NationStates Jolt Archive

Isnt compiling a list of people who dont completely share your opinions, calling it an Axis of Evil and posting it, flame baiting. Isnt calling others 'Evil' just because they dont agree with you flame baiting?

Also are the comments about Asian sex slaves not somewhat inappropriate?

I find the entire thread offensive, and certainly dont want my nation's name in a thread that has such offensive and inppopriate comments (re 'Asian sex slaves).

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391563&page=1&pp=15

I find post number 11 particularly inappropriate and offensive.

If it's by way of roleplay, it's not flamebaiting. You don't see North Korea reporting America to the UN for "flamebaiting."

You're definately right with post #11, however wrong, in my opinion, with the concept of the thread.

For it to be roleplay wouldnt those listed have to be playing, otherwise I could post any amount of flaming about anyone, in the forums for role playing and say "oh but that is just role playing"? I am not playing any role play game, and I dont feel that I should be included in one if I'm not playing.

Really if anyone can circumvent the rules about flaming just by saying 'oh it's only role playing' why have any rules?

The fact that the person who started the list actually does disagree with the view point of those listed makes it a bit hard to believe that this is an honest role play rather than an attempt to victimise or intimidate those on the list.

I think that post 11 is just blatantly offensive.

I think that post 11 is just blatantly offensive.
Yeh, I don't know quite what drove him to post that.

Locked.

The fact that the person who started the list actually does disagree with the view point of those listed makes it a bit hard to believe that this is an honest role play rather than an attempt to victimise or intimidate those on the list.
Unfortunately, you are correct. I over-reacted to all the abortion threads, and I was compelled to create that thread, mainly to get at a particular nation. I now regret posting the thread. The link to the official apology is in my sig.

Nice apology, although I disagree on one point...
We realize that there is nothing we can do to repair our reputation, if we had any in the first place.
Actually your apology both serves to mend what reputation you do have, and to forge one where you dont.
Have you considered a career in diplomacy?

Nice apology, although I disagree on one point...

Actually your apology both serves to mend what reputation you do have, and to forge one where you dont.
Where?
Have you considered a career in diplomacy?
No, actually, I haven't.

IC: The Goobergunchian government is greatly disappointed about being left off of the list. Abortion has been legal in our nation since its inception.

OOC: ;)

Where?
Where what?

I read your apology, and I disagree that nothing can be done to redeem your reputation, in fact I consider your apology to not only be redeeming, but also consider that if I knew nothing of you previously, read the thread complained about, then read your apology that this would cause me to veiw you favourably and thus gain for you a reputation where one had not previously existed.
Ideally the thread wouldnt have been posted, but no one is perfect nor is anyone (that I know of) either to change the past, so the next most ideal thing would be for you to apologise unreservedly, which isnt an easy thing for anyone to do, and so earns you considerable 'kudos' in my eyes.

No, actually, I haven't.
If your apology is any indication, you certainly have the necessary skills. Apologising and sounding as you mean it isnt easy, in fact it's a skill in itself. As I posted earlier, it's a good apology, I dont see how anyone who read it could not accept it and let any offended feelings over the issue go, which is the whole point of an apology.

so the next most ideal thing would be for you to apologise unreservedly, which isnt an easy thing for anyone to do,
And is that what I just did, or does that mean sending a personal message of apology?
If your apology is any indication, you certainly have the necessary skills. Apologising and sounding as you mean it isnt easy, in fact it's a skill in itself. As I posted earlier, it's a good apology, I dont see how anyone who read it could not accept it and let any offended feelings over the issue go, which is the whole point of an apology.
Thanks :)

And is that what I just did, or does that mean sending a personal message of apology?
No I dont think it's necessary, I suspect you are missing my point, which (for the sake of clarity) is that in my opinion your apology does redeem your reputation and if you had no reputation, would be a good step towards establishing a favourable reputation.

I think it's churlish when someone makes an apology that has every appearence of sincerity, to not accept it as being sincere and acknowledge it. I was happy enough to complain, and I dont think it's right since you have accepted the complaint and apologised, to not give you credit for that.

Far from suggesting there is more you should do, I am acknowledging my approval and acceptance of your apology as being entirely adequate, and in fact somewhat eloquent (sp? You know the word that means 'you said that good').

