NationStates Jolt Archive

Oahu

World Factbook Entry: Welcome to the ever growing and richly cultural region of The Persian Empire. We are an Imperial region that is involved in both NationStates politics and also in good role play.

Our region has a forum that boasts a Bazaar for trade, role play at our capitol city of Susa, and the Plains of Mesopotamia for role playing war games. We also boast a UN army to become one of the most respected Empires in the world.

http://s7.invisionfree.com/The_Persian_Empire/index.php

UN Delegate: None.

Founder: Scovenia

Oahu is an empty wasteland, devoid of nations. [List all nations]

Like what you see? Move Crazy girl to Oahu today!

Today's United Nations Report
The Largest Automobile Manufacturing Sector in Oahu

# Nation UN Category Motto
1. FlagThe Holy Empire of King Peter IV Corporate Police State "Obey or be smited by his holiness!"
2. FlagThe Free Thinking Democracy of Neo AtheniaUN Member Democratic Socialists "The last to ask why is the first to fall"
3. FlagThe Free Land of Tropical Utopia Left-wing Utopia "Where the Air is Pure and the Water is Sweet!"
4. FlagThe Kingdom of BuahUN Member Democratic Socialists "Let it be written and let it be done."
5. FlagThe Absolute Dictatorship of Fell HoppersUN Member Psychotic Dictatorship "If you got the money, we've got your disease."

Regional Happenings

* 2 minutes ago: The Free Thinking Democracy of Neo Athenia departed this region for The Persian Empire
* 6 minutes ago: The Absolute Dictatorship of Fell Hoppers departed this region for The Pacific
* 7 minutes ago: The Holy Empire of King Peter IV departed this region for The Rejected Realms
* 7 minutes ago: The Absolute Dictatorship of Fell Hoppers ejected The Holy Empire of King Peter IV from the region.
* 7 minutes ago: The Kingdom of Buah departed this region for The Rejected Realms
* 7 minutes ago: The Absolute Dictatorship of Fell Hoppers ejected The Kingdom of Buah from the region.
* 11 hours ago: The Free Land of Tropical Utopia departed this region for The Persian Empire
* 18 hours ago: The Empire of -Devious- departed this region for West Pacific
* 18 hours ago: The Empire of -Devious- arrived from The North Pacific.
* 1 day ago: The Armed Republic of Old Skool Federation departed this region for The Rejected Realms

Oahu Civil Headquarters

Messages from regional members are co-ordinated here.
Lodged From Message
2 days ago The Armed Republic of Old Skool Federation whoa that was fast
2 days ago The Armed Republic of Old Skool Federation I'm just refounding OSF, i will be back in a bit.
2 days ago The Absolute Dictatorship of Fell Hoppers Join the United Nations and vote for me as delegate.
2 days ago The Armed Republic of Old Skool Federation am back. Nice WFE
2 days ago The Armed Republic of Old Skool Federation hey whos "King Peter IV"?? Are you a local?
2 days ago The Empire of Evil Dragons Breath The Dragon Breath is here.
1 day ago The Armed Republic of Old Skool Federation This place is damn exciting.
1 day ago The Free Thinking Democracy of Neo Athenia Hey hey, we haven't gotten around to kicking this into full gear yet.

We will be refounding the region either tonight or tommorow. We ask everyone to move out. If you are not moved out by update time we are gonna have to kick you out temporarily. :-(
18 hours ago The Empire of -Devious- ok awesome. i'm outta here then.
2 minutes ago The Free Thinking Democracy of Neo Athenia Ok, everyone here has either moved out or has been removed manually. Those who were moved out will be allowed back in once the region is refounded.

We apologize for the inconveniece, but again, we had given advance warning.



so...what do you think?

# 1 minute ago: The Absolute Dictatorship of Fell Hoppers ceased to exist.
# 1 minute ago: Fell hoppers was ejected from the UN for rule violations.

that...was....fast :eek:

that...was....fast :eek:

The entire team has been on the ball tonight.

