NationStates Jolt Archive

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/frisbeeteria/split_sm.jpg from http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=288255

Ever wondered what godmoding is? Ever pondered upon the subtle differences between trolling and flamebait?

Godmoding,Godmodding/Wanking and (puppet) Multiing: Look here: http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43557



I have always wondered about godmodding, in fact, and apparently I must continue to wonder, as that link doesn't work :)

Damn! It got purged! :x

I'll have to ask [violet] about this...

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Yeah they are, they are illegal by game rules.

Yo, none of these things are illegal.

:lol:

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Yeah they are, they are illegal by game rules.

Being against the rules of a site doesn't make something illegal, yo.

Illegal by site rules, not by government rules.

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Would you prefer "disallowed actions"?

Yeah they are, they are illegal by game rules.

Being against the rules of a site doesn't make something illegal, yo.

Illegal by site rules, not by government rules.

The government doesn't have rules. It has laws.
This site doesn't have laws. It has rules.

The adjective "illegal" pertains to laws, not rules.

Main Entry: 1law
Pronunciation: 'lo
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lagu, of Scandinavian origin; akin to Old Norse log law; akin to Old English licgan to lie -- more at LIE
Date: before 12th century
1 a (1) : a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority (2)
synonyms LAW, RULE, REGULATION, PRECEPT, STATUTE, ORDINANCE

Not only does the definition pertain exactly to situation in this site but rule is a synonym of law.

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Would you prefer "disallowed actions"?

Yes, but that sounds too light. I would suggest something like "prohibited." It has a more serious connotation and fits the context well.

English is a marvelously expressive language, isn't it? :)

Indeed.

Mirriam-Webster (http://www.m-w.com) also gives the following synonyms: forbidden, banned, verboten.

Personally, I think the connotation of 'verboten' is highly expressive, but given the options here, I would actually vote for "forbidden". It has a more ominous connotation than any of the others.

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

And so it was changed.

Now we can quit hijacking this thread :wink:

I think you're right that I got the definition wrong, but I maintain that "illegal" is inappropriate for this situation because of its common usage. Usually, when you do something illegal, you are faced with fines, jail time, community service, etc. If you break a rule at NS, your violation is removed and you're given a warning. If you keep it up, you get banished. I don't see Klamath going to jail (He'd tunnel to Ramallah before letting the police get him) for his spam. I don't see Tumenia getting fined. Do you see what I mean now?

I think it's only a problem if people will be confused. I wouldn't interpret "illegal" here to mean "against the real-life criminal law." But then again, some people might. I've known people who freaked out the first time they saw an "illegal memory access" error on their computers. And it IS theoretically possible to break the law on NationStates (e.g. by libelling or threatening someone). Although I don't think most people would interpret "illegal" this way, some people might. But they'd figure it out when they opened the thread. I don't know too many people who would think that "Normacking" is a recognized crime.

[EDIT: It was changed after I started to write this.....sorry for hijacking.]

the term taboo would actually work to if it didnt have a cultural connotation.

And so it was changed.

Now we can quit hijacking this thread :wink:

Er..that's right!

Ever pondered upon the subtle differences between trolling and flamebait?


Yes, actually.


Flamebait: Posts that are made with the aim of angering someone.
(like 'You are a [insert vile comment here]' for example).

Trolling: Posts that are made with the aim of angering people. (like 'ALL JEWS ARE [insert vile comment here]' for example). Also is used to refer to making obviously silly topics that people nonetheless will reply to. (making a case for the proof that teletubbies exist for instance. There will always be someone who feels compelled to post 'No they don't.' despite the fact that threads like this should be just left to die.)

The difference is subtle indeed. If I understand correctly, flamebait is made with the aim of angering someone--that is, a particular person. Trolling posts are made with the aim of angering people--that is, anybody who is around. Do I have that right?

But if that's the case, what's the difference between flamebait and flaming, according to the definitions above? "You are a [insert vile comment here]" sounds like a flame. As I see it, the main difference is that flamebait is insulting or likely to cause anger, but it may or may not rise to the level of a flame.

For example, suppose I post: "Hey, X, I hear that you're from country Y. Well, I think that most people in country Y are of subaverage intelligence!" I'm not directly flaming X, but I am putting out bait with the expectation that X will flame me in reply. (I'm also probably trolling in this example.)

