
Senator
 
Posts: 4905
Founded: Oct 05, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Minoa » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:40 am

Fratt wrote:TRR is a sinker. It's called like that because - as it was the case in Lazarus, before the creation of Balder and Osiris - nations cannot be ejected from it. It's a sink. Nations that end there cannot drop any further.

So it should not be renamed. If you think the tag has been lacking cohesion since Balder and Osiris were added, then it's the resurrection regions that should be renamed, not TRR.

However I'll note that, even if Balder and Osiris were created in 2011, I had never heard anyone call TRR anything but a sinker before late 2016 or so, five years later. This makes me agree with Unibot when he says that the reasons for a change of name are ideological, and not an 'obvious' consequence of different mechanics.

Then I will recommend the terms Sinker and Revival respectively.
Mme A. d'Oiseau, B.A. (State of Minoa)

User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lenlyvit » Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:04 pm

Minoa wrote:
Fratt wrote:TRR is a sinker. It's called like that because - as it was the case in Lazarus, before the creation of Balder and Osiris - nations cannot be ejected from it. It's a sink. Nations that end there cannot drop any further.

So it should not be renamed. If you think the tag has been lacking cohesion since Balder and Osiris were added, then it's the resurrection regions that should be renamed, not TRR.

However I'll note that, even if Balder and Osiris were created in 2011, I had never heard anyone call TRR anything but a sinker before late 2016 or so, five years later. This makes me agree with Unibot when he says that the reasons for a change of name are ideological, and not an 'obvious' consequence of different mechanics.

Then I will recommend the terms Sinker and Revival respectively.

I think Revival on its own may be the wrong thing. Reviver would be a better version of that if we went in that direction.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
The Atlae Isles
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1059
Founded: Feb 07, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby The Atlae Isles » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:21 pm

Instead of having a tag only for TRR, I propose having a tag for all GCRs (Game-Created Regions, perhaps?) and add TRR to that.

Except I do like Catcher and Reject a lot. :)
Author of Issues #752, #816, and #967
Delegate-Elect of The East Pacific
WA Ambassador: George Williamsen
"Gloria in Terra" | "The pronunciation of "Atlae" is /ætleɪ/. Don't you forget it."
Collecting TEP Cards! - Deputy Steward of TEAPOT

User avatar
Lenlyvit
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1031
Founded: Feb 13, 2012
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lenlyvit » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:24 pm

The Atlae Isles wrote:Instead of having a tag only for TRR, I propose having a tag for all GCRs (Game-Created Regions, perhaps?) and add TRR to that.

Except I do like Catcher and Reject a lot. :)

I think adding a GCR tag wouldn't be a great idea. If they did that, the mods would then need to add a UCR tag.
Former three time Delegate of 10000 Islands


It's okay, I've been commended by the Security Council so you can trust me. Author of 17 Security Council Resolutions.

User avatar
Jar Wattinree
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1298
Founded: Dec 14, 2016
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Jar Wattinree » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:26 pm

Lenlyvit wrote:
The Atlae Isles wrote:Instead of having a tag only for TRR, I propose having a tag for all GCRs (Game-Created Regions, perhaps?) and add TRR to that.

Except I do like Catcher and Reject a lot. :)

I think adding a GCR tag wouldn't be a great idea. If they did that, the mods would then need to add a UCR tag.

Which would be redundant as heck, since everything outside of GCR is UCR.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Technical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Central Cinia, Comfed

Advertisement

Remove ads