To explain the sitaution, The Persian Empire was in control of that region, and we were refounding the region. We had given everyone advance warning about moving out or we would need to remove the nation temporarily. The nations were inactive, and telegrams were sent saying they would be let back into the region once the region was refounded (which would be tommorow).

I feel it is outrageous that no one asked the nations in question or gave a warning beforehand. If someone had asked about this they could have clearly seen that this was not griefing, as most of the other member nations had moved out voluntarily.

These nations have no track record of griefing or UN rule violations of any sort. I can vouch for both of them on that, and I ask that both nations be reinstated immediately.

Also, in addition, I have a copy of the telegram sent by Neo Athenia to the ejected nations...

"I would like to inform you that the reason you have been removed is because we are refounding the region. NOT because we are griefing, by tommorow Oahu will be refounded and you will be allowed to return without question.

We apologize for the inconvenience, but we did give advance warning of this."

We made sure that everyone in the region was informed of precisely what was going to happen in the region. We did not want to be seen as griefers and it seemed that these nations had covered their bases.

In addition, we had full intent of allowing them back in, and we mentioned this on a number of occasions as you can see in the post.

I ask the mods to really look at this, and consider again that these nations are not known griefers, multis, or violators of any NationStates rules in any way.

Posting the telegram is not enough evidence to prove it exists, the moderator's will need to check your inbox to ensure it's valid. Don't delete it until told otherwise. :)

To explain the sitaution, The Persian Empire was in control of that region, and we were refounding the region.

thanks for admitting you invaded it :D

Considering Neo Athenia was one of my puppet nations, I KNOW I sent those telegrams out!

As for Fell Hoppers, he is a friend of mine. He never got more involved in NationStates politics at all until I asked him to, so he's innocent.

Next time, please ask us what is going on before accusing us of something, it may not be what you think at it may create a sitaution where no such situation exists.

The moderators can check the inboxes and they will see that the nation of Neo Athenia did in fact send those telegrams.

This is yet more proof that I have no track record of any kind. If you check any of my puppet nations (and I have several), you will know that never at any given point in time have I had more than one UN nation, and I have never been ejected for griefing before.

thanks for admitting you invaded it :D

Invading it? The region was DEAD. It had two nations that were completely inactive, with no founder and no delegate.

But I am not going to go into a debate over an invasion or not. We were going to revitalize the dying region and help it grow back.

and Regardless, we followed what we felt was proper protocol, informing everyone to move out, and those we did eject we told them quite clearly that they would be invited back in and that it was just to refound the region overnight. We had NO intention of griefing or keeping those ejections permanent.

But before we even got a chance to do what we intended, we were deleted. That is the point I am trying to make.

A point I would also like to make, these two nations were deleted for a refounding of the region and ejecting two nations.

However, I remember during the invasion of The North Pacific, Great Bight would eject multiple nations each day. I remember helping in the effort to liberate it 3 months ago with my UN nation at the time The Charlie Browns.

Many nations kept getting booted, it was griefing on a much larger scale than any "griefing" we supposedly commited. Yet, the moderators never deleted him now did they?

So why are two nations that are doing nothing to harm anyone being punished for something they didn't do, while nations who do commit these crimes are not?

Feeder Regions have different invading rules from player-created ones. Ejecting natives without giving them a password, and letting a region die is griefing.

Feeder Regions have different invading rules from player-created ones. Ejecting natives without giving them a password, and letting a region die is griefing.


Please read the facts before making such an accusation!

There was NO PASSWORD on the region whatsoever, and we specifically stated we were REFOUNDING THE REGION!

We were going to recreate it tommorow, so that it would have an active founder, as stated in the telegrams Neo Athenia sent to the ejected nations, we had every intention to allow them back in.

Also, consider the fact that these nations have been inactive for 2 months now, and as we said, we were going to let them back in. The moderators can check their inboxes. We did not oppress anyone and we never password protected the region. Anyone was free to move in and out as they pleased.

