NationStates Jolt Archive

After reading Cog's post here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7053478&postcount=46) about the current UN resolution being in violation of the rules - I know it's being discussed with the Admin and Mod Squad - but I have a few questions about it.

First, did anyone file a Getting Help report letting the mods know that it was in fact a violation of the rules? If so, did the mods actually see the request (I know there's been a backlog) at any point?

Second, I know cases of this nature have come up before, what type of punishment occurs to the nation in question when a slip up is made?

And, third, is there anything us players who regularly browse the the UN proposal list if the Getting Help page is backlogged? How else would be the easiest way to let the moderation staff know that we think a proposal might be in violation of the rules?

And, third, is there anything us players who regularly browse the the UN proposal list if the Getting Help page is backlogged? How else would be the easiest way to let the moderation staff know that we think a proposal might be in violation of the rules?
irc.esper.net - #themodcave ;)

irc.esper.net - #themodcave ;)

Thanks, UP. I just wanted to know the most effective way at this point. :)

I've stopped filing Getting Help requests for UN resolutions. Given that most of the crap tends to roll off without making Quorum, it just doesn't seem worth it to fill up the mailbox with a ton of details about it.

I'd love to see the Enodia protocols enforced. There are people actively trying to subvert the UN by posting the most inane and pointless proposals, then getting friends to approve them. In fact, there is a whole series of regions (Goontopia, Goontopia Prime, and at least 25 more 3-nation UN-Delegated other-numbered Goontopias) who are using their regional message boards to promote ways to get dumb stuff in the queue.

As to the current proposal, it didn't just slip through. It's been under discussion in the forums for at least 2 or 3 weeks, and a lot of Cog's points were raised and discarded unaddressed. It's also been through the proposal queue at least once before without getting enough approvals.

To sum up, I'd really like to see one or more mods take on the UN queue on a more regular basis. Cogitation can't be everywhere all the time, and none of the other Game Mods seem to be all that interested in the UN. I realize it's hard to maintain an interest in the same old drudgery of sifting through horrid proposals, but it's an unaddressed need.

I've stopped filing Getting Help requests for UN resolutions.

So, have I.

To sum up, I'd really like to see one or more mods take on the UN queue on a more regular basis.

I concur.

The Getting Help Page is useful for certain complaints on proposals. Obviously, a "KILL ALL <X>" proposal doesn't need to be filed. We'll either catch it, or it'll die on it's own.

However, if you see a proposal that actually has substance (and thus a chance of hitting the floor), please file a request. Putting the entire text isn't necessary (we have to look it up to delete it anyway), so just the title will suffice. Also, it would be good if you could put your personal objections to the proposal in your request. We are trying to enforce Enodia's rules, it's just... well... he was a shitload better at it than anybody else. The rest of us got really lazy when it came to the UN, especially those of us who aren't in the UN.

But, there's more of us going through it more often, and Melkor's currently going nuts on the list, attacking it like the fevered drunk he is, so the backlog is down to hours or a day, not weeks.

The reason it would still be good to mention resolutions like Law of the Sea, is because we sometimes miss stuff. It's really easy to catch the crap proposals and when I don't have a lot of time, those are the ones I pay attention to.

:eek: he's hitting the UN list as well?
someone's trying to get at least one gold medal at the next mod-olympics :p

:eek: he's hitting the UN list as well? No, no, no, no... he's hitting the tasklist, some of us other Mods are browsing the UN.

someone's trying to get at least one gold medal at the next mod-olympics :p Nah, he's still playing catch-up. He might have nabbed a couple bronzes, though... heh

last i heard you were behind him? :p

Does this mean that we can effectively ignore it, even if it passes?

last i heard you were behind him? :p
Possible. I haven't hit the list in a month or two. Just been doing random stuff latelt. ;)

i knew it! :p :D

ok the laws of the sea though are real so how were they enacted in rl

ok the laws of the sea though are real so how were they enacted in rl

If you want to debate the resolution, do so in the UN forum, this isn't the place for it.

ok the laws of the sea though are real so how were they enacted in rl

Real-Life doesn't have UN categories to abide by.

But, there's more of us going through it more often, and Melkor's currently going nuts on the list, attacking it like the fevered drunk he is, so the backlog is down to hours or a day, not weeks.

The reason it would still be good to mention resolutions like Law of the Sea, is because we sometimes miss stuff. It's really easy to catch the crap proposals and when I don't have a lot of time, those are the ones I pay attention to.

