NationStates Jolt Archive

This post is in response to the actions of some moderators in the topic "I know, I know". I would have posted it there, but it's locked. (Yay, PHPBB.)

The topic was regarding the banning of the Nazi Hakenkreuz (often incorrectly called a Swastika) in NationStates flags.

Here is what one moderator had to say:

<quote>
Old topic.

Swasticas on flags were banned by [violet] and Max Barry. There is no higher authority on this game, so please quit trying to rehash it, especially on this forum. As this thread shows, this is an old ruling and has been debated endlessly. Your arguments, counterarguments, theories, appeals, rants, or whatever, are not new. We've seen them all before.

Not trying to OMG ABUZE MAH POWAHZ! but I'm really sick of seeing this every month or so. There's nothing that can be done about this, and arguing about it, or bringing up Communism vs. Nazism isn't going to solve anything.

Just like you can't have more than one nation in the UN, you can't have a swastica on your flag. Cope, move on, and be done with it.
</quote>

I wish to point out that I found no reference to the banning of Nazi symbology in the NationStates FAQ. I, and some other forum participants, were not even aware of the ban until we saw the topic "I know, I know". I suggest that if someone would provide such information, it would give the moderators some more rational basis to delete posts and talk condescendingly to users that discuss such issues.

If the forum is supposed to include some of the rules of the game, I suggest that those rules be at least pointed to in the FAQ.

I recognize that this is a free service, and therefore I have no representation. However, I have heard rumors about an upcoming pay-to-play version. I don't think that the current practice (of not informing players about the rules and then berating them for not knowing about the unwritten rules) encourages people to pay money for the service.

In short, if the gamemasters/moderators want to ban something, fine, but they should let the players know in advance, preferably with an explanation as to why there is a ban.

The long-debated pay-for-play (Nationstates 2) has always been acknowledged to be seperate from this service.

This point is being addressed currently.

--Scolo

I like how you edited out the part where I point people to the thread where the ban was originally anounced and explained.

You didn't even give me the curtesy of an elipses to show where you edited my post.

Also, you might note that I wasn't shutting down the question of if they were banned, but conversation on why as well as "well what about this?" arguments that have been shot down numerous times.

I didn't edit anything out; I just copied and pasted. I guess you believe I should have explicitly relinked the word `this' to the topic you referenced.

However, that is *irrelevant*. Please re-read my post. The root of my complaint is that a rule of the game is not expressed in the FAQ. The focus of my complaint is that some of you moderators expect us to know such unwritten rules, and apparently expect us to go through old topics to find them, and then treat us in a belittling manner for not having done so.

I am quite certain that if the Nazi issue had been addressed in the FAQ, there would be a lot less discussion about it to annoy you. I now shall amplify this point: You can expect people to restart that same topic over, and over, and over, as long as the banned Nazi flag issue is not addressed in the FAQ. Once it is thoroughly addressed in the FAQ, anyone who starts such a topic will be quickly shot down by other users who will reply "READ THE FAQ!"

However, my point is probably lost on you. Judging by not only what you said on that topic, but what you have just said now (calling me deceitful and discourteous and ignoring my point), you apparently do prefer to berate users rather than to resolve issues.

(Incidentally, I am intriged by the irony of your attack on me, whereby you demonstrate deceit and a lack of courtesy.)

Of course, you have the power to edit and delete my posts, and you shall if you wish. However, even if my posts are deleted, my point will still stand, and you will still have to deal with it.

I'm not expecting you to thank me, but I did actually do you a favor by pointing out some flaws in the system so that they may be corrected, thereby saving moderators like you some headaches. I chose my particular manner of presenting the issue based on the treatment I got from moderators on the "I know, I know" topic.

[...]
The root of my complaint is that a rule of the game is not expressed in the FAQ.

Something that the moderators are entirely incapable of changing.

The focus of my complaint is that some of you moderators expect us to know such unwritten rules, and apparently expect us to go through old topics to find them, and then treat us in a belittling manner for not having done so.

