NationStates Jolt Archive

In my opinion, the way of dealing with new nations and rejected nations should be changed.

All of the Nations in the various "Pacific" regions should be consolidated into the "Newbie Realms". Members moved to the Newbie Realms already in the UN will have their UN memberships suspended until they move to another region.

New nations will also be placed in the Newbie Realms and not be allowed membership into the UN until they find a real region.

Nations in the Rejected Realms will also have their UN memberships suspended until such time as they move to a new region.

In doing so, we will eliminate the power held over the UN by a few large blocs of do-nothings.

Good idea, no?

No. Very bad idea. Some of us like the feeder regions and the political implications and UN power held by those.

Besides, no major change is going to happen to the game anytime soon.

If anything I'd say revoke UN membership from nations that don't have any UN activities(voting, endorsing etc.) for awhile

No. Very bad idea. Some of us like the feeder regions and the political implications and UN power held by those.

Besides, no major change is going to happen to the game anytime soon.

Yeah come on, I love the political complications of the big region.

These so- called "super regions" may seem to dominate NS politics, but they also serve an important function in giving newbies the chance to acclimate to the NS game. To remove such a way for them to become part of the larger NS "world" would be to deny them the fundamental ways to learn the game mechanics and to learn to play the game properly with other nations.

1 - Definitely not a good idea. People in the Rejected Realms might not neccessarily have been booted - I know of people, and myself have a puppet, in there for the fun of being in a normal region bar the Francos/Porsky-ousted unlucky newbies coming in every two sceonds,

2 - Why ban UN access for these people? They have a right to choose their region, and it is their decision whether they want to join the UN.

3 - All in all, not a very smart idea if it was implemented. I for one would certainly lose interest in the game, the game which I have been playing for more than a year now.

In my opinion, the way of dealing with new nations and rejected nations should be changed.

All of the Nations in the various "Pacific" regions should be consolidated into the "Newbie Realms". Members moved to the Newbie Realms already in the UN will have their UN memberships suspended until they move to another region.

New nations will also be placed in the Newbie Realms and not be allowed membership into the UN until they find a real region.

Nations in the Rejected Realms will also have their UN memberships suspended until such time as they move to a new region.

In doing so, we will eliminate the power held over the UN by a few large blocs of do-nothings.

Good idea, no?

I take it you want me to lodge my 460 votes against your future UN resolutions, and Pehaps Kandarins 200, Twoslits 500, LR's 500, Norions 400, and FS's 250 shouls also be lodged against you as well, your thoughts are jsut skewed, those of us hwo have ben around for a while dont stay there to please anyone but ourselves, we like to be an Example to new nations not punish them for being new as a lot of folks like aparently you want to .

The game is staying as it is.

http://www.weirdozone.0catch.com/projects/nationstates/salusasecondus/salusasecondus2.jpg
SalusaSecondus
Tech Modling
PGP: 0x0604DF3E

I'll be the desenting voice and say I like the idea. That's not to say I think it's needed 100%, but it's not a horrible idea by any means.

The Super Regions play into UN politics the same way the big states play into US presidential elections. If you can get NY, CA, TX and FL on your side, you can basically bypass at least half of all the other states.

As 1 Infinite Loop points out, the 6 SRs account for ~1,800 votes. Seeing as a resolution seems to need ~10,000 - 12,000 votes to pass or fail, it can get basically 10-20% of it's needed vote count from the SRs. While that's not enough to pass or fail by any means, it does mean they hold a very powerful sway on UN politics.

Like I said, it's not really needed, but breaking the SRs power in the UN would make for a more representative UN. I think a really fair thing to do would be to strip the UN delegate position in the SRs, but still allow individual membership in the UN, thus preserving a nation's ability to join the UN and do proposals and everything, but breaking SR super vote block power. Just a thought.

I'll be the desenting voice and say I like the idea. That's not to say I think it's needed 100%, but it's not a horrible idea by any means.

The Super Regions play into UN politics the same way the big states play into US presidential elections. If you can get NY, CA, TX and FL on your side, you can basically bypass at least half of all the other states.

As 1 Infinite Loop points out, the 6 SRs account for ~1,800 votes. Seeing as a resolution seems to need ~10,000 - 12,000 votes to pass or fail, it can get basically 10-20% of it's needed vote count from the SRs. While that's not enough to pass or fail by any means, it does mean they hold a very powerful sway on UN politics.

Like I said, it's not really needed, but breaking the SRs power in the UN would make for a more representative UN. I think a really fair thing to do would be to strip the UN delegate position in the SRs, but still allow individual membership in the UN, thus preserving a nation's ability to join the UN and do proposals and everything, but breaking SR super vote block power. Just a thought.
Similarly, in the real life UN, there is the Security Council. Nations on the UNSC have a lot more power then other, regular RL UN nations (assuming we are making the analogy of RL UN Nation -> NS UN Delegate). Granted the NS UN isn't based entirely on the RL UN (no estabglished UNSC for example), but the fact of the matter is there will always be some people (or states, or governments, or what have you) that have more sway then others.