I think somebody needs to speak up on the *other* duty moderators *should* be doing. Deleting racist or other obviously inappropriate proposals should be simple enough, but in the case of larger, more complex resolutions (i.e. anything a touch closer to a real world proposal / resolution / convention) shouldn't just be treated in the same unhelpful way that most proposals are currently being deleted.

Sometimes a proposal author has a good defense why he / she chose a particular category. Let's take the "Free Trade" category as an example. Many experienced UN players seem to think that this category means, "any resolution that improves our economies". It doesn't, and there really is no easy way to see this, since the category rarely rolls up to the UN floor for a vote.

I think when a proposal is deleted, but obviously was constructed within the spirit of the UN (i.e. working with nations), that the moderator who deleted it should probably send an encouraging note if they feel there is a more appropriate other category. For the Law of the Saw, I honestly see two clauses (3 and 15) which are removals of "international trade barriers", so in this case the note could have been something along the lines of, "Please rewrite and focuse more on the 'economic freedom' issues you've included in clauses 3 and 15."

Another note ... I would hope that IRC isn't given too much priority over the getting help page. I've submitted requests there before and never heard back ... but I've also sent directed telegrams and also heard nothing back before as well. *shrug*

I deleted three pages of bad proposals the other day, Mikitivity. Two hours later, GMC came on and deleted two more pages of proposals that I had missed. That's a good 25 worthless, illegal, racist, bigoted, etc. proposals that were removed in one day.

And, no, we're not going to have workshops via Mod Center telegram over why a proposal was deleted. We do have other things to do, you know. Like restoring nations; sniffing out UN multis; dealing with harrassing telegrams, regional events, and nation names; dealing with spammers; deleting region griefers; dealing with Forum problems that need GM asistance; deleting nations with inappropriate names; deleting inappropriate mottos, animals, currencies and flags; and every other thing that comes down the line, including threads like this.

And, occationally, we like to play NationStates.

In short, we generally don't have time to rewrite your issues for you, that's what the UN forum is for.

IRC tends to get addressed more quickly than the Getting Help Page, as I get asked to do things even when I'm not in #themodcave. I might respond to a direct request like that even if I wasn't planning on doing any mod work (this seems to happen a lot with griefings) and had the Center closed. If I'm not intending to do work, the list won't open itself. Also, every request to the center is read. Just because we don't give a personal responce doesn't mean that it hasn't been read. Oftentimes we don't respond, unless the person filing the request is directly involved.

In other words, if you filed a complaint about a harassing telegram, I'd most likely respond with what action was take (ie: So-and-so's been warned). If you send a request with some suspected Multi's, I probably won't respond. And, of course, sometimes we feel that nothing needs to be done about the situation because it's too trivial, not in violation, the people aren't multis, etc.

Finally, telegramming is often the worst way to try and get help.

I deleted three pages of bad proposals the other day, Mikitivity. Two hours later, GMC came on and deleted two more pages of proposals that I had missed. That's a good 25 worthless, illegal, racist, bigoted, etc. proposals that were removed in one day.

And, no, we're not going to have workshops via Mod Center telegram over why a proposal was deleted. We do have other things to do, you know.

I'm aware of that, but as you noted above ... those 25 proposals that were deleted were racist, bigoted, etc. What I'm curious about is how many times do you see something that you feel is *close* and that a polite, "I'm considering this to be the wrong category, but would not delete it if it were X category." might actually stream line your job?

There are always going to be hosts of trash proposals. But as more and more well written proposals make their way into the queue (not the floor, just the queue), the people submitting those other proposals might start to learn a thing or two.

You may of course feel free to disagree, but I don't think my opinion is totally without merit.

EDIT: And believe it or not, I think it would be a great thing if the mods could play the game more often as well. It will certainly allow you to recall how frustrating or how rewarding the game can be. Hopefully the two new mods will lighten the load some.

Personally, I telegram people who post proposals in the wrong category telling them the right category, so your criticism doesn't exactly apply...

I must wonder, however, how you could possibly know what everyone else's proposal deletion telegrams say in the first place.

I think that the reason the Law of the Sea one got through was that at a glance it appeared well-written and a decent proposal, and took further examination to discover the problems. Whereas most of the crap proposals are obviously crap at a glance, this kind is harder to sniff out.

I suspect a lot of crap proposals could sneak through if the writers made an effort to make them look nice.

Personally, I telegram people who post proposals in the wrong category telling them the right category, so your criticism doesn't exactly apply...

I must wonder, however, how you could possibly know what everyone else's proposal deletion telegrams say in the first place.