It's an announcement. It's not hidden, and again I have no quarrel with people asking if swaticas are allowed on flags. What I don't like is attempts at moral equivilency and people telling us that if we ban the swastica, we must ban the Star of David. Or the Hammer and Sickle. Or the American Flag. Or any number of other things. Since the thread had turned from a dicsussion of "if" to one of "why", I locked the thread. Having seen the same arguments dozens of times, I have little patience for them.

I am quite certain that if the Nazi issue had been addressed in the FAQ, there would be a lot less discussion about it to annoy you.

People who don't read stickies and announcements often don't read FAQs either.

I now shall amplify this point: You can expect people to restart that same topic over, and over, and over, as long as the banned Nazi flag issue is not addressed in the FAQ. Once it is thoroughly addressed in the FAQ, anyone who starts such a topic will be quickly shot down by other users who will reply "READ THE FAQ!"

And, again, I have no problems with people asking what the rules are. See my original lock post.

Or my earlier post in this thread.

Or earlier in this thread.

However, my point is probably lost on you.

How delightfully condescending.

Judging by not only what you said on that topic, but what you have just said now (calling me deceitful and discourteous and ignoring my point), you apparently do prefer to berate users rather than to resolve issues.

As you blithely ignore mine...

(Incidentally, I am intriged by the irony of your attack on me, whereby you demonstrate deceit and a lack of courtesy.)

Of course, you have the power to edit and delete my posts, and you shall if you wish. However, even if my posts are deleted, my point will still stand, and you will still have to deal with it.

Moving on to martyrdom, I see.

I'm not expecting you to thank me, but I did actually do you a favor by pointing out some flaws in the system so that they may be corrected, thereby saving moderators like you some headaches. I chose my particular manner of presenting the issue based on the treatment I got from moderators on the "I know, I know" topic.

And, again, my headache is not people asking what the rule is. My headache comes from people refusing to accept a particular ruling. Alter the FAQ will no suddenly cause people to accept the rule. We still get complaints about limiting the number of UN nations a given person may control, and that's a far older ruling, and clearly explained in the FAQ.

Okay, now I understand that NationStates 2 will be a separate service. (Incidentally, the future version is only barely hinted at in the FAQ.) I mentioned the money aspect as a possible incentive to provide a better service.

If there is no incentive to provide a better service in the current NationStates, and if the current admins and mods like things the way they are (complete with new users innocently re-raising old issues because they were not already informed that the issues were old, much to the annoyance of the mods), then I suppose I should refrain from voicing complaints at deaf ears. In fact, in that case, I should refrain from using the forum so that I won't inadvertently make the same mistake again. That way, although nothing will get fixed, at least the mods will no longer be bothered by me.

However, my optimism shall hold out at least for a couple of days. Hopefully, some mods will actually address the issue I presented, instead of deflecting it or attacking me.

so...ummm...
what is your issue anyway?

they said the swastika isn't allowed, and it is in the stickies..

i lost ya..

[...]
The root of my complaint is that a rule of the game is not expressed in the FAQ.

Something that the moderators are entirely incapable of changing.


I can accept that mods cannot directly change that. I don't even know if you can talk to the admins about that. However, I know that you can change your behavior towards the users.


The focus of my complaint is that some of you moderators expect us to know such unwritten rules, and apparently expect us to go through old topics to find them, and then treat us in a belittling manner for not having done so.


It's an announcement. It's not hidden, and again I have no quarrel with people asking if swaticas are allowed on flags. What I don't like is attempts at moral equivilency and people telling us that if we ban the swastica, we must ban the Star of David. Or the Hammer and Sickle. Or the American Flag. Or any number of other things. Since the thread had turned from a dicsussion of "if" to one of "why", I locked the thread. Having seen the same arguments dozens of times, I have little patience for them.


