We need a big ol Sticky, , ,
1 Infinite Loop
15-02-2004, 12:37
That says
Defenders, you are classified as Invaders regardless of
any High Moral Goals you have assumed, You Must Follow ALL Rules Lain Down By The MODERATORS in regarde to invasions. Failure to comply will result in your nation ceasing to exist , it's only legacy,
the Message
"X nation ceased to exist"
being in the regional happenings for a litttle while.
then a list of the rules set forth perhaps.
this is mearly a suggestion, and I would recommend putting it in Gameplay.
=-=-=
Loop
My current flag
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/1_infinite_loop.jpg
Perhaps a section for defenders on the current "Big Invasion/Delegate FAQ" would be enough (and maybe a chanege in the title) ...
Drop of Honey
16-02-2004, 09:23
Perhaps just scrap "defender" and "invader" completely, and just call them all "non-natives".
1 Infinite Loop
16-02-2004, 09:25
wouldnt work it woudl make the term non native too vague.
Drop of Honey
16-02-2004, 09:28
wouldn't work it would make the term non native too vague.
Nothing vague about it. Invaders and defenders are both, by definition, non-natives. If you aren't a native to a region, and are in said region, you are a "non-native".
Seems pretty simple to me, and it strips any good or bad connotations from what is people mucking around in other people's regions.
What about third parties, like innocent n00bs that happen to wander in during an invasion (no, not invaders claiming to be one ... It does happen every now and then)? I think they already claimed the term "non-native."
Plus which, 'invader' and 'defender' are widely used. Changing the official definitions won't change much.
1 Infinite Loop
16-02-2004, 11:01
naleth hit the nail on the proverbial head, take the tale of Art Frahm, he moved in to United States when the invader delegate dropped the password so he could settle into a region he has been trying to get into, then new invaders move in and boot him out. calling him a inader when all he is is a innocent settler caught up in a war.
Goobergunchia
16-02-2004, 18:37
What about third parties, like innocent n00bs that happen to wander in during an invasion (no, not invaders claiming to be one ... It does happen every now and then)? I think they already claimed the term "non-native."
Plus which, 'invader' and 'defender' are widely used. Changing the official definitions won't change much.
Or neutral parties that are observing but not aiding either side.
The Most Glorious Hack
17-02-2004, 06:34
What about third parties, like innocent n00bs that happen to wander in during an invasion (no, not invaders claiming to be one ... It does happen every now and then)? I think they already claimed the term "non-native."
Plus which, 'invader' and 'defender' are widely used. Changing the official definitions won't change much.
Or neutral parties that are observing but not aiding either side.
While they are not engaged in any regional activity, they still don't have the protections of Natives.
1 Infinite Loop
17-02-2004, 07:08
Well on topic, I still say we need a sticky explaining that Defenders are Invaders and no amount of posturing will change that.