I know I'm being picky, but "flaming," "flame-baiting," and "trolling" are so often used interchangably that some clearer distinctions (if possible) would be helpful.

Osutoria-Hangarii, posting the same totally off-topic remark six times, even if in the form of edits, in a Mod's rule annoncement of all things, is spam. Not to mention that you used an illegible font size. And so, here is an official warning.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Osutoria-Hangarii, posting the same totally off-topic remark six times, even if in the form of edits, in a Mod's rule annoncement of all things, is spam. Not to mention that you used an illegible font size. And so, here is an official warning.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Ah, actually, that's not what they originally were. We had an off-topic discussion, and he removed his remarks. It's all good.

I know I'm being picky, but "flaming," "flame-baiting," and "trolling" are so often used interchangably that some clearer distinctions (if possible) would be helpful.
I understand the possible confusion, which is why sometimes I refer to a particular offence as flaming/baiting, meaning that the offence in question covers both areas.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Ah, actually, that's not what they originally were. We had an off-topic discussion, and he removed his remarks. It's all good.
Very well, I retract the warning. :wink:

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

ooc: We should really name something after Marathon...

ooc: We should really name something after Marathon...

Gratuitous mod-bashing?

ooc: We should really name something after Marathon...

i thought we had, normacking was making enormous quote pyramids.

ooc: We should really name something after Marathon...
Lol

--Felix

ooc: We should really name something after Marathon...

Gratuitous mod-bashing?

Nah, Sheol was mod bashing/harassing/etc long before Marathon was. I dare say that Sheol was probably the first true anti-mod :lol:

ooc: We should really name something after Marathon...

Gratuitous mod-bashing?

Nah, Sheol was mod bashing/harassing/etc long before Marathon was. I dare say that Sheol was probably the first true anti-mod :lol:

Someone should make the Republic of Mister Anderson and use it to criticize the mods; then they can have the "problem with authority" convo and everyone can lol

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

perhaps making tiny posts should be part of those rules as well, it gets really annoying to see them a lot, especially when a lot of oflks use them

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

Pilot: Approach, what's the tower?
ATC: That's a big tall building with glass all around it, but that's not important right now.

perhaps making tiny posts should be part of those rules as well, it gets really annoying to see them a lot, especially when a lot of oflks use them

There you go. Fixed.

:lol:

...

Klamath and Normack must feel lucky to have such a repuatation.

Thaaank you Sirrrrocco.

I hope that this cuts down on some of the spam that I see so much of.

Of course it probably won't.

I think tht TG said that gravedigging was dragging up threads from over a month past (personallly I think that two weeks would be better, but you're the mods), you might want to add that.

Peace, Truth, and Justice,
Luke

Eh, it's pretty much up to the mod on the spot to decide how long constitutes a gravedug thread. After all, if a lot of threads that were younger than a month by two weeks were bumped, I expect we'd still do something about it. :wink:

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

I gravedig yo motha and screw her in the arse! :o

that was probably your last and first post.

i like public suicide by n00bs :twisted:

Yes, is it necessary to say MOD alert when you're already in the Moderation topics? lol The name alone is enough to get him/her burned. :shock:

Yes, is it necessary to say MOD alert when you're already in the Moderation topics? lol The name alone is enough to get him/her burned. :shock:

hmm, just in case 'Modalert' for previous page.

I gravedig yo motha and screw her in the arse! :o
http://members.rogers.com/zeppo_marx/images/pics/larson4.jpg

(Thanks Zeppistan!)

:lol:

...

Klamath and Normack must feel lucky to have such a repuatation.

8)

this thread was a good idea

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

waza dawg, I wanna be revive!

http://members.rogers.com/zeppo_marx/images/pics/larson4.jpg

they're after you.

What a good idea this is. Now I finally know what is wrong and not allowed.

Flame: Expressing anger in uncouth ways with OOC comments (i.e. swearing, being obnoxious, threatening etc.)


Damn! It got purged! :x
I'll have to ask [violet] about this...

:shock: but certainly there are exceptions to every rule... it is just that one Mods exception is another Mods itchy-trigger-finger relief... Example: Hack sayed it would be silly to deleate a nation for having 'NationStatesModerater' as a national animal, then Grace said he deleated the nation for that very reason... not to mention my former nation Texakastan was deleated for pointing this out...
:shock: My point is that I'm not really sure what kind of a sense of humor any given Mod has, or even if he or she has one at all... I mean, isn't this a game about satire??? (you can't have satire without pissing someone off)

Flame: Expressing anger in uncouth ways with OOC comments (i.e. swearing, being obnoxious, threatening etc.)


