NationStates Jolt Archive

If I could please request that only NS Moderators reply in this thread, thank you...

Over the past month or so I have been keeping track of the advertising carried out by nations on behalf of their regions on The South Pacific (TSP) RMB...Noticing a persistent violation of the rule that states in
'The One Stop Rules Shop', "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."

This has led to me issuing warnings in line with TSP's 3 Warnings Law on behalf of TSP and more recently reporting such offenders to NS Mods, not intending in the slightest to impersonate a NS Mod...TSP has always had a 3 Warnings Law, which in the past has been praised by the Nation States...

I have done nothing to contravene the rules of NS, only trying to uphold those rules as they are written through the rules as currently constituted in TSP...

I have never stated that I am or was a NS Mod, but clearly stating in all warnings to nations that I was acting on behalf of TSP and its 3 Warnings Law in upholding the NS Rules overning Ad-SPAM...

NationStates Moderators
Nicktenstein...You are warned, in accordance with the 3 Warnings Law, for violating NS rules in posting multiple Ad-SPAM on The South Pacific RMB within a 24hr period...Your official warning can be found here:
(Link to Thread on TSP offsite forum)

Kloister
Prime Minister
The South Pacific

You must make very sure not to sound as if you are speaking with the voice of the moderators. Warned for mod-impersonation.

The 3 Warnings Law in TSP has been in place for over 2 and a half years, and was supported by NS mods...No-one has ever been warned for 'Mod Impersonation' before for carrying out a warning...Because we always call in TSP's 3 warnings law and we place a link to our forum, where the warning is officially recorded with a direct copy of the offending material taken from the RMB...

TSP work in accordance with the NS rules and support them in every way...We have adopted the NS rules and developed TSP's from them...

I would like it clarified exactly why, when acting in this manner I have been warned by the NS Mods, for upholding their own rules as a member of TSP?..And request that my warning be overturned and stricken from the record...

Thank you and regards

I am just here to support Kloister in this matter as the delegate of the South Pacific. He has never said that he was acting as a moderator in any of his posts on the RMB, and his actions were merely supporting the NationStates rules, and upholding our laws which are firmly modelled and grounded on the NationStates rules.

I believe that warning him for mod impersonation is a trifle hard, especially as he was doing what he thought was right and it was in accordance with the rules of both NationStates and the laws of The South Pacific.

He wasn't impersonating a moderator, nor was he claiming to be one. He was acting in good faith.

In the past, our 3 warnings law, designed to support the game rules and moderation team has been praised. It's been in place for 2 and half years. Why now, does simply carrying out our piece of government in the region warrant a mod warning? I honestly can't understand why the rules changed overnight. An explaination would be appreciated - especially as to my knowledge, the game rules haven't changed. We are supporting you, and you are telling us that's a bad thing by issuing us a warning?

Technically he was impersonating a moderation when in his post on your RMB, he stated this:

NationStates Moderators

Nicktenstein...You are warned, in accordance with the 3 Warnings Law, for violating NS rules in posting multiple Ad-SPAM on The South Pacific RMB within a 24hr period...Your official warning can be found here:
(Link to Thread on TSP offsite forum)


He said "NationStates Moderators" in the opening part of that RMB message, thus pretended to be a NS Moderator. And he said that the person was "Warned", which only a MOD can do, not a non-mod player.

Technically he was impersonating a moderation when in his post on your RMB, he stated this:
He said "NationStates Moderators" in the opening part of that RMB message, thus pretended to be a NS Moderator. And he said that the person was "Warned", which only a MOD can do, not a non-mod player.
No, I'm pretty sure that the Nationstates Moderators is from the telegram he received.

What's likely the problem is that he used terminology like "warning" and "official warning". The TG is rather clear: It's up to you to avoid sounding like a moderator.

You are warned, in accordance with the 3 Warnings Law, for violating NS rules in posting multiple Ad-SPAM on The South Pacific RMB within a 24hr period...Your official warning can be found here - <link>
I see why you were slapped. The phrase "official warning" pretty much belongs to us exclusively. Also, NS doesn't have a 3 Warnings Law, so if they look for official justification, it doesn't exist.

Let's consider this or something similar as an alternate:
NS rules prohibit posting multiple Ad-SPAM on The South Pacific RMB within a 24hr period. In addition, The South Pacific community's 3 Warnings Law specifies that you will be ejected from the region for breaking this rule, whether the NationStates moderators officially warn you or not. This is your <1st> TSP warning. Please observe both NS and TSP rules.
<link to TSP warning thread>

No, I'm pretty sure that the Nationstates Moderators is from the telegram he received.

