The Rejected Times - Issue XXV
Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 9:40 pm
Issue XXV. July 25, 2014.
Editor-in-Chief: Unibot | Copy Editor: Gruenberg Table of Contents
Part I
Not In My Wildest Dreams (Kogvuron)
Bearly Started: A Special Interview with Bears Armed
The Legitimate Point of View? (Glen-Rhodes)
Migration in The Rejected Realms (Starrie)
The Decline of Defending (Cormac Somerset)
Part II
It’s the End of the World! (Afforess)
The Myth of the Gameplay-Role Play Divide (Joe Bobs)
A Critique of the Wolfist Manifesto (Kogvuron)
We'll see your World Cup and Raise You! (Apox)
The Battlefield Effect (Unibot)
Part III
Foreign Relations Main Talking Point In The South Pacific Elections (Gruenberg)
Lazarus "Wins" The World Cup (Kogvuron)
World Assembly Legislative League Treaty Ratified By TNP (Gruenberg)
NSG Reacts to MH17 With Shock And Anger, Mostly Anger (Thafoo)
Is TNP's community "cracking at the seams"? (Church of Satan)
World Assembly's 300th Resolution Breaks Record (Gruenberg)
TRR Chooses a New Flag! (Church of Satan)
In Brief - News Round-Up (Gruenberg)
Not In My Wildest Dreams
FEATURE | KOGVURON
The founder of The Rejected Times reflects on its legacy and impact...
A year and a half ago, I started the TRR Media Organization on a whim. I saw an opening, an opportunity, and I took it. At the time, there were no real established media organizations, save for the PNN which was always more into satire than reporting. I wanted to help create something special, something unique, and something that we as a region could be proud.
We started out with humble beginnings. Issue 1 was only 5 short articles and an interview, and was basically put together by three people. However, as time went on, the Organization grew and changed and adapted in order to fit the current times. Today, the Rejected Times as the Media Organization is now known, regularly pumps out issues with the most insightful editorials, the most informative commentaries, and the funnies cartoons available in NationStates gameplay.
I could talk about the Times for pages, but instead I’m going to talk about a couple of other things. First, I wanted to acknowledge the change that the Times has made in gameplay as a whole. As I said earlier, back when I founded the Times, there were basically no serious media organizations. Today, there are many. Most excitingly, many of our fellow GCRs have formed their own media organizations as well. From The Northern Lights to the Independent Herald Tribune, the Rejected Times has helped to inspire a new generation of GCR media organizations. And this is something that we can all be excited in.
Second, I wanted to talk highlight the work put in by the staff of the Rejected Times. Our paper truly has the greatest staff of journalists in NationStates. From the all-star writers whose eye-opening op-eds headline pieces, to less-recognized reporters who help keep people informed about what is going on, everyone works extremely hard to meet deadlines, and to keep improving. Today, TRT is so far removed from my original image of what the media organization would be like, and that is great, because the input of so many people has made it far better than what I alone imagined.
Third, I wanted to thank everyone who has ever been involved in a publication of the Times. You have transformed a small idea into huge publication, one that will surely last long past most of us here in this game. You helped to build one of the greatest newspapers that this game has ever seen. And you have made me proud to call myself a contributor to the Rejected Times.
Thank you, and here is to 25 more stellar issues!
Bearly Started: A Special Interview with Bears Armed
INTERVIEW | UNIBOT
Bears Armed sails to victory with "Legal Competence". 7,135 votes to 2,282.
Congratulations on your victory with "Legal Competence". For our readers, could you give a brief overview of the resolution?
Certainly. It requires that every member nation have and use a fair system of some kind for determining which people there are or aren’t fit to make important decisions for themselves, without needing a parent or guardian’s approval for their actions, whilst leaving the actual details of those systems for the nations (in their variety) to determine locally.
If I understand it correctly, this stands as a major success for you in a career-long crusade to push for sapient rights? How did that mission begin and what have been some of your successes and losses along the way?
It began quite shortly after I got involved in NS. I started looking at the ‘United Nations’ (the international organisation that we had in those pre-‘WA’ days) a few months after creating my first nation, Godwinnia, and by that stage I’d already decided that the nation had some Fantasy elements in its nature including the presence of groups from a few non-human peoples in its population. This meant that when I started looking for proposal ideas and noticed that there was nothing guaranteeing sapient non-humans the same rights that humans enjoyed, it seemed an obvious possibility to try. However my own first attempt at drafting a proposal on the subject inspired somebody else to create one as well, they submitted theirs before mine was ready, and when theirs was voted-down I turned to other projects instead for a while.