Damn! It got purged! :x
I'll have to ask [violet] about this...

:shock: but certainly there are exceptions to every rule... it is just that one Mods exception is another Mods itchy-trigger-finger relief... Example: Hack sayed it would be silly to deleate a nation for having 'NationStatesModerater' as a national animal, then Grace said he deleated the nation for that very reason... not to mention my former nation Texakastan was deleated for pointing this out...
:shock: My point is that I'm not really sure what kind of a sense of humor any given Mod has, or even if he or she has one at all... I mean, isn't this a game about satire??? (you can't have satire without pissing someone off)

Don't these mods have anything better to do than harass their detractors? Maybe...moderating? :shock:

Under what categorie falls posting goatze and tubgirl? Spamming or deliberatly psychological damage?

Can a founding nation be punished for griefing :?:

Founders can boot all the inhabitants if they want. They kinda rule like that.
^
|
|
|
Puppet of a GM, FYI.

Pretty obvious, really:

That Place Over There
World Factbook Entry: This is a realm for the puppets of The Most Glorious Hack. Anyone who wishes to live here is more than welcome to come in.

UN Delegate: None.

Founder: The Most Serene Republic of The Evil Smurfs

Pretty obvious, really:

That Place Over There
World Factbook Entry: This is a realm for the puppets of The Most Glorious Hack. Anyone who wishes to live here is more than welcome to come in.

UN Delegate: None.

Founder: The Most Serene Republic of The Evil Smurfs


Yeah, I noticed that when I decided to take a peek a Lazurus.

BTW: Does the second sentence mean that one can put puppets in your puppet depository, or only main nations?

Doesn't matter to me, puppet or main, either's fine. It's like a storage locker :)

Doesn't matter to me, puppet or main, either's fine. It's like a storage locker :)
'K, then I have one that I'll put there when I'm done using it to watch Lazarus for a couple of my puppets.

I wonder how mant different regions that I din't found I can manage puppets in.

Which reminds me.

I'm doing something which I am not quite sure if it is legal.

I'm keeping an eye on certain dying regions in order to recreate them when they finally die off (one of them I have it's one remaiing nation in my Dossier, one I have two puppets in which are the only nation aside from one lone UN member).

Is this an acceptable practice?

I don't see anything wrong with it.

I don't see anything wrong with it.
Good. :D

Random thought: Put a reference to region griefing in the griefing section.

Random thought: Put a reference to region griefing in the griefing section.
It isn't in there yet? Ah, yes I see. Good point.

*nudges Siro*

Spamming to the point where you get deleted is known as Klamathing.

Oh that's clever... :roll:

I've always heard it called "suicide" really...and never Klamathing. Perhaps "suicide - klamath style" but still not Klamathing.

Spamming to the point where you get deleted is known as Klamathing.

Oh that's clever... :roll:

I've always heard it called "suicide" really...and never Klamathing. Perhaps "suicide - klamath style" but still not Klamathing.

Nah, it's always been Klamathing. Normacking I believe is just spamming and being a general dink.

*lost*

And that's what I get I guess for RPing more than being in the Mod forum...

For RPing... no, I'm not even going to try. Every time I post on any subject, or do anything besides RP, I get flamed.

For RPing... no, I'm not even going to try. Every time I post on any subject, or do anything besides RP, I get flamed.

"U B1$(&! I""M GONNA F(*&3IN' K1LL..."

Oh wait... :wink:

For RPing... no, I'm not even going to try. Every time I post on any subject, or do anything besides RP, I get flamed.

"U B1$(&! I""M GONNA F(*&3IN' K1LL..."

Oh wait... :wink:

:cry:

I feel so unloved.

Spamming to the point where you get deleted is known as Klamathing.

Oh that's clever... :roll:

I've always heard it called "suicide" really...and never Klamathing. Perhaps "suicide - klamath style" but still not Klamathing.

Nah, it's always been Klamathing. Normacking I believe is just spamming and being a general dink.

you sir are the dink

hahahahahahah

hahahahaha


ha ha ha

ha

hahahaha''

*cough*

*cough*

*gag*

*cough*

ha


~Normack~
General Forum King
so this is what
size 8 does
http://69.57.141.218/367/22/upload/av-1.jpg

Normack, all you had to say was 'please don't call me that.' So cut it out.