So once again, with all of this in mind, I would like to request once again that Neo Athenia and Fell Hoppers be reinstated into NationStates.

I think I have provided very substantial evidence to prove my case that there was no foul play done here. This is clearly a situation that has been blown way out of proportion.

If anyone has any consideration or honor in them, please consider the facts that have been provided. These nations were harming no one and they have never been removed for any offenses before. They should be reinstated.

OK, apologies for that, but even if there was no pw set, that is still a griefing.

Ok, myself and a friend are checking if there are specific rules against ejecting for the sake of refounding a region. If there is then I wasn't sure about it and I will apologize. If it does turn out that this is the case, then I am sorry, I did not know and was not aware, and will keep this in mind in the future.

If this is not the case, then I will reiterate my claim that these nations did nothing wrong.

Either way, this is still a first time offense for both of these nations, and a very minor one at that. We may have been misguided, but our intentions were clearly not meant to harm or upset anyone.

OK, apologies for that, but even if there was no pw set, that is still a griefing.

Well Apology Accepted :-).

the definition of griefing is as such:

Once I've taken over a region, can I eject everyone else?
No. Region crashing by itself is a legitimate tactic to seize power, but ejecting large numbers of nations is griefing. It can be a fine line between region crashing and griefing. Players who enjoy launching invasions should take care to stay on the right side.

This is a very vague definition, two nations cant be considered a large amount, and Cyrus was fully willing to allow those two (very inactive) nations do as they pleased after the refounding of Oahu.
The notice that this would be happening was given two days in advance to all residents of the region, all but the two inactive nations replied, and complied.
The two inactive nations were also sent notices that they would be allowed to rejoin the region after the refounding.
This is one of those few occuances where there should be an exception to the rule, the nations New Athenia and Fell Hoppers should be reinstated because they did all in their power to make sure that the two nations knew about the coming refounding of Oahu and were willing to allow those two nations to rejoin the region after the region had been refounded.

the definition of griefing is as such:

Once I've taken over a region, can I eject everyone else?
No. Region crashing by itself is a legitimate tactic to seize power, but ejecting large numbers of nations is griefing. It can be a fine line between region crashing and griefing. Players who enjoy launching invasions should take care to stay on the right side.

This is a very vague definition, two nations cant be considered a large amount, and Cyrus was fully willing to allow those two (very inactive) nations do as they pleased after the refounding of Oahu.
The notice that this would be happening was given two days in advance to all residents of the region, all but the two inactive nations replied, and complied.
The two inactive nations were also sent notices that they would be allowed to rejoin the region after the refounding.
This is one of those few occuances where there should be an exception to the rule, the nations New Athenia and Fell Hoppers should be reinstated because they did all in their power to make sure that the two nations knew about the coming refounding of Oahu and were willing to allow those two nations to rejoin the region after the region had been refounded.


I don't think I could have said it any better than that.

With all this in mind, I will ask once again that Neo Athenia and Fell Hoppers be reinstated into the game.

there's a thread in the gameplay forum with all the rules, called invasion FAQ or something like it.

there aren't any different rules for the pacifics afaik, but great bight wasn't deleted because of the size of the region, and because he gained delegacy through swapping according to the mods, not invading.

Well, thank you for informing me of the FAQ here. Now I read over this and here are some of the facts, according to the invading rules...

"Natives may NOT be banned for longer than ONE system update. (In other words, about 24 hours.)"

Ok, first off, these natives were only ejected a few hours ago, they were not even banned for a period of 24 hours. They were also to be allowed back in, as I have said once again.

Now there is a given number as sort of a rule of thumb about how many ejections could be considered griefing, but I would like to point out this very important point:

"Note that this is not a concrete value- each complaint of griefing must be handled on a case by case basis."

This is definately a very specific case here. In this case, the natives were informed of the refounding two days ahead of time. Other nations in the region were informed as well, and they had responded back to me and left voluntarily. These two very inactive nations did not respond. Even after they were removed they were informed of precisely what was going on. The region was not going to be left to die, but to be recreated. Since we were allowing them to return as soon as the region was to be recreated then there was no reason to believe that there was foul play involved.