Another thing is, if the Super Regions were eliminated and newbs did move out of them at a much higer rate, odds are some of the current big player-based regions would grow much faster and we would be in a similar situation. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to assume the European delegate to get at least as many endorsements as Francos or Kandarin in that kind of environment.

you know making megaregions into a security council is a pretty neat idea,
the Pacifics,
the RR
Nationstates
and Europe
perhaps a extra one just to keep the number odd.

you know making megaregions into a security council is a pretty neat idea,
the Pacifics,
the RR
Nationstates
and Europe
perhaps a extra one just to keep the number odd.

you know making megaregions into a security council is a pretty neat idea,
the Pacifics,
the RR
Nationstates
and Europe
perhaps a extra one just to keep the number odd.

you know making megaregions into a security council is a pretty neat idea,
the Pacifics,
the RR
Nationstates
and Europe
perhaps a extra one just to keep the number odd.

Maybe for the extra region, do like the RL UN (Not the security council, so far as I'm aware, but most other councils and commities) and have the last SC membership rotate every couple of months. Of course, you'd need to limit it to regions with high pops., maybe around 150-200 nations or better, but I think it might work.

you know making megaregions into a security council is a pretty neat idea,
the Pacifics,
the RR
Nationstates
and Europe
perhaps a extra one just to keep the number odd.

Maybe for the extra region, do like the RL UN (Not the security council, so far as I'm aware, but most other councils and commities) and have the last SC membership rotate every couple of months. Of course, you'd need to limit it to regions with high pops., maybe around 150-200 nations or better, but I think it might work.
The RL UN's got the P5 (permanent 5) members with veto - UK, USA, PR China, Russia, France - and then a rotating cast of 6 or so members without veto. Syria was in there recently.

sounds like an idea, teh 5 pacifics then the rotatorsalthough I would go with 6 and let the RR in on the perminant side, and 5 rotators

you know making megaregions into a security council is a pretty neat idea,
the Pacifics,
the RR
Nationstates
and Europe
perhaps a extra one just to keep the number odd.

yeah, such as the anticapitalist alliance

(alright, i don't know if we're still within the top 5 largest player-created regions but i assume we are)

<snip>

I take it you want me to lodge my 460 votes against your future UN resolutions, and Pehaps Kandarins 200, Twoslits 500, LR's 500, Norions 400, and FS's 250 shouls also be lodged against you as well, your thoughts are jsut skewed, those of us hwo have ben around for a while dont stay there to please anyone but ourselves, we like to be an Example to new nations not punish them for being new as a lot of folks like aparently you want to .

When a player makes a game mechanics suggestion on the "Technical" board, disagreeing with said player and posting reasons why is acceptable. Intimidating or threateaning said player with in-game consequences for making a game mechanics suggestion in the proper place is NOT acceptable.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
NationStates Game Moderator

...

Another thing is, if the Super Regions were eliminated and newbs did move out of them at a much higer rate, odds are some of the current big player-based regions would grow much faster and we would be in a similar situation. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to assume the European delegate to get at least as many endorsements as Francos or Kandarin in that kind of environment.

It could be argued that such a thing would be desirable, as the super-regions that would result would not be super-regions by default; effort would be required to make them that way. The feeder regions, because of their nature, are super-regions almost by default; new nations are dumped there and sometimes don't move at all.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder of The Realm of Ambrosia

The concept of a "Newbie Realms" puts an unpleasant stigma on newer players. It has the unconscious effect of saying young nations are a lower class than older players.

But they aren't really newbie regions. Many of the players, especially the active ones, in the super regions are quite old. All the pacific delagates are over 1.4Billion, not newbies by any strech.

The concept of a "Newbie Realms" puts an unpleasant stigma on newer players. It has the unconscious effect of saying young nations are a lower class than older players.

Hmmm.... A valid concern; that's not a stigma that we would want to attach to every new nation that's created. However, I note that a similar argument could be made of "The Rejected Realms", where all ejected nations are sent. That might have a similar unconscious effect of saying that their inhabitants are a lower class than other players, yet many players choose to live there on a permanent basis, anyway.

Still, I concede that your argument has merit.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder of The Realm of Ambrosia

Your argument that those regions are inactive is incorrect. True, many of their members are inactive, but even without them those regions are larger than any others. I've grown fascinated with them, because they have the same mechanics as the other regions but on a larger scale. (Except for the Rejected Realms, which has its own internal system style)