OK, I'll update the definitions a bit then.

Osutoria-Hangarii, posting the same totally off-topic remark six times, even if in the form of edits, in a Mod's rule annoncement of all things, is spam. Not to mention that you used an illegible font size. And so, here is an official warning.

Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

I know you retracted the warning, and all that, but...

I could read the font at that size. ;-) And I have 1600x1200.

Okay, okay, sorry.
Toad

Godmoding,Godmodding/Wanking and (puppet) Multiing: Look here: http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=43557 [line broken, will be fixed soon]



LMAO, has anyone else spotted the Godmodding bit?
Its says Wanking, as well, can I just ask what Masterbation has to do with this?
Or are you just not aware of what the word means?
Suffice to say its amused me no end tonight.

NS Mods say No to Wanking.... :lol: :lol: :lol:
Is it a deleteable offence?

I was surprised too, believe me. :)

Apparently wanking is a term which, though little used here, is popular in the IRC channels. There are many different forms: Spacewanking for example would involve say a 5-million population nation invoking the use of a starfleet twenty times the size of that of the Star Wars fleet. :wink:

It's basically used to describe any inappropriately humiliating behavior, for obvious reasons. Puppetwanking, spacewanking, techwanking, etc. Often used as an insult, often on the IRC channel where one isn't likely to get warned. Cowards. ;)

Any one who wants to see a good example of Flaming and Flame-baiting search for the thread entitled Invincible Shield by the DragonLance. The DragonLance is my ex-nation and my last words were forbidden and should never be said to anyone especially a game moderator (oops). Incase you are too lazy to go to the thread i will tell you as a great piece of advice never tell a game moderator to "eat my ass with a spoon." These were the famous last words for this great nation that required immense amounts of noob stupidity.

Sirocco, Raem, STOP IT, I'm crying here. :lol:
I just have to show this to more English people.
This HAS to be on of the Funniest things in years.
I can see the headlines now...

The Sun

Wanking outbreak on The Internet
Christian Groups Voice Concern.

Needles to say, If I laugh so much that I wet myself, it will be the NS Mods who pay for any cleaning.
Now If you'll excuse me I have to go collapse in a corner somewhere.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Clarification please. And pardon my ignorance.

Region Griefing is forbidden while Region Crashing is not...is that correct?

Clarification please. And pardon my ignorance.

Region Griefing is forbidden while Region Crashing is not...is that correct?

yep, you're allowed to invade a region by taken the delegacy there (crashing), but you're not allowed to grief the region:

you're not allowed to ban natives
you can eject a small number of natives (but you have to remove them from the banlist immediatly
if you put a password on the region, you have to give it out to all the natives.
you're not allowed to spam the message board, or the regional happenings.
and of course, you can't use multis (more than one un nation per player)

you can also read about it here (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1478151#1478151)

Thanks, Crazy Girl

I don't know too many people who would think that "Normacking" is a recognized crime.


that's it, I'm writing a letter to my senator...

my region was just crashed by the mtadis matanis mafia (or sumthing like that) they came in over night, took the delgacy posisition and ejected two nations already there and kept them banned, being the founder i quickly got rid of there delegate and seized regional control. was what they did legal? they threatend to do it again if anyone resisted. but that didnt stop me....

is sounds to me like what the did was illegal they cannot kick nations out without probable cause also if they place a password they must tell every orginal nation in the region but what is legal is capturing the delgate position and not messing with the region if they mess with the region it is griefing and it should be report right a way

may i also say that they password protected the region and did not give it out to every member, well not me :evil:

that is againest the rules and they should be reported to a mod let him investigate what happen and punish them in someway

*FILES REPORT*

Message Edited

Spamming to the point where you get deleted is known as Klamathing.

As in Klamath!? What happened with Klamath? I left NationStates for a few months and I miss out on important events. :evil:

Spamming to the point where you get deleted is known as Klamathing.

As in Klamath!? What happened with Klamath? I left NationStates for a few months and I miss out on important events. :evil:
He commited unintentional suicide by mod I do believe.

INANITION just posted an off-topic message to my topic ("Socialist Alliance" in the II forum). The topic was originally a Socialist alliance, but he starts denouncing Socialism! This, I believe, is trolling; in the least it is posting an off-topic message. How, then, do I file a report on this person?