There is no need for sarcasm here.

That is great that you are telegramming people with a suggestion! :)

Unfortunately I have received a deletion telegram telling me, "Next time use the appropriate category." That was not helpful, and I believe I have the exact text wrong there ... but that covers the basic lack of direction that was conveyed. Granted it was just once, but I feel I'm not the exception to the general rule. I've seen a few other players post their telegrams, and I've noticed that sometimes they get the same message.

Now Cog has made note that he doesn't send telegrams explaining his deletions, but instead has posted examples in the UN forum. I actually find those helpful.

*sigh*

It isn't an easy job, but if any moderator is going to delete something that he / she feels (use of their judgement, which he / she was assigned to the team for right?) is a misunderstanding, it would be nice to get a note pointing the proposal author in the right direction.

There is no need for sarcasm here.

That is great that you are telegramming people with a suggestion! :)

Unfortunately I have received a deletion telegram telling me, "Next time use the appropriate category." That was not helpful, and I believe I have the exact text wrong there ... but that covers the basic lack of direction that was conveyed. Granted it was just once, but I feel I'm not the exception to the general rule. I've seen a few other players post their telegrams, and I've noticed that sometimes they get the same message.

Now Cog has made note that he doesn't send telegrams explaining his deletions, but instead has posted examples in the UN forum. I actually find those helpful.

*sigh*

It isn't an easy job, but if any moderator is going to delete something that he / she feels (use of their judgement, which he / she was assigned to the team for right?) is a misunderstanding, it would be nice to get a note pointing the proposal author in the right direction.
First, I didn't detect any sarcasm in GMCs post. From reading this topic, one might get the impression that the problem being discussed is widespread, so GMC was wondering what basis you had for making such a statement (or implication). You don't have such a basis unless you know what proposal deletion telegrams other authors have received.

Hmmm.... Actually, thinking about it further, GMCs comment does make sense when read straight or read as sarcastic. So, I'm not sure if he's being sarcastic or not.

Second, the official log says that on September 11, you were sent a Voice-of-Mod telegram stating:
Next time, make sure your UN proposal is in the correct category.
I've spoken about this with the other Moderators, and the consensus, so far, is that the telegram was blunt, but not rude*. Keep in mind that we, as Moderators, have to enforce the rules. As part of that responsibility, we have to tell people when they've broken the rules and that they have to get back in-line. This often requires a degree of arrogance and bluntness, no matter how polite we try to be. Now we can make suggestions as to how you can comply with the rules in the future (and I try to make such suggestions, myself), but the volume of cases we have to handle sometimes prohibits this, and, ultimately, it's really your responsibility, as a player, to understand and comply with the rules, not our responsibility to explain the rules to you on every single violation.

* Now, if this Moderator were cursing you out in the telegram, then that would be rude.

Keep in mind that when dealing with a lot of proposals, the sequence-of-events usually goes like this for every single proposal:

Read proposal.
Judge proposal. (Move to last step if proposal is OK.)
Delete proposal.
Load nation.
Add/Modify "warned" tag.
Send telegram.
Move on to next proposal.

So, because our time is limited, we have to keep that process as short as possible. Consequently, we have to expect that there's going to be some friction. I doubt that that's entirely avoidable.

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

Second, the official log says that on September 11, you were sent a Voice-of-Mod telegram ...

Keep in mind that when dealing with a lot of proposals, the sequence-of-events usually goes like this for every single proposal:

Read proposal.
Judge proposal. (Move to last step if proposal is OK.)
Delete proposal.
Load nation.
Add/Modify "warned" tag.
Send telegram.
Move on to next proposal.

So, because our time is limited, we have to keep that process as short as possible. Consequently, we have to expect that there's going to be some friction. I doubt that that's entirely avoidable.


Thank you again.

I'm assuming that a Voice-of-Mod telegram is also a UN warning. It isn't completely clear, but I've assumed that is at least one strike I'm now permanently carrying around -- hence another reason why I wasn't all too thrilled about the "bluntness" of the telegram.

I wish I had an additional suggestion on how to reduce some of that friction. That said, I wouldn't mind it at all if you felt that perhaps my Global Disaster Assistance proposal shouldn't be added to your case study of deleted proposals with your explanation on how you *would* have ruled had you found it first.

I actually did look for it there last night, and may have missed it if it was already included in the stickied thread.

I'm also wondering if perhaps passed resolutions can't be used as no-no examples, with the explanation that they've been grandfathered.

Thank you again.

