For those not interested in reading the ten-pages of argument, I'll try to explain the situation as simply as I can and give my own input.
Over the years, the World Assembly has had a number of rules that have been carefully devised so that the whole system can function properly. A proposal proposes new laws, changes to the world - BUT it obviously can't ACTUALLY change the world because that world is NationStates, a fictional game. The WA is fundamentally a bit schizophrenic. On the one hand you've got regional delegates, casting votes, regional passwords, and other assorted WA gameplay things. On the other hand we have the proposals themselves, the drafting of said proposals, the long discussions, the RPs, and the debates. It was necessary to segregate the two because it just wasn't possible to have the ambassador of Sirocco arguing why child labour should be banned when entire countries were being airlifted by helicopters out of the Pacific in the game. This is the most important complaint. There are some other problems, but I'll get to them later.
C&C has forced these two worlds to merge together, quite abruptly. I'm struggling for a particularly apposite analogy here, but I suppose it's a bit like this: you've got a bunch of actors who have been rehearsing and performing Othello for years. They've honed it to perfection, and they're having a great laugh doing so. Then one day the director comes in and tells them that they can refer to each other by their real names on the stage now, and they can kill Othello earlier on if they want. And the audience can join in too and do a dance.
OK, enough of the analogy. Simply put: it means that the WA people are being made to acknowledge things they cannot acknowledge in character. Commendations have perforated the cocoon that the WA's been safely nestled in all these years. Regional passwords, raiding, ejection to the Rejected Realms, the actual players behind the nations- it's all completely irreconcilable with the idea that everything the WA produces is wholly IC. A number of the rules were placed to protect that distinction. How can the roleplayed ambassadors of a nation possibly even begin to debate the merits of commending a region for its role in reporting spammers? It just can't work.
It may seem a bit silly and confusing to some people, but you can imagine how pissed off footballers would be if the spectators could jump on pitch and boot about their own balls if they wanted and yet be able to affect the score.
Now, before I go on any further, I want to point out that though [violet] didn't discuss this with anyone and just put it into the game, it wasn't done with any kind of malevolence or disregard for the WA forumers. She just wasn't fully aware of how things went down there. We all want to make NationStates a better game, and this was one of the first steps. The problem wasn't that [violet] didn't think the WAers opinions mattered, it's that she didn't realise she was completely shattering their game for them. You ARE valued members of the community. None of us want to lose the people who've made the WA what is today, believe me, we all think you've done a tremendous job, and we don't want to completely bulldoze over everything you've been doing until now. We're no trying to piss in anyone's sandpit. I'm don't want to speak on [violet]'s behalf here, and I'm not trying to, but I want to emphasise what I said before. The WA community is a valued community. It just wasn't completely understood. Once we get to a mutual understanding, I think things will progress much more smoothly.
So, let's look at the other side of the argument: everyone I've talked to who isn't a hardcore WA forumite has loved the idea of C&C and think it's a fantastic addition to the game. Suddenly the WA has become a great deal more interesting to casual and involved players alike because now it's doing something that could, potentially, directly involve themselves. There is enormous potential for the C&Cs to become something really impressive. Here's a scenario I imagined if this really took off:
Region A and Region B are longstanding rivals for ideological reasons and currently in the middle of an uneasy truce. One day, a nation from region A goes on a smear campaign against region B, telling everyone not to join them and even succeeds in getting a few nations from region B to defect. The delegate of region B is furious and files a proposal to condemn the nation for its lies. Region A, acting in the defence of one of its member states, goes on to the forum to counter this and tells all and sunder that Region B is lying and spreads even more lies about the region. Region B calls on an ally, Region C, to spread the word and condemn Region A for its blatant warmongering. And so the dominos fall until the condemnation of some insignificant nation has become a very big deal indeed...
I think we can all agree that this would be a really fun thing to happen in NationStates. Nothing else has ever given cross-region alliances in NationStates any proper meaning apart from raiding. The problem is that this is all incompatible with how the WA forumers see things. How could regional disputes ever cross into the WA forum where the OOC concerns and the IC concerns could possibly (and probably) be completely ignored? It's not so much that the WA can now affect gameplay, because it can't really, it can only comment on it. But it acknowledges that gameplay exists, therefore admitting a game exists. How can one RP under those circumstances? So we're going to need some sort of compromise. There's a number of things we could do at the moment...
- Leave things as they are. WA forumers leave the game and while things remain much the same, a lot of what goes on in the WA forum will be seen as meaningless. No one will want to RP because it's too difficult and eventually it becomes a very dull place to post. No one wants this.