Report it in the Moderation forum as a new topic and a moderator will investigate.

Let's say that a country has an off-site forum. Can this country post a topic pointing other countries to this forum?

For the sake of completeness, I'd like to see the following forbidden actions added to the glossary:

-thoughtcrime: *considering* any of the actions in the glossary. Punishment: deletion without warning (recent example: I Principi).

-mispresence: being around when thoughtcrime is committed. Unforgivable: deletion without warning (recent example: Black&Blue Army)

-misaffiliation: knowing someone who was around when a thoughtcrime was committed. Just as offensive: deletion without warning (recent examples: Karnemelk and Jewelste)

I hope this clears up a few misunderstandings about mod decisions.

Let's say that a country has an off-site forum. Can this country post a topic pointing other countries to this forum?

It really does depend how the country goes about it. Spreading it across every region is obviously spam for example. If the off-site forum is related to NS then its fine, otherwise it's thought of as spam.

Is it okay to empty out a region when you're the native delegate?

No.

If a Founder kicked a nation from the region that didnt do anything offensive, is that against the rules?

If a Founder kicked a nation from the region that didnt do anything offensive, is that against the rules?

No - Founders may kick anybody they want.

~The Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia
Non-Moderator, just an experienced player

Following the Grub incident, I was looking for the rules about what is and isn't allowed on regional messageboards. Perhaps an addition to the "spam" section is needed? Especially on the topics:

• Recruitment messages (feeder and non-feeder regions)

• Nations who arrive in a region to troll or spam their boards

• Clarification of how a founder may clear spam from the board (Neut's ruling?)


White Lotus Eaters
UN Delegate, Urbanites (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_region/region=urbanites)

i still think it's weird that a founder has to specify that it's a founder clearing when he want's to clear his region from spam..
o well, could just be me..

Done. :)

Thanks for that - wouldn't want anyone running afoul of unwritten rules, would we? :wink:

Is it legal for my regional controller to tell me i MUST endorse his choice of delegate or face expulsion? The controller is not in the UN and I fear that he is using the guy he has as delegate to ensure our region votes the way he wants in the UN. He has people scared to exercise democracy - and the delegate cannot take instructions from the people who have endorsed him, for fear of enraging our local despot.

Please advise whether I can state that his actions are an infringement or not.

No rules have been broken. I guess you'll just have to do what he wants or leave. Founders can do pretty much anything they like.

Hmmm I'll hold on - with any luck my failure to comply will cause him to slip somewhere in his un-sporting means of playing the game, and I'll get him on that

Perhaps troll feeding should be added to the list...

I have a question: in a region where the founder has expired, an outgoing UN Delegate turning off access to regional controls before the incoming delegate takes over. Surely that would mean nobody had access to the controls?

Can that be done? Is it legal?

you can't bar delegate access in a region with no founder (or with a dead founder)

I didn't know it was possible, but I saw a regional ticker which said it happened so ...?

I didn't know it was possible, but I saw a regional ticker which said it happened so ...?

It's automatically undone, even if it shows up in the events.

I have a question about invasions.

If one must remove natives from the ban list immediately after ejecting them, then what is the point of ejecting them?

I hope someone can clear this up for me. Thank you for your assistance.

Following the Grub incident, I was looking for the rules about what is and isn't allowed on regional messageboards. Perhaps an addition to the "spam" section is needed? Especially on the topics:

• Recruitment messages (feeder and non-feeder regions)

• Nations who arrive in a region to troll or spam their boards

• Clarification of how a founder may clear spam from the board (Neut's ruling?)


has there been a ruling on how often recruitment messages can be placed in feeder regions? Sometimes I will see the same message posted several times in one day, as it gets cleared off the board. As you know, on this thread, it says "AdSpam: Spamming other people's regional messageboards with adverts for your region. The only places where you are allowed to put advertisements are the Gameplay forum or the regional messageboards of the feeder regions (The Pacifics and The Rejected Realms). And even then, don't over-do it."

how does a player tell when it's been over done?

