NationStates Jolt Archive

In order to keep The One-Stop Rules Shop Sticky (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023) spam free, this topic has been created and that topic locked. If you have suggestions, recommendations, or seek clarification on any of these rules, please add them here. All comments will be read and appropriate edits made where needed. Thanks for your input.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator

Awesome job, Fris!

fris, whether you like it or not, prepare for a bunch of hugs
love this passage!

The Gameplay forum is about how players manipulate their nations and regions. There is no roleplaying aspect to the Gameplay forum at all. Don't post roleplays here. Don't start roleplays here. Don't talk about roleplaying strategies here. Gameplay is not about roleplaying. That's why we have TWO roleplaying forums. Got it? Good.

also, if you want, i can write down the current invasionrules in short?

thats friking cool fris

Very nice work, Fris! This will be a good resource for new and old players alike, as long as they read it. ;)

ONLY moderator statements are definitive, so don't use language that implies that you are 100% certain.
I know I have been accused time and time again that I am acting as a moderator, when in fact, the language I use is how I type everywhere and speak in real life, for the most part. This is why Karma or GMC, I do believe, made the statement that the "I'm not a mod" disclaimer was outlawed. If people can't figure out that a regular player is not a mod, perhaps, they should start reading the FAQ, Stickies and other resources before they ask a question that many of us can answer "definitely," per se, based on references to previous rulings, decisions and existing rules with links to these particular insights.

I just balk that people assume I'm a moderating because I have a wide usage of the English language, and when I read that particular statement, I felt a big finger was pointing to me (though I know that's not why it was said, lol). I just know I've been unofficially warned not to use certain language mechanisms to describe rules, when in fact, I really don't have any other way of getting my ideas out linguistically. If people assume I'm a mod and my post is definitive, that's their problem, not mine, especially if they can't figure out the difference between a mod posting a player posting.

when I read that particular statement, I felt a big finger was pointing to me
Heh. Never even occured to me.

The difference here is simple. "You can't do 'action'. Period." - That is definitive.

"I'm quite sure you can't do 'action'." - Is not definitive. Makes it obvious that it's personal opinion.

"According to <link>, you can't do 'action'." - Is not definitive. Link to prior mod ruling leaves open the possibility that different circumstances exist.It's all in the phrasing. Only mods can say the first one, but helpful players could say #2 or #3 with no problem.

Heh. Never even occured to me.

Sure... it's part of that big old mod conspiracy.

*shifty eyes*

Hands Fris wads of cash.

It's all in the phrasing. Only mods can say the first one, but helpful players could say #2 or #3 with no problem.

While I understand where you're coming from, and I understand the clear differences between the different phrases, I talk normally with the first phrase when dealing with situations that require rules/structures/etc. I take care while here though, now, to try to make sure I don't "sound" like a mod, I just wish I didn't have to make sure. :p

Excellent. I was just thinking the other day that it was getting around time for one of these.

One suggestion: maybe a sticky copy of the rules in General.

Politely informing another nation that you are henceforth using the Jolt "ignore" feature is acceptable, but repeating it in different threads or over long periods is considered gloating. Other cases will be considered on an ad hoc basis.

Still no guidance on whether it is legitimate to use a puppet to circumvent a Jolt ignore (provided it isn't done so as to run into other forbidden actions) or quoting an ignored poster to bring their points to the ignorer's attention?

Kudos, Fris. Well-written and well-presented.

And here's your payment for mentioning the sports threads, thanks. ;)

Still no guidance on whether it is legitimate to use a puppet to circumvent a Jolt ignore (provided it isn't done so as to run into other forbidden actions) or quoting an ignored poster to bring their points to the ignorer's attention?

I think they've said it before, but fris didn't say it here...

I dont recall what he said about puppets, but for quotes, if you see a:

Some sorta post

Just dont read it! \=Þ

*NOTE* Ish not a mod. If he was, there'd be no more antacids in the house. */NOTE*

Still no guidance on whether it is legitimate to use a puppet to circumvent a Jolt ignore (provided it isn't done so as to run into other forbidden actions) or quoting an ignored poster to bring their points to the ignorer's attention?
Unless this reaches the level of ... Griefing: Harrassing a nation because of what they did or said. This often manifests when one player follows another around in thread after thread, abusing and flaming the target nation ... I don't see that it's something a moderator needs to deal with. If you don't get along with another player, that's not our problem unless or until site rules are broken.

Another mod turned up this ruling by Cogitation: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8267986&postcount=36

Moderators hold it to be self-evident that if someone chooses to ignore your telegrams or your forum posts, then you are not allowed to circumvent that block.
I think that's adequately covered under a combination of griefing (the harrassment aspect), flamebaiting, trolling, etc, and does not need a separate mention as a ruling. My inclination is to not add it to the rule list as a separate item.

Nice thread, it looks well made, now if it were just part of the gameitself and "Set In stone" as it were.

I am most pleased with this


Requests for proposal approval may be telegrammed to UN delegates, except where the region's World Factbook entry designates otherwise. More than one request per proposal may be considered spam and should be avoided.


as I have had such a message saying not to lobby me up for over a year.
In fact I recently got complaints from Non EP members demanding I change my vote, LOL, I just forewarded them the link to the EP thread where the decision was made by the voters of the region.

Another mod turned up this ruling by Cogitation: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8267986&postcount=36


I think that's adequately covered under a combination of griefing (the harrassment aspect), flamebaiting, trolling, etc, and does not need a separate mention as a ruling. My inclination is to not add it to the rule list as a separate item.

This doesn't address the concerns that I raised later in the thread: take post

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8268815&postcount=42

for example and those following it.

This is exactly the sort of rules-lawyering we hate, especially when it's based on a set-in-stone rules-lawyer complaint from a frequently-warned poster. (no, I don't mean you, BWO)This doesn't address the concerns that I raised later in the thread.
I still think it does, but I'll tell you what - you take what you see as the ruling in that thread (whether implied or overt) and encapsulate it into a sentence or two, and I'll discuss with the other mods as to whether we should edit it in.

When writing your response, take note of the Thread Ownership aspects in the roleplay forums, the section on Puppet Multiing, and the "malicious" clause in the FAQ. If you have something that those concepts doesn't adequately cover, boil it down to the essentials and post it here.

I still think it does, but I'll tell you what - you take what you see as the ruling in that thread (whether implied or overt) and encapsulate it into a sentence or two, and I'll discuss with the other mods as to whether we should edit it in.

When writing your response, take note of the Thread Ownership aspects in the roleplay forums, the section on Puppet Multiing, and the "malicious" clause in the FAQ. If you have something that those concepts doesn't adequately cover, boil it down to the essentials and post it here.

I'll focus on the earlier quoted section, as beyond that point Cog was adding caveats to just about everything written in the tread and clearly indicating that a lot of provisional thinking on the feet was going on, so...

"Moderators hold it to be self-evident that if someone chooses to ignore your telegrams or your forum posts, then you are not allowed to circumvent that block."

The conclusions I would draw from Cog's statement with regard to the General forum are:

1. if you are known to be ignored by a poster, then other players should not quote you in a thread in which the ignorer is active.

2. if you are known to be ignored by a poster, then you are not allowed to post on any threads with a puppet which is not ignored by that poster if the ignorer is active on the thread. However, you are still allowed to post on such a thread with your ignored nation if no one quotes you.

The problems I have here are that by a poster ignoring you, they then are effectively placing other restrictions on the actions which you and other posters are allowed to take in the game or on the forums, and I find this strange, as one player should not have the ability to limit the actions of others in such a way.

The conclusions I would draw from Cog's statement with regard to the General forum are:

1. if you are known to be ignored by a poster, then other players should not quote you in a thread in which the ignorer is active.

2. if you are known to be ignored by a poster, then you are notallowed to post on any threads with a puppet which is not ignored by that poster if the ignorer is active on the thread. However, you are still allowed to post on such a thread with your ignored nation if no one quotes you.
Wow. I see that as a HUUUGE stretch from Cog's comments.

The way I interpreted that was that if a Thread Originator (and only that nation, and only in II or NS where the concept of Thread Ownership has meaning) ignores you and asks you to leave the thread, that you can't circumvent that with puppets. Furthermore, following that nation around with puppets for the express purpose of harrassing them would qualify as personal griefing, and could be punished accordingly.

Your interpretation of that is bizarrely unreasonable, and I don't believe it was Cogitation's intent to grant any given player the power to define where others could post by virtue of declared "ignores". This is rules-lawyering run amok. I'll leave this open for Cogitation to respond, but for now I personally reject your interpretation as written.

Wow. I see that as a HUUUGE stretch from Cog's comments.

Okay, these were based on some of the questions that rose later in the thread, and were really only meant to apply to General, where I generally reside.

The way I interpreted that was that if a Thread Originator (and only that nation, and only in II or NS where the concept of Thread Ownership has meaning) ignores you and asks you to leave the thread, that you can't circumvent that with puppets. Furthermore, following that nation around with puppets for the express purpose of harrassing them would qualify as personal griefing, and could be punished accordingly.

I guess that I'm still focusing on General here, where thread ownership is a different thing entirely. As far as griefing goes, I certainly agree that it is a bad thing.

Your interpretation of that is bizarrely unreasonable, and I don't believe it was Cogitation's intent to grant any given player the power to define where others could post by virtue of declared "ignores". This is rules-lawyering run amok. I'll leave this open for Cogitation to respond, but for now I personally reject your interpretation as written.


Okay: I can understand your concerns with regard to rules-lawyering here. Would it help if I was to frame those conclusions as questions like so:

1. If you are known to be ignored by a poster, then are other players allowed to quote you in a thread in which the ignorer is active, provided it is done in a manner which is not griefing?

2. If you are known to be ignored by a poster, then are you allowed to post on any threads with a puppet which is not ignored by that poster if the ignorer is active on the thread?

3. Are you still allowed to post on such a thread with your ignored nation if no one quotes you? (dependent the response to question #1)

Why is it that moderators threaten to delete your nation if you break forum rules?

I don't roleplay my nation and only use the forum as an outlet on the general forum, and as far as i can see, the only relation to jolt.co.uk is that they have a forums for the nationstates.net website. I would rather not have my nation deleted because i had a faux paux(sp) because i didn't read some obscure rule.

Why is it that moderators threaten to delete your nation if you break forum rules?

You're playing NationStates, whether it's on the forums or not, and as such, you're under the jurisdiction of NS rules.

You're playing NationStates, whether it's on the forums or not, and as such, you're under the jurisdiction of NS rules.

but that's the whole point. i'm NOT playing nationstates on the forum, and from what i see the rules only apply to the forums, not nationstates.net. my actions or opinions on the forums shouldn't affect my nation status because i break a rule i don't follow on the nationstates website.
edit..
rather.. jolt website, not nationstates.

but that's the whole point. i'm NOT playing nationstates on the forum.
Yeah you are. "Playing NationStates" involves every aspect of the game and related forums. If all you do here is post in Paradise Club, you're playing NationStates. If you use your nation account to post in Jolt's Chat forum, you're not playing NationStates. Anything you do on NationStates.net or in the dozen-odd NS forums is "Playing NationStates."

Why is it that moderators threaten to delete your nation if you break forum rules?

I don't roleplay my nation and only use the forum as an outlet on the general forum, and as far as i can see, the only relation to jolt.co.uk is that they have a forums for the nationstates.net website. I would rather not have my nation deleted because i had a faux paux(sp) because i didn't read some obscure rule.I would guess this is because there are a lot of people who feel it is their inalienable right to break the rules if they object to them. A surprising majority of players are able to post to the forums on a regular basis without ever getting a warning by the Moderators. It's also a rare Moderator who deletes someone on a minor, first-time offense. Major offenses (like posting pornographic links or similar graphic content) earn an immediate deletion because it's just one of those things you just don't do here. If you haven't figured that out by now, I'd guess you're not going to.

By clicking agreement of the Terms of Service (something you have to do to join NationStates for whatever purpose), you are bound by it. If you cross the line and didn't realise it, you'll be informed of what you did and warned not to do it again. If you do it repeatedly, it'll be assumed you simply aren't interested in civil discourse and eventually removed. I've never known the Moderation staff to threaten anyone. They merely inform people of the rules and what will happen after repeated breaches.