I'm assuming that a Voice-of-Mod telegram is also a UN warning. It isn't completely clear, but I've assumed that is at least one strike I'm now permanently carrying around -- hence another reason why I wasn't all too thrilled about the "bluntness" of the telegram.
Correct, you now have one official warning for a bad proposal.

I wish I had an additional suggestion on how to reduce some of that friction. That said, I wouldn't mind it at all if you felt that perhaps my Global Disaster Assistance proposal shouldn't be added to your case study of deleted proposals with your explanation on how you *would* have ruled had you found it first.

I actually did look for it there last night, and may have missed it if it was already included in the stickied thread.
Most Moderators feel that they don't have the time to post an explanation for each proposal that they delete (which is probably a reasonable assessment). Consequently, I'm the only one who posts in the "Case Study of Deleted Proposals" thread.

Since I have the text for the Global Disaster Assistance" proposal, I'll add it when I have time (I'm a bit pressed right now).

I generally can't analyze proposals that other Mods have deleted because I don't have the text, category, or other information.

I'm also wondering if perhaps passed resolutions can't be used as no-no examples, with the explanation that they've been grandfathered.
If passed resolutions (that should have been deleted) are grandfathered in, rather than being removed by Admin, then yeah, I'll do this.

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

Correct, you now have one official warning for a bad proposal.

On that note, I'd like the moderation team to consider eventually taking away some times of warnings after a year or two. The reason I say this, is I talked about Hersfold about making another Olympics proposal in the future that meets what we believe are the rules, and he said that he really felt that the risk of a mod finding fault with anything is pretty much keeping him out of *most* UN related activities.

Personally, with one strike against me, I only feel *half* of that pressure, but it is there, and I would hope that active players can make a mistake or four over a very long time period, without having to create new nations.


Since I have the text for the Global Disaster Assistance" proposal, I'll add it when I have time (I'm a bit pressed right now).

If passed resolutions (that should have been deleted) are grandfathered in, rather than being removed by Admin, then yeah, I'll do this.


Please don't feel I'm rushing you here, but I actually think that the proposal would be a good example of what to avoid, and ironically if I had been a bit louder in the UN forum, I may have been able to work with Serconea to avoid the subject of this current thread. (His resolution dates back to at least the late August whaling debates if not further.)

As for the passed resolutions, a number of us have explained in forum that the rules have changed since many of them were adopted, but many proposal authors do not post in the forum (and unfortunately my crystal ball only allows me to view telegrams not what people are reading <--- I'm joking there, but the flamethrowers down please!). ;)

ADDENDUM (edit): I wanted to add that my justification for having certain warns disappear is that some of the proposal categories are not clear. Examples: the debate I've started in technical concerning Free Trade and the current situation(s) <--- Serconea's Free Trade proposal is not the only one that took the category for a boost in economies instead of removal of controls on businesses. Another example is my "political stability" issue looked like a trade off between the right to sue somebody and a corresponding increase in law enforcement / stability.

Bottom line, I think some of the categories aren't as clear as others, and in a game where the vast majority of resolutions and viable proposals are focused in three categories: Human Rights, Environmental, and Social Justice, there just aren't that many examples of good Free Trade or Political Stablity proposals or resolutions around.

In other words, many of us (and I bet even mods) would disagree on what exactly fits in those categories. After a few rulings have been made, if players demostrate a wilingness to follow the newly explained rules I would hope this would be recognized.

I'd like the moderation team to consider eventually taking away some times of warnings after a year or two.
Frisbeeteria's got two strikes, and I can say that I share the pressure not to screw up. On the other hand, I've got Frisbeeteria Prime warming up in the bullpen, and if my primary nation gets ejected I'll just 'transfer the flag', like any good admiral. Hotrodia just moved to a new UN delegate, and everyone seems fine with it.

The warning worries aren't really a problem, but the simplistic categories are. This game was designed for what, 2000 participants? Time to add on a couple of new rooms over the garage.

Frisbeeteria's got two strikes, and I can say that I share the pressure not to screw up. On the other hand, I've got Frisbeeteria Prime warming up in the bullpen, and if my primary nation gets ejected I'll just 'transfer the flag', like any good admiral. Hotrodia just moved to a new UN delegate, and everyone seems fine with it.

The warning worries aren't really a problem, but the simplistic categories are. This game was designed for what, 2000 participants? Time to add on a couple of new rooms over the garage.

First off, I've contemplated making a puppet or two for several reasons, and chief among them is exactly what you've suggested.