Our intentions, as I have maintained, were benign in nature.

Furthermore, I have seen no rule that states that removing nations from a region for the sake of refounding the region is defined as griefing. Especially if telegrams were sent informing the natives of this course of action both before and after the actions were taken.

Not to mention also that they weren't even banned for one system update yet, and our intentions were clear that they would be allowed back in as soon as possible.

heres a direct quote

There is a fine line between griefing and invading; sometimes it's invisible. This is because the point of an invasion is to seize a region because the natives don't want you to; because they want to keep you out. If the natives didn't care, invasions wouldn't be competitive and wouldn't be fun. But griefing is defined as acting with the primary purpose of upsetting other people, which seems to cover this. This is why we have always had trouble distinguishing invaders from griefers.

heres a direct quote

There is a fine line between griefing and invading; sometimes it's invisible. This is because the point of an invasion is to seize a region because the natives don't want you to; because they want to keep you out. If the natives didn't care, invasions wouldn't be competitive and wouldn't be fun. But griefing is defined as acting with the primary purpose of upsetting other people, which seems to cover this. This is why we have always had trouble distinguishing invaders from griefers.


Going on that, who were we upsetting? We removed two inactive nations and promised them re-entry once the region was recreated.

This furthers my point that our actions were harmless.

Here is another quote from the new Invader Rules post:

"Beachcomber, I have YET to hear ANY suggestions for rule improvements. For the past YEAR I have heard nothing from you but bitching because 'the Mods are getting tougher on invaders yet again.'

The reality is that both proposed rule sets give FAR more leniency than is currently provided.

1. Currently, passwords must be given out IMMEDIATELY following being set. Both proposed rulesets give more time for the invaders to accomplish this task.

2. Currently, any Native ejected must be IMMEDIATELY removed from the ban-list. The proposed rules offer 24 hrs (Rep's) and 12 hrs (mine) of ban-time. And to be honest, You could EASILY make do with 6."


Now in our case, our nations weren't even given 6 hours to remove the ejected nations from the ban list. We were deleted all too quickly, before the question on whether we were truly griefing or not was even revealed!

Also, as for passwords, once again, there WAS no password on the region.

I really do not understand why these nations were deleted so quickly, without being warned or informed of anything we were doing wrong. We did not have any time to correct any of the mistakes we may have made, nor were we even given a chance to explain ourselves.

This is not simply trying to find a loophole, I feel that there has been a very legitimate case made to reinstate the nations of Neo Athenia and Fell Hoppers. As shown here as well I am not the only one who feels this way either.

Furthermore, I have seen no rule that states that removing nations from a region for the sake of refounding the region is defined as griefing. Especially if telegrams were sent informing the natives of this course of action both before and after the actions were taken.

Not to mention also that they weren't even banned for one system update yet, and our intentions were clear that they would be allowed back in as soon as possible.

Though there were only 2 (inactive) nations, you still ejected them in order to refound the region. If the total number of natives is 2, and you eject only those 2, you still ejected 100% of all the natives. This is a clear case of griefing. It is not the large ammount that makes it griefing. It is the percentage that makes it so. And doing so, to refound the region for yourself is a nono.

At this point, there's no need for anyone other than the Mod who handled this case to post.

Though there were only 2 (inactive) nations, you still ejected them in order to refound the region. If the total number of natives is 2, and you eject only those 2, you still ejected 100% of all the natives. This is a clear case of griefing. It is not the large ammount that makes it griefing. It is the percentage that makes it so. And doing so, to refound the region for yourself is a nono.


Well I can see where arguement is coming from, however, keep in mind, again, these nations were inactive for over a month, second we were following the proper protocols in informing them that they were allowed back in.

But nevertheless, I dont know how much more I need to say to prove my case. I really think that a warning would have sufficed, as these nations had no idea the specifics of this. I personally have a very different interpretation as seen here on this thread.

