NationStates Jolt Archive

Why has she been deleted? She distributed the password, unbanned natives and didn't UN multi ( at least, it wasn't written "was ejected from the UN for rules violation ) that when she got deleted.

We used the XML feeds to base our ejections, and people such Illuve has been mod-reporting us for ejecting non-native like Hellandros.

What wrong did we do? Please reply before next update. Last time this happened, my nation was restored after update as it turned out we didn't break any rules but I had to go to the mIRC channel but I've been banned from there and I was promised someone would "look into this" but no news yet.

Answer please? :)

Please don't ignore us dear mods. :)

Please don't ignore us dear mods. :)
Might I point out to all today's posters that it is in fact a major religious holiday in most of our countries, and some of us have better things to do than delve into moderation issues today.



Not me, mind you. It's just that I'm a lowly forum mod and have no authority on such matters.

Might I point out to all today's posters that it is in fact a major religious holiday in most of our countries, and some of us have better things to do than delve into moderation issues today.

~Gasp~ You mean the mods have lives too?

EVERY! RUN! IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD! THE MODS HAVE LIVES TOO! AAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEE!

Okay, back on topic:

Is it possible the name itself is was decided to be a violation?

But could we know what rules were broken? Before next update and not 1-2 updates later like last time?

A & O was deleted for "griefing". I checked the nations on the banlist, the list of natives, she distributed the password. I fail to see how A & o could have griefed.

Anyway, I've been banned from themodcave for quite awhile now, at least a month or two and I was never told the reason, other that "somebody" would look into this.

Is it possible the name itself is was decided to be a violation?

Nope.

Let me point out that A & O was sent a TG stating she didn't need to unban non-natives and therefore left non-natives on the ban-list ( which was forcefully cleared by moderators later ).

What did she get deleted for then? Banning non-natives when she had been cleared to do so? :confused:

A & O was deleted for "griefing". I checked the nations on the banlist, the list of natives, she distributed the password. I fail to see how A & o could have griefed.

Did she remember to also TG the password to the natives she kicked? Even though they were kicked (and removed immediately you claim) they too must be sent the password... failure to do so is greifing

*NOTE* Ish not a mod */NOTE*

As I recall, the precise reason for a deletion is usually only the business of both the deleted account holder, should they ask via another account, and the Moderation Staff themselves.

One would think " was ejected from the UN for rules violation " is more then enough reason for every-one else, who-ever else they are.

But, as I said, usually, just so you are aware that can be the case ...

She most certainly did distribute the password to all natives, ejected, or not. And within an hour, I might add. Also, that was last update, so It would have occured then.

Also, Dear moderator, whilst it may be easter, your apathetic behaviour speaks volumes about hidden bias. :) Not just because you found the time to post despite that it is Easter anyway.

It would be nice to get a response anytime soon :)

If a moderator wants to take two weeks or two years to respond, it doesn't really matter. They can do that, especially when more important concerns are brought up. Just because you want a response doesn't mean you will be given a response. Demanding it, as many of you have, does nothing to speed up the process.

We used the XML feeds to base our ejections, and people such Illuve has been mod-reporting us for ejecting non-native like Hellandros.

XML feeds are not necessarily right when determing the basis of who is or isn't a native. It's important, when pulling up regional cache, to use them in conjunction to the task at hand. However, they are never full proof, and it's best to eject cautiously because of this very fact.

She most certainly did distribute the password to all natives, ejected, or not. And within an hour, I might add.

A moderator will obviously correct me if I'm wrong but natives must be given the password immediately if ejected or if they leave the region freely during an invasion. This doesn't mean an hour later, this means immediately.

Also, Dear moderator, whilst it may be easter, your apathetic behaviour speaks volumes about hidden bias.

How does celebrating Easter = moderator bias? That's a new one for me! Thanks for the laugh. Considering Fris is a forum moderator and can't quite answer to the query, and the modeator that dealt out the punishment might not be around a computer, I think it's laudable that you're placing a bias on those two facts alone.

"A moderator will obviously correct me if I'm wrong but natives must be given the password immediately if ejected or if they leave the region freely during an invasion. This doesn't mean an hour later, this means immediately."

You have to realise that it was a region of around 100 nations. Theres no way they could've got the password to all the natives immediately.

As I recall, the precise reason for a deletion is usually only the business of both the deleted account holder, should they ask via another account, and the Moderation Staff themselves.

One would think " was ejected from the UN for rules violation " is more then enough reason for every-one else, who-ever else they are.

But, as I said, usually, just so you are aware that can be the case ...

If so, why are you getting yourself involved then?

Tuesday Heights, I'd love to see how you can tg a hundred plus nations immediately as well. :fluffle:

ooc- Man these smilies are cute!

TH: Just so you know, ''apathetic'' means when you 'turn a blind eye'' ''don't really care'' ''disinterested'' etc.