No I dont think it's necessary, I suspect you are missing my point, which (for the sake of clarity) is that in my opinion your apology does redeem your reputation and if you had no reputation, would be a good step towards establishing a favourable reputation.

I think it's churlish when someone makes an apology that has every appearence of sincerity, to not accept it as being sincere and acknowledge it. I was happy enough to complain, and I dont think it's right since you have accepted the complaint and apologised, to not give you credit for that.

Far from suggesting there is more you should do, I am acknowledging my approval and acceptance of your apology as being entirely adequate, and in fact somewhat eloquent (sp? You know the word that means 'you said that good').
Thanks. :)

And yes, you got the spelling right in that last word ;)

BTW, my actions were actually targeted at a specific nation, and I was very rude and nasty to her in a few separate threads, but I have since sent her TG containing my personal apology. :)

For it to be roleplay wouldnt those listed have to be playing, otherwise I could post any amount of flaming about anyone, in the forums for role playing and say "oh but that is just role playing"? I am not playing any role play game, and I dont feel that I should be included in one if I'm not playing.

Really if anyone can circumvent the rules about flaming just by saying 'oh it's only role playing' why have any rules?

The fact that the person who started the list actually does disagree with the view point of those listed makes it a bit hard to believe that this is an honest role play rather than an attempt to victimise or intimidate those on the list.

Ok. While it's not my RP style, what if I was to post propaganda against a certain nation or alliance? Now what if that propaganda was completely wrong, as most propaganda is? Is that flaming? Is that flamebait?

There is an obvious difference between roleplaying and OOC remarks. You can't just say something is roleplaying to get out of a warning or whatnot.

Also, while I could go on for hours about how the rest of your post is wrong, I'm just going to focus on one little line of your's. You are, by making a nation, playing the role of a national leader. By posting on these forums in either the UN, NS, or II, you are playing the role of your nation. Playing a role is the same as roleplaying.

The fact that the person who started the list actually feels that way means little in the art of roleplay. Now I'm not going to waste my time and read over the whole thread and form an opinion on his intentions, but I'll be damned if my right to roleplay is going to be questioned, even if it's by someone with no power to take it away.

You are, by making a nation, playing the role of a national leader. By posting on these forums in either the UN, NS, or II, you are playing the role of your nation. Playing a role is the same as roleplaying.

The fact that the person who started the list actually feels that way means little in the art of roleplay. Now I'm not going to waste my time and read over the whole thread and form an opinion on his intentions, but I'll be damned if my right to roleplay is going to be questioned, even if it's by someone with no power to take it away.

Ah, but there's the rub. Some people listed on the "Axis of Evil" were not roleplayers, did not ask to be involved in this roleplay, and indeed had never posted or roleplayed in the UN, NS or II.

Instead, their names were posted without their knowledge, and they were only alerted to the thread when third parties informed them of same.

Instead, their names were posted without their knowledge, and they were only alerted to the thread when third parties informed them of same.
TPE directly informed some of us, but I seriously doubt that he informed everybody on the list, so you have a point.

Ah, but there's the rub. Some people listed on the "Axis of Evil" were not roleplayers, did not ask to be involved in this roleplay, and indeed had never posted or roleplayed in the UN, NS or II.

Instead, their names were posted without their knowledge, and they were only alerted to the thread when third parties informed them of same.

Not to start a fight or anything...lol...but isn't creating a nation roleplaying?

NationStates is a free nation simulation game. Build a nation and run it according to your own warped political ideals. Create a Utopian paradise for society's less fortunate or a totalitarian corporate police state. Care for your people or deliberately oppress them. Join the United Nations or remain a rogue state. It's really up to you.

Isn't running a nation playing the role of a national leader...and therefore creating a nation is akin to roleplaying? I know I'm just arguing semantics (sp?) here, but wouldn't it have been easier for the nations in question to simply IGNORE their name on the list, and since they don't post there anyhow, ignore it all together as well? If I invite you to a roleplay, put your name on a list in my first post, and you decline...do I have to take your name down?

I just don't see how calling a nation's policies evil constitute flaming. AMF and I did that all the time with each other's characters and leaders for a good part of my first year here. Was that wrong? Just wondering.

TPE directly informed some of us, but I seriously doubt that he informed everybody on the list, so you have a point.
You're right. I didn't.

EDIT: And the reason I didn't was because I was intentionally targeting a specific nation.