(oh, my main nation is in a birthing region)

And Temme, it clears people's UN support (unless the people make it back before the server updates), forcing them to start collect endorsements over from zero

We kinda expect some common sense here. Maybe one ad per day, excepting cases where your previous ad is still visible.

danke Sirocco. I had a guy stick up a second ad after three hours. (now if i can remember his name, because he never responded to my TG that I sent him :oops: :x )

Flame: Expressing anger in uncouth ways with OOC comments (i.e. swearing, being obnoxious, threatening etc.)


Damn! It got purged! :x
I'll have to ask [violet] about this...

:shock: but certainly there are exceptions to every rule... it is just that one Mods exception is another Mods itchy-trigger-finger relief... Example: Hack sayed it would be silly to deleate a nation for having 'NationStatesModerater' as a national animal, then Grace said he deleated the nation for that very reason... not to mention my former nation Texakastan was deleated for pointing this out...
:shock: My point is that I'm not really sure what kind of a sense of humor any given Mod has, or even if he or she has one at all... I mean, isn't this a game about satire??? (you can't have satire without pissing someone off)

You've raised an issue I also have questions about. It strikes me that some mods tend to be quite legalistic -- or is that anally retentive? Even in this discussion, one mod, who shall be nameless to protect the innocent, had to step in to protect someone from another mod, who shall remain nameless to protect the trigger-happy. Over font size? To give him/her his/her due, he/she retracted the bullet when his/her fellow-mod spoke up in defence of the target -- I mean, contributor to the discussion. It's fortunate the other mod was still on the board though, as my observation has been that (some) mods are not over-keen on reversing a decision just because further information suggests they over-reacted.

Meanwhile, I've been on other NS boards where people are offending the moral, religious, racial and cultural sensibilities of everyone else on the board, with not a mod to be seen. I'm referring to hard-core racists, neo-nazis, and other such ignoramuses who imagine that they're being patriots by spewing hatred at others on the board, and it goes on for pages without the hand of a mod to intervene. There are even senior posters who seem to just go on and on like this, with no intervention.

I'm not engaging in rhetoric here, I really want to understand how this happens. In all this, there is just a little too much of the 3rd grade teacher handing out detentions the boy or girl who talks in class while seeming to ignore the class thug and his gang.

Peace,

PT

The difference is subtle indeed. If I understand correctly, flamebait is made with the aim of angering someone--that is, a particular person. Trolling posts are made with the aim of angering people--that is, anybody who is around. Do I have that right?

But if that's the case, what's the difference between flamebait and flaming, according to the definitions above? "You are a [insert vile comment here]" sounds like a flame. As I see it, the main difference is that flamebait is insulting or likely to cause anger, but it may or may not rise to the level of a flame.

I think the difference between a flame and flamebait is this: A flame is a DIRECT attack on someONE: "So and so is a [insert vile insult here]."
Flamebait is an indirect attack on someone. "I hate countries who do [XYZ action]," with XYZ action taken to mean either an indirect jab against a particular country who does that or as a general swipe meant to anger a person or group of people who fits that category.

Then again, I could be wrong about the distinction.

What about the timeframe of offenses? Where does it state that no matter how long ago you commited an offense it is still applicable to the factors of deletion?

I have a question about invasions.

If one must remove natives from the ban list immediately after ejecting them, then what is the point of ejecting them?

I hope someone can clear this up for me. Thank you for your assistance.

And may I add, what is a "native" for the purpose of this rule?

I'm asking particularly because my region has recently faced a series of invasions/attempts, and it appears that one of the invaders may have been a long-time "sleeper". I currently have another nation that was described in the invader region as being "their" nation which would help with another attempt.

So, does the rule mean that after a certain time, a (potential) sleeper has to be allowed to return, perhaps to do it all over again?

PT

"Gravedigging: Posting a reply on a long disused thread; bumping threads that aren't used anymore."

How much leeway are we going to be allowed in trying to resume conversations or discussions we were having, before the boards were all shut down? Obviously we had to have the long hiatus so the boards could be renewed in this amazing, beautiful new form which our wonderful NS creator in his near-infinite wisdom has chosen, and which our wonderful and kindly mods in their near-infinite graciousness oversee. [I didn't lay it on too thickly, did I? I mean, I did say "near-", so it's OK right?]

I would like to pick up some of those old threads from immediately before the closing down of the old NS message boards, but I want to be sure I'm not going to be lined up in front of a
:sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper:
for doing it.

TIA.

PT

Oooh the missing sticky.

Gravedigging: Posting a reply on a long disused thread; bumping threads that aren't used anymore.


how old does a thread usually get before it is considered grave digging to post on it?