What's likely the problem is that he used terminology like "warning" and "official warning". The TG is rather clear: It's up to you to avoid sounding like a moderator.
Yes it was from the TG I received...I have never attempted or wished to impersonate a NS Mod...

The use of the words 'warning' and 'official warning' were used solely in conjuction with TSP 3 Warnings Law...They are official in that sense...Surely if I was warning them on behalf of NS then I would be linking to a post on this forum!..

If the warnings cannot be 'official' when made by me on behalf of TSP then I have trouble seeing how we can continue to help NS Mods in the enforcement of the rules as they stand at the moment...Maybe you could offer some guidance on that?..

I see why you were slapped. The phrase "official warning" pretty much belongs to us exclusively. Also, NS doesn't have a 3 Warnings Law, so if they look for official justification, it doesn't exist.

The phrase official warning should really be listed somewhere in NS, as being 'out of bounds' so that this misunderstanding cannot occur again...And surely it stands to reason that if a 3WL does not exist in NS then it proves by which authority I was using to issue 'official' TSP warnings!..Especially as there were only links to TSP Forum!..

NS rules prohibit posting multiple Ad-SPAM on The South Pacific RMB within a 24hr period. In addition, The South Pacific community's 3 Warnings Law specifies that you will be ejected from the region for breaking this rule, whether the NationStates moderators officially warn you or not. This is your <1st> TSP warning. Please observe both NS and TSP rules.
<link to TSP warning thread>
I appreciate your suggestion and will certainly take it on board for all future activity...

Yes it was from the TG I received...I have never attempted or wished to impersonate a NS Mod...

The use of the words 'warning' and 'official warning' were used solely in conjuction with TSP 3 Warnings Law...They are official in that sense...Surely if I was warning them on behalf of NS then I would be linking to a post on this forum!..
That's the thing, our rules are not in conjunction with your 3 warnings law. If they break the official rules within The One Stop Rules Shop, they get warned, officially. If they break your rules, you need to make it specifically clear that these are NOT the official rules of NS, but the unofficial rules of your region.


If the warnings cannot be 'official' when made by me on behalf of TSP then I have trouble seeing how we can continue to help NS Mods in the enforcement of the rules as they stand at the moment...Maybe you could offer some guidance on that?..
How about ...taking screenshots and reporting them to the Getting Help page, where they can officially be taken care of? Just a thought.

Well reporting the offending Nations to the NS Mods is what has got me in this predicament in the first place...I would also argue that screenshots can be doctored as much as copied content from the RMB...Which begs the question how can Spamming be proven, with the necessary evidence, unless a complete history of the RMB is archived...This is something that I have been trying to achieve...The Exodus region have developed a script which does this and I would like to implement something similar for TSP...Would that be considered by NS Mods as permitted evidence?..

So I gather from the way this discussion has gone the warning I have received will not be recinded?..

If not, it sort of makes a mockery of the whole purpose of having rules that are nigh on impossible to enforce!..

Screenshots of the RMB are not taken by the player. Those are easily edited. They aren't even touched by the player if you submit it correctly, by checking off that option in the Getting Help Request; therefore, I do believe that is 100% safe.

Your warning stands.

You're not understanding something. The Nationstates moderators were placed in their positions to enforce the rules, and will continue to do so. Non-moderators have no obligation to 'help out'; therefore, your 'enforcement' of the rules is going a bit too far, seeing as you aren't a moderator. What we do appreciate is when people submit evidence of rule breaking, in the GHP and the Mod forum.

You arent here to enforce the rules, we are.

OK...I appreciate that I may have been 'enthusiastic' in my attempts to help the Mods with their enforcement of the rules, but if I may just draw your attention to this:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=383874

Specifically the line from Cogitation...'Majesto: In my official opinion as Moderator, I think Kloister is making it sufficiently clear that he is not a NationStates authority.'...

And if I could enquire as to how long the warning stays upon my record and how many warnings a member is permitted before being deleted?..

Thanks

OK...I have been patiently waiting for a response to my previous questions, and seven days have since elapsed...

Is there an answer on the horizon?..

Not to seem rude, but you've been answered, several times. The fact that you haven't liked the answers is most likely entirely beside the point.

plus, in the case you linked to, at no time was the phrase "NS rules" or "offical warning" used. Personally I'd say that the linked case is a lot more clear that it is a SP rule that was broken rather than an offical rule, but thats just my opinion.

Not to seem rude, but you've been answered, several times. The fact that you haven't liked the answers is most likely entirely beside the point.

What DLN said. Kloister, acknowledge and move on.