... If you use your nation account to post in Jolt's Chat forum, you're not playing NationStates. Anything you do on NationStates.net or in the dozen-odd NS forums is "Playing NationStates."

the only forum i posted into before this one was the General forum. not posting in any IC aspect.

Don't get me wrong, if i break forum rules repeatedly (which i don't expect to do) i expect to be removed from the forum. however, i feel it's unfair to have my nation deleted from the nationstates.net website whenever i don't even RP or interact ICly with anyone. (can see why you would use the threat of nation deletion for people who do RP, but not for those who don't)
I've never known the Moderation staff to threaten anyone.
uh... just the other day, someone said "if you don't remove referral links from blah blah blah, you'll have your nation deleted" that looks like a threat to me :p (but does that go on to say that it's not a threat because it can be accomplished? who's to say...)

edit
well, that begs the question... are the two accounts tied in to where if you delete mirchaz the forum user it will delete mirchaz the nation?

the only forum i posted into before this one was the General forum. not posting in any IC aspect.
Only two of the 11 forums (3 if you count UN, which I don't) are roleplaying forums. ALL 11 forums are part of "the game". Your nation account and your Jolt account are considered one account for the purposes of NationStates moderation, even though they are technically two different systems.

If you break rules in General, you are breaking rules of NationStates. Why should your NationStates nation be allowed to continue playing? Those rules were broken using that named account, and the moderators have decided that the deleted named account in question can't participate in any aspect of the game. Thus, you lose forum posting privileges as well as "nation/game" playing privileges.

I'm not blind to your argument, it's just that we don't accept it as valid. Jolt and/or NationStates accounts are one and the same.

Regarding, ignores, quotes, etc. Play nice. If you do that, you'll probably be fine.

uh... just the other day, someone said "if you don't remove referral links from blah blah blah, you'll have your nation deleted" that looks like a threat to me :p (but does that go on to say that it's not a threat because it can be accomplished? who's to say...)Personally, I would take that as a Moderator warning to someone who has a consistent problem with following the rules. I've observed that people who frequently need Moderator attention in that regard will get less and less leeway as the Moderators become convinced those people are not interested in following the rules.

Okay: I can understand your concerns with regard to rules-lawyering here. Would it help if I was to frame those conclusions as questions like so:

1. If you are known to be ignored by a poster, then are other players allowed to quote you in a thread in which the ignorer is active, provided it is done in a manner which is not griefing?

2. If you are known to be ignored by a poster, then are you allowed to post on any threads with a puppet which is not ignored by that poster if the ignorer is active on the thread?

3. Are you still allowed to post on such a thread with your ignored nation if no one quotes you? (dependent the response to question #1)
<deleted post>
On second thought, harassment is already against the rules and we'll judge each case on it's own merits. Remember 'Play nice.' If you do that, you won't break any rules.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8802313

Off-topic posts moved from this discussion, for those interested in continuing those points. Please continue them there.

On second thought, harassment is already against the rules and we'll judge each case on it's own merits. Remember 'Play nice.' If you do that, you won't break any rules.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Okay, I can accept that this is going to remain something of a grey area. Cheers.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/frisbeeteria/split_sm.jpg - ZOMG! S3CR1TS of the Mods? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416862) discussion moved to another thread.

I do have one question about the whole warning process and the "records" of individual posters. Is it possible for a regular poster to find out just what the "book" on him or her? For instance, if I got a formal warning for announcing an IGNORE and then that ignore was retracted, would I be able to find out if that took me off a proverbial deat list?

And for an official warning, is it the usual custom to TG the offending country or just limit the "interaction" to a post on a particular thread?

For instance, if I got a formal warning for announcing an IGNORE and then that ignore was retracted, would I be able to find out if that took me off a proverbial deat list?
If you received an official warning for something you did, apologies thereafter do not remove the warning. The offense happened, you were called on it, and perhaps you actually learned from your mistake. There are no do-overs. However, prolonged good behavior can be seen as a mitigating factor in the event of future mistakes.

If you were warned, and the moderator later realizes he was in error, that warning is expunged. If you didn't actually do anything wrong, we will not hold our error against you in any way. That's only fair.

If you flamed somebody and then apologized before moderators were involved, we will not automatically penalize you for the flame. We're entirely in favor of people working out their own problems without needing intervention. Once we're involved in an official capacity, the record becomes official as well. So yeah, you're stuck with it.

For forum offenses, warnings will typically be in-thread. For random spammers and others who are unlikely to revisit any given thread and notice their posts were deleted, we usually drop a Voice-of-Moderator (VoM) telegram into their inbox alerting them to the warning. For game offenses, official warnings are usually VoMed to them (correct me if I'm wrong, GMs). For game offenses that require the deletion of said nation, we typically assume that inability to login is sufficient notification.

I do have one question
I decided to split/move this discussion to the Official Mod sticky, rather than the Unofficial one.

Yes, that most certainly was. How big is "too big" is largely up to mod judgement. I'd say 300x200 or so is as big as you'd want to go.Cool, thank you. Should get Fris to put that in that huge sticky he has.This was posted in a Technical thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8885064#post8885064). It's really helpful if you cross-post such suggestions here, with a link to the ruling, so we can keep a proper history of the precedent.

Flag size has been added.

fris i'm kinda blind and running low on time so i just scanned this thread real quick, what about nativity, its not in there(the main thread)

Invasion Rules: Invasion rules are under review, and will be posted separately.

The invasion rules are still under review. Until we come up with a definitive updated version, we're running under the cobbled-together mess we've developed to date - hang in there.

~ Tsar the Mod.

fris, on adspam...

isn't it so you are allowed to advertise in other people's regions when the founder, and when there is no founder, the delegate, has given permission?

isn't it so you are allowed to advertise in other people's regions when the founder, and when there is no founder, the delegate, has given permission?
I haven't seen that rule, but if you want to link me to something, I'll consider adding it. As a Forum mod, I don't make such decisions, I just compile them.

Unofficial opinion: As far as permission goes, I'd want to see it in the WFE and not just by telegram or some offline method. If the WFE states that advertising is permitted, I'd see that as a conflict if somebody reported spam in such a region, and probably wouldn't act on it. Which I can't anyway, not being a game mod.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=343654

there ya go, fris

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=343654
I only found one post that appeared to be a possible final ruling, and that was from Cogitation in Post 108 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=6728939&postcount=108). Given that the rules currently posted in the Rules sticky were made official more recently than that ruling, I'm not including any changes until I've had a chance to thoroughly discuss this with other mods.

well, he said it more than once in that thread..

post 2:

...if one obtains the permission of the Founder or Delegate first. In this case, that's you. They must ask you ahead of time and you have to say "Yes" before they can start advertising. If they don't get your permission and they advertise, anyway, then it's spam.

Tell them that they have to have Founder permission to advertise, and you do not give them permission to advertise in your reigon. If they continue, then file a Getting Help request.


post 12:

For clarification, I was thinking CH board recuitment posts, for which you need Founder/Delegate permission. If it's recruitment telegrams, then I'll have to get back to you.

post 108:

Posting recruitment messages on the Civil Headquarters boards of user-created regions is illegal UNLESS you first telegram the Founder and ask for permission to post an ad. If there's no Founder, then you can telegram the Delegate and ask for permission.

still, of course, it is one mod, and the ruling is older than your thread, but it is still funny how that would mean it's not relevant anymore.

still, of course, it is one mod, and the ruling is older than your thread, but it is still funny how that would mean it's not relevant anymore.
I guess I wasn't clear. I clearly remember another moderation topic in which new rules were hashed out, presumeably superceding the post you quote. As I recall, recruitment spam had grown to unreasonable levels, and a new policy was put in place sometime in late 2004 or early 2005.

I'll dig for it when I have a chance, or hope some handy digger does the hard bits for me. Either way, nothing happens until I've had some input from Game Mods who posted both the original and the revised decisions.

mmm...been looking around, did find a slightly altered version:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=389458

post 3 and 10,

Yeah, that's the one I remembered. I know there have been alterations since (Lazarus was added to the "permitted" list when Testlandia was retired), but there were still unanswered questions in that one.

Also, I'd like clarification on what constitutes Founder permission. Would that be a WFE entry, or does it have to be telegrammed? Does the permissions tg have to be kept? How can we possibly prevent abuse of this, or spamming of the founders, if we incorporate such rules into the official ruleset?

Sorry, just being thorough here.

OK, Crazy Girl, we had our Moddish chat. Here's the language we came up with. I'm going to leave it up for comment for a day or two before adding it to the rules.

NOTE: Policy change (as approved by several game mods and backed by several forum mods)

Since ad-spam can be reported by anyone, everyone needs to be able to see that it's permitted. And since anyone who can modify the World Factbook Entry has defacto and dejure abilities to set regional policy, here's what we decided:"Ads are allowed in player-created regions if and only if the World Factbook Entry says they're allowed."If you want to telegram the founder or delegate to try to get them to allow advertising, that's up to you. But unless they add a line stating that either telegram or Regional Messageboard advertising is permitted, you can't do it.

OK, Crazy Girl, we had our Moddish chat. Here's the language we came up with. I'm going to leave it up for comment for a day or two before adding it to the rules.

NOTE: Policy change (as approved by several game mods and backed by several forum mods)

Since ad-spam can be reported by anyone, everyone needs to be able to see that it's permitted. And since anyone who can modify the World Factbook Entry has defacto and dejure abilities to set regional policy, here's what we decided:"Ads are allowed in player-created regions if and only if the World Factbook Entry says it's allowed."If you want to telegram the founder or delegate to try to get them to allow advertising, that's up to you. But unless they add a line stating that either telegram or Regional Messageboard advertising is permitted, you can't do it.
i think this sounds very good

Posted in Policy on Advertisement/Plugs (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=419854)Hey, I was curious what the policy is on advertisement/plugs. I work for a television show and one of my tasks is promotion. It is on the web and is clean. It concerns certain areas of psychology. Would would be the policy on basically me saying "This show exists, watch" in the General forum?
If you're advertising for monetary gain, then no, it is not allowed.
The following line has been added under Forbidden links Don't link to sites where you (or a friend/relative) stand to gain financially. Feel free to contact Jolt (http://www.jolt.co.uk/index.php?jpage=contact.htm) for information on paid advertising.

"Ads are allowed in player-created regions if and only if the World Factbook Entry says they're allowed."

I'd add: "... or when it is posted by the delegate or founder nation." This happens when there's a region move / refounding going on and the sitting delegate ends up temporarily promoting a different region. It can also occur as part of an inter-regional agreement. Basically, it means adds are selectively allowed instead of having to choose between all or no adds.

Ballotonia

I'd add: "... or when it is posted by the delegate or founder nation." This happens when there's a region move / refounding going on and the sitting delegate ends up temporarily promoting a different region. It can also occur as part of an inter-regional agreement. Basically, it means adds are selectively allowed instead of having to choose between all or no adds.
The WFE entry can be made as selective as the Founder/Delegate wants ("ads acccepted from Star Wars-themed regions only"), but there still needs to be a message on the WFE explaining it. The other part I'm going to have to consider a bit, but I'm inclined to still require a notice.

Here's my revised AdSpam section. Mostly what I did was formatting, but I added a clarification line about WFE permissions.

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 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=1234),
The regional messageboards of the game-created regions Feeder regions, defined as The Pacific, The North Pacific, The East Pacific, The South Pacific, and The West Pacific. Note that it is not legal to advertise in copycat regions like "West Pacific",
The Rejected Realms and Lazarus,
Official Warzones. And even then, don't over-do it. One ad per advertised region (NOT per posting nation) in any 24-hour period is the rule. Don't post if an ad for your region is still visible, even if it's been more than 24 hours.
Ads are allowed in player-created regions if and only if the World Factbook Entry says they're allowed. Whomever controls the WFE may set regional policy towards ads.
The same rules apply to sending advertisement telegrams to nations not residing in a feeder region: don't do it. No 24-hour rule here - one per nation, period. Report AdSpam using the Getting Help Page (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=help).

New UN Proposal Rules (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465) link added.

I have a question.

Some people consider themselves Nazis.
Not Hitler loving Nazis, but proper Nationalsozialismus', whos beliefs want a centrally governed state.
Their flag doesn't have to be a swastika, because proper Nazis don't associate with swastikas, but if these people mention 'Nazi' anywhere, they get banned. If a dictator jumped up, and started a war in the name of christianity, the cross wouldn't be banned here.