Yes, and you have the power to act on your impatience, while the users do not. Instead of letting a meaningful discussion continue, you killed it because it annoyed you. Meanwhile, some topic about sacrificing n00bs to mods reached 66 pages.


...

I now shall amplify this point: You can expect people to restart that same topic over, and over, and over, as long as the banned Nazi flag issue is not addressed in the FAQ. Once it is thoroughly addressed in the FAQ, anyone who starts such a topic will be quickly shot down by other users who will reply "READ THE FAQ!"

And, again, I have no problems with people asking what the rules are. See my original lock post.

Or my earlier post in this thread.

Or earlier in this thread.


So what? That does not address what I said.


However, my point is probably lost on you.

How delightfully condescending.


I forgot, condescension is your job. Can't let the users get uppity with the mods, now, can we?


Judging by not only what you said on that topic, but what you have just said now (calling me deceitful and discourteous and ignoring my point), you apparently do prefer to berate users rather than to resolve issues.

As you blithely ignore mine...


I did not ignore yours; I directly discarded them, because as I stated, they are *irrelevant*.


(Incidentally, I am intriged by the irony of your attack on me, whereby you demonstrate deceit and a lack of courtesy.)

Of course, you have the power to edit and delete my posts, and you shall if you wish. However, even if my posts are deleted, my point will still stand, and you will still have to deal with it.

Moving on to martyrdom, I see.


Wow, for you to confuse logic with martyrdom is pretty obtuse. Let me reiterate: Assume for a moment that I don't exist and never posted anything. The problem I presented would *still exist*. The point is deleting my posts or trying to publicly discredit me won't make the actual problem go away. What the hell does that have to do with martyrdom?


I'm not expecting you to thank me, but I did actually do you a favor by pointing out some flaws in the system so that they may be corrected, thereby saving moderators like you some headaches. I chose my particular manner of presenting the issue based on the treatment I got from moderators on the "I know, I know" topic.

And, again, my headache is not people asking what the rule is. My headache comes from people refusing to accept a particular ruling. Alter the FAQ will no suddenly cause people to accept the rule. We still get complaints about limiting the number of UN nations a given person may control, and that's a far older ruling, and clearly explained in the FAQ.

First off, I do not care about the *details* of your headache. I'm talking about nipping the whole thing in the bud. Secondly, there *is no such ruling* according to the game FAQ, let alone an explanation. Of course we do not accept a ruling we do not know about!

Regarding the fact that some people argue with the FAQ: As long as you say "read the game FAQ" every time you shut users down when they ask about multiple UN nations per user, I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with you expecting us to know about a rule that is only addressed (and not even completely addressed) in a forum topic. Moreover, I have a problem with the manner in which you shut down the "I know, I know" topic. I'm also bothered by the fact that some mod (perhaps not you) deleted my post to that topic without explanation.

Now, we go on like this for days--I seeking a solution, you seeking to discredit me--or you can give some acknowledgement that there might be a problem, and that somebody might look into dealing with it, instead of taking frustrations out on users.

Now that we've discussed what gives you a headache, I'll tell you what gives me a headache: People in positions of authority and responsibility who don't take their positions seriously enough to do a good job. That is why I bothered to voice my concerns in the first place.

Ok, I'm not sure what your problem is, Isudidi. Hack's been more than patient with you, while you have repeatedly sniped back.

There IS an announcement detailing this ruling. He cannot help it if you cannot be arsed to read announcements. Did you even read the FAQ before this issue came to your attention? How many of the announcements and stickies have you read?

Might I suggest you sit down, STFU, and RTFM. EVERYTHING you've requested has already been implemented, and doesn't require personal attacks against a moderator.

i know STFU, but what does RTFM mean?

RTFM = *nix slang for "Read the f---ing manual".

ah, thanks raem, got it ;)

crazy americans and their slang :P

I really, really think we need to make it worth a warning just to raise the issue. Right? If you bring up the Swastika/Hakenkreuz statement, you should be warned, and failure to drop it should be a deletable offense. Just like all other spam.