Pardon me, but as I read the initial cited telegram posted by Kloister and the posts by Euroslavia:

NationStates Moderators
Nicktenstein...You are warned, in accordance with the 3 Warnings Law, for violating NS rules in posting multiple Ad-SPAM on The South Pacific RMB within a 24hr period...Your official warning can be found here:
(Link to Thread on TSP offsite forum)

Kloister
Prime Minister
The South Pacific

You must make very sure not to sound as if you are speaking with the voice of the moderators. Warned for mod-impersonation.

Emphasis mine

Your warning stands.

There was a question which needed an answer from the Mods. Dread Lady Nathicana, Chuichstan, there was not a case of missing the point, as can be clearly read in subsequent posts by Kloister in this thread. Frisbeeteria and Euroslavia offered a construction point in their posts; perhaps others might read the posts in this thread, and others, in a more than cursory fashion.

Yes, there was, and they answered it - in full. Perhaps we're not the ones misreading. They not only said why he'd been warned, but offered alternative ways of phrasing to avoid more problems in the future, AND stated clearly that the warning would stand. I fail to see the problem. How many times in various forms do those points need to be repeated after all?

And if I could enquire as to how long the warning stays upon my record and how many warnings a member is permitted before being deleted?..
They are permanent.

No fixed number, it depends on the severity of the infractions. This one is clearly 'mild'.
The Republic of the Mods2, you are warned for foul and abusive language as stipulated in the 3 Warnings Law of the South Pacific...Please cease and desist from this behaviour...
Notably absent from this post, in comparison to the one you were warned for, are the phrases "violating NS rules" and "official warning". Notably present in this post is the phrase "the 3 Warnings Law of the South Pacific". That makes it an entirely different scenario, and Cogitation's prior ruling is irrelevant to this case.

We're not looking for excuses to delete players that are trying to be helpful, really we're not. Just take two steps back from the situation, and use the alternates we suggested. You'll be fine. Hell, I've got a warning on this nation. Deserved it, too!

Yes, there was, and they answered it - in full. Perhaps we're not the ones misreading. They not only said why he'd been warned, but offered alternative ways of phrasing to avoid more problems in the future, AND stated clearly that the warning would stand. I fail to see the problem. How many times in various forms do those points need to be repeated after all?

This was the question I meant

And if I could enquire as to how long the warning stays upon my record and how many warnings a member is permitted before being deleted?..

Frisbeeteria answered it. That was all that was needed, not comments such as yours which served no purpose.

Now that we in the South Pacific know the policy NS wishes us to take, we'll follow it. Thank you, Frisbeeteria.

They are permanent.

No fixed number, it depends on the severity of the infractions. This one is clearly 'mild'.

<snipped>

We're not looking for excuses to delete players that are trying to be helpful, really we're not. Just take two steps back from the situation, and use the alternates we suggested. You'll be fine. Hell, I've got a warning on this nation. Deserved it, too!

That's all I was asking for...And as Caer Rialis stated, it was not at all helpful or constructive to have some of you jump down my throat and accusing me of not accepting the ruling and being unable to move on...A little clarity goes a long way in helping us to help you, which is all that I have tried to do with regard to Ad-SPAM...

I think we can now consider this issue closed...With SPers taking on the guidance and suggestions as kindly given by Frisbeeteria and Euroslavia...

Thanks

Kloister

One last comment, and then I'm closing this.
It sort of makes a mockery of the whole purpose of having rules that are nigh on impossible to enforce!..
You're right. They are just about impossible to enforce, except for egregious violators.

The adspam rules were put in place at the request of players who didn't like all the regional adspam. The rules were balanced by the desires of players in player-created regions who didn't have any other way to reach new players. Like all compromises, neither side is entirely happy with the results.

To be frank, the mods aren't entirely happy with the results either. We spend a lot more time adjudicating essentially minor issues with adspam than we'd like, in the face of more pressing issues. In a perfect world, adspammers would be reasonable human beings who would react positively to politely-phrased requests to post less frequently ... and feeder residents would only respond politely, rather than being abrasive and abusive to spammers who are often brand new to the game.

Our ruleset is massive. It's not easy to find for brand new players. Adding more rules, or posting them in more prominent locations, would diminish some of the fun of this game. Despite the fact that some of us build our lives around this site, it is ultimately just a game, and we don't want to restrict it so much that it's no fun for new players.

We're not interested in punishment for punishment's sake. If that happened, Max would be entirely correct to remove us as mods. We'll continue to enforce the rules as written, and players are encouraged to help us make this a pleasant place to play. If that means that a few bad apples slip through the cracks, so be it. "Fun" is ultimately more important than "order".