Also, the swastika, explicitly banned from NS, for the doings of one man. Long before Hitler, long before modern civilisation, the swastika was a worldwide sign of piece, and it is still being found all around the world in ancient drawings etc.

So why is it that for one regime, one man, these symbols are banned throughout?

This is obvious discrimination against the true believers and peace lovers.

So why is it that for one regime, one man, these symbols are banned throughout?

Because Max Barry said so, and he owns the site, therefore, his word is law.

I know [Violet] had written an extensive topic on it... if someone wants to find it, feel free... but basically as TH said, Max's site, Max's rule

The only Sticky in the Archive, it's not all that hard to find.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=275081

Edit: even easier to find, now that I've linked it in the Sticky.

[I]f these people mention 'Nazi' anywhere, they get banned.

We do not ban people for mentioning the word Nazi. Look around the site -- there are plenty of Nazis here who manage to post civilly and remain on the site.

What people get banned for is flaming, trolling, posting obscenity -- you know, what everyone ELSE gets banned for.

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,
The regional messageboards of the game-created regions
Feeder regions, defined as The Pacific, The North Pacific, The East Pacific, The South Pacific, and The West Pacific. Note that it is not legal to advertise in copycat regions like "West Pacific",
The Rejected Realms and Lazarus,
Official Warzones.
And even then, don't over-do it. One ad per advertised region (NOT per posting nation) in any 24-hour period is the rule. Don't post if an ad for your region is still visible, even if it's been more than 24 hours.
Recruitment telegrams may be sent to residents of game-created regions. No 24-hour rule here - one per nation, period.
Sending recruitment telegrams to nations outside of the feeder regions is not permitted.
Ads are allowed in player-created regions if and only if the World Factbook Entry says they're allowed. Whomever controls the WFE may set regional policy towards ads.

[Emphasis Mine]

I believe there is a mistake. There is a contradiction between which nations you can send personal recruitment telegrams to.

If memory serves, you can send personal recruitment telegrams to any game-created region. By your own definition, those regions are:

Feeder regions, defined as The Pacific, The North Pacific, The East Pacific, The South Pacific, and The West Pacific
The Rejected Realms and Lazarus
Official Warzones

However, directly below the statement "recruitment telegrams may be sent to residents of game-created regions," you write "Sending recruitment telegrams to nations outside of the feeder regions is not permitted."

Your definition of feeder regions excludes the other game-created regions listed above. Perhaps you should change the last quotation to "Sending recruitment telegrams to nations outside of the game-created regions is not permitted."

Regardless, great job. That thread really helps.

Fixed.

Fixed.

Thanks!

Sorry about the semi-grave dig... but this is the official topic to ask it

When someone is forumbanned, is it a soft ban (they shouldn't post in the forum) or a hard ban (they cannot log in)

If the former, is it illegal to log in just to view topics?

When a player is forumbanned, they cannot logon with the banned nation. It's a hard ban on that nation.

In addition, it's a soft forumban on all other puppet nations controlled by that player. Evading a forumban with a puppet will get the hard forumban extended to other nations as well, and can lead to deletion of some of the nations (depending on other circumstances).

You can read the forums all you want while banned. Logging in with a puppet does not break forumban, only posting with a puppet is considered "posting past forumban".

Question: The rules state that thread ownership only applies in certain forums, but I have seen in my time here that Mods respect the author's request for a thread lock in General as well, a forum where it does not apply.

So is it just common practice to respect thread ownership (to a degree) in General rather than a rule? Are there just certain Mods who do this occassionally? Has the rule simply been changed recently? I'm confuzzled.

So is it just common practice to respect thread ownership (to a degree) in General rather than a rule?
There are three different aspects here: thread management in a helpful sense, sticky management, and thread management in a rulebreaking sense.

It's common for us to lock, split, or otherwise maintain threads in General or other forums as a favor to the topic starter when such action will make the thread more readable or on topic. Examples of this include deleting or splitting posts from the General stickies that Erastide maintains or Komodom's UN sticky. Stickies are a somewhat special case, as their stickiness implies a certain level of Official Approval. If somebody has a non-sticky (but persistant) thread and wants similar assistance, we will consider it on a case by case basis. My base rule on that involves the question, "would I have done this if I stumbled across it myself?" If the answer is yes, I generally accede to the request.

Other General threads may be locked on request if the thread starter (or anyone else, for that matter) points out that the topic has devolved beyond redemption, or if rampant rulebreaking has wrecked the topic. From a maintenence perspective, this is just an extenstion of our own Modly ability to close problem threads and deal with topic hijacking. No one of us can possibly read every post in every thread, so it's fine to have them pointed out to us.

The thread ownership aspect in the RP forums extends much further than it does elsewhere. RP topic starters can ask to have certain players removed from a thread. We do not allow that level of control anywhere else. Also, requests for closure or deletion are almost entirely automatic, which is not the case elsewhere.

I'm not sure where these precedents came from (they preceded my modship), but that's how I read them, and that's how I observe them.

There are three different aspects here: thread management in a helpful sense, sticky management, and thread management in a rulebreaking sense. <snip>
My associate is correct on all points.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Thanks for the clarification, y'all. :)

It's nice to have one's inane and random questions about the rules answered. :D

just some nitpicking, but...

wouldn't it be handier to link to this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=5812823&postcount=59) instead of this one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=302815)?

The first are the binding rules, in the second one, the one you link to, are the proposed rules...i know the post links to the binding rules, but you know how easy some people even miss that (like with the invasion rules sticky, people missing the big red letters saying it's a draft..)

A question... according to the One-Stop-Rules-Shop (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8784627&postcount=2), advertisements can be placed in the following regions:

*Feeder regions, defined as The Pacific, The North Pacific, The East Pacific, The South Pacific, and The West Pacific. Note that it is not legal to advertise in copycat regions like "West Pacific",
*The Rejected Realms and Lazarus,
*Official Warzones. Is it legal to also advertise in regions that are foundered, and say in the WFE that 'This region is being run like a warzone.'

Is that sufficient permission? Or MUST it say 'Outside regions may advertise'

Thank you in advance for the clarification from a mod.

Is it legal to also advertise in regions that are foundered, and say in the WFE that 'This region is being run like a warzone.'Originally posted in the One-Stop-Rules-Shop
RMB Ads are allowed in player-created regions if and only if the World Factbook Entry says they're allowed. Whomever controls the WFE may set regional policy towards ads.
As to ad-spam policy, all you really need to say is, "Ads allowed".

As to stating, "This region is being run like a warzone," ... well ... that's not a player option. You can't permit griefing and ejections that go beyond official limits, you can't permit unfettered spamming of the regional happenings and regional messageboard, and you can't automate clearing of the banlist, password, and so on. Mods will respond to complaints about such regions without regard to any such published notice. We might also simply stumble across it and act without a complaint. It happens all the time.

Thus, you can't really say that you're running it like a warzone, because you're not. Stick to the official warzones.

Ah, thank you Fris. I was just checking into the legality of those really. There are a few regions with that disclaimer that I know of (prolly more) who have a founder. The founder every 12 hours clears the ban list, removes passwords whenever he sees, etc. I just figured if they really want to be like a warzone that much, I wanted to see the Mod's oppinions of their idea.

From This NationStates sticky (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416470):
Since people don't seem to be getting the message, no further regional ads will be moved from the Nationstates forum to the Gameplay forum, they will simply be deleted. Do not post adverts for your region in this forum.
Added to the Adspam rules.

GMC's ruling on OOC threads in RP forums (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9261069&postcount=5) has been added to Post #4.

I have a concern with respect to a nation's name.

This nation (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=display_nation/nation=hitler_the_nazi). In looking at his posts, he doesn't seem to espouse Nazi-esque views, but I wanted to know if calling yourself that is considered a rules violation. If not, I apologise for troubling you with this post.

It is not an illegal name.

Thanks for the response. Sorry I troubled you.

Better to ask the question than wonder about it.
OMG slipped into teacher mode while still on vacation! ANGST!

;)

I continue to think that the Moderation is doing a great job.



Keep up the good work.

[violet]'s new flag ruling appended. The Acceptable Flag Policy (or: Swastikas, Boobies, and Sickles, oh my!) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=438053) topic is the best place to discuss that particular ruling.

A couple of questions/comments with regard to the flaming and flamebait entries:

Flame: Expressing anger at someone in uncouth ways with OOC (out-of-character) comments (i.e. swearing, being obnoxious, threatening etc). It does to watch what you post IC (in-character) as well unless the other posters know you're not serious. You do not need to curse to be a flamer. Erudite slams while maintaining a veneer of politeness can also be considered flaming. Flaming in the forums should be reported in the Moderation forum, in the game itself, through Getting Help Page.

Flamebait: Posts that are made with the aim of angering someone indirectly. Not outright flame, but still liable to bring angry replies. Flame baiting is a far more subtle and covert action; it is an underhanded tactic that is designed to provoke a response from another player. It's in the same context of trolling but with flamebaiting it's just the one person.

1. If a player makes an incendiary comment about a former NS player (or someone he has reason to believe no longer plays the game) that would be classified as flaming, is that still considered actionable? For instance, if, after Roach-Busters was officially deated Friday or Saturday, someone made an insulting comment about him, would that still be warnable?

2. If someone makes an incendiary comment about a political figure or pundit whom he has reason to believe does not read or post on these fora, is that considered actionable/warnable? For instance, if someone were to write, "Ann Coulter is a Nazi," would that be actionable? If the Nazi part alone is actionable, what about "Ann Coulter is a [insert standard grade school barb here]?"

I am not 100% positive Sarz, but IIRFC... (the F is for Fris) the first would be, the second wouldn't be. EDIT: Depending on sevarity, the second may be trolling, /EDIT

I seem to recall it being said that famous persons are okay as long as it isn't too out of hand, and said person doesn't have an account here.

I am not 100% positive Sarz, but IIRFC... (the F is for Fris) the first would be, the second wouldn't be.

I seem to recall it being said that famous persons are okay as long as it isn't too out of hand, and said person doesn't have an account here.I appreciate your input, but I'd like to get official word on it. Seems people get bent out of shape if you use Nazi to refer to someone who isn't *literally* one.

We're not going to micromange words to the level of defining specific contexts. If it's meant to be malicious, it's against the rules. That's all you're gonna get.

New Appeals process added by SalusaSecondus.

GMC added a section on copyrights (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8784670#post8784670).

I'm back to ask another question that came up as a result of a debate in the UN forum (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9659042&postcount=23) about everybody's favorite OOC dead horse: compliance.

LV suggests that when Fris writes this in the Final Thoughts section...

A Note concerning the NationStates Terms of Service (TOS) and FAQ: While it should go without saying, some players apparently think the TOS and FAQ don't apply on the forums. They do. Don't be stupid.

...he is saying that all of the FAQ, including the part about UN resolutions being binding rather than just the rules stuff--like only having one nation in the UN--are applicable to the forums, and thus we can conclude that roleplayed noncompliance is illegal (with the caveat that NS doesn't have the staff to enforce such roleplaying conventions).

Is that the case? Is roleplayed noncompliance illegal but unenforced? Because if so I need to rewrite some stickies, since what LV is concluding would contradict the stickies I wrote.

Thanks in advance.

Opening up a topic for discussion among the players, probably to add it to the rules sticky:

I've noticed a definite tendency among certain players to keep track of their puppet logins by waiting for their nation to 'cease to exist', at which point they submit a Restoration request via Getting Help. Some of our more massive puppeteers sometimes submit a list of 5, 10, or even 30+ nations at a time to restore.

Resurrection is NOT a substitute for logging on.

The mods are not a substitute for logging in to your nations. If you contantly ask us to restore nations simply because you're too lazy to keep them alive, we may stop restoring them. We see a ton of rezz requests that have been dead for 28, 29, or 30 days. If you're logging on that often, you take the responsibility for your own nations. It's a pain in the butt for US to do it, but they're YOUR nations. You do it.

If you're using us as a convenience when puppets hit 28-30 days, or keeping track of your logon activity by the regional death notices, they might just stay dead next time. You have been notified.

Is roleplayed noncompliance illegal but unenforced?
"The UN is the world's governing body. It proposes and votes on resolutions, which are then binding on all member nations. In other words ..."

In other words, the Compliance Ministry (or the UN Gnomes, if you prefer), force those changes to be recorded in your nation's legal system. They will have an economic effect. They will affect your freedoms. That's not optional.