As I have said before, these nations are first time offenders, and we thought the rules were meant in a different way. I will apologize for anything wrong that we may have done and I would like to have these two nations reinstated. Again, we meant no harm and did not mean to break the rules.

Pardon the post, actual information here...

XML October 25, 2004:<NAME>Oahu</NAME>
<FACTBOOK>Aloha! Come and join Oahu, where the sandy beaches are beautiful and the people are friendly!!

Peace is restored, work of the Alliance Defense Network. Thankyou for your time.
</FACTBOOK>
<NUMNATIONS>3</NUMNATIONS>
<NATIONS>buah:fiveplustwo:king_peter_iv</NATIONS>
<DELEGATE>0</DELEGATE>
<DELEGATEVOTES>0</DELEGATEVOTES>
<FOUNDER>scovenia</FOUNDER>

October 1, 2004 XML is exactly the same.

Ballotonia

I would just like to ask has the moderator who handled the case made the decision on whether or not Neo Athenia and Fell Hoppers can be reinstated or not?

I would also like to state something that Fell Hoppers had informed me of as well.

The fact that most of the natives had given their consent for this course of action that was taken. The only nation that did not, which was Buah, has been inactive for 58 DAYS!

On the message board it was stated by King Peter IV that he was ok with whatever we were going to do. If we can find him and see what he says he will tell us so.

Now, that would mean only ONE nation was ejected against their will, out of the three natives in the region.

According to the latest posts on Oahu, the three natives were...
King Peter IV
Tropical Utopia
Buah

King Peter IV gave us written consent on the regional board, before it was cleared off, Tropical Utopia voluntarily left, and Buah was again, totally inactive.

So it was not 2 out of 2 natives that were ejected against their will, it was in fact only one!

next time, learn the rules first.
the stuff you're quoting, was from a draft, not the current rules.
and you kicked out too many natives.

Rather than just making accusations against my arguements, perhaps you could quote some of the official rules and help me out on this.

These finger pointing posts with no actual evidence to back them up do nothing to help anyone.

My collegues and I have presented arguement after arguement after arguement to plead our case. We have backed our claims up with quotes from the NationStates FAQs, the posted draft rules of invasion, and telegrams and posts that were send between all the nations in Oahu at the time.

Now let us look at the facts, the region itself was inactive for over a month, posts were made before the refounding, everyone was informed that if they did not leave they would be ejected temporarily, and all but ONE nation got back to us and gave their consent to this plan of action.

How is it that ejecting ONE nation against its will that was inactive for THREE MONTHS considered an offense worthy of deletion?

I would like to see some detailed evidence to support the claims that have been made here. It is very upsetting that we have provided substantial evidence to prove our claims, while most of the rebuttals have consisted of only a few sentances in most cases with no support to back it up.

Could a moderator could PLEASE come in, read this case, and make a decision about whether or not to reinstate these two nations. Once a moderator comes in and makes a decision and explains why, then I will abide by whatever decision is made.

Consider again, we are first time offenders here, we did not mean any harm by what we did, and we did everything we could to try to cover our bases with this.

We have backed our claims up with quotes from the NationStates FAQs, the posted draft rules of invasion, and telegrams and posts that were send between all the nations in Oahu at the time.

The bolded part is where you are wrong in this matter of backing up your claims. You cannot claim something you did was legal if you're quoting from a draft.

Well, there are two things to keep in mind about that...

One, that is not my ONLY source of evidence, there are many others. So even if one is outdated, it does not account for all the other evidence that has been presented.

Two, where exactly are the official rules posted? I can't seem to find them, and if someone could send me a link I would really appreciate it.

The closest thing we found was the FAQs, which also have been quoted rather extensively.

So while you do make a good point, that does not reconcile the rest of the evidence that has been posted. It does not make the arguement itself wrong or invalid because of this one error alone.

