NationStates Jolt Archive

One nation is trying to impersonate me. This imposter is called Crub (I am Grub with a G). This guy has the same flag, motto, currency, and animal. I am sure he's trying to confuse people into thinking it is me.

Thanks,
Grub

32 minutes ago: The United States of Crub ceased to exist.

:wink:

I could have sworn I read somewhere that inimtating a nation was ok, as long as their reputation wasn't ruined..

Well we found sufficient evidence to prove that the owner of this nation wasn't going to do Grub any favours.

Nations have been deleted for impersonation before. I know this from personal experience... :?

ahh but can you delete a nation based on what you think they might do??? as far as i know, you can't. unless your George W Bush, you do not know if anything of mal-purpose was intended by that nations owner.

ahh but can you delete a nation based on what you think they might do??? as far as i know, you can't. unless your George W Bush, you do not know if anything of mal-purpose was intended by that nations owner.

:roll: Keep the politics where they belong.

ahh but can you delete a nation based on what you think they might do??? as far as i know, you can't. unless your George W Bush, you do not know if anything of mal-purpose was intended by that nations owner.

Bad! This is an internet game, not democracy. The mods must be obeyed. They need nothing more than suspicion.

Welcome to Oceania.

ahh but can you delete a nation based on what you think they might do??? as far as i know, you can't. unless your George W Bush, you do not know if anything of mal-purpose was intended by that nations owner.

You can't pretend to be someone else. Whatever about George Bush or anything else, that summs it up pretty simply.

(not a moderator)

point taken, twas more of a joke than a political stance. hehe. and i know the mods must be obeyed, for they are the only regulation we have in NS, and they are greatly appreciated. i just don't see where in the rules it says a nation who did not do any harm to anyone else can be deleted, as well as another nation owned of the same owner.

either way, the mods ruled, i would like to hear a response on this issue though, for future reference. for the benefit of everyone in NS.

maybe this will help explain why i'm confused about the deletions

General rule on impersonations is that it's OK as long as it's not to the defammation of a player. In other words, I could impersonate Kandarin there to gain intelligence. However, the instant I start harrassing Kandarin or begin to defame his character, it's gone too far.


The only exceptions being the Moderators - for somewhat (I hope) obvious reasons. Moderators are not to be closely impersonated as it can (and has in the past) cause(d) confusion.

thoughts on this please

Thanks

ahh but can you delete a nation based on what you think they might do??? as far as i know, you can't. unless your George W Bush, you do not know if anything of mal-purpose was intended by that nations owner.

Bad! This is an internet game, not democracy. The mods must be obeyed. They need nothing more than suspicion.

Welcome to Oceania.

Yes, the mods must be obeyed, as was pointed out by der kommiser above.


-----------------
Kwas out.

http://www.laogaming.com/images/russ/programming.jpg (http://www.laogaming.com/forums)

Yeah, you've got to be cautious.

I have a puppet that I keep cautiously hidden due to an error when I named it. The name is "Sith Unchained". I meant it to be "Unleashed", but I suppose I thought of Melkor and my fingers betrayed me.

Impersonating a Mod, even for a joke, is quite grave.

As for the impersonation rule, as it depends on the impersonator's behaviour, I think it's OK. Though it may be better if the punishment doesn't limit to the impersonating nation, but to the main nation belonging to the impersonator.

I mean, let's suppose I make a nation (this was called to my attention on IRC) named SITHiril and I start posing as Sirithil. If I get deleted only Sithiril, well, I lose only the impersonating nation. But if I lose that and DarkSith, well... OUCH! Sure thing I'd never repeat that stunt again.

Oh, and this is not even a suggestion, just an example.