Second, I was actually wondering why you've not drafted your own proposals since the "Rights and Duties" resolution. :(

However, what good is a warning system if a player (who the warning is against, not the nation) can just transfer the flag?

I'm not advocating that we stop this practice, but illustrating that when some of your more active UN players: Frisbeeteria, Mikitivity, and Hersfold are *all* shy about participating in the UN because of strikes, that it might be worth re-evaluating the nature of strikes.

I'm not calling for immediate action, but I would hope that long-term that the game moderators consider just what sort of impact strikes really have. This is just what I consider a good example (the situation resulting from this resolution) to illustrate players who do in fact play in good faith, but might be a valuable asset to the game.

NOTE: I do appreciate and realize that those of us that are active UN players do enjoy valued advice from several moderators, and that actually may be in order to prevent us from just tossing in the towel.

Hmmm ... when NS2 comes along, will our slates be clean then?

In my defence, can I say that I only chose that category because a respondee (Frisbeeteria no less) suggested it should be that category?

I'd like this to pass, but if forced to resubmit I will. When does the vote end?

Hmmm ... when NS2 comes along, will our slates be clean then?As that will be a separate, pay-for-play game, of course.

Second, I was actually wondering why you've not drafted your own proposals since the "Rights and Duties" resolution.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. I'd rather coach from the sidelines than get back in the game anyway.
I only chose that category because a respondee (Frisbeeteria no less) suggested it
And sometimes I'm not a particularly good coach either, or so it would seem.

It does seem absurd to me that the likes of Mik & Fris have warnings against them that hold indefinitely, especially when the mistakes made are perfectly understandable. You only have to look at the time Cog spends on determining what exactly is the most appropriate category to realise that innocent mistakes are not only understandable, they're also to be expected. May I suggest some leniency here?

Mine were deserved. Had nothing to do with the UN per se.

I can be a bit of an arrogant bastard, y'see ...

It does seem absurd to me that the likes of Mik & Fris have warnings against them that hold indefinitely, especially when the mistakes made are perfectly understandable. You only have to look at the time Cog spends on determining what exactly is the most appropriate category to realise that innocent mistakes are not only understandable, they're also to be expected. May I suggest some leniency here?

It isn't my single warning that I mind so much. That just means I'm behind in the count (baseball talk) and will practice a bit more caution.

If anything, you know I'll turn this around when I see other multi-category proposals and offer my advice to keep others out of the same fate.

My biggest concern is that a moderator who wasn't familiar with the circumstances (i.e. the proposal in question) will view the warning not as a "damn, it looked cool, but not appropriate for the game", but as a "Ah, another one of those bigotry or joke proposal authors". But hey, perhaps my log includes such info.

At the present I'm more concerned about Hersfold who also thought he was following the rules. He has posted a lot of great suggestions (some that would be better for NS2) in technical over the months, and is gonna be around just as long as a Fris nation or one of the Mikitivity corporations.

On that note, I'd like the moderation team to consider eventually taking away some times of warnings after a year or two. The reason I say this, is I talked about Hersfold about making another Olympics proposal in the future that meets what we believe are the rules, and he said that he really felt that the risk of a mod finding fault with anything is pretty much keeping him out of *most* UN related activities.

It has a greater effect than on those who get the strikes. I have, so far never submitted a resolution to the UN. And especially with the recent proposal, I probably will never submit a proposal to the UN. Yes I don't have any "strikes" but why would I even do anything that might give me one?

The baseball analogy is stupid. If you strike out, you return later when it's your turn in the rotation. If you get three strikes here, you are ejected for life! A better analogy is the "Silver Bullet." After all, it takes three silver bullets to kill a werewolf right? And once a werewolf id dead, he's DEAD!

Is that what you want? Do you really want anyone who might actually give the time and thought to make a decent proposal not submit anything because he might have forgotten a dotten "i" or a crossed "t" or because his proposal might accidentally cross some not obvious parameter and if he did that three times then his nation would be destroyed and he would have to start all over again? Do you really want only moronic resolutions that violate every rule in the book from people who don't even care if their nation is destroyed?

Think about that for a moment. If that is what you want then fine.

I know it's not what I want.

(Not destroyed. Ejected from the UN. Bad proposals won't get you DEATed unless your're filling the queue with malicious crap, I believe.)

Is my resolution going to be deleted, or will it stay?

Is my resolution going to be deleted, or will it stay?

This is not an official answer, but it may interest everybody to know that I plan on including it in the UNA Archive, along with its official vote. If there is any post vote decision about it, I'll of course make a note in the archive, but I hope it stays. :)