Now, let's look at this on the local level. I pass a law making smoking illegal. Does that make it impossible to smoke? Of course not. Butt-leggers would spring up overnight despite any laws, and die-hard smokers would find ways to indulge their filthy, banned habit. If caught in the act, they are subject to whatever penaties are required by the law ... unless the sheriff also happens to be the county butt-legger.

On a national level, 'snurfling' is outlawed by the UN. The proposal author wisely leaves the punishment up to the national government (by omitting it from his text). Your nation decides to punish 'snurflers' by making a chalk mark on the sole of their left shoe. Mine decides to kill all the damn 'snurflers'. We're both in compliance.

Abortion is legal, but your theocratic government can't abide it. Despite the fact that the laws are on the books, your government cannot possibly allow it. If they restrict it in any way, they will be breaking their own national law, and they will be subject to any punishments specified in the UN resolution. Since that particular resolution specifies no punishment, I'm hard-pressed to see how you could enforce compliance ... though other UN nations could intercede and attempt to force them to comply. It's as good a reason as any to bring out the diplomats and generals.

The laws MUST reflect the UN resolutions, but that in itself does not stop law-breakers. Perhaps that's why so many of us have ghastly crime statistics.

With regards to Texan Hotrodders' post: the issue, I imagine, is with how one defines 'noncompliance'. I've never seen any mod action for someone saying 'we won't comply with this' - but I've never seen a decent RPer/UNer say that. I once RPed a form of non-compliance, and no mod action was taken. There's a difference between saying 'fuck off' every time an environmental resolution is passed, and defining terms in ways that defy conventional wisdom.

Fris, that must be annoying. I've had a few of my puppets die, and I would only ask for resurrection if I became inactive with Gruenberg or my old nation. I'm not sure how much player input there can really be here as we don't really know how often these sort of requests are made.

Butt-leggers and snurfling? :D

With the resurrection issue... The only thing I would be worried about is how to determine if it's purposeful. Are people letting *all* their puppets die? Or constantly letting the same ones die? Otherwise, how do you know it's their intent?

I'm worried because I can sometimes let a few of mine die too if I'm really busy, but it's never used as a timekeeping measure. (I'm still not exactly sure how one would do it anyways. :P)

"The UN is the world's governing body. It proposes and votes on resolutions, which are then binding on all member nations. In other words ..."

In other words, the Compliance Ministry (or the UN Gnomes, if you prefer), force those changes to be recorded in your nation's legal system. They will have an economic effect. They will affect your freedoms. That's not optional.

Now, let's look at this on the local level. I pass a law making smoking illegal. Does that make it impossible to smoke? Of course not. Butt-leggers would spring up overnight despite any laws, and die-hard smokers would find ways to indulge their filthy, banned habit. If caught in the act, they are subject to whatever penaties are required by the law ... unless the sheriff also happens to be the county butt-legger.

On a national level, 'snurfling' is outlawed by the UN. The proposal author wisely leaves the punishment up to the national government (by omitting it from his text). Your nation decides to punish 'snurflers' by making a chalk mark on the sole of their left shoe. Mine decides to kill all the damn 'snurflers'. We're both in compliance.

Abortion is legal, but your theocratic government can't abide it. Despite the fact that the laws are on the books, your government cannot possibly allow it. If they restrict it in any way, they will be breaking their own national law, and they will be subject to any punishments specified in the UN resolution. Since that particular resolution specifies no punishment, I'm hard-pressed to see how you could enforce compliance ... though other UN nations could intercede and attempt to force them to comply. It's as good a reason as any to bring out the diplomats and generals.

The laws MUST reflect the UN resolutions, but that in itself does not stop law-breakers. Perhaps that's why so many of us have ghastly crime statistics.

Uhhh...yeah. That's a bit of a roundabout answer, and I'm getting the impression that roleplayed noncompliance could be legal depending on the resolution in question. Is that impression correct, and is your statement meant as (1) confirmation of noncompliance as illegal and (2) the FAQ applies to the forums in this case as well? Maybe I'm missing something here, and I just want to be sure I'm getting it right.

Butt-leggers and snurfling? :D

With the resurrection issue... The only thing I would be worried about is how to determine if it's purposeful. Are people letting *all* their puppets die? Or constantly letting the same ones die? Otherwise, how do you know it's their intent?

I'm worried because I can sometimes let a few of mine die too if I'm really busy, but it's never used as a timekeeping measure. (I'm still not exactly sure how one would do it anyways. :P)

Same here. Although I'm admittedly much better about keeping them alive than I have been in the past. *blush*

(1) confirmation of noncompliance as illegal and (2) the FAQ applies to the forums in this case as well?
It was intended to be roundabout, in a sense, as it's not possible to encapsulate all the relevant possibilities.

No UN nation should be able to state, "Abortion is against the law in our nation". We're not going to lock threads and warn RPers who say it, but other UN nations are more than welcome to call them on it. It can't be against the law in a UN nation. Is the law enforced? That's another question altogether.

Picture the Southern US in the early 60's. Integration was the Law of the Land, yet the Governor, the Attorney General, and most of the police force were standing on the school steps with clubs, preventing integration. On the other side, civil rights activists and non-violent protesters made their position known.

Was Mississippi in compliance? The law mandated integration, but law-breakers high in local governments flouted that law. The nation must be in compliance, but individuals and groups within that nation may resist. If you want to roleplay those sorts of events, I'd say they are totally fine.

With the resurrection issue... The only thing I would be worried about is how to determine if it's purposeful. Are people letting *all* their puppets die? Or constantly letting the same ones die? Otherwise, how do you know it's their intent?
One particular nation triggered this. Every few weeks, we get a long list of 20-40 puppets to be restored from him/her. It's my understanding that s/he has a stable of 300+ puppets. That's fine, if s/he wants to keep up with them. It's a pain in the butt to process such a list, and I made that clear in a telegram. The monthly 'puppet revival' fest just ended for that player.

As for the people with 2 or 3 puppets who wait for them to expire before they notice and request restoration ... I'm hoping that an update to the One-Stop Shop will act as notification. Sometimes we notice the same names over and over again. Other times, they use minor puppets each time to request it. It's not something we're going on a rampage about, but dammit - they're YOUR puppets. When did it become OUR responsibility? You make 'em - you play 'em.

It was intended to be roundabout, in a sense, as it's not possible to encapsulate all the relevant possibilities.

No UN nation should be able to state, "Abortion is against the law in our nation". We're not going to lock threads and warn RPers who say it, but other UN nations are more than welcome to call them on it. It can't be against the law in a UN nation. Is the law enforced? That's another question altogether.

Picture the Southern US in the early 60's. Integration was the Law of the Land, yet the Governor, the Attorney General, and most of the police force were standing on the school steps with clubs, preventing integration. On the other side, civil rights activists and non-violent protesters made their position known.

Was Mississippi in compliance? The law mandated integration, but law-breakers high in local governments flouted that law. The nation must be in compliance, but individuals and groups within that nation may resist. If you want to roleplay those sorts of events, I'd say they are totally fine.

Soooo...too complicated of a matter to make a straight-out illegal/legal ruling on it either way? Fine with me.

One particular nation triggered this. Every few weeks, we get a long list of 20-40 puppets to be restored from him/her. It's my understanding that s/he has a stable of 300+ puppets. That's fine, if s/he wants to keep up with them. It's a pain in the butt to process such a list, and I made that clear in a telegram. The monthly 'puppet revival' fest just ended for that player.

As for the people with 2 or 3 puppets who wait for them to expire before they notice and request restoration ... I'm hoping that an update to the One-Stop Shop will act as notification. Sometimes we notice the same names over and over again. Other times, they use minor puppets each time to request it. It's not something we're going on a rampage about, but dammit - they're YOUR puppets. When did it become OUR responsibility? You make 'em - you play 'em.

I decided to keep a dossier of all puppet nations within one nation. This seems to help. I've never sent in a list of 20-40 puppets, but once or twice I was a bad girl and let a slew of embassy nations die (as HotRodia can attest to :P).

As for the puppet nation writing the GHR...I do that all the time, for anything that requires a GHR, just based on what nation I'm logged into at the time when I spot something that needs reported. I always just assumed the mods knew it was me anyway. Is that practice frowned upon?

I always just assumed the mods knew it was me anyway. Is that practice frowned upon?
We knew. It's fine.

Hye, I was wondering, if we asked nicely...could we bring back the "Temple of the Mods" or the "Pyramid" thing. I remember we had lots of fun doing that back then, and I'd love to see how many people would join in on it.

Its just a simple thing...lol

Worshipping mods was fun.... ::sighs::

I also have a question, regarding customizable field violations. I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but I can't seem to find a definitive ruling.

The OSRS bars any 'human...terms' for national animals. I imagine this is primarily designed to prevent, for example, '$ethnic_minority teeters on the brink of extinction' appearing. I've also seen 'female' ruled on, although that was in the context of other more obvious violations also being present.

Is 'human' itself prohibited? Periodically (and today it's here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446005)), Gameplay/Technical/Got Issues? gets a thread along the lines of 'look how funny it is that my national animal/currency is' in the context of an issue. On this occasion today, but also in the past, people with the word 'human' for national animal have commented - Green Sun was one example, I think. Is this actually barred?

I also have a question, regarding customizable field violations. I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but I can't seem to find a definitive ruling.

The OSRS bars any 'human...terms' for national animals. I imagine this is primarily designed to prevent, for example, '$ethnic_minority teeters on the brink of extinction' appearing. I've also seen 'female' ruled on, although that was in the context of other more obvious violations also being present.

Is 'human' itself prohibited? Periodically (and today it's here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446005)), Gameplay/Technical/Got Issues? gets a thread along the lines of 'look how funny it is that my national animal/currency is' in the context of an issue. On this occasion today, but also in the past, people with the word 'human' for national animal have commented - Green Sun was one example, I think. Is this actually barred?

I don't believe so. The real rule that regulates this is "Nothing Malicious". Most people seeing a nation with an animal of "human" won't feel it as being malicious (at least, I don't think that they will). This is very different from if they see a nation with singles out one group of people to treat as animals.

I've seen many nations with human's for animals. Some simply have "human", some have fictional groups, and some even have had real groups of people. Sometimes this was a problem, sometimes not. The real key is whether it appeared malicious, obscene, threatening, etc. or not.

Thank you. I thought that would be the case.

(But when they come, don't blame me if they're offended.)

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=447448

Addressing the 'not a mod' disclaimers.

I'm wondering if the prohibitions against copycat threads found in General can be modified somehow to incorporate International Incidents, particularly with "trend threads" like the "Ask About" thread trend that's still going on and the previous trends of "What do you think about me" threads or "What I think of you" threads?

Taking a thread that's an original idea and adapting it to add your own spin on it is cool and it's something I've done from time to time. But making a blatant copy of a thread or doing a thread type because "all teh 1337 us0rz do!!!1111" is highly annoying.

I think as much as one might find such threads "annoying", they're likely to not be either banned or placed into one thread; since technically they are of different subjects. For example, a thread written to gain the attitudes of NSers about Sarzonia, will be somewhat different to the same for the attitudes of NSer's about Austar Union. From my understanding, general Moderator procedure for "copy-cat" threads is either closure, or a merging if it's been developed enough. So, as much as I'd like to even see them gone myself; *shrug*, such things arent usually done for the simple fact that we hate them.

Of course, the Moderators might disagree (although I surely doubt), and / or have another reason to actually merge / close them. It just silly to me if they were to work around the clock closing threads that just a handful of people find annoying to read.

Do note though if your request is rejected, you do have the option to not read them. I do the same, about religious discussions within General. They're boring, repetitive, and filled with people who know very little about the subject in question. Do I find them annoying? Yeah. Would I like to see them closed / banned? Of course. But would they actually be? Heck no.

I partly agree with Sarzonia; except that I don't feel the problem has become as severe as in General, or, in general, severe enough, to warrant absolute action. Perhaps just a gentle reminder is in order. After all, if these sorts of threads - and I hope I know which ones you're referring to, but I won't name names - exist, it's an indication that their creators' factbooks aren't really in order. Factbooks seem to me to me an ideal place to find out information, and ask additional questions.

Factbooks seem to me to me an ideal place to find out information, and ask additional questions.That's why I linked my factbook in my sig and bolded the hyperlink. If someone has questions, why waste creating the thread about it?