Most impersionations don't work anyway. The only places they actualy work are in regions where you are present at regualr intervals. Cause if the locals know you well enough then the impersonator will slip up. Even if they do have the same flag and everything else it doesn't mean that they can talk like you or even act in the same way. The only way for a impersionation to be truely sucsessful is if the impersonator has studyed the victims actions, opinions and political (regional of course) knolage so it becomes second nature. Alot of people just think that if shove a similar name on a bogus nation it'll fool everyone....but people are not stupid.

Anyway, most impersionations don't last too long even if they are good because the aim of an impersionation is to manipulate or ruin a nations rep. The victim should find out fairly quickly if someones pranceing round as them cause they will eventualy find out that people start to hate them.

Anyway, thats my experinces inna paragraph or two....

Pork.

maybe this will help explain why i'm confused about the deletions

General rule on impersonations is that it's OK as long as it's not to the defammation of a player. In other words, I could impersonate Kandarin there to gain intelligence. However, the instant I start harrassing Kandarin or begin to defame his character, it's gone too far.


The only exceptions being the Moderators - for somewhat (I hope) obvious reasons. Moderators are not to be closely impersonated as it can (and has in the past) cause(d) confusion.

thoughts on this please

Thanks

Correct. That is the standing policy.

I am not familiar with the case-at-hand, but I presume that the impersonator was deleted for crossing the line described in Neut's post.

Yeah, you've got to be cautious.

I have a puppet that I keep cautiously hidden due to an error when I named it. The name is "Sith Unchained". I meant it to be "Unleashed", but I suppose I thought of Melkor and my fingers betrayed me.

Impersonating a Mod, even for a joke, is quite grave.

As for the impersonation rule, as it depends on the impersonator's behaviour, I think it's OK. Though it may be better if the punishment doesn't limit to the impersonating nation, but to the main nation belonging to the impersonator.

I mean, let's suppose I make a nation (this was called to my attention on IRC) named SITHiril and I start posing as Sirithil. If I get deleted only Sithiril, well, I lose only the impersonating nation. But if I lose that and DarkSith, well... OUCH! Sure thing I'd never repeat that stunt again.

Oh, and this is not even a suggestion, just an example.

"Sith Unchained" should be fine, as long as you don't pretend to be Melkor.

There are nations out there called "Cognitia" and "Edolia". "Edolia", in particular, roleplays with Melkor, sometimes. These haven't been modbombed because the name similarities are just a coincidence and they've never attempted to impersonate NationStates Moderators.

Generally, we mods will act when we believe that there was an intent to impersonate us.

Spelling error corrected.

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

There are nations out there called "Cognitia" and "Endolia". "Endolia", in particular, roleplays with Melkor, sometimes. These haven't been modbombed because the name similarities are just a coincidence and they've never attempted to impersonate NationStates Moderators.

Nation Not Found: "Endolia" - I think you mean Edolia.

thanks Cog.

i would just like to point out that the nation deleted was not guilty of crossing the line, in fact no TG's were sent out or posts made by that nation. So if the mod who deleted him and the main nation of that puppet, could look into it they would see this maybe?

Thanks

thanks Cog.

i would just like to point out that the nation deleted was not guilty of crossing the line, in fact no TG's were sent out or posts made by that nation.

It's also possible that the nation was deleted on a suspected intent of harassing or defaming another player.

Again, I'm not familiar with the details of this case, so I don't know for sure either way. So, I'm not going to comment further.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

While I appreciate the "pre-emptive strike" mentality generally, it has no place here in NS. The suggestion that "mods must be obeyed" is as callous as it is ridiculous. Moderators are not in this game to impose their will---they are supposed to be neutral observers of the game and make sure than no rules are violated (not determine which players will or will not violate rules.)

This confirms what I have long suspected about moderators. I have said this before and will say it again: Allow the players to play the game, please. Stop the "situational" rule interpretations designed to impose a desired outcome. If you are going to be biased, don't be a moderator. It really is that simple.

Otherwise, you have have a game wherein no player can determine where the "lines" are. It is impossible to do this when the lines are constantly being shifted to effect particular outcomes or, as in the case of Grub of 10000 Islands, benefit certain players.