Sorry, just thought you should understand the word before you finish laughing! :)


Also TH, since no-one asked for your opinion, you are unconnected with the situation, and you ''are not a moderator'' (as you, yourself stated), kindly butt out... :)

well, i know someone once calculated how long it would take to telegram a 100 nation region..

now if only i could find it back :p

anyways, here's a little piece of advice: first telegram the password, then put it on the region. this way, all natives have it before you put it up, and no one will complain you sent it too late :D

The griefer was deleted for ejecting large numbers of nations from the region. This is very much against the rules whether or not they are unbanned.

TH: Just so you know, ''apathetic'' means when you 'turn a blind eye'' ''don't really care'' ''disinterested'' etc.
Just so you know, ''apathetic'' doesn't mean 'spend some time with family', 'have to go to work or school', or any of the myriad reasons why the moderator in question hasn't responded.

One mod performed this action. Unless or untill THAT mod responds, it's not going to be answered.

If so, why are you getting yourself involved then?It was to make sure in your interest that you're all aware, that when you get your answer, it might not even be an answer, at least not the one with the level of gory detail you want. But I see Sirocco has given you as much as I suspect you'll get as it is.Also TH, since no-one asked for your opinion, you are unconnected with the situation, and you ''are not a moderator'' (as you, yourself stated), kindly butt out...And I don't know Ramir, if you quite realise where you were when you posted that.

This is the Moderation forum and until a Moderator tells some-one to do so, no one has to " butt out " at all, especially not on your orders, non ? Because just like TH said she was not, you too are not a moderator, so try not to look as if your acting as one I suggest.

I love that Komo defends when I sleep. :) Carry on.

If you invade, can you post the password on the region's civil headquarters, and put it in teh factbook, instead of sending a telegram?

If you invade, can you post the password on the region's civil headquarters, and put it in teh factbook, instead of sending a telegram?
I'm 99 and 44/100 percent certain that has been deemed unacceptable. It's also rather entirely pointless. What good is a password if everyone can see it?

If you invade, can you post the password on the region's civil headquarters, and put it in teh factbook, instead of sending a telegram?

Putting the password in a region's civil headquarters isn't a good idea, seeing as if the region is active enough, the password will fall from visibility in a few hours, or up to a day or so.

Putting it in your Regional Factbook would be an even worse mistake, because you would be opening up the entire region to invasion, or to defenders trying to save the region. Not every nation checks the Factbook often either.

Telegramming the password to every native should stay as the best way to give the password out to all who need it.

I'm 99 and 44/100 percent certain that has been deemed unacceptable. It's also rather entirely pointless. What good is a password if everyone can see it?
Won't everyone know it anyways, if you send it?

I doubt any outsider may want it, unless it's for defense, but then the natives can send the passowrd to defenders as well...

But just wondering...Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramir
She most certainly did distribute the password to all natives, ejected, or not. And within an hour, I might add.



A moderator will obviously correct me if I'm wrong but natives must be given the password immediately if ejected or if they leave the region freely during an invasion. This doesn't mean an hour later, this means immediately.

They have until one update to give out the regional password.

They have until one update to give out the regional password.

Incorrect. I made this mistake before, but the thread that you looked at is only a draft, and not the actual rules that invaders/defenders should go by. Invaders must give out the password immediately after the region is passworded.

Incorrect. I made this mistake before, but the thread that you looked at is only a draft, and not the actual rules that invaders/defenders should go by. Invaders must give out the password immediately after the region is passworded.

May I ask where the "official rules" are then?

May I ask where the "official rules" are then?

Big Invasion/delegate FAQ (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=301703)

password must be telegrammed to all natives in a clear, noncryptic way, immediatly. (this only goes for invader delegates)

well, i know someone once calculated how long it would take to telegram a 100 nation region..

now if only i could find it back :p

anyways, here's a little piece of advice: first telegram the password, then put it on the region. this way, all natives have it before you put it up, and no one will complain you sent it too late :D

I've calculated it again recently...

You can send out no more than one telegram every 15 seconds.

Should you have ideal conditions (IE, the pages open instantaneously with no problems) you can get four natives every minute

100 natives divided by 4 natives per minute, is 25 minutes

Note... as I said, this is an ideal world... more realistically, it is probably 3 natives per minute, and therefore, about 33 minutes.

The safest bet (as crazy girl pointed out) is just just telegram before implimentation

*NOTE* Ish not a mod */NOTE*

The griefer was deleted for ejecting large numbers of nations from the region. This is very much against the rules whether or not they are unbanned.

First of all, we were told we were allowed to eject as many non-natives as we wanted and even keep them on the ban-list. Now, we're being told ejecting large amount of "nations" is illegal? Does that mean we're not allowed to twart large scaled defender invasions :confused: How many nations did she eject to qualify as "large number of ejections"?

And I don't know Ramir, if you quite realise where you were when you posted that.

This is the Moderation forum and until a Moderator tells some-one to do so, no one has to " butt out " at all, especially not on your orders, non ? Because just like TH said she was not, you too are not a moderator, so try not to look as if your acting as one I suggest.


This is Ramir's puppet, btw.