Are things complete for the Sapient Rights movement? Or is there more work to be done?
There’s definitely more work that could be done, although in some cases that might interfere more extensively with national sovereignty than I or the Bears would really like: We accept the need for international legislation in the case of the most ‘fundamental’ rights, but have a rather narrower view than some nations do about what rights should actually counts as 'fundamental' in that context.
For one thing, I’d still like to see an “Equal rights for non-human sapients” resolution passed, although bearing in mind that at least three other proposals on the subject (including one by me) have already been voted down since the earliest one that I already mentioned here I’m not very optimistic about the chance of that ever happening.
An idea that does seem quite obvious and potentially viable would be a resolution about the rights & duties of the guardians who are assigned to look after the interests of those individuals who don’t qualify to manage their own affairs under the Legal Competence rules. I was going to start work on one myself, as a follow-up to ‘Legal Competence’, but another nation has already started a draft and for now I’ve settled for commenting on that instead.
I heard you faced a moderation challenge with "Legal Competence" before it passed. Obviously the proposal survived, so what was the challenge? How was it resolved?
All that I know about it is what was posted in the discussion thread: Somebody, their identity not publicly revealed, questioned whether some detail in the text would count as either contradicting or amending an existing resolution — despite my inclusion of a line specifically recognising that earlier resolutions (if still in effect) took precedence over this proposal in any cases where they overlapped — and the Mods decided that it didn’t do so.
Although I've known you for a long time, I'm not sure I'm well informed about Bears Armed, the player. How did you find NationStates? How did you get settled down into the World Assembly and the NS Sports community? And how did your bears theme develop?
I originally learned about NS, back in 2005, from an online friend-of-a-friend who mentioned that she’d just revived her own nation and posted a link to that page. The basic idea looked interesting, and I had some spare time available, so I created ‘Godwinnia’ that same day and never looked back. I lurked in the forums for a couple of months before starting to post there, learning what was what, and the NS-UN was simply the side of things that attracted me most: I introduced myself there by commenting a bit on some drafts by other people and then went on to start the ‘Sapient Rights’ proposal that I’ve already mentioned, and apparently did so sensibly enough that the existing regulars accepted me quite quickly. The ‘NS Sports’ side of things, which in those days was included in the ‘NS’ sub-forum rather than given a separate section of its own, was a later addition to my interests: Shortly after creating the Bears I was looking for ways in which to introduce them to the outside world, sign-ups for the [first] Summer Olympics happened to be open, and my involvement just grew from there.
And why the Bears, you ask? Well, after running various human or mostly-human nations for about a year I decided that I’d like to try the challenge of running an actual non-human nation successfully, I didn’t want to simply resort to using one or another of the well-known concepts from SF&F, a Modly comment in the forum about the illegality of submitting joke proposals on ideas such as that old favourite the “Right to Keep and Arm Bears” put this idea into my head, bears did look rather easier to handle than some of the other possibilities… and I’d always had both a sweet tooth and urges to hibernate when winter came along.
As you may know, The Rejected Times often publishes articles that provide a critical light on issues in the World Assembly, especially in regards to the Secretariat. What issues do you think are most prominent in the World Assembly (if any) and how do you see these issues being resolved?
Well, let’s see...
a/ Starting with one of the biggest shouting points of recent months, there’s the question of whether Mall made a misjudgement in proposing ‘Liberate Haven’, because a lot of people think he should have realised that doing so would stir up such a major storm and that this might impact on quite a few other players’ feelings about the Secretariat as a whole. My response to this would be: Yes, in my opinion he made a serious mistake. No, though, it obviously wasn’t an abuse of power. No, he shouldn’t “have to” resign, but he should learn from this and be more careful in future… and if he doesn’t learn from this situation, and does something else along those lines that causes such a major kerfuffle again, then maybeso then the Secretariat as a whole would be well-advised to reconsider whether having him in their ranks is overall an asset or a hindrance to their work.
b/ Some of the GA regulars have expressed unhappiness about various recent rulings on proposals’ legality, but although I might have preferred more clarity about the reasoning involved in a few cases I don’t actually have any major objections to raise there. I understand and have no problem with the Secretariat’s current policy of using all of the GA-experienced Mods available to try and get their rulings as correct as possible on the first paw, instead of deliberately holding some back for potential use as a ‘court of appeal’, especially bearing in mind the limited number of judges that they have available: In my personal experience they’ve always been willing to listen to reasoned arguments about the actual facts involved, and past precedents, if the players raising questions actually take that approach instead of trying to insist on changes to the existing rules or just shouting for a second opinion.