That might just be because I'm intolerant.



~Roania: Supporting the Rules, because they are the rules.

Er, shouldn’t it be in Technical.

It’s a fair enough request if rather robustly delivered. Some players will never get to grips with the idea that rules can be based on precedent and stickies, but that is their problem. Maybe a note in the FAQ about reading the forum stickies or something might help some of them.

Not to say I'm endorsing the idea or the method of expressing it, but the idea is worth admin at least thinking about it (if they haven't already done so, several times).

The issue is that many (the majority?) of NS rules are built up by what is known as Common Law. The legal system exists as nothing more than a list of precedants. While these systems can work well (they are the source of both British and American law) it is best if the decisions get codified at some point. Unfortunately, we're still working on that.

Thus, that's my excuse for why it hasn't happened yet. A better rules codification is being worked on (though it will take a while). This swastika issue, however, has been added to the FAQ for after we move to Jolt.

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

I really, really think we need to make it worth a warning just to raise the issue. Right? If you bring up the Swastika/Hakenkreuz statement, you should be warned, and failure to drop it should be a deletable offense. Just like all other spam.

That might just be because I'm intolerant.

I remember when I started playing this game over year ago --when there were far fewer people mind you-- and I was scared out of my wits. RP threads, a Rules and Regulations thread by Kitsylvania, and all these "old" nations strutting there stuff. It was intense.

Now there are probably over 1000 nations on the forums with billion plus populations. I was scared when 50,000 were served... now it's up to 550,000. I'd be too intimidated to even post for fear of being called an idiot, which raises another point.

I couldn't imagine coming onto this sight now with the way us old people treat the innocently ignorant. We can't expect them to know something without asking, you're giving someone who is new to this site to much credit. It's like a kid riding a shiny new bike. You have to let him fall down and ask questions without berating him or shooting him in the leg. Young ones are going to ask questions... and those of us graced with knowledge must answer... or else this scenario will play out over and over again:


Why can't I have a swastika for my flag?


Because you can't. Read the stickies. You've been warned for talking about swastikas.

But I was just... Sweet Jesus everything is on fire!!!

Moments ago: The Nation of newplayer ceased to exist.

That kind of reaction to inquiry would scare me from coming to this site. We just need to think of ourselves as old parents. :wink:

This is why Roania is not a mod. ;)

I remember when I started playing this game over year ago --when there were far fewer people mind you-- and I was scared out of my wits. RP threads, a Rules and Regulations thread by Kitsylvania, and all these "old" nations strutting there stuff. It was intense.

Now there are probably over 1000 nations on the forums with billion plus populations. I was scared when 50,000 were served... now it's up to 550,000. I'd be too intimidated to even post for fear of being called an idiot, which raises another point.
You know... that's entirely true and rather profound. I didn't even get involved in NS to any extent outside of issues until after I'd reached a billion, all those incomprehensible RP stickies! I didn't understand until Francos Spain came along and kicked me out that there was more to this game than stat wanking or issue answering... I don't think we're a very n00b-friendly game. (Which explains the hundreds of new players we get every week? Perhaps I should go away now, as it's 1:30 AM and I rarely make sense at this hour of the night.)

*shrugs*

That, unfortunately, is a community issue. There's very little moderators can do about it.

--Scolo

Like I said, I don't function well at 1:30 AM. Night Scolo :)

This is why Roania is not a mod. ;)

Eh. I never said I wanted to be a mod. I'll try to tone down the angry bile, though.

I just feel that most of these people didn't read the FAQ, and that a great deal of the people asking about them are puppets of older nations making fools out of us.

And cute, Bloc. Real cute. :roll:

Whilst I don’t necessarily agree with the original poster he does do a good job at representing people who play the game and don’t use the forums. These people are often left in the dark about game rulings like this and this so called “common law”. Maybe one of the game or forum moderators should put a note in the FAQ to tell people to check the forums for updated stickys and news that does not quiet cut it for the news page.

