Rembrandt van Rijn
17-12-2003, 08:42
I'd like to see a clarification here, as the ruling leaves some questions on my side. (original thread was locked, so I'm asking here)
(emphasis added)
I would like one of our kind helpful mods to clarify a question regarding naitve status in a region.
Here's the situation. A certain region (the name isn't relevent although some will guess which one it is) was invaded and a big controversy broke out. Since I wasn't doing anything important, I moved into the region to keep up on the fun. I wasn't part of the invasion in any way. As usually goes in these situations, the delegate got deleted for griefing and the region became open again. A couple days later, members of a (several?) defender groups entered the region and "liberated" it. This morning I found myself in the Rejected Realms. When I tried to move back in to the region I realized I was still on the ban list. At that point I TM'd the delegate and asked to be removed. He refused.
My question is am I considered a native since I was in the region when the 2nd invasion (liberation?) occured?
I would appreciate only a moderator answer this question.
Do you fully intend to reside in that region on a permanent basis?
Umm, probably not permanently. But just for the sake of arguement, say I am.
In that case, I'd argue that you're a native for the 2nd invasion. You were intending to make that region your permanent home in a peaceful manner (not an invader) when it was invaded - regardless of the short period of time you resided there.
Had you been residing there to keep an eye on the situation, or in an attempt to assist in the liberation of the region, etc., I would argue that you were not in native status for the 2nd invasion.
Understandable. Thanks for the quick response.
I shoulda moved a puppet in instead.
lol...you're welcome. I just sent you a telegram.
First of: The 'couple days' is a horrid misrepresentation. I moved in about 30 minutes after Fisz got deleted. Not 'a couple days'. All other ACC troops were still on the scene, and the endorsements were such that a different nation of the invader group would've become delegate in the next update if nothing else were to happen. A non-UN puppet of mine had moved in about a day earlier as part of a (failed) invasion/liberation a day before. This was/is an active counterinvasion of something that was still going on at the time. (most ACC forces decided to flee the scene immediately instead of fighting for the region, so it turned out to be a quite solid victory at the next update).
When I became (invading) delegate, I booted three nations: all non-natives (based on the december 5 inhabitants, which was when the ACC had already taken control of the region.
The problem I have with the ruling above is that a mod is making a judgement on what is legal based on the (retro-actively!) expressed intent of a nation, not on their actions. Please know that for any invader (defenders included) it is impossible to objectively determine what the intent are of nations. In light of the above ruling, they hence can never know who's native or not, as a booted (counter-) invader merely has to retro-actively claim to having had the intent to remain a permanent resident, in order to see any actions of the invading delegate be declared illegal. Basically it means that in order to not break any rules one would have to regard almost ALL nations to be native, even if one is 100% sure it's a puppet of an invader. After all, the intent for that nation could be anything: become a UN nation later on and grab the region, or become a permanent resident, or... whatever, as long as they are allowed to tactically declare any intent retro-actively, it's essentially all of those at the same time. You end up with nations who can decide later on whether they like to be declared invaders or natives. That's a very big difference!
(since I'm specifically discussing an already made ruling here, please limit any other comments to adding a NEW viewpoint/information on the ruling discussed in this specific case. Don't throw in your own judgement please.)
Rembrandt
(emphasis added)
I would like one of our kind helpful mods to clarify a question regarding naitve status in a region.
Here's the situation. A certain region (the name isn't relevent although some will guess which one it is) was invaded and a big controversy broke out. Since I wasn't doing anything important, I moved into the region to keep up on the fun. I wasn't part of the invasion in any way. As usually goes in these situations, the delegate got deleted for griefing and the region became open again. A couple days later, members of a (several?) defender groups entered the region and "liberated" it. This morning I found myself in the Rejected Realms. When I tried to move back in to the region I realized I was still on the ban list. At that point I TM'd the delegate and asked to be removed. He refused.
My question is am I considered a native since I was in the region when the 2nd invasion (liberation?) occured?
I would appreciate only a moderator answer this question.
Do you fully intend to reside in that region on a permanent basis?
Umm, probably not permanently. But just for the sake of arguement, say I am.
In that case, I'd argue that you're a native for the 2nd invasion. You were intending to make that region your permanent home in a peaceful manner (not an invader) when it was invaded - regardless of the short period of time you resided there.
Had you been residing there to keep an eye on the situation, or in an attempt to assist in the liberation of the region, etc., I would argue that you were not in native status for the 2nd invasion.
Understandable. Thanks for the quick response.
I shoulda moved a puppet in instead.
lol...you're welcome. I just sent you a telegram.
First of: The 'couple days' is a horrid misrepresentation. I moved in about 30 minutes after Fisz got deleted. Not 'a couple days'. All other ACC troops were still on the scene, and the endorsements were such that a different nation of the invader group would've become delegate in the next update if nothing else were to happen. A non-UN puppet of mine had moved in about a day earlier as part of a (failed) invasion/liberation a day before. This was/is an active counterinvasion of something that was still going on at the time. (most ACC forces decided to flee the scene immediately instead of fighting for the region, so it turned out to be a quite solid victory at the next update).
When I became (invading) delegate, I booted three nations: all non-natives (based on the december 5 inhabitants, which was when the ACC had already taken control of the region.
The problem I have with the ruling above is that a mod is making a judgement on what is legal based on the (retro-actively!) expressed intent of a nation, not on their actions. Please know that for any invader (defenders included) it is impossible to objectively determine what the intent are of nations. In light of the above ruling, they hence can never know who's native or not, as a booted (counter-) invader merely has to retro-actively claim to having had the intent to remain a permanent resident, in order to see any actions of the invading delegate be declared illegal. Basically it means that in order to not break any rules one would have to regard almost ALL nations to be native, even if one is 100% sure it's a puppet of an invader. After all, the intent for that nation could be anything: become a UN nation later on and grab the region, or become a permanent resident, or... whatever, as long as they are allowed to tactically declare any intent retro-actively, it's essentially all of those at the same time. You end up with nations who can decide later on whether they like to be declared invaders or natives. That's a very big difference!
(since I'm specifically discussing an already made ruling here, please limit any other comments to adding a NEW viewpoint/information on the ruling discussed in this specific case. Don't throw in your own judgement please.)
Rembrandt