c/ And talking about players wanting the rules changed, there’s also the recurring drive by some GA semi-regulars to have the ‘mandatory compliance’ rule abolished… That’s a potential change that I definitely think would be another mistake, because even leaving aside the matter of passed resolutions causing stat changes — which might not always make perfect sense under current circumstances, but would become downright nonsensical if member nations were actually free to ignore any & all GA laws to which their governments objected — if all resolutions became totally optional then where would be the point in trying to hard to craft ‘good’ proposals and get those passed? How much sense would still bothering with that if it would have no more effect than simply tossing ideas out bloggishly on a “take it or leave it” basis? What, in fact, would continue to distinguish the GA from NSG?
You've been a modestly vocal anti-invasion advocate for a long time - and in a way, you're both a roleplayer and a gameplayer. So, may I ask: do you see solutions on the horizon for settling the divide between Gameplay and Roleplay? Especially in regards to the "Liberate Haven" debacle?
Sadly, no, I don’t. Some raiders might become more “reasonable” about their choices of targets, but I suspect that there will always be others who either attack everywhere that they can or deliberately choose the targets that they know there will be the most fuss about so that — in some peoples’ eyes — they will look more important. As long as the administration continues to regard R/D as a valuable aspect of NS, and declines to introduce any measures that would drastically limit it, we’re probably stuck with more-or-less the current situation.
Have you ever considered becoming a defender? Why or why not? *hands Bears Armed a business card tactfully*
I’ve considered that, yes, but there are several reasons why I’m unlikely to make defending a major part of my NS activity: RL generally limits my ability to be around at updates, I’m averse to being a cog in a larger organisation (I already get more than enough of that for my liking in RL, and one reason why I enjoy NS so much is being in charge of something — even though that’s only a fictional nation — myself instead…), I think that Bears Armed Mission’s continued GA activity might actually contribute more to both its home region and the game as a whole than just adding one more soldier to the ranks would do, and it really wouldn’t makes sense from an IC viewpoint for Bears Armed Mission to keep moving between regions.
However there have been a few occasions, during periods while B.A.M. wasn’t regional delegate, when I’ve shifted WA membership temporarily to other puppets that were already in various other regions so that those could support native delegates against outside threats… and I do have puppets, acknowledged or secret, in quite a few regions…
The NS World Cup is coming up soon - what are Bears Armed's chances? And how do you plan to roleplay this World Cup?
I’d like to say “an easy win”, but to be honest — considering their recent form, and consequent rating — I’d be overjoyed just to get them through the qualifiers successfully and into the World Cup proper again for the first time in a while. I think that that might be possible this time around, looking at how free I will be to spend time on my RPs. And the main theme for this RP? I’m going to continue with a storyline that I actually began several Cups ago, but that was intended from the start to be spread across the years: It’s basically inspired by DC Comics’ classic ‘Crisis on Infinite Earths’ storyline from 1985, although with more of an Ursine aspect…
“Look, up in the sky!
Is it a bird?
Is it a plane?
No, it’s SuperBear!”
I know you’re a big fan of NationStates Issues and you’ve done a lot of research on how they affect nations and how population rises. What’s your favourite NationStates Issue and why?
Careful there, Uni, you almost look as though you’re implying that some issue decisions might actually affect population levels… which we know, despite the fact that some answers look as though they should have effects, isn’t the case.
My “favourite issue, and why?” Ouch, that’s a difficult question: So many possible choices… I think that I’ll have to go with #201 ‘Jolly Roger Sighted Off The Port Bow!’, for its novelty value.
Thank you so much for joining us for this very special issue, Bears Armed. Good luck in the future, mate. I couldn’t think of a genuinely nicer, more treasured player who we could have shared with the world for this interview. If you’ve got any final words for our readers, you have the floor.
Thank you for the compliments, and thank you for giving me this opportunity to express my opinions.
“Remember, dear readers, it isn’t absurd:
A person’s a person, no matter how furred.”
And remember, too, that only you can prevent wildfires!
The Legitimate Point of View?
Independentism's influence over The South Pacific wanes
OPINION | GLEN-RHODES
Disclaimer: The following views are that of the author solely in a private capacity.