Hi kids.



I wish to point out that I found no reference to the banning of Nazi symbology in the NationStates FAQ.
...
If the forum is supposed to include some of the rules of the game, I suggest that those rules be at least pointed to in the FAQ.

Did you even read the FAQ before this issue came to your attention?

People who don't read stickies and announcements often don't read FAQs either.
[editor's note: the rule in question is located in the `Archives', not the `Moderation' or `Game Play'. Can anyone tell me where Arthur Dent's eviction notice was stored?]




The issue is that many (the majority?) of NS rules are built up by what is known as Common Law. The legal system exists as nothing more than a list of precedants.


SalusaSecondus suggests the phpBB (why phpBB? because NNTP allows structured debates via message forking and does not allow for after-the-fact editing) is the canon of NationStates rules and regulations.
Therefore the issue of codifying the canon is quite simple. The `new and improved FAQ' need only include:
`ALL RULES CAN BE FOUND SOMEPLACE IN THE MESSAGE BOARD. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EACH PLAYER TO READ EACH AND EVER SINGLE POST'.


That should clear everything up.
I DON'T CARE HOW ARBITRARY THE RULES MIGHT SEEM.
I *DO* need to know where I can find them!

</RANT>

It's not like any of the rules we're expected to follow are hidden. Many of the rules pertaining to individual forums can be found at the top of that forum. Those rules not included in the FAQ are usually here in Moderation.
The archived thread should be linked to a sticky here in Moderation, if it isn't (Bad mods! :D ).

It's not like they're hard to find.

ALL RULES CAN BE FOUND SOMEPLACE IN THE MESSAGE BOARD. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EACH PLAYER TO READ EACH AND EVER SINGLE POST
Forum: Moderation
Announcement: Glossary of Forbidden Actions

etc

How obvious can it be? When I first started playing, and I mean the very first day, I saw the hint in the FAQ to read the stickies and announcements, and I read them. If I can, so can every other newbie.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Greetings:

Far be it from me to beat a `dead horse' into the ground....



How do I go to war against another nation? Or trade?
...
Into the breach, however, steps the NationStates community, which has independently devised an entire system covering war, trade, and just about anything else you can think of. [referencing the `International Incidents' forum]

I wish to point out that I found no reference to the banning of Nazi symbology in the NationStates FAQ.

Did you even read the FAQ before this issue came to your attention?

If the forum is supposed to include some of the rules of the game, I suggest that those rules be at least pointed to in the FAQ.

Those rules not included in the FAQ are usually here in Moderation.
[not the `Archive' Forum?]
The archived thread should be linked to a sticky here in Moderation, if it isn't (Bad mods! [editor's emphesis] :D [author's pandering]).
It's not like they're hard to find.[editor's emphesis]

Er, shouldn’t it be in Technical[?].

[WHICH forum?]

It's not like any of the rules we're expected to follow are hidden.
Many of the rules pertaining to individual forums can be found at the top of that forum.

[The rule in question is not located in the `Moderation' or `Game Play', but in the `Archives'. Can anyone tell me where Arthur Dent's eviction notice was stored?]

It’s a fair enough request if rather robustly delivered.
The issue is that many (the majority?)[author's emphesis] of NS rules are built up by what is known as Common Law.


Why can't I have a swastika for my flag?
Because you can't. Read the stickies. You've been warned for talking about swastikas.
But I was just... Sweet Jesus everything is on fire!!!