I have to agree with some of my fellow nations here.

If there are no concrete intell or evidence that a nation is going to commit an act, how can a moderator act on mere suspicion alone? Couldn't we all be suspect?

How many of us in moderation have responded to a new nation's question without disclaiming ourselves as a mod? In a way, that could be construed as impersoanting a mod because a new nation may think that nation in response is a moderator.

I'm not questioning the judgment in this case of the moderators, as they may have more evidence than they are allowed to admit.

Otherwise, you have have a game wherein no player can determine where the "lines" are. It is impossible to do this when the lines are constantly being shifted to effect particular outcomes or, as in the case of Grub of 10000 Islands, benefit certain players.It is not impossible to determine where the lines are. We've currently got 122,203 players who haven't crossed them and are peacefully playing the game.

And on the contrary, the mods are here to be obeyed. The creator of the game has hired them to enforce the rules of his game. We as players can only play his game as long as we follow his rules. If you think his mods are enforcing the rules in a biased manner, it's to him that you need to complain.

This is a privately owned site. They can do whatever you want. If you get deleted, well whatever. It's not like you paid for it or anything.

While I appreciate the "pre-emptive strike" mentality generally, it has no place here in NS. The suggestion that "mods must be obeyed" is as callous as it is ridiculous. Moderators are not in this game to impose their will---they are supposed to be neutral observers of the game and make sure than no rules are violated (not determine which players will or will not violate rules.)

This confirms what I have long suspected about moderators. I have said this before and will say it again: Allow the players to play the game, please. Stop the "situational" rule interpretations designed to impose a desired outcome. If you are going to be biased, don't be a moderator. It really is that simple.

Otherwise, you have have a game wherein no player can determine where the "lines" are. It is impossible to do this when the lines are constantly being shifted to effect particular outcomes or, as in the case of Grub of 10000 Islands, benefit certain players.

+

Well we found sufficient evidence to prove that the owner of this nation wasn't going to do Grub any favours.

!=

HE HAED A NAME N OMFG I HAEV NOT UESD MY M0D P0WREZ IN S0000000 LONG LOL SO I DEAT.

If there was definite evidence (which I'm told there isn't) then delete that nation. But, when you delete another nation of his then that is crossing the line.

There was definite evidence. This nation was the puppet of a nation that had been systematically harrassing Grub and his region for some time. I decided that enough was enough and deleted him.

But why delete his main nation as well for just creating another nation? He did nothing with that other nation, so then only delete the puppet. Bring back the main nation.

No. As I said, it was the last of a number of offences and by rights he should have been deleted long ago.

But why delete his main nation as well for just creating another nation? He did nothing with that other nation, so then only delete the puppet. Bring back the main nation.
I've seen somewhere that mod's issue a warning to the main nation when they delete a puppet for rule violations. Based on Sirroccos post, he had more then enough warnings already.

There was no offence by impersonating Grub! It has been stated by the mods that that is okay, and he was revived a bit back.... I had something else to say but I forgot so you'll have to wait....

If it had been an impersonation by someone else I would have merely kept an eye on it, but the fact that the puppetmaster had already been known to grief Grub was enough for me to warrant deletion. There is no way this nation will be brought back. Drop it.

But why delete his main nation as well for just creating another nation? He did nothing with that other nation, so then only delete the puppet. Bring back the main nation.

So are you saying then that if a nation wants to act like an ass, all they have to do is create a puppet to do it with, this way they can protect their main nation and just act like an ass using a puppet.. ? I don't think so. You create a puppet to harrass another player or act like an ass.. you're fair game. We treat it in terms of one player no matter how many nations they own, otherwise, what is the point? We certainly are not going to be sending any message that says otherwise. (Of course different sitautions some times call for different action) but the rule of thumb is expect to lose all your nations if you break the rules of Nationstates, if you don't.. you got lucky!