I am quite aware Komo, but if you were less ignorant & had read the whole sentence, it also said ''and unconnected with this situation'' too. Ramir happens to be very connected with the situation, as Absinthe & Opium is her puppet. Therefore, her comments were merely posted because the subject matter happens to be ABOUT HER. :)

So instead of thwarting your over-ambitious ego in topics irrelevent to you, perhaps you should get the facts right first? No-one here asked for your opinion, Grippsholm asked a MODERATOR. So unless you are one... I guess that would mean you are 'butting in' also, and in which case, I also ASK, not TELL, you to butt out too.. :)

TH: Yes, I understand you feel the need to withdraw into the Nasicournian hole & let someone else do the talking for you. Some people just don't have it in them to talk in a civil debate... but no worries, I'm sure theres lots of other topics you can go and ''butt-in'' on! :)

Also Komo, another language point. TELL = Command, wheras what I had actually written, was more of a question. :)

Hope that clears everything up for people.

Frisbeeteria: If I had thought it did mean any of those things, why, I suppose I would have also put them in my explaination of the word, wouldn't I?


Thankyou Sirocco, It's nice to have a response, whether I argue about the justice of it, or not.

> 52 were ejected & left on the ban-list. All non-natives. I probably ejected around 7 or 8 natives & unbanned them too. (All posed threat )

The griefer was deleted for ejecting large numbers of nations from the region. This is very much against the rules whether or not they are unbanned.

I do believe there is no limit to the number of non-natives which may be banned. Please correct me if my understanding of the rules is incorrect.

Ballotonia

I do believe there is no limit to the number of non-natives which may be banned. Please correct me if my understanding of the rules is incorrect.

Ballotonia

Correct:
"Non-natives may be ejected at will and without restriction."
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8566981&postcount=108

The situation is being discussed among NationStates Moderators.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

well going by guidelines (mods don't have to obviously this one did) it's greifing if you kick 10% or 20 natives whichever is smaller, 11 native ejections happend.

Cyperius
Brabant States (Ejected twice)
Von Aven
Seosavists
Finomi
Berg-Cleves
Laonia
Octopolis
Keoii
DarkEagle

Edit: Our region contains 98 now, around 115 when invaders and defenders where here

seo...i think i already know, but where did you get those numbers?

someone else, Illuve he's called. He spent a long time looking through rules. Why do you ask?

because i think he got those numbers from the draft rules, which were never official or used, but were just some thoughts on how the rules could be changed.

from what i understand...there are no set numbers. guidelines often mentioned are roughly 10% and some tactical ejections.

personally, i'd say 11 is on the border, but not reallygrounds for deletion (if those indeed are all natives, and i believe it was also different if those nations would all belong to the same player..)

of course, i'm not a mod, so what do i know :p

just an old player's opinion..

because i think he got those numbers from the draft rules, which were never official or used, but were just some thoughts on how the rules could be changed.

from what i understand...there are no set numbers. guidelines often mentioned are roughly 10% and some tactical ejections.

personally, i'd say 11 is on the border, but not reallygrounds for deletion (if those indeed are all natives, and i believe it was also different if those nations would all belong to the same player..)

of course, i'm not a mod, so what do i know :p

just an old player's opinion..
Yeah thats what I said guidelines, which the mod in this case appearantly used.

Those are defintly all natives and different nations, I can probably prove that they are natives if anyone asks me to.

I just posted because this topic seemed to be one sided with mostly DEN players posting.

From the information I received from Absynthe and Opium, there were 111 nations in Western Europe when the Invader Delegate took over, of which 5 were invaders. That makes 96 'natives', of which about 20 were UN members (I'm not sure of that figure, but it's what most of the 'natives' I've IMed with think it was - 18 to 22 would most certainly cover the true number).

Using the guideline 10% figure, then 10 ejections would either match or excede the figure posted on the draft thread, depending on what is done to that 0.6 of a nation.

However, I've also seen a reference to 'a few tactical ejections' and one can ask if half the native UN membership being ejected falls under that description.

Plus, I'm pretty certain that Von Aven was banned for longer than what was allowed, but I can't point to any evidence to back that up, as I am not the 'owner' of that puppet.

One of the problems is that there is no one up-to-date and official post that I can find with rules - only guidelines. And where there are statements that might be considered to have the force of rules, they usually refer to a specific event in the past and so just how applicable they are to the situation at hand is an open question.

Unfortunately, I don't see how it can be otherwise. There are many ways to play the game of NationStates and while some of these may overlap and be compatible with each other, some are going to be (to one degree or another) mutually exclusive depending on how all sides view the one common playground we have, namely the Regional page. Something that might fit for a large region with a certain style might be the worst thing possible for a small region with a different style - and the Moderators need to take every 'side' into consideration...

... meaning that the desires of the natives to play their version of NationStates needs to be appreciated while the desires of the Invaders to play their version needs to be respected keeping in mind the desires of the Defenders to play their version. That can't be an easy thing to do!

The point that I'm trying to make here is that, at best, the Mods will only be able to give general guidelines as to what's acceptable and what's not because every situation will have aspects that make it unique, and possibly render a past decision inapplicable, or the reasoning behind it inappropriate. And, I think that the rule (writen or unwriten) that this should be fun for everyone is not always given the attention it should be.