I can't find the 150 endorsement rule anywhere in here. I was informed that you will be expelled from the region if you endorse more than 150 people in an effort to get endorsements. Can anyone point me in the right direction to find this rule?

Thanks

That's not a rule I've ever heard of.

I can't find the 150 endorsement rule anywhere in here. I was informed that you will be expelled from the region if you endorse more than 150 people in an effort to get endorsements. Can anyone point me in the right direction to find this rule?

Thanks

That is a rule especially made by certain delegates. The numbers may vary in different regios. It all depends on how paranoid the ruling delegate is. Has nothing to do with game rules.
Chances are that the delegate has a script running, to count how many nations you've endorsed.

Swasticas are banned right?

yes

yes

Only in the game, not in the forum.

Well then, take a look at the following region:

Warzone Portugal

Well then, take a look at the following region:

Warzone Portugal

I see three of them. Did you report them?

4, actually. Taken care of.

Exactly what constitutes a "flame"? I see that the definition here says: "Expressing anger at someone in uncouth ways with OOC comments (i.e. swearing, being obnoxious, threatening etc.)" I'm just wondering if this means all swearing is flaming, or what? How much leeway is given by the Mods?

While swearing is not, necessarily, verbotten it does walk the line of acceptability. By swearing, one runs the risk of slipping into flaming. bah

A DOS nation refers to nations that frequently cheat, spam, grief etc. until we're sick of them and just delete them when we see them. Thus the term 'Delete On Sight'. You do NOT want to be a DOS nation. ;)

Thank you

I am the delegate of California.

An invader nation (named in the invader region as a senior officer) has come to our region. When challengd, he TG'd me that he's on vacation and won't invade us, and anyway, I'm not allowed to eject him because it's considered "harassment". Is this true?

After what we went through this summer, my region and I have no desire to offer a haven to invaders under any circumstances.

Pure Thought, the region California.

I am the delegate of California.

An invader nation (named in the invader region as a senior officer) has come to our region. When challengd, he TG'd me that he's on vacation and won't invade us, and anyway, I'm not allowed to eject him because it's considered "harassment". Is this true?

After what we went through this summer, my region and I have no desire to offer a haven to invaders under any circumstances.

Pure Thought, the region California.

Unless I'm sadly mistaken, my understanding is that you may eject anyone at any time for any reason, or for no reason at all. If this nation has relocated to your region, you can rest assured he's not there for "vacation!"

Unless I'm sadly mistaken, my understanding is that you may eject anyone at any time for any reason, or for no reason at all. If this nation has relocated to your region, you can rest assured he's not there for "vacation!"

Big thanks. I just wanted to be sure, since I've heard that mistakes aren't always tolerated. Better safe than sorry.

Pure Thought, the Region of California

Unless I'm sadly mistaken, my understanding is that you may eject anyone at any time for any reason, or for no reason at all. If this nation has relocated to your region, you can rest assured he's not there for "vacation!"

This is not strictly true for all delegates. But I believe that if you are an internally-elected delegate, you can eject any nation you like.

:confused: :confused: I got a message that said that I was spamming a nation in a region it had created, but I don't get it. :confused: I had telegrammed "The Eigenstate of PunDamis" because Eigenstate is something from quantum mechanics, Fermions, the currency, and Bosons, the animal, are the two categories of particles according to physics. :confused: I am studying physics, and since I made a region about physics, and I saw this nation, obviously knowledgeable about physics, I invited him to join, following which I received a telegram from the mods telling me to stop spamming. WHat happened? :confused: :confused:

:confused: :confused: I got a message that said that I was spamming a nation in a region it had created, but I don't get it. :confused: I had telegrammed "The Eigenstate of PunDamis" because Eigenstate is something from quantum mechanics, Fermions, the currency, and Bosons, the animal, are the two categories of particles according to physics. :confused: I am studying physics, and since I made a region about physics, and I saw this nation, obviously knowledgeable about physics, I invited him to join, following which I received a telegram from the mods telling me to stop spamming. WHat happened? :confused: :confused:

You're not allowed to recruit nations from regions that are created by players. Only the 5 feeder Pacific regions, and maybe the Rejected Realms, are open for recruitment. The idea is that if they've moved to a created region, they must want to be there, and not move to another region

If you want them to join your region, you need to get to know them first, then ask. Otherwise they may report you for spamming. And after several warnings, you could be deleted.