In early June 2104, the Assembly of The South Pacific found itself yet again debating the region’s stance on military gameplay – whether we are Independent, and what being Independent truly means. This discussion had last been held in late November 2013, when Hileville posed the question if TSP was actually Independent, given the raider and imperialist slant of its foreign affairs. That discussion did not lead anywhere, except to show that Independence in TSP was not monolithic – it has its supporters and detractors, and not everybody agreed on what it meant in the first place.
Belschaft, the region’s loudest and most prolific advocate of Independence, proposed a Charter amendment in June 2014 that would have officially re-declared Independence to be one of the “fundamental ideals and principles” of The South Pacific. The language read:
"6. Independence; that ours is an independent region, devoid of any prescribed military ideology or alignment, and that our officials shall act on such basis."
A year prior, this amendment would likely have sailed through the Assembly. But something unexpected happened. The fault lines that were first exposed in November 2013 were fully opened by Belschaft’s proposed amendment. Opponents to Independence, this author included, vilified the amendment as an attempt to push out non-Independents from the region. Proponents of the amendment denied that, and argued that it’s really defenders (particularly Unibot and myself) who were harming the region by advocating for something other than Independence.
However, among those who called themselves Independents, or eschewed any label, there was a clear disjointing when it came to what these people really wanted. Many simply did not care about military gameplay, and assumed Independence was merely another term for not getting involved. Others thought of Independence more in terms of regionalism.
The original language of Belschaft’s amendment was changed midway through the debate, abandoning the language of Independence, and adopting something some have started referring to as TSP First:
"6. Openness; this region seeks to remain open in matters of military and political alignment, welcoming all citizens and officials with loyalty to the region."
While this language is different from that which ultimately made it to the voting floor (although failed to get the requisite 75% required to pass, with the region split 10-7 in supporting it), I believe this marks an evolution in the debate over Independence. Throughout the debate, it seemed that people began to see Independence as a distinct ideological position, with a set of connotations that went beyond merely “acting according to the interests of TSP.”
In other words, I posit that TSP now sees Independence for what many have argued it has been all along: an ideology that consistently favors raiding and imperialism, and disapproves of defenders. TSP First arose from that debate as a completely separate ideal, one in which raiders, imperialists, defenders, and neutrals are all capable of having TSP’s best interests in mind, even if they advocate for the adoption if a particular ideology.
It’s under this ideal that I made the conscious choice to highlight my disagreements with Independence in my own campaign platform. A year or two ago, this would have been predictable political suicide. In my past two campaigns for Minister of Foreign Affairs, I avoided discussing the topic altogether, instead focusing on internal ministry reforms. However, I always thought that it was a shame TSP could not see people run on their beliefs, because being anything other than Independent was too controversial.
The debate over Belschaft’s amendment, and the subsequent failure of even a watered down version, signaled to me that the iron-fisted vision of Independence as the exclusively acceptable ideology of TSP no longer existed. I also saw a dramatic shift in other GCRs. Osiris went raider. Lazarus went defender. The Rejected Realms officially adopted the “defender” label in January 2014, although it had long been a member of the Founderless Regions Alliance.
I have no illusions that TSP will adopt a specific military stance anytime soon. There are still people in the region who believe that non-Independents threaten TSP society. There are even more who don’t really care about military gameplay, at least not enough to go all in on any particular stance. But I think TSP will enter into a new era where Independence is not the only legitimate point of view, and where Cabinet members can run on their sincerely held positions. And that is ultimately far better for the region than the alternative.
Migration in The Rejected Realms
An Empirical Investigation
FEATURE | STARRIE
This article profiles four groups of nations -- those immigrating to The Rejected Realms, those emigrating, migrating nations in general, and all nations in total. These are named trr-i, trr-e, wld-m, and wld-s respectively in the graphs. I've collected a sample size of almost 20,000 from each group, found on nsarchive.net. Error bars at 1-std.
This shows the average civil rights, economy, and political freedom of each group of nation. With the exception of economy, nations immigrating to TRR seem to align with the average world nation while nations emigrating from TRR seem to align with migrating nations in general.
These histograms show the three statistics, with score on the x-axis and frequency of the y-axis. Red, blue, and green show economy, civil rights, and political freedoms in some order which i've forgotten. Curiously, the wld-m group seems to be the only one which has lost the spike right below 60. The wld-s group seems to have a large proportion of nearly maxed-out scores. Beyond that, there isn't a huge visible difference in the charts.
I stuck these two charts together for no particular reason. It seems that small nations do the majority of the moving in NS. It is notable that nations tend to leave TRR with a significantly larger population than when they joined. The effect is too large to dismiss as an artifact caused by the sampling window. Perhaps nations CTE less often in TRR.