Again, I would really like to ask the mods to make a decision on this, as their word is the final call on this matter.

read here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=301703)

um, the rules say 40% and it is still on a case by case basis

To further the previous post made by my friend Bullrathe, here is another part of the official rules to take note of:

"OK...THERE IS NO SET PERCENTAGE"

There you have it, right there, there are certain rules of thumb yes, but there is no officially defined percentage. As Bullrathe has said, it is on a case by case basis.

The case we are asking the Game Moderators to review is the case that has been presented in very elaborate detail.

It is getting to the point where my only desire now is to hear an official moderator review on the situation and prove how the decision has merit, regardless of the decision itself.

I was also deleted i did not make an appeal tho i should have all those nations i had were different each of my brothers had one and i get the blame its atroucious the moderators just ban you on no evidence.
L.Solaris

Lord Solaris, please explain what happened? Is this related to Oahu, or a separate complaint?

To be honest, this appeal does not seem to have done anything at all. It appears that formally presenting your case does not seem to do any good at all since we still have gotten no official word from the Moderators concerning this issue.

If I had known that, I would have merely blurted things out, given little to no reason for my statements, and acted in an immature fashion. In fact, that seemed to be much like the person who unjustly accused us in the first place.

But since it seems to be a battle that cannot be won at all, I will end this here. It is truly a sad thing when this sort of thing happens though.

are you doing some selective reading?

read this, also quoted from that thread:

The 40% guideline was originally quoted in regards to the Francos Spain case, which is a case of an internally-elected Delegate, not an invasion. Although I might be mistaken about what the tolerance is for internally-elected Delegates, the tolerance for Invader Delegates is definitely much, much less. To avoid running afoul of the Mod Squad, Invader Delegates should limit themselves to ejecting ONLY those natives who are a direct threat to the Invader Delegate's position. Also remember that any ejected natives must be removed from the banlist instantly.

With all due respect, Crazy Girl, a player has asked for an appeal. You cannot speak on behalf of the moderation team and therefore you have no business posting here any longer. Please don't.

oh yeah, i should stop posting in my own thread and let this guy insult me, is that it myrthy?

With all due respect, Crazy Girl, a player has asked for an appeal. You cannot speak on behalf of the moderation team and therefore you have no business posting here any longer. Please don't.

Thank you Myrth, I appreciate that.

And yes Crazy Girl, this thread was started by you. But to claim ownership rights to a thread on a PUBLIC forum is just ridiculous.

Also, I did read the section you posted, so we didn't remove them from the banlist immediately, that was an error on our part. Despite that though, we did quite CLEARLY state that they woudl be allowed back in once the region was refounded. Even your original post shows this. Yes we made a mistake, but of course, our nations were so promptly deleted that we didn't even get a chance to rectify that anyway.

But now, this bickering is getting nowhere! All I want to hear is a moderator's viewpoint on this and be done with the whole thing. I am tired of argueing my point, and I am tired of the immature comments on this board. I just want to hear an official moderator stance on this appeal.

:(

oh yeah, i should stop posting in my own thread and let this guy insult me, is that it myrthy?


This is the EXACT kind of sillyness and immaturity I was talking about!

You can't chase the thread author out, Myrth. That isn't right.

Ahem.

1)CG reported an issue.
2)King Cyrus has presented his side.
3) A game mod is needed to handle this.

There is no point anyone else posting at this time, ESPECIALLY since it is turning away from Moderation and into an argument.

If Myrth has stated that there is no reason for a poster to post again, then there really is no reason for them to post again -- especially since things are rapidly getting personal. This is Moderation, not Speculate and Insult.

I suggest everyone chill out now.

Ejecting inactive nations in order to refound a region is against the rules. Also, for that matter, is being a UN multi. Both of these violations occured. I see no reason to reverse the decision of the Mod who handled this case.

- The Most Glorious Hack
NationStates Game Moderator

since when do you need a gamemod to explain what went wrong in an invasion, like when all natives got kicked out? this is ridiculous. :rolleyes: