NationStates Jolt Archive

sorry if this is not appropriate here (i would appreciate if you told me where to get information about this), but i have a doubt: supposedly WA resolutions rule in all WA members, but a friend of mine, who is one, has just approved that 'convicted felons are forced into slavery for their crimes'
is this allowed or could there be any trouble for him?
thanks

Explained best by Omigodtheykilledkenny:
Resolution text is roleplay, issues are gameplay. You can answer issues in all sorts of ways contrary to the text of resolutions, and it's not illegal. Likewise, you can write resolutions with no care for how nations might answer their issues later.

so basically, resolutions are said to be enforced, however the issues you get don't have to be in line with the resolutions. they are just around for diplomatic fun!

Wachichi

If you mean real, in-game trouble for him-the-person -- like mods descending on him hurling infractions, wielding banhammers or kicking him out of the WA -- no, it won't.

Of course, he is deciding to do something the WA told him not to do, so you're entitled to point at him and go "nerny-nerny-ner, you're not a good player!" To which he's entitled to reply, "But I'm being my idea of a good government!", and from there on you can sort it out between yourselves.

If he chooses to make his decision public to the whole NS world and waits to see what happens, there's no telling what kind of trouble his nation might end up with, from a plague of frogs to a belligerent challenge to an international dance-off.

See, NS operates at several levels. One is the game mechanism: nations can't escape it. Another is roleplay.

The effect of WA decisions is automatic. Once the WA decision is made, his nation's statistics are affected accordingly. No choice, no escape.

The effects of issues are automatic, too, but issues aren't all nations, they're just your nation. You can just decide not to decide (dismiss the issue), or make a different decision next time the issue comes up, or make contradictory decisions.

This is where the roleplay comes in. By deciding that way on that particular issue, your friend is effectively roleplaying that his nation defies the WA. But the WA works on "don't ask, don't tell" lines. So if he never advertises that he's doing it, there'll be no repercussions -- and his national statistics will still show the effect of the WA anti-slavery decision.

If he goes into International Incidents or NationStates and starts a thread describing how his nation is getting around, sneaking through loopholes in, or deliberately breaking the latest WA law, then other players will roleplay their nations' reactions (and who knows what he'll end up with). But he doesn't have to do that, or anything else, either.

Though I think he owes you a drink in the Strangers' Bar. ;)

so basically, resolutions are said to be enforced, however the issues you get don't have to be in line with the resolutions. they are just around for diplomatic fun!

WachichiIt isn't this way so as to encourage in-game noncompliance; it's this way because there's no real way to stop it. When you post in-character, however, you are expected to assume compliance with all past and active resolutions, even if you're only "in compliance" by virtue of exploited loopholes.

If he goes into International Incidents or NationStates and starts a thread describing how his nation is getting around, sneaking through loopholes in, or deliberately breaking the latest WA law, then other players will roleplay their nations' reactions (and who knows what he'll end up with). But he doesn't have to do that, or anything else, either.Nah, if he goes into the II forum and describes anything related to the WA, he'll likely be laughed right off the world stage (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=546669). :tongue:

Nah, if he goes into the II forum and describes anything related to the WA, he'll likely be laughed right off the world stage (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=546669). :tongue:

Oh, I don't know so much, the WA is widely respected for the way its members comport themselves with dignity and authority (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=540943). So nerny nerny ner ner, smartypants :D.

Everyone is right, but there's an additional factor: the slavery ban doesn't apply to prison labour anyway.