Well indeed. But, there aren't that many of them as yet. I admit, adding 'because I want to be cool too' to the title - or whatever it was - doesn't get things off to a great start, but the self-deprecation does allay irritation a bit. Again, the trend is nothing like as bad as in general...but if someone were to gently point that mindless copy-catting isn't really the done thing, I can't see how harmful it would be.

EDIT: Ok, I've seen another one. This really is getting trying. I now pretty much agree with Sarzonia that this represents an annoying trend.

There have been a number of complaints today that the rules are not clear. Given the complexity of the precedent, that's hardly surprising. However, such complaints are groundless when nobody complains.

When I created this thread a few months ago, I included a comments and clarifications thread (this one) and a link to it. If you'll read through this thread, you'll see that many of the suggestions were implemented, and others (after due consideration) were rejected. If you don't tell us where the problems are, WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIX THEM.

When someone points out an area of concern, like today's Definition of Griefing issues, we thoughtfully and carefully address it. Despite the fact that a draft of the definitions of "Griefing" and "Refounding" was started almost immediately after the current complaints, they won't be added to the Rules sticky until and unless they get approved by most of the mods and admins. We're not going to slam some new definition in place without vetting it carefully for future problems and loopholes.

Consider this a wordy 'bump', and don't jam this thread up with suggestions for refounding or griefing rules. There's been plenty of posting in other threads, and I'll be posting the approved list soon enough. If there are other areas of confusion ...

... SAY SOMETHING.

Thanks Fris. I think the main issue really is for the fact that people are using ignorance as an excuse to get around the rules. But to be frank, I find it nearly impossible to create a thread (Such as the One Stop Rules Shop) detailed enough to cover every single scenario, with every single variable being the exact same as the next. Complaining that the rules thread isnt clear, or has a slightly different definition to what another would have used it for isnt an excuse enough to get away with something. Afterall, with the griefing case in general in mind, there had been enough precedent to even suggest that what had been done might be against the rules. I think when it comes down to either a suggestion verses an exact wording to; it gets a bit rediculous to use such as a reason as to why such and such shouldnt have recieved certain punishments. (No, I'm not being specific, just situations in general).

Ultimately, what I find where there is a different sort of understanding of the rules, a lack of communication has ensured. And for the Moderators to be expected to know every situation to come out there, or anything which is to come or happen within the game mechanics; such places too much pressure on anyone. Salusa, the Moderators, and Players included. Unfortunately, it comes down to a player's responsibility to look after his own, to check up on the rules before he does something a little bit "iffy", or whatever. In the meantime, it's unfortunate that certain players have had to be deleted over some kind of 'misunderstanding', or a lack of knowledge of the rules in question. But I find that this really highlights something to be remembered by all users of Nationstates, both within the Player Base and Moderation Team.

Communication is essentiel.

What about adding a small paragraph that basically says, "If you have a serious question about the legality of your actions, contact the moderators FIRST. You may use the following methods. (irc, getting help, moderation forum)"

This of course could be really bad in terms of increasing the workload of requests. But given there's no real way to cover every possible offense, I'm not sure how else you could remind people that they need to consider their actions even if it's not covered in the OSRS.

(that was one good thing about having a huge number of stickies, noone knew where any of the rules were, so it was really on the user to figure it out :p)

edit: Or, you could just add a disclaimer at the beginning that says something along the lines of, "The most common infractions are listed here, but even if your action is not listed, you still need to consider your actions carefully before carrying them out."

The following explanation of the griefing rules has been added to Post #2 of the OSRS. Note that this is not new policy (with the exception of the recommendations about refounding), but clarification of the policy we have followed for the last several years.

Griefing: Harassing a nation or region because of what they did or said. This is specifically forbidden in telegrams and Regional Messageboard (RMB) posts. If you receive abusive telegrams, save them. If there are abusive RMB posts, use the Additional Information checkboxes on the Getting Help Page (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=help). Griefing also refers to the wholesale ejection of nations from a region by anyone other than the Founder, whether Native or Invader. Invasion Griefing is the malicious cousin of "region crashing". Where "crashing" involves moving several nations into a region at once and taking over the delegate-ship, Region Griefing is used to describe the practice of illegally ejecting too many members of a region after invading it. Report this using the Getting Help Page (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=help). More detail on invasion rules and infractions may be found in the Region invasion FAQ (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=301703). For now, some basics.

Region invading is legal, but griefing is not. When invaders take over a region, they may NOT 'destroy' the region in malicious ways. If a password is set, it must be telegrammed immediately to all natives of the region. This includes both UN and non-UN nations, and natives who are in the region as well as those 'kicked'. If the password is changed, a new set of telegrams must be sent. Failure to distribute the password is griefing.
Invader delegates may sometimes kick natives out of the region for strategic reasons, but they must be immediately unbanned. Failure to unban natives is griefing.
The number of nations kicked is subject to mod interpretation, but we will generally consider more than 10% ejections to be malicious. Note that this precludes kicking ANY natives in small regions.
Counter-invaders who arrive after the invasion may be kicked and left banned, but again mod interpretation comes into play. If you kick/ban somebody who appears to be native to the region, it's griefing.
All percentage ejections, native or invader, refer not to daily or monthly, but rather to the length of the invasion/delegacy. Switching delegates to sneak around this ban would be considered malicious. The punishment for griefing a region is deletion of the nation. Repeat offenders may be denied UN privileges for all their nations permanently. Egregious offenders may be permanently banned from the game.

Founders versus Delegates: Founders have a given set of powers, which include the ability to eject any and all nations without penalty, set a password without distributing it, clear spam from the Regional Messageboard, and deny access to the Regional Controls. These abilities reside with the Founder nation only - they may not be shared with the Delegate, with other puppet nations of the same player, or with other players.

Delegates may (if given access to the Regional Controls) do many of the same tasks as the Founder, but they are not permitted to empty the region, clear spam, or turn off Regional Controls. Delegates do NOT gain founder rights on the death or absence of the Founder. If a Delegate ejects a large group of nations (typically more than 40% for Native Delegates or 10% for Invaders), they can be considered a griefer and will be deleted.

Refounding: A region that has lost its Founder (through absence or deletion) is at greater risk from invaders. Thus, refounding is often a desirable outcome. However, refounding must be done voluntarily and consensually. Each nation must leave the region under their own power, whether live player or puppet. Ejecting all nations, even a region comprised entirely of your own puppets, or players who agree with the idea of refounding, is still griefing.

The proper way to refound is to move to a temporary region. At the start, the native Delegate may eject up to the 40% limit of inactive nations and set a password. It would be smart to reserve some of the ejection percentage for the endgame. A telegram should be sent to all ejectees advising them of the plan. The other nations then move to the temp region. When the region is empty, it will disappear on update and someone may refound it. Note that there is no guarantee that a native will be the one to refound. If the name is open, it's first-come, first-served.

Refounding: A region that has lost its Founder (through absence or deletion) is at greater risk from invaders. Thus, refounding is often a desirable outcome. However, refounding must be done voluntarily and consensually. Each nation must leave the region under their own power, whether live player or puppet. Ejecting all nations, even a region comprised entirely of your own puppets, or players who agree with the idea of refounding, is still griefing.

The proper way to refound is to move to a temporary region. At the start, the native Delegate may eject up to the 40% limit of inactive nations and set a password. It would be smart to reserve some of the ejection percentage for the endgame. A telegram should be sent to all ejectees advising them of the plan. The other nations then move to the temp region. When the region is empty, it will disappear on update and someone may refound it. Note that there is no guarantee that a native will be the one to refound. If the name is open, it's first-come, first-served.[/indent]:( and after all my HARD WORK on the Refounding how to...


well, at least it's something.:) would it help if, before the process starts, the delegate let's the mods know so that they know it's not greifing?

a little nitpicking here...

you might want to add the telegram must be sent in a clear way, no riddles or tricks like saying the password is "help" and then include the " in the password.

also, i'm not sure if the rules have changed on this, but..
for massgriefing (kicking all natives) the punishment has always been deletion, afaik, but at times, failing to send out a password or keeping a native on the banlist only resulted in a warning or ejection from the UN or having the delegate tag removed..or maybe i'm just reading wrong

And for the refounding...40% and leaving some for the endgame...is that 40% of the original set of nations, or the remaining nations? and i assume they still can't eject the last natives?
as for the rest, well done i think ;)

I seem to recall that in the past ejecting a Founder was considered griefing. I noticed that there is no mention of this in the griefing rules you just posted. Was there a change in the rules or am I just missing something?:)

I think that's only when you fail to remove him/her from the banlist, since founders count as natives too, afaik

In order to keep The One-Stop Rules Shop Sticky (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023) spam free, this topic has been created and that topic locked. If you have suggestions, recommendations, or seek clarification on any of these rules, please add them here. All comments will be read and appropriate edits made where needed. Thanks for your input.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator
My suggestion is to rename it to just "Rules Shop", since it clearly isnt "One Stop" as the mods reserve the right to ammend the rules at any time for any reason without necessarily telling anyone first.

My suggestion is to rename it to just "Rules Shop", since it clearly isnt "One Stop" as the mods reserve the right to ammend the rules at any time for any reason without necessarily telling anyone first.I think they call it the "ONE STOP Rules Shop" because it's suppose to be the one place to go for the rules not that they don't change or get updated.

they should link those other FAQs to it tho.

I seem to recall that in the past ejecting a Founder was considered griefing.
If it is, I've never heard of the rule. Not saying it doesn't exist, just never heard of it.

Ejecting the living founder may or may not be illegal, but it's surely stupid. Since the Founder can unban himself and remove the password from outside the region, all you're likely to do is piss him off ... unless of course you find him inactive, and manage to refound ... which is once again griefing. (Won't help him get back a lost region, though).

I dunno. We'll get more input from others.
would it help if, before the process starts, the delegate let's the mods know so that they know it's not greifing?
I'm thinking 'no'. Clogging up the tasklist with a bunch of 'permission slip' informative posts would make our job that much harder. Typically, only one mod sees a given task, and they may not be the one that handles any griefing complaint. Given the volume of tasks (we recently passed 40,000), we're unlikely to search backwards on every complaint looking for explanations.
a little nitpicking here
I'm only trying to cover the basics here, CG. The FAQ has more info on specifics and is clearly linked. Given that we've spent over a year unsuccessfully trying to come up with the be-all, end-all, definitive list of invasion rules, I'm only including the ones that I felt were central to the concept.

As for the math on refounding ... I left it vague on purpose. There is no way to pre-define what constitutes griefing, as it depends on (among other things) region size and activity. I also didn't mention anything about anyone opposing the refounding, but should probably factor that in.

I'm thinking 'no'. Clogging up the tasklist with a bunch of 'permission slip' informative posts would make our job that much harder. Typically, only one mod sees a given task, and they may not be the one that handles any griefing complaint. Given the volume of tasks (we recently passed 40,000), we're unlikely to search backwards on every complaint looking for explanations.Wowzers! 40,000... ok, I'll try to find ways not to put more on you guy's plates.

I think they call it the "ONE STOP Rules Shop" because it's suppose to be the one place to go for the rules not that they don't change or get updated.
If the rules keep chaning then how is it possible to have a one stop rules shop? Especially as one mod told me on IRC 'some sections havent been written yet'. Its just misleading.

If it is, I've never heard of the rule. Not saying it doesn't exist, just never heard of it.

Ejecting the living founder may or may not be illegal, but it's surely stupid. Since the Founder can unban himself and remove the password from outside the region, all you're likely to do is piss him off ...

Right. So the only real reason you would do it is just to be malicious, essentially. That's how I'd see it.

I dunno. We'll get more input from others.

Thanks.:)

I have another suggestion! Yey!

Please dispell myths such as the one expressed in this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9804570&postcount=5) post. The red warning signs appear even if a founder ejects nations, which is not against the rules. Therefore, without clarification the red warning sign is at best useless and at worst misleading. Now, since direct clarification doesnt exist...

If you know founder can ignore them, you should use your brain and understand delegates (the only others who can eject) can't ignore them. The bright red message is a fair warning, anyone dumb enough to keep kicking after getting a bunch of them deserves to get deleted.

I have another suggestion! Yey!