- Change the C&C system into something that complements the World Assembly rather than changes it. This could be difficult and I can't say I've thought of anything yet. But it would be a very happy outcome if we could manage it. Suggestions are very welcome! Ardchoille is in the midst of building up a ruleset for these new categories. Have your say!
- Make the C&C system separate from the proposals section. On the upside, this would mean that it could be put into a separate subforum where IC and OOC could mingle. On the downside, this could make C&C seem less important than normal resolutions and divorces it slightly from being part of the WA which was kind of the whole point.
- Keep the C&C system as it is but make it separate from the WA. Again, this rather demeans the concept of the C&C in that it was about the organisation as a whole uniting to comment on a particular nation or region. A possibility I wouldn't exclude, but it's not very desirable.
- Only allow IC Commendations and Condemnations. This would be very difficult and confusing for players. Not desirable.
- Make separate categories for IC and OOC C&Cs. Again, this is difficult and confusing. Messy too. Not desirable.
- Remove C&C altogether. It's a possibility, but for something with so much potential, I don't think it's desirable.
- Make the C&C and the proposals two distinct branches of the WA. I don't think it would take long for things to become... internecine. But it's an idea to hold on to.
- Something else? If anyone's got a suggestion, I'd love to hear it! Drop me an e-mail (sirocco@nationstates.net) or post in the thread I linked to earlier when it becomes unlocked.
Now, there is another source of contention over the C&Cs and this is something that changes a very fundamental rule of the World Assembly, if not the entire game, and it is this: the WA cannot in any way affect a non-WA nation. This rule's been present since almost the beginning for a few obvious reasons, some practical, some ideological, and some philosophical.
If someone submits a proposal that says trade with non-WA nations should cease, we should invade non-WA nations, blah blah blah, we have to delete it. Why? Because there's no provision in the game for affecting those changes. The code only allows for changes to affect the WA nations, otherwise what's the point? Why join the WA at all? Suddenly joining the WA isn't a major decision anymore and is reduced to a triviality. Also, some object to the power of the WA over sovereignty and don't join because of that and other personal objections to certain resolutions or the general ideological thrust of the World Assembly. And then there are those who don't join because they're simply not interested in that part of the game.
The upshot of all this is that these people (a not inconsiderate number of players) may and could strongly object that the WA is doing something that affects them. Now, the C&C system rather neatly sidesteps this by not actually affecting them and merely putting a badge on the C&C'd nation. I can still see problems though, as this would still be too much for some. Or many. Who knows? The point of fact is that if the WA puts up a proposal condemning your nation for anti-WA attitudes then your nation has no defences because it is completely at the whim of WA members.
They could deal with this by joining the WA and submitting a repeal after being C&C'd but as you can imagine this could be seen as distasteful for the nation on many levels. They could also entreaty WA members on their behalf or debate it in the forums which may be better, but I don't know if that's a perfect solution. Ultimately because they've been branded with something they don't want and, from their point of view, shouldn't be made to have. I don't want to see people ditching their favourite nation because of this.
Possible choices as I see it...
- Keep things as they are. Possible, but probably not the best solution. I can foresee many players getting pissed off about this.
- C&Cs can only affect WA members. A solution, it's true, but not exactly desirable. The system carries more weight and importance if it can be used worldwide.
- C&Cs affect non-WA nations but only WA members can see them. Something to think about. Imperfect, but... still something to think about.
- non-WA nations can make an appeal after getting C&C'd to be voted on by the WA. It's a nice idea, but I think it's ultimately unworkable. Not only would it be difficult to work into the game, but if the nation loses the appeal then it's still stuck with a badge it hates forever.
- non-WA nations get the C&C but it expires after a time. This is an idea I rather like. It allows the WA to make its opinions known and allows the non-WA nation to be badge-free after enduring whatever blessing or black spot it just acquired. On the other hand, this would lessen the impact of the C&C and the WA would probably be rather disinterested in voting on matters involving non-WA nations which would be a shame.
- Something else? Again, let me know. I'd love to hear.
Some other neat threads, you may like to look at:
The Modern WA - A discussion on WA roleplay.
NS School of Ideological Studies - Something I completely missed until now. It's New South Hell again, this time analysing issues with more passion than anyone previously. Obviously not to be missed. You should check out his forum for quite an illuminating list of essays and analyses.
Latin Motto Clinic - Naivetry is translating mottos into Latin for everyone. Very, very cool. I wish I could remember how to write in Latin.
An Analysis of NationStates Generations - An updated version of the essay Unibot wrote a while back.
That's it from me for now. Ta-ra.
Posts