This exchange merely amplifies my point. If the administration decides [for any reason at all, period] that any given act is against the rules we, as the player community would like to know where we can find these `rules'.
We understand that not all games can be as thorough as StarFleet Battles [[http://www.starfleetgames.com], [http://mustuweb.mnsfld.edu/flytrap/sfb.jpg]], but host humbly request games should be at least as open as Monopoly [http://mustuweb.mnsfld.edu/flytrap/monopoly.jpg].
We accept that any rule can be made at any time for any reason, because we agree, according to the FAQ, AUP, and EULA, this game `belongs' to someone else and we are only allowed to play at the charity of someone else.
We do, however, request a `hint' at where we may find said rules, so we may work towards upholding said rules and avoid the violation of said rules.
We understand that codifying any rule can be, at times, fraught with dificulty and danger.
We accept and acknowlege any rule, no matter how deliberate and well-thought out, may be construed as `arbitrary' and `with-out basis' by any number of the guests [referred to as `players'].
Understanding this state of nature and being we, the players, do not wish to argue, debate, challenge, or `mince words' with the administration staff, but instead politely and respectfully petition [while bowing profusly] for a centralized canon of `Official "Jenifer Government:NationStates" Rules Repository'.

We the players understand that many of the decisions of the Game Administration are beyond the control of the Forum Moderators, and do not wish, in any way, method, or means, to continue to harass, bother, molest, or otherwise impead the Forum Moderators in their duties. We the players merely suggest that the Forum Moderators should not continue to be held responsible for the actions and decisions of the Game Administrators, and therefore the Game Administrators are derelict in their duties if they do not provide for the aforementioned canon of rules and regulations.
It is obvious to the players that so long as the Forum Moderators do not like being the mouth-pieces of the Game Administrators, yet are required to be the moth-pieces of the Game Administrators, there will continue to be `trouble brewing' and `dead horses beaten'.


In short, if the gamemasters/moderators want to ban something, fine, but they should let the players know in advance ...
...
Assume for a moment that I don't exist and never posted anything. The problem I presented would *still exist*.

We the players see LOGIC AND FACT in this argument.

It's like my own Father Knows Best state.

We the players accept the prerogative of the author, and must under any and all circumstances respect and abide by his decisions.

We then players do not feel the above are contradictory in any way. We the players would simply like one single codification of canon to refer to.

We the players thank the Game Administration and the Forum Moderators for their time and effort in continuing to make this game great.

Respectfully,
Timothy J. Bruce
uniblab@hotmail.com
</RANT>

The mods can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like these new nations with swastikas in their flags are just getting deleted on sight. It's my understanding that the first time they spot a nation with a swastika flag, they change the flag and give the nation a reprimand to not have such a flag. After that, if they decide to restore their original flag, they're subject to the rules just like anyone else. They can't feign ignorance after that, regardless if they've read all the stickies and announcements in the game or if they've never even been into the forums once.

There's a very simple solution to all of this if you're unhappy with the methods of the mods or with the rulings of the game: use the back button on your browser.

Please, el moderatoros, correct me if any of this was inaccurate.

The mods can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like these new nations with swastikas in their flags are just getting deleted on sight. It's my understanding that the first time they spot a nation with a swastika flag, they change the flag and give the nation a reprimand to not have such a flag.

This is exactly our point.


There's a very simple solution to all of this if you're unhappy with the methods of the mods or with the rulings of the game: use the back button on your browser.

This much is already addressed in the FAQ.

Why do you suggest the Forum Moderators should perform the Game Administrator's duties?
The Forum Moderators have already expressed their exhaustion at doing so, as evidenced by

Old topic.

Really?

Swasticas on flags were banned by [violet] and Max Barry. There is no higher authority on this game, so please quit trying to rehash it, especially on this forum.

This is acceptable. We would love to know where `this' rule can be found.

As this [editor's note: because `this' is a URL, and `this' was locked by The Most Glorius Hack, it is impossible to quote him correctly] thread shows, this is an old ruling and has been debated endlessly. Your arguments, counterarguments, theories, appeals, rants, or whatever, are not new. We've seen them all before.

We point out that after some searching we did find `this'. We found `this' right next to Arthur Dent's eviction notice.

Not trying to OMG ABUZE MAH POWAHZ! but I'm really sick of seeing this every month or so.

