NATION

PASSWORD

New SC Categories (+ survey!)

Bug reports, general help, ideas for improvements, and questions about how things are meant to work.
User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6096
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

New SC Categories (+ survey!)

Postby Unibot III » Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:42 am

Sedge suggested that new SC categories was on his list for consideration, and I think it's an important conversation for the WA Security Council. We haven't seen the introduction of new SC categories since 2009. The current SC categories are very limited and mostly cosmetic. The SC's activity has waxed and waned, with periods of stagnation, in part due to its limited scope.

New SC categories could be whimsy or purposeful (directed towards problems in NSGP), but in general the rule of thumb is they have to respect the primacy of founders over the WA. The other general rule of thumb is that resolutions should be a double-edged sword that can be used for "good" and "bad."

I wanted to open up a new discussion over what kind of new SC categories could be viable.




I'll propose a few ideas (they've been proposed before):

Document (Types: Memorandum, Agreement, Convention). The title of the resolution would not be fixed (a la the GA). It would be a blank canvass resolution type that could be used for international laws against stuff like Queue Raiding, or international agreements like the Peacekeeping Agreement in Lazarus.

Embargo. "Embargo ____" resolutions would resign member-states from the WA after a nominal amount of time (10 secs) if they move into an embargoed founderless UCR region. Member-states that resided in the embargoed region before the resolution was proposed would be grandfathered. Effectively this proposal would act as a last-resort mechanism to curb invasion piling but with significant risks and challenges for defenders.

Image

I've written a lot about the Embargo category and we had a good discussion on it last year.

Restriction. "Restrict _____" resolutions would restrict ROs in nominee regions from being given border controls by the WA Delegate. The purpose is to restrict the ability of delegates to 'pool' their influence in crisis situations, by delegating bans and ejections to their ROs.

Mediation. "Mediate ____" resolutions would flip non-executive WA regions to being executive WA regions. Founders could flick the region back to being non-executive with a tick of a box, although repeat legislation could flip it back - and if founders CTE'd, the region would become an executive WA region again. What's the purpose of the resolution? The reality is there are boatloads of regions that have been hawked/griefed (like Macedon's old regions) that collect dust with inactive founders that are logged into automatically by a script. These resolutions would allow the WA to catch those hawkers/griefers off guard.

I've proposed Mediation before as "Democratization."




Earlier in March, I commissioned a small poll here in Technical regarding the popularity of each category proposed in this thread discussion.

RESULTS:

Thank you to the 32 respondents that took the survey.

Basically, all the proposed categories received more than majority support (excluding No Opinions), except "Dismissal." Impeachment and Document were significantly more popular than other proposed categories - likely because they do not impact Military Gameplay. The "No Opinion" vote was highest for 'Custodian' and lowest for "Expulsion."

Image

Approval rating (minus No Opinion)
Impeachment: 88.89%
Document: 65.38%
Custodian: 62.50%
Restriction: 56.00%
Mediation: 55.56%
Embargo: 53.57%
Expulsion: 53.33%
Dismissal: 35.71%
Last edited by Unibot III on Wed Apr 07, 2021 7:48 am, edited 4 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
Comfed
Diplomat
 
Posts: 925
Founded: Apr 09, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Comfed » Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:50 am

Mediation should be permanent, but I like all of them. Any other shiny badge ideas?
Last edited by Comfed on Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Mall:
Best part about being a mod was engaging in normal player behavior and getting accused of abuse
"You think this is abuse? I'll SHOW you abuse."
Ever-Wandering Souls wrote: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.

Numero Capitan wrote:I haven't bothered reading back but I can unequivocally say that I agree with everything HEM has said and Unibot is wrong

Put this in your sig if you passed biology and know that gender and sex are not the same thing.

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6096
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Unibot III » Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:06 am

Comfed wrote:Mediation should be permanent, but I like all of them. Any other shiny badge ideas?


I love shiny badge ideas. I'm glad I'm not the only one.

I've imagined the document badge before as being near blank.

The "Executive" and "Border Control" symbols could be a source of inspiration. With Mediation having a parthenon, and Restriction having a shield. Incidentially, I've made those symbols before for badge proposals before. :p

Subtitles, hmm...