Is hacking seen as any kind of Rule braking and if so what mearsures are taken to prevent it :mp5:

I've had a recent run-in with that. While not actually trying hack, merely typing in the name of a nation you don't own and then typing stuff in the password box even if its "sdasdad" or "fhfhgdghd" is illegal. so is encouraging others to do so.

Now my question is what is RP or RPing?

I've had a recent run-in with that. While not actually trying hack, merely typing in the name of a nation you don't own and then typing stuff in the password box even if its "sdasdad" or "fhfhgdghd" is illegal. so is encouraging others to do so.

Now my question is what is RP or RPing?
rp/ing is role playing meaning you take on the charecter of you nations leaders/citizents i'm just starting but it seems fun

You're not allowed to recruit nations from regions that are created by players. Only the 5 feeder Pacific regions, and maybe the Rejected Realms, are open for recruitment. The idea is that if they've moved to a created region, they must want to be there, and not move to another region

If you want them to join your region, you need to get to know them first, then ask. Otherwise they may report you for spamming. And after several warnings, you could be deleted.


Could this info be put into the FAQ? I know it is in this sticky - but it is possible to play the game without visiting the forums - which means it is possible to break the rules without knowing it.

Godmodding is a sin? Awesome, I can finally have a good RP.

All fun is banned!!

Gravedigging doesnt seem THAT bad ... at least not in comparison with the others...

yeah, but why ask a nation that has its storefront in the last page to buy something? just why? the main reason is to prevent people from taking RPs dead months ago and/or resurecting long dead storefronts

I recommend you turn off auto-login, set your password to a lengthy alphanumeric hash that you're never going to remember, and simply walk away. Your nation will then be deleted in 28 days.

Committing suicide-by-mod is never a good idea, especially as the moderators often refuse to delete your nation if you attempt to do so.

How do I cease to exist as a nation? Could it be arranged? My nation is IISRRAELL, if I am not destroyed I will have to become annoying and use this list of forbidden actions as a guidline for how I will piss people off. Sincerely IISRRAELL


DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL DESTROY IISRRAELL
Spamming is not the answer, my friend.

That's a pretty restrictive list.

I hope I haven't made a post that hasn't broken at least 2 of those rules.








Guidelines. How about if you called them "guidelines"?

I hope I haven't made a post that hasn't broken at least 2 of those rules.
Erm, did you mean to use a double-negative like that?

Yes, call them "guidelines."

...

Guidelines that will get you DEATed if you don't follow them, but sure...

I mean, really, if I've been here for two years without getting deleted (and I'm a pretty obnoxious person), then that gives some merit to the position the rules aren't that restrictive.

That, or I'm just a really good superninja.

That's a pretty restrictive list.

I hope I haven't made a post that hasn't broken at least 2 of those rules.

Guidelines. How about if you called them "guidelines"?

Well...considering that your name could be considered illegal...

SB, please don't smush A's supposedly illegal name into his face where ever he posts. It's more than a little obnoxious. Yes, I agree there may be grounds for his deletion/other action, but unless you have a personal vendetta, there's no reason to run around and yell "Lookit me, I'm an enforcer!"

SB, please don't smush A's supposedly illegal name into his face where ever he posts. It's more than a little obnoxious. Yes, I agree there may be grounds for his deletion/other action, but unless you have a personal vendetta, there's no reason to run around and yell "Lookit me, I'm an enforcer!"

Look at the times that I posted please before you take the "holier than thou" stance and start accusing me. I posted here first, and then realizing that I should probably report it, did just that.

I'm not following him around shoving a pending (and now almost certain) deletion in his face...I noticed it here, and then reported it. I'm not enforcing anything. To suggest that I am, when it's obvious that I'm not...is like you said..."more than a little obnoxious."

Alright, you're completely right. I rarely read the timestamps of posts, a very bad habit of mine, and I saw your post here after I saw your thread dedicated to name in question. I mistakenly thought you had made that thread, then come over here just to flaunt the fact you were going to get Asshelmetta punished, when in fact you had posted here first.

I fucked up, I made assumptions. I'm sorry. If I could go back, I would have never made such a comment, as I consider you one of the more intelligent members on NS and should have thought twice about why in the world you would make such an immature comment, while I was at fault, ignoring the context of time entirely.