Please dispell myths such as the one expressed in this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9804570&postcount=5) post. The red warning signs appear even if a founder ejects nations, which is not against the rules. Therefore, without clarification the red warning sign is at best useless and at worst misleading. Now, since direct clarification doesnt exist...
If direct clarification doesn't exist, then perhaps you should ask, as this gentlemen did here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=449475)

If direct clarification doesn't exist, then perhaps you should ask, as this gentlemen did here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=449475)
I do not expect to require clarification of a thread called a "One Stop Rules Shop". Nor do I expect people to object to making rules clearer, frankly.

If you know founder can ignore them, you should use your brain and understand delegates (the only others who can eject) can't ignore them. The bright red message is a fair warning, anyone dumb enough to keep kicking after getting a bunch of them deserves to get deleted.
It may suprise you but I (as someone who doesnt spend lots of time on the Moderation and Gameplay forums) didnt know that what Hogsweat did was against the rules, despite being here for a year and a half. Hogsweat did not know that what he did was against the rules despite being here more than 2 and a half years. Perhaps that is indicative of something?

Guys, this thread isn't about Hogsweat so quit making it about Hogsweat.

Yeah, you are all pissed off that this happened, but it's done and the guy who codes the game is content that it was done right so it's over by his ruling. I'm all for more rule clarification, but Praetonia, if you want more people to listen to you then quit implying that the moderations and the admin have fucked Hogsweat over.

I'm out for the night, seeya later guys.

I do not expect to require clarification of a thread called a "One Stop Rules Shop". Nor do I expect people to object to making rules clearer, frankly.


It may suprise you but I (as someone who doesnt spend lots of time on the Moderation and Gameplay forums) didnt know that what Hogsweat did was against the rules, despite being here for a year and a half. Hogsweat did not know that what he did was against the rules despite being here more than 2 and a half years. Perhaps that is indicative of something?

And of course that red warning didn;t give any clue:rolleyes:

And of course that red warning didn;t give any clue:rolleyes:
You might want to re-read my reply.

Iuthia - Yes I know nothings going to happen about Hogsweat. I just want to make sure it doesnt happen to anyone else. I really dont see why so many people seem to have such deep-felt problems with clarifying rules :rolleyes:

And of course that red warning didn;t give any clue:rolleyes:
This continued flaming benefits no one. Please desist.

Anyone dumb enough to keep kicking after getting a bunch of them deserves to get deleted.
Um, right, so, here's a situation, see if you recognise the similarities:

1) Person A is a RPer, he has no interest in Gameplay, nor does he ever go into the Gameplay or Moderation forum. Therefore he is not aware of Gameplay rules.

2) Person B is involved heavily in Gameplay, but relatively, doesn't post that much on the forum in debates. Therefore, when a debate comes up, Person B has no idea how to do it, so they just resort to flaming.

Um, right, so, here's a situation, see if you recognise the similarities:

1) Person A is a RPer, he has no interest in Gameplay, nor does he ever go into the Gameplay or Moderation forum. Therefore he is not aware of Gameplay rules.

2) Person B is involved heavily in Gameplay, but relatively, doesn't post that much on the forum in debates. Therefore, when a debate comes up, Person B has no idea how to do it, so they just resort to flaming.


This thread is about The One-Stop Rules Shop, not another thread for complaining about the deletion of Hogsweat. Now ALL of you will knock it off immediately.

If the rules keep chaning then how is it possible to have a one stop rules shop?
Since you've made this point about 20 times now, you can stop. We got it.

The rules sticky was posted on 30 April 2005. Before that, we got by just fine on precedent alone. As it says in the very first line, "Collected here for your amusement and amazement are summaries of most of the rules and conditions of NationStates." We never claimed it was complete. We never intended it to be complete. It's a convenience item, not a legal handbook. If you don't like the way it is handled, you're welcome to set up your own site and create your own rules.

Sorry if this shouldn't be here, or has already been answered:

If two UN members share the same email, but have different computers and therefore different IPs, would they be considered multis?

Thanks.

Sorry if this shouldn't be here, or has already been answered:

If two UN members share the same email, but have different computers and therefore different IPs, would they be considered multis?

Thanks.

Having the same e-mail address means that the nation who applies first to the UN will be accepted, though if you send in an application again with the second nation (despite having a different IP address), it will be automatically rejected. One e-mail address per one UN nation. So only one of those nations can be in the UN until one of you gets a different e-mail address.

OK. Thanks!

I've seen the statement that the site is PG-13 many times in my tenure here, but I noticed it's not mentioned in the One Stop Rules Shop. Would it possible to add it? I think it makes things much clearer as to the level you're shooting for on obscenity and explicit content. I realize that the OSRS is not the end-all-be-all of rules, but it seems like it would alleviate some of the recent arguments about the acceptable level of obscenity.

Added to Post #3 (Forums)Obscene and Explicit content: Sexually graphic images and posts. Very strictly forbidden. Obscene imagery and content in the forums should be reported to the Moderation Forum. Please provide a link to the topic, but do not quote it while explaining its illegality. Then we have to find and delete your posts too.

The standard for both forums and game is the US movie rating "PG-13". Mild swearing may be tolerated, mild sexuality may be hinted, but explicit or excessive versions of either or both may result in proportional mod response.

I just want to state, for the record, that the "It was my brother that's the rulebreaker, not me!!!" won't fly for me.


Not before. Not now. Not ever.

One comment on the iron cross ruling I noticed. The iron cross is being used by the federal government of Germany and is still an ensign of the German navy. Like the WW2 flag of the Japanese Empire, I don't think that official state symbols can be banned. I recall that someone wanted to see the Imperial Japanese flag banned because of its history. A mod ruling was that it couldn't be banned, since it's Japans naval jack.

Source: http://www.flaggenlexikon.de/fdtl.htm note that this is a German site, and not a right-wing extremist page which finds all WW2 symbols acceptable.

This is ASCII art. It's a picture of that annoying kid from the TV show "Family Guy" on American television. If for some reason you haven't been able to identify this, now you know what it looks like and where it's from.

Now WOULD YOU PEOPLE PLEASE STOP POSTING IT IN REGION ADS? We get it. You like it. Move on.


.............................. ..........____
................. .........,--~’’’’¯¯¯ ..’-,...¯’’~’’~--,,
................ ...,-‘’’¯~, ....’- ...... ............... ....\\-,
....... ......,-‘_¯, ........................ ............, ........’~,
........ ..,-‘ ... ....................... ...........,-;’,,,,_ ........’-,,
....... ,-‘_, ........____ ............... ....,-‘ ..° ....’-, ......,°.;
..... ,-‘ .............,,,---,,, ............ ......|,,--~’’’’’’¯I .....,’
.... ,;,_ .........,-‘ ....° ..,,;, ..........’-, .’~,_ ....,-‘’ ....,’
. ,--; .............|,,--~’’’ ....| ...........-‘ ........¯¯ ......,’
..;,°;, ............’-,_ ......,,-‘ .........._,,;- ......... ...,-‘
.......’~, .............’’’’’’’’’ ...........-‘’ ,-‘ ..........,,~’
............’~-, ................ ............... .....,,-~’
.................... ‘~--,,,,_______,,,,-~’’’’¯¯\\
............ .........,-‘ ......,, \\....\\ ._,,,,i;;;|-|_,\\
................. ..,/, ....,-;’---‘----‘ ...... ..../.,_;|
.................,/, ,’’’’~, .............. .......| ¯
................... ‘’-‘’’| .................. ....\\,
........................ ../, ........../\\------~’’¯’; .
.................. .....,’’ ¯’’~--~’’’ .¯’---,,,,--‘’
........................ ‘’~-,,-~

You recently made a post about how NS general isn't a homework site, because people were constantly posting their calc problems. Do you have a problem with posting up pieces of writing(not nesscessarily homework) for feedback?

Post #2 updated:Invasion Rules
The concept of Invasion Griefing was made obsolete by the introduction of Regional Influence (http://www.nationstates.net/pages/influence.html). Other rules, such as those governing spam or the use of UN Multis, naturally remain in force.
Naturally, there are significant changes as a result of this, and the blue link above will answer most of your questions. For any other influence-related questions or comments, please post them in the Regional Influence (NSv1.9 changes) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477177) thread, to avoid cluttering this one too much.


Oh, we also reorganized the Spamming section, but I don't think there are any significant changes apart from clarity enhancements.

Feeder spam is universally disliked within the feeders, but serves a useful game purpose. Nonetheless, there is no good reason why spammers should be given free reign at the expense of 'natives' of the region.
This is ASCII art. It's a picture of that annoying kid from the TV show "Family Guy" on American television.
Due to the number of spam complaints about ASCII art (via Getting Help), I'm opening this up for comments from the floor again. The people who use such art also happen to be the ones who seem incapable of reading the rules about "one post per region per 24 hours".

I'm also considering officially suggesting the policy of The North Pacific, specifically "**There is a 15 line limit on recruitment ads** . Your comments on both ideas are welcome.

I am all for limiting ASCII spam from the RMBs. It's annoying and I see no reason for it.

personally I don't see any problems with either of them.

The ASCII art one i haven't seen much of but i'm guesing it would get very annoying after the first few times. (on a slighty off-topic point the kid is the best char on the show ;) )
As for the recruitment posts, 15 lines seems like plenty of space to say what region you are advertising and why people should move there. Having to scroll down to get past a single post can be very annoying if you're trying to view the whole board.

I am all for limiting ASCII spam from the RMBs. It's annoying and I see no reason for it.

Couldn't you and shouldn't you say the same thing about the 15-line limit. I've been recruiting in this game on and off for several years and I can't imagine what would require either of those things.

I'm also considering officially suggesting the policy of The North Pacific, specifically "**There is a 15 line limit on recruitment ads** . Your comments on both ideas are welcome.
I'm quite biased on this whole concept. But cheers! :D

These long-haired troublemakers should all be lined up against the wall and shot!

Or... the fifteen line limit seems reasonable. I can't recall ever needing more than seven.

I've never done any recruiting (yet), but 15 lines sounds like enough to me. You can always give them more info once you've lured them into your region.

And speaking as a nation that's parked in a Spam Area (The Rejected Realm), I say ASCII art must die,die,die!

I am all for limiting ASCII spam from the RMBs. It's annoying and I see no reason for it.

Likewise!

I thought regional recruitment ads on RMBs were bad before that started, but the ASCII art just makes them even worse.

Id say 12 line maximum recruitment message.
Any ASCII should be counted as a recruitment message on forums RMBs and sigs whether it actually contains recruitment text or not. 1 ASCII art and 1 other recruitment message equals mod warning. ASCII art in forum or sig equals mod warning. Repeat offenders get typical punishments.

Oh, and the Family Guy kid's name is Stewie

Feeder spam is universally disliked within the feeders, but serves a useful game purpose. Nonetheless, there is no good reason why spammers should be given free reign at the expense of 'natives' of the region.

Due to the number of spam complaints about ASCII art (via Getting Help), I'm opening this up for comments from the floor again. The people who use such art also happen to be the ones who seem incapable of reading the rules about "one post per region per 24 hours".

I'm also considering officially suggesting the policy of The North Pacific, specifically "**There is a 15 line limit on recruitment ads** . Your comments on both ideas are welcome.

I manage to read and obey the rule about "one post per region per 24 hours". I also manage to use ASCII art A N D keep the ad with the 15 line limitation of The North Pacific. Count 'em for yourself:

. . . . /~-__
. . . .//; . . . ~~~~-~---____
. . . /// . . . .//. . . . . . . . . . ~~;
. . ./// . .==//==. . . Region . . ./
. . /// . . . // . . . . . . of . . . . /
. .//'_ . . .//. . . . . Christ . . . /
. //. . ~~~-____ . . . . . . . . /
.// . . . . . . . . .~~~~~~~_/
//
• PROCLAMATION TO THE FAITHFUL: You are wanted and needed in the Region of Christ.
• Ready to pick a new region other than this game made one? Come to the Region of Christ!
• Do you want more than mere political jargon and role-play? Come to the Region of Christ!
• Do you want to make a real difference in the lives of people? Come to the Region of Christ!
• Are you a NationStates noobie still learning the ropes? Come to the Region of Christ!
• There is fun outside the game-created regions. Come enjoy it in the Region of Christ!

Aside from the content (which is intended for a rather limited audience) and given the imposed limitations, I'd like to think it is a fairly attractive ad.