He still never harrased anybody with Crub.... Still can't think of what I was going to say...

Kwas. Drop it. The judgement has been made. Impersonation is still against the rules in certain situations like this. Neither Crub nor its owner will be brought back. End of story.

the main nation ABSOLUTELY never harrassed Grub. It was an opponent of Grub yes, but never did he spam grub, never did he threaten grub, never did he flame grub or flamebait, in fact he has a lot of respect for Grub, theres no proof of any harrasment of grub by that nation. sure mod reports were filed against grub by that nation, but these were all legitamate concerns, and it is up to the mods whether or not grub broke any rules, which he didnt, not the nation who filed reports. if filing legitimate concerns as mod reports is illegal, than what are we suppose to do when we think antoher nation could possibly be breaking the rules? the mods have to be informed of these things, and if its not an infraction, they just dont take any action, rightfully.

but to say that the main nation in charge of the puppet of Crub harrassed Grub, is just untrue. i dont mean to be on my high horse, but its just something i feel passionate about, so my apologies, but something is wrong here.

also stephistan, the puppet of Crub did nothing to act like an ass, no TG's or posts were made by it, no communication with any other nations, it was basically created, and moved to a different region, thats it.

thanks

We have had complaints against the main nation for spamming in the past. Now drop it.

for spamming...? he gets deated for creating a nation and supposedly spamming in the past? Well this is the Psychotic Dictatorship of NationStates, so I guess that sounds right.

Kwas out.

there may have been complaints about spamming, but did you look into them?? i assure that nation never spammed. as a nationstates player i have the right to argue my case against something i see as wrong, and i mean no disrespect, but this is definetly something that needs to be farther looked into. check and see if that nation ever really spammed and im absolutely sure you will find it never happened, ever. its the same as the grub case probably, you found out that he never spammed, so surely you can find out that the main nation in charge of the puppet of Crub never spammed.

Thank you.

Kwas.. just a friendly bit of advice... I'd let it go, man. I've seen too many nations press an issue in here lately, and wind up DEAT. It's not worth getting the axe.

Yah, I definitally hear that, some of them were mine. Funny how it ends up mostly against the invaders eh?

Yah, I definitally hear that, some of them were mine. Funny how it ends up mostly against the invaders eh?



I know.

Why does everyone hate invaders?

Some mods were/are defenders.

Some mods were/are defenders.

Or maybe you come on here and openly attack moderator decisions.

Let me clarify a few things.

First, impersonation is legal EXCEPT when harassing another player or attempting to defame the player being impersonated.

Second, we Moderators usually only take action after an offense has occured. However, if we have strong reason to believe that someone intends to break the rules, we can act preempively. Sirocco and Stephistan have stated that sufficient evidence was found to conclude that the impersonator intended to break the rules with "Crub". We will not disclose this evidence as doing so will compromise our ability to do our jobs in the future.

Third, players who break the rules multiple times are liable to have their main nation deleted. Sirocco has stated that the impersonator has a past history of rulebreaking.

Fourth, I want to reiterate that committing an offense with a puppet gets a warning for the main nation. If puppets are used to committ multiple offenses, then the main nation is deleted. So, (taking the past offenses into account) this was sufficient to delete both the puppet and the puppetmaster.

if filing legitimate concerns as mod reports is illegal, than what are we suppose to do when we think antoher nation could possibly be breaking the rules? the mods have to be informed of these things, and if its not an infraction, they just dont take any action, rightfully.

Fifth, while filing legitimate concerns through the "Getting Help" page is legal, filing fradulent reports is illegal. It is our belief that the "concerns" filed by the offender were fradulent and submitted solely for the purpose of harassing Grub.

The decision stands. The Moderators will not consider any further appeals. All further complaints should be directed to admin@nationstates.net. Expect considerable delay as [violet] is very busy.

iLock.

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