Restrict - A resolution to limit executive powers to a delegate or founder
Embargo - A resolution to restrict freedom of movement to a region
Document - A resolution to establish international law
Mediate - A resolution to confer executive powers to a delegate

In a way there's a nice symmetry to it. Embaroes are (kind of) the opposite of Liberations. Restrictions are (kind of) the opposite of Mediations. One opens up movement, one limits it. One gives border control powers to someone, the other takes it away.
Last edited by Unibot III on Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:16 am, edited 3 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
Merni
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1466
Founded: May 03, 2016
Democratic Socialists

Postby Merni » Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:25 am

Unibot III wrote:Mediation. "Mediate ____" resolutions would flip non-executive WA regions to being executive WA regions. Founders could flick the region back to being non-executive with a tick of a box, although repeat legislation could flip it back - and if founders CTE'd, the region would become an executive WA region again. What's the purpose of the resolution? The reality is there are boatloads of regions that have been hawked/griefed (like Macedon's old regions) that collect dust with inactive founders that are logged into automatically by a script. These resolutions would allow the WA to catch those hawkers/griefers off guard.

Can an SC resolution, with a 4-7 day period from submission to passing, plus presumably drafting time, catch anyone off guard?
COVID19 still exists! | Donate your free time
The Labyrinth | TGW Warden | GA Committee List

Admins: Please allow blocking WA TGs!
E -8.0 S -3.18
Wrote 532 GA
meth
I've noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born. — Ronald Reagan
When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People’s Stick.' — Mikhail Bakunin (to Karl Marx)
You're supposed to be employing the arts of diplomacy, not the ruddy great thumping sledgehammers of diplomacy. — Ardchoille
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion [...] but rather by its superiority in applying organised violence. — Samuel P. Huntington (even he said that!)

User avatar
Lorrana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 529
Founded: Dec 16, 2020
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Lorrana » Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:29 am

Merni wrote:
Unibot III wrote:Mediation. "Mediate ____" resolutions would flip non-executive WA regions to being executive WA regions. Founders could flick the region back to being non-executive with a tick of a box, although repeat legislation could flip it back - and if founders CTE'd, the region would become an executive WA region again. What's the purpose of the resolution? The reality is there are boatloads of regions that have been hawked/griefed (like Macedon's old regions) that collect dust with inactive founders that are logged into automatically by a script. These resolutions would allow the WA to catch those hawkers/griefers off guard.

Can an SC resolution, with a 4-7 day period from submission to passing, plus presumably drafting time, catch anyone off guard?


Yeah, by the time the resolution is passed, the hawkers/griefers are already finished.
Irl things are ramping up so I don't have much free time anymore :(
NS Stats are sometimes right, but sometimes wrong. TG me if you have questions, but the most important thing to know is that Lorrana is capitalist, even though the stats show otherwise
News Headlines: Bad weather predicted for weeks in Lorrana; Lorrana enters World Cup 88 Qualifiers

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6096
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Unibot III » Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:31 am

Merni wrote:
Unibot III wrote:Mediation. "Mediate ____" resolutions would flip non-executive WA regions to being executive WA regions. Founders could flick the region back to being non-executive with a tick of a box, although repeat legislation could flip it back - and if founders CTE'd, the region would become an executive WA region again. What's the purpose of the resolution? The reality is there are boatloads of regions that have been hawked/griefed (like Macedon's old regions) that collect dust with inactive founders that are logged into automatically by a script. These resolutions would allow the WA to catch those hawkers/griefers off guard.

Can an SC resolution, with a 4-7 day period from submission to passing, plus presumably drafting time, catch anyone off guard?


Short answer is yes. There are a lot of hawked regions being occupied by people who don’t even play the game anymore. All they need is a script to keep going.

Active invaders, obviously would not be impacted by a resolution category like this, but it’s a very different story for ‘ancestral’ occupations & hawked regions.

The WASC has some history with these kinds of situations. With “Liberate ‘Greece’” for instance, we openly liberated Greece, in broad daylight, knowing it was only a matter of time before Yanua returned. The region was freed because the international community was able to catch Yanua off guard eventually in one of their slumbers.
Last edited by Unibot III on Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:34 am, 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
Sedgistan
Senior Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 29660
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:09 pm

Document - no issue with these, I think players could be quite creative with a blank slate.

Embargo - haven't formulated a view on it. I don't think the original thread got enough experienced current R/D input on it for the idea to have been fully explored yet.

Restriction - same as Embargo, it needs a lot more current R/D input.

Mediation - strikes me as going against your "respect the primacy of founders" standard. It's looking for a way to undermine founders in situations you dislike.