Has anyone suggested to the 'natives' of the game created feeder regions that one of the hazards of residing there is ad spam? That said, I have no problem with a fifteen line limit imposed by The North Pacific and I stick to it through all the game created regions. Others should have no problem with ASCII art as long as it is kept within the 15 line limit. I suggest that a good solution might be better enforcement of the existing rules.

I'm also considering officially suggesting the policy of The North Pacific, specifically "**There is a 15 line limit on recruitment ads** . Your comments on both ideas are welcome.

Maybe we could also ban those incredibly condescending ads that tell you how to change regions in the manner of a bored scientist congratulating a control group for putting on their pants without killing any innocent bystanders?

Maybe we could also ban those incredibly condescending ads that tell you how to change regions in the manner of a bored scientist congratulating a control group for putting on their pants without killing any innocent bystanders?


LOL!

God I hate those too.

But what is really sad is that some people actually need guided through the process.

Took me about five seconds to manage it when I first started playing, so I'm not sure why people need it, but they do.

Has anyone suggested to the 'natives' of the game created feeder regions that one of the hazards of residing there is ad spam? That said, I have no problem with a fifteen line limit imposed by The North Pacific and I stick to it through all the game created regions. Others should have no problem with ASCII art as long as it is kept within the 15 line limit. I suggest that a good solution might be better enforcement of the existing rules.

Yes, I realize that the feeders will always be spam magnets, but at least give us better quality spam! I noticed your ad, and it's not bad. Certainly better than that other ASCII art that everyone's griping about.

One of my other complaints is that many people use the same ads for all the regions, even though the audience in the Rejected Realms and Lazarus is very different from the Pacifics. Much fewer newcomers. I think ads for those two regions should be better targeted, but I don't think that can be regulated.

I've suggested several times to Sal to have new people make an IQ test before they can join the game....so far no luck ;)

I manage to read and obey the rule about "one post per region per 24 hours". I also manage to use ASCII art A N D keep the ad with the 15 line limitation of The North Pacific.

Aside from the content (which is intended for a rather limited audience) and given the imposed limitations, I'd like to think it is a fairly attractive ad.
It is an attractive ad. I quite enjoy the recruiters that manage to recruit using ascii art that incorporates their message. Especially when you manage to stay below 15 lines. :)
Has anyone suggested to the 'natives' of the game created feeder regions that one of the hazards of residing there is ad spam? That said, I have no problem with a fifteen line limit imposed by The North Pacific and I stick to it through all the game created regions. Others should have no problem with ASCII art as long as it is kept within the 15 line limit. I suggest that a good solution might be better enforcement of the existing rules.
As a long time native of TNP, I fully recognize that spam is a part of our daily life. What we tend to object to is the ads that are so long that people have to scroll through pages and pages just to get to the reply box. The rules, as they stand, don't prohibit extremely long regional recruitment ads unless a mod deems them so long they become spam. But I find it hard to believe that newbies will read extremely long ads anyways, and that means it's something that everyone ignores. Which leads to the question of how successful recruiting is on the RMB as opposed to telegram recruiting.

As delegate, it's close to impossible to stop the recruiters from posting in our region. Most of them come and are gone in under a minute. Even if I'm watching, to open up regional controls and input their name takes longer then the time they stay in region. Truly though, most recruiters are quite good natured and agree to stay within our line limit.
Maybe we could also ban those incredibly condescending ads that tell you how to change regions in the manner of a bored scientist congratulating a control group for putting on their pants without killing any innocent bystanders?
hehe. I actually suggest to recruiters who need to shorten their ads that perhaps they don't need to offer up directions every time they post the same ad day in and day out. Especially since they can waste 4-5 lines doing it.

Has anyone suggested to the 'natives' of the game created feeder regions that one of the hazards of residing there is ad spam?
20%-30% of the game's nations reside in the feeders. While it has been suggested that they must accept adspam (even to the point of warning self-appointed 'native' spam clearers), we must consider a compromise position that gives those players access to their own messageboards. Some adspammers attempt to introduce their message in a way that fits it into the stream of existing comments, and those players should be applauded. However, the majority just post and run.

Most regions can manage regional politics via their messageboards. The Pacifics are so huge that 10 messages simply isn't enough for any meaningful content, so they've all created off-site forums to allow for conversations and discussions. Still, they are NS players, and should have the same access to their own RMB that everyone else gets.

No matter what we do here, there will be people annoyed with our decision. Our job is to minimize the annoyance in whatever way we can.

20%-30% of the game's nations reside in the feeders. While it has been suggested that they must accept adspam (even to the point of warning self-appointed 'native' spam clearers), we must consider a compromise position that gives those players access to their own messageboards. Some adspammers attempt to introduce their message in a way that fits it into the stream of existing comments, and those players should be applauded. However, the majority just post and run.

Most regions can manage regional politics via their messageboards. The Pacifics are so huge that 10 messages simply isn't enough for any meaningful content, so they've all created off-site forums to allow for conversations and discussions. Still, they are NS players, and should have the same access to their own RMB that everyone else gets.

No matter what we do here, there will be people annoyed with our decision. Our job is to minimize the annoyance in whatever way we can.

I agree with the 15 line limit and the banning of ASCII art, but how does that affect the effort to make the RMB available to the game-created regions? The only rule that would affect that, methinks, is the rule on one ad per 24-hour period. Are there other rules you are considering to achieve this newly-stated goal?

The game-created regions get the advantage of not having to recruit. Their regions are automatically populated by people arriving. For this benefit, they have the very small cost of dealing with recruitment from the other end. I'd trade with them. Have new nations automatically pop up in my region and people can start placing ads on my RMB. I think that's a fair trade.

I don't think it's a surprise or even unfair that game-created regions have a bit of a different role in NS. It's very much a part of how you Max created the game. They pay a small price for the benefits of that region.

One thing that concerns me about adspam in the feeders lately is the fact that it can be quite a traumatic experience for a newcomer to the game. One look at the overwhelming amount of adspam within a matter of a few posts on a regional messageboard can confuse a new nation, at best.

While I respect the fact that it is a necessary part of the game, specifically for founder regions, I do feel an overhaul is in order, to clean up recruitment messages, to the point where they are less-confusing to newcomers, and less-annoying to natives of the region.

it can be quite a traumatic experience for a newcomer to the game.
Sorry, I don't buy this argument. I see multiple new nations moving to advertised regions every day. Fact is, the only reason we're discussing limits on adspam is that adspam gets results. If it didn't, the daily spammers would have given up long ago.

While I'm sure you're right about some players, it's hardly 'traumatic'. This is an incredibly simple game, and the pages are static. It's not like experienced players are dropping from the scaffolding and blowing their heads off the second they enter the game. Newbs can choose to read or choose to move on. No biggie.

Well, I was actually basing my findings on new player feedback I have received in the past, especially as seen on the regional messageboard. But whatever.

Maybe traumatic is the wrong choice of words, but some new players are definitely put off by the spam. And confused.

Please remember, though -- we're not talking about getting rid of recruitment in the feeders/lazarus/the rejected realms -- we're talking about the formatting.

we're not talking about getting rid of recruitment in the feeders/lazarus/the rejected realmsDamn.

Right. Which I addressed, earlier...
While I respect the fact that it is a necessary part of the game, specifically for founder regions, I do feel an overhaul is in order, to clean up recruitment messages, to the point where they are less-confusing to newcomers, and less-annoying to natives of the region.
I'm not for removing them completely. However, I do feel toning them down a bit is quite the idea.

With respects to the earlier use of "traumatic" as an adjective, my apologies. I was feeling a bit dramatic, at the time. :p But, to FEC's rephrase, I agree.

Put recruitment messages in a sidebar on the right as single-sentence links, perhaps?

Put recruitment messages in a sidebar on the right as single-sentence links, perhaps?

How about a link with a short blurb? Short like a signature? Otherwise, how would any new nation know what they're looking at?

How about a link with a short blurb? Short like a signature? Otherwise, how would any new nation know what they're looking at?

I meant a link like, say

Join this thread! (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11324767#post11324767)

That.

I meant a link like, say

Join this thread! (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=11324767#post11324767)

That.

I know what you meant. I was editing your suggestion to make it more palettable.

I like TNP's policy. 15 lines should be plenty to get the idea across. The ascii is annoying when it's there day after day, sometimes multiple times a day :O, especially the vulture guy.


It seems everyone in the West really likes Stewie though, not being a big television watcher I had to receive instruction to find out who Stewie was. ;)

*waves*

If we can't ban it altogether it should at least be limited.

Also, what about letting the feeders advertise in regions that send adverts to us? Turnabout is fair play.

If we can't ban it altogether it should at least be limited.

Also, what about letting the feeders advertise in regions that send adverts to us? Turnabout is fair play.

Sure so long as all of the new nations that would normally go to the feeders go the advertising regions as well. There is a benefit the feeders get for the annoyance of advertising.

Ah, Pierc, the habits of the pre-mod time :D

Since we're on the subject of natives having their RMB for themselves, even in feeders, I noticed this coment (posted in a playercreated region reffering to a feeder:


What about collective control of the RMB. I don't think that qualifies as spamming.

Is he right or wrong? Is it legal for a playercreated region to take control of a feeder's RMB?

There are several channels that can be used to reach the mods. For public rulings that request mod input or action on a specific thread, you may use the Moderation forums. If you have a technical issue that isn't cover in either the FAQ, the Sticky threads in the Nuts and Bolts forums (Mod, Tech, Issues, Archive), you can open a thread in the Technical forum.


For issues that require privacy, such as naming suggested cheaters, there are two ways to reach us. The preferred method is the Getting Help page, as this is the place where information can be most easily documented and logged. Even mods can't change the info logged in Getting Help, so we're always 100% certain it is accurate.


The secondary method is the IRC channel #themodcave on esper.net. Responses here are based on mod availibility, and often it is logged but not monitored. If you happen to catch someone here, great. They might be able to discuss the issue, or they may refer you back to Getting Help or the forums.
There has been a trend lately to visit #themodcave in an attempt to winnow some tasty tidbit about influence or invasions or server timing out of whomever happens to be present. We're not going to give you something there that isn't available publicly. If we want you to know about how influence works, we'll get Max to write a FAQ on it. If there's nothing published publicly, we're not going to tell you privately. It's not favoritsm, it's not bias. It's called 'giving everyone equal access to information'.

The only legitimate use for #themodcave is for discussing a situation that's too complicated for a Getting Help report, or giving us a quick heads up on some emergency situation. Note that porn spammers are emergencies, but nation restorations are not. IRC logging isn't 100% reliable, and I for one don't check back when my ISP bumps me from the channel. If you didn't catch somebody live, file a Getting Help request or make a forum post. That's how we keep it honest for everyone.

A word about regional schisms:

Regional schisms occur when two or more groups of nations within a region can't come to terms, and some of the nations pick up and move to a new region. This is absolutely normal political activity, and fully within the rules.

A number of players have tried to use Getting Help and the adspam rules to try to punish players who talk about their exit plans on regional message boards and telegrams. We don't consider regional schism discussions to fall under the adspam rules, and will not warn for a *reasonable* amount of traffic and discussion.

This isn't carte blanche permission to overwhelm your former buddies in either region - it's an opportunity for discussion of political differences. If you've got a new forum, let's keep posting about it to the 24-hour rule like we use in the feeders. Also, such discussions should be finished in a week or two. Anyone so inactive to need a month's notification isn't really a factor.

Possible abuses of this ruling might include 'hit-and-run' spamming or excessive Regional Happenings spam, so keep it under control, folks. Keep it polite and flame-free while you're at it.

Thoughts?

A word about regional schisms:

Regional schisms occur when two or more groups of nations within a region can't come to terms, and some of the nations pick up and move to a new region. This is absolutely normal political activity, and fully within the rules.

A number of players have tried to use Getting Help and the adspam rules to try to punish players who talk about their exit plans on regional message boards and telegrams. We don't consider regional schism discussions to fall under the adspam rules, and will not warn for a *reasonable* amount of traffic and discussion.

This isn't carte blanche permission to overwhelm your former buddies in either region - it's an opportunity for discussion of political differences. If you've got a new forum, let's keep posting about it to the 24-hour rule like we use in the feeders. Also, such discussions should be finished in a week or two. Anyone so inactive to need a month's notification isn't really a factor.

Possible abuses of this ruling might include 'hit-and-run' spamming or excessive Regional Happenings spam, so keep it under control, folks. Keep it polite and flame-free while you're at it.

Thoughts?

