NationStates Jolt Archive

(I want to make sure that people ,especially TH and Hack, know what I'm talking about, but the original thread has been locked. Anyway...)

When I said that the game was created for the enjoyment of players, I meant that the game now exists for the enjoyment of players. Sorry for making myself unclear.

Yes, the original purpose of NS was to sell a book. I already said that. However, since NS is ten times more popular than Jennifer Government, we can say that NS has move beyond its original purpose. It is now a full-fledged game, and what is the purpose of a game? For the enjoyment of players.

Hack said that the mods are to enforce the rules. Yes they are, but what are the rules for? Again, for the enjoyment of players. This is true from the beginning, since rules don't help to sell books. Therefore, the mods/admin should make the game as enjoyable for as much players as possible. This includes not making unpopular decisions. Like I said, the mods are under no obligation to do anything (private site, "if it happens, it happens" etc.) but just because they aren't obliged to do somenthing, doesn't mean that they shouldn't. If a minority of players oppose a decision, that's fine. There will always be opposition. But if the majority of players oppose a decision, then there's a problem.

(Now that I got that that out of my system, I promose that I will not make any more posts on the deletion of Orioni, and I realize that he/she will not be resurrected. Mods can also feel free to lock this thread, although hopefully not before TH and Hack have a chance to respond. Thank you.)

Sandpit, there was no reason to explain yourself, I perfectly understood where you were coming from and merely disagreed.

Also, just a slight point, there's more than a million nations in this game... it would be very hard to get a majority out of a million nations. ;)

Just because people don't post agreement in Moderation topics doesn't necessarily mean the decisions are "unpopular". While I appreciate the player concern over the Orioni case, I happened to agree with the mod decision. I didn't register that opinion because it seemed pointless and spammy to do so.

The site can and has evolved over time with input from players and moderators, and the admins have in fact changed their minds on occasion. With that in mind, I think your suggestion (which I read as Moderation staff bowing to popular pressure on controversial issues) is an absolutely ghastly idea. It turns mod decisions into popularity contests. If you want spammers and griefers to set the rules of these forums, this is the way to do it.

Well, I don't think 17,000 people oppose the decision, so I wouldn't say a majorty disapprove.

However, our enforcement of the rules has nothing to do with improving the enjoyment of the players. A good number of people would enjoy the game if we didn't enforce the rules at all.

I'm sorry that you don't like the decision, but it's going to stand.