The one I've mentioned a bit lately is "Expulsion" whereby the WA bans a nation from the WA. It just feels appropriate for the WA to have that power, and there are lots of interesting ways it could be used. However, my primary concern is that it would stifle those that play NS in different ways to the mainstream. NS has enough stability/stagnation already.

"Impeach" is something brought up in the Secretary-General thread that might be worth implementing, depending on the term lengths and powers of the S-G position.

Some people may remember "Custodian" from the R/D Summit many years ago - the WA appointing a "Custodian" in a region that has full Executive authority (when the Founder isn't present) but has to spend influence. I'm not as keen on this as I once was, as there's a more comprehensive set of changes I'd like to see that would render this mostly unnecessary (related to the Democracy/Oligarchy/Autocracy idea first raised by Violet a few years back).

User avatar
The Python
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 394
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Overthrow category

Postby The Python » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:17 pm

Another idea would be "overthrow". This would ban a certain nation from having any authority over a region - for example, it would force them to not be WA delegate, resign them as RO, make the region founderless if it's a founder etc.
Card Farmer and defender. Nation mostly represents RL views. AKA Apatosaurus. Proud member of the Poop Squad.
For: Universal healthcare, UBI, Gun Control, Democratic Socialism, Pacifism, Human and animal rights, Political Freedom etc.
Against: Fascism, Authoritarianism, One-party states, Racism, Militarism, War, Donald Trump, Nationalism, Conservatism, Animal abuse, Slaughterhouses etc.
Political compass 9Axes
8Values
Time-zone: GMT+12/NZST
fenda nations always deserve banjection and also you dont taste good - Evil Cub
I wish i could be quoted in a forum sig v_v - Alfonzo
Gameplay is all about cherry pikcing - Miravana
anyone more than double python's age is old - Altmoras
Positions

User avatar
Comfed
Diplomat
 
Posts: 925
Founded: Apr 09, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Comfed » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:20 pm

The Python wrote:Another idea would be "overthrow". This would ban a certain nation from having any authority over a region - for example, it would force them to not be WA delegate, resign them as RO, make the region founderless if it's a founder etc.

That sounds nice except for the overthrow the founder bit.
Mall:
Best part about being a mod was engaging in normal player behavior and getting accused of abuse
"You think this is abuse? I'll SHOW you abuse."
Ever-Wandering Souls wrote: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.

Numero Capitan wrote:I haven't bothered reading back but I can unequivocally say that I agree with everything HEM has said and Unibot is wrong

Put this in your sig if you passed biology and know that gender and sex are not the same thing.

User avatar
The Python
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 394
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Python » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:22 pm

Comfed wrote:
The Python wrote:Another idea would be "overthrow". This would ban a certain nation from having any authority over a region - for example, it would force them to not be WA delegate, resign them as RO, make the region founderless if it's a founder etc.

That sounds nice except for the overthrow the founder bit.

it would be so that like fascist regions can be raided.
Card Farmer and defender. Nation mostly represents RL views. AKA Apatosaurus. Proud member of the Poop Squad.
For: Universal healthcare, UBI, Gun Control, Democratic Socialism, Pacifism, Human and animal rights, Political Freedom etc.
Against: Fascism, Authoritarianism, One-party states, Racism, Militarism, War, Donald Trump, Nationalism, Conservatism, Animal abuse, Slaughterhouses etc.
Political compass 9Axes
8Values
Time-zone: GMT+12/NZST
fenda nations always deserve banjection and also you dont taste good - Evil Cub
I wish i could be quoted in a forum sig v_v - Alfonzo
Gameplay is all about cherry pikcing - Miravana
anyone more than double python's age is old - Altmoras
Positions

User avatar
Toerana
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 168
Founded: Nov 27, 2018
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Toerana » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:24 pm

The Python wrote:
Comfed wrote:That sounds nice except for the overthrow the founder bit.

it would be so that like fascist regions can be raided.

The WA taking the founder's region away from them is inherently flawed.
"In a world of Trumps, Le Pens and Putins, we are very firmly on exactly the other side."
- Vince Cable -
| Rejected Times Editor-In-Chief |
| Citizen of the Rejected Realms | South Pacific Citizen | Thaecian Senator |
NPO Delenda Est

User avatar
Unibot III
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6096
Founded: Mar 11, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Unibot III » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:28 pm

@Sedge: I agree with the input thing, I’d like to hear more input from active R/Ders on those categories. For mediation, I think the primacy of founders is respected in that they can flip executive status back — it’s up to founders whether they want to invest the time & energy to undermine long term mediation campaigns. The SC has successfully taken on founders like Yanua before, but they should be given the upper hand over the SC.