We the players then most humbly suggest someone bothers do do something about it then. Has anyone cosidered writing such a rule down?
We the players understand that each and every decisions is beyond the hands of the Forum Moderators.

Swasticas on flags were banned by [violet] and Max Barry. There is no higher authority on this game...
...
nothing that can be done about this...

No one is asking for anything to be done about this. We the players, in fact, like it this way. We the players merely request a centralized repository of rules, AKA a canon, to consult at any time.

As proposed earlier: if the Game Administrators are too busy to be bothered with writing down their commandments then it is the Game Administrators who are creating problems for the Forum Moderators...or at least in the case of Myrth, Forum Moderatz0r[Myrth's emphesis]


We the players again stress we are happy living in this Father Knows Best state, and do not care to question the rules. We the players merely desire a rule-book.

We thank everyone for their time,
</RANT>

The mods can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like these new nations with swastikas in their flags are just getting deleted on sight. It's my understanding that the first time they spot a nation with a swastika flag, they change the flag and give the nation a reprimand to not have such a flag.

This is exactly our point.



I don't understand the confusion then. Why do you need codified law? It's not as if the mods are striking down anyone who violates the rules without warning. If you accidentally or ignorantly break a rule, they inform you first. There you go. You've been informed. You don't need a written law, because you've just been given one. If you continue to break the rules, then your out. Can't plead ignorance, because the mods told you personally how and why you broke the rules. Now if the mods went around viciously deleting anyone who broke the rules without so much as a warning, I could see the need for a set list of the rules of the site so that you wouldn't accidentally break them. But what's the difference if they're codified or not?

So, you admit that you must abide by the whims of the site's owner, who is in absentia (as far as day-to-day running of the place is concerned). The moderators are the Owner's Voice in the daily affairs of Nationstates. As such, they enforce His Own Will upon us. They have not seen fit to codify a set of rules because, frankly, the system works.

So, you admit that you must abide by the whims of the site's owner, who is in absentia (as far as day-to-day running of the place is concerned). The moderators are the Owner's Voice in the daily affairs of Nationstates. As such, they enforce His Own Will upon us. They have not seen fit to codify a set of rules because, frankly, the system works.

Having a religious experience, Raem? :wink:

Essentially, there's no reason there should be a codified set of rule. Common Law is based on precedent, not the whims of rulers. It's all about tradition. And the majority of users on this site would come from countries where common law is the system.

Max no longer does much running of this site. Instead, he passed his powers down unto those of us whom he considered worthy. Obey them as you would him. Amen.

Amen to that, brother :lol:

Not knowing the rules is not excuse for breaking them. You just have to look once in a few days the mod section of the forum and take a look at the announcement and stickies (you could skip the "I agree with that" or "Mods are evil" posts). If something is illegal in real-life it probably be illegal here too. If you are not sure if something is allowed ask the mods. They make you feel hating your main operational system and eating your keyboard and then doing bad things on the ever-slow NS Forum server but will always help you :lol:

As this [editor's note: because `this' is a URL, and `this' was locked by The Most Glorius Hack, it is impossible to quote him correctly] thread shows, this is an old ruling and has been debated endlessly. Your arguments, counterarguments, theories, appeals, rants, or whatever, are not new. We've seen them all before.

We point out that after some searching we did find `this'. We found `this' right next to Arthur Dent's eviction notice.

Right-click, copy.

Or, you could just click on 'this'.


Not trying to OMG ABUZE MAH POWAHZ! but I'm really sick of seeing this every month or so.

We the players then most humbly suggest someone bothers do do something about it then. Has anyone cosidered writing such a rule down?

Re-read the thread. People were not asking that the rule be placed in the FAQ. They were arguing the decision.

interesting... since the Swastika originally was an Egyptian symbol that Germany altered slightly.

For a "pro democracy" game, it sure has some weird rules, Not that I support Nazism, but I support your right to follow or use what you want. As long as you will take the responsibility and the consiquences of your choice.