My region had such a schism, twice. This seems more reasonable than the solution we came up with (prior to reconciliation). Doesn't it revive the question of native versus invader though? At what point does one become native enough for it to be a 'schism' and not 'adspam'?

Hey, guys. I'm new here, but I'm not new to RPing. Anyway, I was reading through everything I could to learn more about how the RP system works here, especially via the One Stop Rules thread. Therefore, I noticed something that I felt best to mention here, and it involves a bit of confusion on my part.

I am quite confused as to where I should formally, IC-wise introduce my nation to the forum. What I mean is that I don't want to start a war or nothing, but just lightly mention the existence of my nation so that it/I may be welcomed to the forum. There's no real mention in the One-Stop Rules Shop of where such a thread were to go, although it does slightly point to the general gameplay forum, rather than II. Still, I'm not sure where to post it, and I'm hesitant to place it where it doesn't go, for fear of being mislabeled too soon. I would, of course, talk to a mod about this, but it appears that we do not have a private-messaging system here, so I feel kinda stupid posting this here, too.

Eh. I just wanted to let you know that possible new people may be confused to this. Or that I'm the only one. Eh.

At what point does one become native enough for it to be a 'schism' and not 'adspam'?
Offhand, I'd say they have to be there for a month or more.

I don't really expect that to be an issue, though. We're really only posting this as common-sense guidance for now. It's not going to end up in the actual ruleset unless and until it becomes a problem. We've been privately using something similar to this for many months now, so we're really just publicizing the concept.

Hey, guys. I'm new here, but I'm not new to RPing. <snip> I am quite confused as to where I should formally, IC-wise introduce my nation to the forum ... <more snip> ... just lightly mention the existence of my nation < still more snip> Eh. I just wanted to let you know that possible new people may be confused to this. Or that I'm the only one. Eh.

Congratulations on being a 2004 nation even more posting-cautious than I am. Eh. Here are some suggestions/ideas I've pinched:

UN: Your rep drops in at the Strangers' Bar (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=310853&page=356).
You/your rep comments OOC/IC on the At Vote or any other UN thread.
You describe your new offices (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=486600&page=9)(or whinge that you haven't got one)
You list your delegation members (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=507615).

II: You hold an office-warming party (Drae Nei example (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=509776&page=13)).
You invite embassies (Kennyite example (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=454422)).
You have some form of national celebration (Royal wedding, song contest, sport, presidential inauguration, Jubilee ...).
You seek international help/participation in an activity, event or disaster involving your nation (building a space program or a new capital; cleanup after tsunami, hurricane, flood, bushfires, earthquake, plague).

NS: You plunge into an open RP, with your character referring to national details where appropriate ("Like all Filthidians, Enrop hated water ...").
You start an RP about something that happens involving people from your nation. This could also go in II; it depends on what it is. Archaeological dig, anti-crime squad, med team fights new disease, mysterious artefact found, events in your nation's history ... NS ones are usually more character-driven, II tend to be event/technology-driven, but no hard-and-fast rules, unless you want to RP armies.

There's also NSWiki. (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)

Offhand, I'd say they have to be there for a month or more.

I don't really expect that to be an issue, though. We're really only posting this as common-sense guidance for now. It's not going to end up in the actual ruleset unless and until it becomes a problem. We've been privately using something similar to this for many months now, so we're really just publicizing the concept.

It's a good solution. A month seems short to me, but I'm one of the crusty veterans that feels like everyone is a noob. It seems possible to abuse it now that it is public, but right now I appear to be asking for a solution searching for a problem. I'm certain if it is abused you'll handle it. Coming from experiencing such schisms I'd say it's much better than how the participants treat it and quite reasonable.

Apparently our old sticky on this topic was eaten by Jolt at some point.
Moving all those nations through Regional Happenings, even 10 at a time, is gonna be spamming. Having any single player move multiple nations for purposes of hiding RH activity has been on the books for some time. This looks the same. We should consider a limitation on puppet flooding as a technique.
[violet], from 02-08-2006, 2:32 AM]
Oh, I agree that doing almost anything with vast numbers of nations is spamming. Players should be made aware of that. It's understandable that they might think from the FAQ that creating and moving around an unlimited number of non-UN nations is okay. But it's not; not when you're talking about these kinds of numbers.
Essential portions of this ruling will be added to the rules sticky, posted in the Regional Happenings Spam section.

Puppet Flooding: Any player creating large numbers of puppets for the purpose of spamming and/or annoying a region, be they invaders, defenders, or natives, may find all such puppets ... and their main nations ... deleted without warning.

Apparently our old sticky on this topic was eaten by Jolt at some point.

Essential portions of this ruling will be added to the rules sticky, posted in the Regional Happenings Spam section.

Puppet Flooding: Any player creating large numbers of puppets for the purpose of spamming and/or annoying a region, be they invaders, defenders, or natives, may find all such puppets ... and their main nations ... deleted without warning.

As someone who committed this offense, honestly having no idea it was offense. Good to know. I'd have been really upset to with no history to have lost my main because of an obscure rule. Turns out that I was wasting my time as ejecting my made-up nations was not accomplishing what I thought it was, but I can see why it wouldn't be acceptable.

Am I right to assume that this generally isn't so outrageous as to cost one their main nation and that you're simply indicating that when histories and severity are included that a deletion of the main nations is a POSSIBLE outcome?

may find all such puppets ... and their main nations ... deleted without warning.

... when histories and severity are included that a deletion of the main nations is a POSSIBLE outcome?

I always attempt to phrase most carefully.

I always attempt to phrase most carefully.

You can delete this after you've read it as I don't want to spam this up, but I always read may as a warning that if you do this you'll lose that. I recognize you'd probably use the word "will" but keep in mind that few are so careful and as such it helps to make it explicitly clear what the consequences are.

Hmmm... nevermind. People shouldn't do it. Really it doesn't matter what you say the consequences are, honestly.

Just a note to explain why the [Moderated Status] Why aren't my posts appearing? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=511849) stickies have been removed.

Jolt admins confirm that the Post Moderation feature has been disabled and uninstalled (finally!). Hopefully we won't have to deal with that fun job again.

Oh, thank <insert name of favorite deity, celebrity, or animal here>.

As the current Delegate of the region of California, I've encountered a[nother] thing I don't understand. It arose from the ruling referred to here: Feeder Region Recruitment Message (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=576860).

One of our recruiting nations was recently ejected and banned from a Feeder region for failing to comply with that region's line limit. After communication between our recruiting nation and the Delegate there (who was courteous, helpful and reasonable) and some research on my part which led me to the above-mentioned thread, we resolved the problem by making sure our ad now conforms to their limit.

On reflection however, this suggested to me two points which I'd like to raise here.

The first is merely mechanical. Would it be possible, in the case of Moderator decisions as critical as the one mentioned in the thread above, to make a link from The One Stop Rules Shop to rulings like this one? I make a regular effort to watch One Stop, and try also to be aware of other rulings that might affect how I carry out my delegacy, but until the Delegate of the Feeder region wrote to our recruiter about this ruling I hadn't seen it. I realize it sounds like a "slippery slope" request, but really, when a ruling as momentous as this one is passed, in which (it seems) the Delegates of the Feeder regions are given the formal right to regulate ads above and beyond the general ad rules of NS, would it not be possible to create such links?

The second is a request for clarification. It arises in part from Moderator Kryozerkia's post about slipperiness of the word "reasonable". As he/she points out, the Delegate is probably trying to create a favourable environment for the residents, and deems this regulation as a "reasonable" way to do it. I agree with this. Moderator Kryozerkia continues by recalling the Feeder that made a ruling for a week that all ads had to be in the form of haiku. (As I recall, our recruiter attempted to comply with this bizarre requirement, although I suspect the result would have made Bashō weep!)

I notice that I still have not found the original ruling to which Moderator Frisbeeteria referred when he locked the above thread. For all I know the questions I want to ask now are already answered. But I don't know because I still can't find the original thread for that ruling.

My difficulty with this ruling is that in principle, it seems to give Feeder regions unbounded powers to prevent in practice that to which they officially must pay lip-service. Since it is established that a region can arbitrarily set a line-limit, or the required literary form, is there any restriction placed on the limits a Feeder may set? For example, what recourse would recruiters have if a Delegate of a Feeder region was particularly hostile to recruiting and decided that all ads must be only one line long (after all, a haiku is three very short lines), or decided that ads must be in the form of palindromes as well as only taking up one or two lines? Have the Delegates of Feeder regions been given that much control over the recruiting process?


I do not raise this with respect to the situation that I described concerning our recruiter nation. In that case the fault was with our recruiter and more especially with me because I have the job of instructing and monitoring our recruiters, and I didn't do my job right on this occasion. But what I've learned because of that situation, and more especially what I've still been unable to learn, has me concerned and confused.

Thanks in advance.

Would it be possible, in the case of Moderator decisions as critical as the one mentioned in the thread above, to make a link from The One Stop Rules Shop to rulings like this one?

I didn't realize it was a ruling. I thought it was simply a clarification of existing standard practice.

Regional Delegates in founderless regions hold the power of ejection. That's game mechanics, not a ruling. Mods don't interfere in regional politics, so Delegates (specifically including Feeder delegates) can pretty much eject players at will for whatever reason they want. If they want to ban-ject adspammers, there's no rule prohibiting it. It's kinda pointless, as the ban list is limited and new puppets aren't. However, we don't restrict it.

The restriction on adspam means that we won't spam-warn a player for advertising their region as long as they follow the adspam guidelines. There's no corresponding restriction on Delegates, or even regular members of a region. At least one region uses volunteer "CommRangers" who politely point offenders towards the rules, both of the game and of the specific forum. That's not something we get involved in.

If a feeder delegate started to become extremely unreasonable, we might step in with a polite suggestion, but I can't imagine circumstances where it would be an official moderator ruling. For the most part, we depend on the democratic process to alleviate such concerns. If advertisers are negatively impacted by that for a little while, I'm not particularly concerned about it.

Well, I can't say I understand fully the logic of it all that much better, and I'm not sure I'm clever enough to know where the Moderators are drawing the lines -- but that's just me. Consequently, I will treat this as though it really is a ruling (though now we know it might not be in the technical sense). Based on that, I'm going to act as if the will of Feeder region Delegates concerning advertising modifies (and in many?/most? circumstances will curtail) the general permission to post an ad in the Feeders according to the general rules concerning advertising.

I won't pretend this is ideal from my viewpoint as an ordinary Delegate whose region needs to advertise, but at least it will produce a kind of consistency to see the rules this way, and that will allow me to instruct our advertisers with safety in mind.

What we will do if a Feeder Delegate ever did become so restrictive that ads became impracticable remains a question for the future. I'm afraid I still don't see what's to prevent that, but I won't be arguing the point any time soon.

BTW, I'm sorry if I was mistaken in calling it a "ruling". I called it that because the Delegate who informed me of it called it that, and because I've understood (or misunderstood?) that it's best to regard Moderator pronouncements on game procedures as "rulings" unless they say it's an opinion. Since I can't (yet) read for myself the post(s) to which the Delegate referred, I felt safer treating it as official than presuming it isn't.


Frisbeeteria, I appreciate it that you answered. I can imagine that questions like mine could be seen as an annoying distraction from other parts of your job, so thanks for taking the time to explain things. If there is anywhere I could read up on this particular thing (repeated searches found no further threads), I'd be happy to educate myself and not trouble you guys with it. Certainly, your post has clarified for me where ad-spam fits into The Great Scheme Of Things that we know and love as NationStates. Thanks.

They are really very cool, very wonderful
Great work .. really informative .. and thanks a lot for sharing ..
Glad it works as expected for you
looking good

I was registered at your forum. I have printed the test message. Do not delete, please.

Thanks for your sharing. Thanks for sharing this useful information. It's great.

Thanks for the suggestion, I wish it had worked.

he best that go together.

Take that, you sweet thing!

Life is too short to be serious, laugh it up.

I have read your topic. What's useful innformation for my job.
I do agree with you. Those are the most effective way
have a blessed day


__________________
Pictures of liposuction before and after - Prices and cost of laser liposuction (http://laserliposuctionbeforeandafter.com)

I have read your topic. What's useful innformation for my job.
I do agree with you. Those are the most effective way
have a blessed day


__________________
Pictures of liposuction before and after - Prices and cost of laser liposuction (http://laserliposuctionbeforeandafter.com)

****.