Out of your ideas...

- Impeach seems like a no brainer!
- I’m not too keen on expulsion because I think it could have too widespread of impacts on NSGP. You could expel leads, coupers etc. I also think it could be used to essentially harass players that a large community decides they have issues with it.
- I’ve never really cared for the “Custodian” idea because I think it just feels redundant in a world with delegates, ROs, and a defender community ready to assist where needed. I dunno.
Last edited by Unibot III on Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:29 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
Zandilund
Attaché
 
Posts: 88
Founded: May 15, 2020
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Zandilund » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:29 pm

Toerana wrote:
The Python wrote:it would be so that like fascist regions can be raided.

The WA taking the founder's region away from them is inherently flawed.


Exactly. The WA can basically destroy invader regions, then we have no more R/D game.
Controlled by the same player who controls The Allied Tribe.

I'm not as active as I used to be (probably active once every 3-7 days) as I'm spending a lot more time on more important things. This has nothing to do with why I'm not as active, but I'm sad because a lot of ideas I thought of but never used in an F7 thread (e.g. the life simulator and make a multiverse) were used. Next time I think of something I should probably use it immediately instead of waiting a few months and having somebody else take it.

This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer than mine, it's too long. (including spaces)

User avatar
Eshialand
Envoy
 
Posts: 323
Founded: Apr 03, 2017
Anarchy

Postby Eshialand » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:33 pm

Toerana wrote:
The Python wrote:it would be so that like fascist regions can be raided.

The WA taking the founder's region away from them is inherently flawed.

In cases where an innocent region was refounded by a raider, it may indeed be necessary. Of course, it would have to be used sparingly and with discretion. It would probably find itself in a similar position to liberations, which don't come up often, but are occasionally necessary.
Zandilund wrote:
Toerana wrote:The WA taking the founder's region away from them is inherently flawed.


Exactly. The WA can basically destroy invader regions, then we have no more R/D game.
The Security Council would never pass an overthrow in an actual raider region.
Warden of The Order of the Grey Wardens since February 10th, 2021.
Baptism of Fire 75 Champions... somehow?
...I'll always be your friend!

User avatar
GruffyRichard and HillbillyBob
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 102
Founded: Nov 17, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby GruffyRichard and HillbillyBob » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:34 pm

Zandilund wrote:
Toerana wrote:The WA taking the founder's region away from them is inherently flawed.


Exactly. The WA can basically destroy invader regions, then we have no more R/D game.

Agreed.
my national anthem
I love nuking stuff. I recommend you don't start nuclear war with me.
Pro- don't-give-a-s***-bout-nothin-ism
Anti-... (I havent filled this out yet.)
dont copy any of this. it's mine. copyrighted by the GRHBian government 4-19-21

User avatar
Zandilund
Attaché
 
Posts: 88
Founded: May 15, 2020
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Zandilund » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:39 pm

Eshialand wrote:
Toerana wrote:The WA taking the founder's region away from them is inherently flawed.

In cases where an innocent region was refounded by a raider, it may indeed be necessary. Of course, it would have to be used sparingly and with discretion. It would probably find itself in a similar position to liberations, which don't come up often, but are occasionally necessary.
Zandilund wrote:
Exactly. The WA can basically destroy invader regions, then we have no more R/D game.
The Security Council would never pass an overthrow in an actual raider region.


True. Some deeper thought and you'll realize that the SC will never overthrow a raider region.

Still, why take a founder's region away from them? A region should be owned by its founder while it still exists, to allow the WA to take away their authority is wrong.
Controlled by the same player who controls The Allied Tribe.

I'm not as active as I used to be (probably active once every 3-7 days) as I'm spending a lot more time on more important things. This has nothing to do with why I'm not as active, but I'm sad because a lot of ideas I thought of but never used in an F7 thread (e.g. the life simulator and make a multiverse) were used. Next time I think of something I should probably use it immediately instead of waiting a few months and having somebody else take it.

This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer than mine, it's too long. (including spaces)

User avatar
The Python
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 394
Founded: Jul 24, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Python » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:44 pm

Zandilund wrote:
Eshialand wrote:In cases where an innocent region was refounded by a raider, it may indeed be necessary. Of course, it would have to be used sparingly and with discretion. It would probably find itself in a similar position to liberations, which don't come up often, but are occasionally necessary.The Security Council would never pass an overthrow in an actual raider region.


True. Some deeper thought and you'll realize that the SC will never overthrow a raider region.

Still, why take a founder's region away from them? A region should be owned by its founder while it still exists, to allow the WA to take away their authority is wrong.

Because fash bad.
And, as Eshialand said, sometimes it's needed if raiders refounded a region.
Last edited by The Python on Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Card Farmer and defender. Nation mostly represents RL views. AKA Apatosaurus. Proud member of the Poop Squad.
For: Universal healthcare, UBI, Gun Control, Democratic Socialism, Pacifism, Human and animal rights, Political Freedom etc.
Against: Fascism, Authoritarianism, One-party states, Racism, Militarism, War, Donald Trump, Nationalism, Conservatism, Animal abuse, Slaughterhouses etc.
Political compass 9Axes
8Values
Time-zone: GMT+12/NZST
fenda nations always deserve banjection and also you dont taste good - Evil Cub
I wish i could be quoted in a forum sig v_v - Alfonzo
Gameplay is all about cherry pikcing - Miravana
anyone more than double python's age is old - Altmoras
Positions

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65145
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:47 pm

I love the document and embargo types
Male, Titoist cultural nationalist, lives somewhere in AZ, give me any good Irish, Canadian, or Scottish whiskey and I will be your friend for life. I'm GAY! US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies
Click Here for RP Info Embassy Program
Ambassadors to the WA: Senior Eve Šanœ, Junior Jon Æthr

RIP Dya

User avatar
Zandilund
Attaché
 
Posts: 88
Founded: May 15, 2020
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Zandilund » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:50 pm

The Python wrote:
Zandilund wrote:
True. Some deeper thought and you'll realize that the SC will never overthrow a raider region.

Still, why take a founder's region away from them? A region should be owned by its founder while it still exists, to allow the WA to take away their authority is wrong.

Because fash bad.


The founder deserves control of their region, even if it becomes an enemy to basically all NS regions.

I dislike the mediate idea since it also takes power away from the founder, but the others seem fine.
Last edited by Zandilund on Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Controlled by the same player who controls The Allied Tribe.

I'm not as active as I used to be (probably active once every 3-7 days) as I'm spending a lot more time on more important things. This has nothing to do with why I'm not as active, but I'm sad because a lot of ideas I thought of but never used in an F7 thread (e.g. the life simulator and make a multiverse) were used. Next time I think of something I should probably use it immediately instead of waiting a few months and having somebody else take it.

This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer than mine, it's too long. (including spaces)

User avatar
Southern Xenick
Envoy
 
Posts: 222
Founded: Aug 20, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Southern Xenick » Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:50 pm

The Python wrote:
Zandilund wrote:
True. Some deeper thought and you'll realize that the SC will never overthrow a raider region.

Still, why take a founder's region away from them? A region should be owned by its founder while it still exists, to allow the WA to take away their authority is wrong.

Because fash bad.
And, as Eshialand said, sometimes it's needed if raiders refounded a region.
Thats the best you can do?
"It's not time yet" is a tactic used by reactionaries in every era. "It's not time for democracy, it's not time for capitalism, it's not time for emancipation." Of course it's not time. It's never time, not on its own. You make it time. If you're under fire in the no-man's land of WW1, you start digging a foxhole even if the ideal time would be when you *aren't* being bombarded, because once you wait for it to be 'time', other situations will need your attention, assuming you survive that long. If the fields aren't furrowed, plow them. If the iron is not hot, make it so. If society is not ready, change it.
[_★_]_[' ]_
( -_-) (-_Q)

User avatar
United Calanworie
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 57
Founded: Dec 12, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby United Calanworie » Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:11 pm

The Python wrote:
Zandilund wrote:
True. Some deeper thought and you'll realize that the SC will never overthrow a raider region.

Still, why take a founder's region away from them? A region should be owned by its founder while it still exists, to allow the WA to take away their authority is wrong.

Because fash bad.
And, as Eshialand said, sometimes it's needed if raiders refounded a region.


It will not just get used against fascists. Sure, that might be your original hope for it, but that's not going to be how it works out in the end. It will be used to target anybody the controlling bloc of the SC has an issue with. And with the Partnership for Sovereignty and other Defender-led WA blocs, that would likely mean raider regions as well.