"I support the right of the Dixie chicks to say what ever they want of President Bush... but they must support our right to react to what they say, even if it means they never sell another album in the US."

OOC here...
So I can use a `Hooked Cross' (thus advertising I'm a NAZI), but I can't use a `swastika' (thus advertising I'm a pacifist) ?

While we are at it, why not ban the colour `white', and any english word with the letter `e' ?

</RANT>

The rest was a discussion of Che Guevera, and some more on the Dixie Chicks. No discussion of putting the rule in the FAQ to be found. Now, the author of this thread says his post was removed from the database. It may have been, I never saw it, however. Therefore, all I had to go on was the posts still there. Since the original question was answered, and the remaining conversation was A) inappropriate for the forum (pros and cons of Che or the Dixie Chicks), or B) discussion of why swasticas were banned, there was no need for the topic to remain unlocked.

No one is asking for anything to be done about this. We the players, in fact, like it this way. We the players merely request a centralized repository of rules, AKA a canon, to consult at any time.

Again, not in that thread you weren't.

I spent a month or so lurking before I even made a post. RP, General, Technical. I think I was probably too timid to break any rules. Doing that isn't possible anymore. The forums ran pretty well back in the day, but not so much now. Telling people to read the forums isn't helpful when they can't be accessed for twelve hours of the day.

I understand that the FAQ is going to be overhauled a bit when we move to Jolt. We should endeavour to explain as much as we can to the new players, because if this problem is something that comes up over and over, then its clear that something needs fixing. There are rules here handed down by Max, by [violet], created by precedant by the mods and there are the laws that are just implied and not codified. People don't know them intuitively.

Have some compassion everyone, we were all new here once.

Not knowing the rules is not excuse for breaking them.I disagree.

Actually, legal authorities tend to disagree with you, Spoffin. "Ignorance is no excuse." It's your responsibility to abide by the rules. It's your responsibility to make sure oyu know the rules.

Not knowing the rules is not excuse for breaking them.I disagree.

It's your responsibility to get to know the laws. They are published in the Law Code, or in our case, the mod section of the forum. No one is going to your home and explainning the rules personally.

Telling people to read the forums isn't helpful when they can't be accessed for twelve hours of the day.

I have to agree with that. Read the doing-bad-things remark below :)

The issue is that many (the majority?) of NS rules are built up by what is known as Common Law. The legal system exists as nothing more than a list of precedants…

So I don't even get credit now? Tish and fipsy, I’m sticking creative Commons Licenses on my posts from now on :wink:

Not knowing the rules is not excuse for breaking them.I disagree.

I'll just say:

YOU'RE WRONG! WRONG! YOU'RE REALLY WRONG!

Maybe in a perfect world... oh, wait. In a perfect world, we wouldn't be having this discussion because Nazism would have died with Hitler. So, the existence of this topic makes this world imperfect.




~Some day a real rain will come and wash this filth from the streets...

Calm down please?

Actually, legal authorities tend to disagree with you, Spoffin. "Ignorance is no excuse." It's your responsibility to abide by the rules. It's your responsibility to make sure oyu know the rules.

Yes it is, but theres a middle ground here. If the rules are hard to find, you can understand that people might break them without knowing.

Not knowing the rules is not excuse for breaking them.I disagree.

I'll just say:

YOU'RE WRONG! WRONG! YOU'RE REALLY WRONG!

Maybe in a perfect world... oh, wait. In a perfect world, we wouldn't be having this discussion because Nazism would have died with Hitler. So, the existence of this topic makes this world imperfect. Thats... a really strange post.

Er... nice to see we're debating common law...

Still, I think the expired equine has been flogged sufficiently. Anyone mind if this gets locked?

I say lock away, but you know that someone else is just going to create a similar thread in the near future.

dun dun dun, another one gets the lock.

dun dun dun, another one gets the lock.
duhDUHduhDUH