I'm not saying it would definitely happen, but it's certainly something to consider before you say "well we need a tool to target fascists."

Also, all the tools you need to handle fascists are already present in the SC. Liberate the region, wait for the founder to get DEAT/puppetswept as they usually do, because fash are terrible at playing by the rules.
Aav#7546

* Hartfelden
* WebTrigger

User avatar
A Bloodred Moon
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 170
Founded: Jan 13, 2019
Democratic Socialists

Postby A Bloodred Moon » Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:02 am

Unibot III wrote:Document (Types: Memorandum, Agreement, Convention). The title of the resolution would not be fixed (a la the GA). It would be a blank canvass resolution type that could be used for international laws against stuff like Queue Raiding, or international agreements like the Peacekeeping Agreement in Lazarus.

By laws, what do you mean here? Something like a condemnation of a practice or support for an agreement, perhaps?

Embargo. "Embargo ____" resolutions would resign member-states from the WA after a nominal amount of time (10 secs) if they move into an embargoed founderless UCR region. Member-states that resided in the embargoed region before the resolution was proposed would be grandfathered. Effectively this proposal would act as a last-resort mechanism to curb invasion piling but with significant risks and challenges for defenders.

(Image)

I've written a lot about the Embargo category and we had a good discussion on it last year.

Opposed, completely. This is essentially making it easy for defenders, and the whole “significant risks” is bullshit. Like they do with liberations, they’ll simply write up a basic template and submit it as soon as a region is raided. In your proposal, raiders would only have their initial updaters, which due to security risks will almost always be smaller, combined with the fact that even if you had 30, 40 or even 50 updaters, defenders can easily siege you out due to the way influence works. The vast majority of defenders can easily get in in 10 seconds and their triggers on several liberations I’ve faced were less than 10 seconds in recent times.

There is one other thing. The way to counter this from our side would be more update bending. If we update bend we don’t even need to ban anyone and it’d just be a game of “who can dump more puppets right before update”. Which still isn’t ideal. There is no need for this, and I don’t see this bringing any positive change.

Restriction. "Restrict _____" resolutions would restrict ROs in nominee regions from being given border controls by the WA Delegate. The purpose is to restrict the ability of delegates to 'pool' their influence in crisis situations, by delegating bans and ejections to their ROs.

What? How would this even work, would every nation in a region be barred from being given BC? Would an individual nation be barred from doing so? Again, why is this a good idea except making things even easier for defenders?

Mediation. "Mediate ____" resolutions would flip non-executive WA regions to being executive WA regions. Founders could flick the region back to being non-executive with a tick of a box, although repeat legislation could flip it back - and if founders CTE'd, the region would become an executive WA region again. What's the purpose of the resolution? The reality is there are boatloads of regions that have been hawked/griefed (like Macedon's old regions) that collect dust with inactive founders that are logged into automatically by a script. These resolutions would allow the WA to catch those hawkers/griefers off guard.

I've proposed Mediation before as "Democratization."

As long as the founder is able to undo it, this one I like.
Armaros

User avatar
The Unified Missourtama States
Diplomat
 
Posts: 509
Founded: Jul 30, 2019
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Unified Missourtama States » Sat Mar 13, 2021 6:09 am

How about:
Liberations, but for nations.

User avatar
Honeydewistania
Minister
 
Posts: 2759
Founded: Jun 09, 2017
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Honeydewistania » Sat Mar 13, 2021 6:20 am

Documents seem completely superfluous. There isn't even the ego boosting that comes with condemns or commends. It'll make more sense to just put everything into dispatches, like how things are now.
she/her
Managing Director of Lazarus and The MT Army Warrior
stuff i wrote
Need me? Click here!
Biggest acheivement: Spelling
Ambassador to the WA: Benji Schubert Hepperle
Assistant to the Ambassador: Rekeil Wrigglesworth II
Official Coffee-fetcher and Masseuse: Jonathan Santos de Oliveira
Wonderess wrote:frankly someone I don’t want to see gain influence in NS and by extension TNP

User avatar
Crowheim
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 111
Founded: Aug 16, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Crowheim » Sat Mar 13, 2021 7:12 am

No to the documents, and no to the mediation which seems very complex.

I like embargo and restriction, though, so support for those two.
-
Chipmunker Kyosson

I do things for the Rejected Realms. (Views do not represent that of the government unless stated otherwise.)

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Technical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bawkie, Drew Durrnil

Advertisement

Remove ads