The influence chart reveals no surprises. Nations taking a quick trip through TRR leave with slightly less influence, and static nations tend to have the most influence. Influence is scored on a scale from 1 to 21, with 1 being minnow and 21 being hermit.
These population histograms reveal more detail. Population is on the x-axis and frequency on the y. Note the natural log scale. Small nations make up a significant portion of nations, and the vast majority of nation migrations seems to be from the very youngest of nations, probably settling in a region. Surprisingly, the trr-e chart shows that few of the nations which joined TRR in their youth leave before around 100 million population. Possibly, young nations recruited to join one region rarely leave for another, at least for the first few weeks.
For each group, there are two influence histograms. The histogram on the right excludes minnow in order to clearly show the rest of the bars. The trr-i histogram sticks out -- even though many hermits move from region to region, few move to TRR. This hints that the majority of nations moving to TRR don't do so voluntarily.
Almost 35,000 nations pass through TRR in the last year. So where did they come from and where did they go? These pie-charts show the origin or destination of nations in all four groups. The top twenty regions are shown and the rest are just lumped together in Other. TRR recieves many nations from the sinkers, but barely any GCRs show up in TRR's emigration chart.
The bottom two charts hint that nation migrations are fairly spread out. Although the top twenty regions hold what seems to be a third of the nations in NS, the top twenty in migration handle less than a fourth of moving nations. TRR is a clear outlier.
One crude way to identify activity / enthusiasm is through flags, the rationale being that a collection of puppets is less likely to have custom flags than the average active region. Over a quarter of the nations entering TRR have the default flag, yet only a sixth leave TRR that way. But in general, we can still consider them slackers. Only 12% of all nations use the default flag, and among traveling nations, the figure is under 8%.
The Decline of Defending
A NationStates Great War on the Horizon?
OPINION | CORMAC SOMERSET
"Defending is dead." You may expect this statement to come from an imperialist or raider partisan, but it came instead from a high profile defender official in a Founderless Regions Alliance member region. Indeed, the decline in defending has been startling. In recent months, defenders have been largely absent at update, neither preventing most invasions nor even attempting to end most long-term occupations. Perhaps the starkest demonstration of the decline in defending was the Lone Wolves United occupation of American Continent, ended after two weeks only by the revival of the Founder, despite minimal support and a comedy of errors on the part of Lone Wolves United.
Rumors of the death of defending should, of course, not be exaggerated. Both the raider and defender sides of the military gameplay spectrum have seen declines in the past, with defenders experiencing another recent decline during the summer of 2012 and raiders seeing an early 2013 lull in activity. In both cases, activity resumed after a few months. Still, it must be noted that the decline of defending has lasted longer than usual and preceded the overall 'summer lull' of NationStates by several months.
If defending is truly dead, as at least one defender official believes, its passing from NationStates gameplay raises serious questions in regard to regional conflict. For as long as NationStates has existed there has been conflict between regions. Whether it's the overall invader-defender conflict or more specific examples such as the battle between the New Pacific Order and the Alliance Defense Network, there has always been conflict in NationStates and defenders have always been integral to that conflict. If defending is dead and buried, how will new forms of conflict take shape?
Some have recently theorized that raiders are trying to create new enemies to replace defenders, or perhaps to become a new generation of defenders. This theory is based on Mallorea and Riva's attempt to pass a liberation resolution against the historic roleplay region Haven, followed shortly thereafter by invasions of roleplay regions Ixnay and American Continent by, respectively, The Black Riders and Lone Wolves United. This theory suggests a coordinated goal to provoke roleplayers into defensive action. Whether there is any truth to this theory, no such goal appears to have been accomplished, as roleplayers have instead continued to insist they want to 'opt out' of gameplay and will not be forced to participate in it as defenders.
If defending remains dead, a far more likely scenario is escalation of already existing conflicts that lie just beneath the surface of a previously united sphere of independent, imperialist, and raider regions. Now able to sustain their own invasions and occupations without support from other regions, in recent months The Black Riders have taken a cavalier attitude toward independent and imperialist regions as well as other raider regions. This erosion of unity has already seen Ainur, currently a minor player in the imperialist sphere, seeking formation of an alliance with The Eternal Knights, the sworn enemies of The Black Riders. Other imperialist regions, such as imperialist Sinker region Osiris, have also begun distancing themselves from the Riders.
Independents and imperialists, meanwhile, remain natural allies as they share the same fundamental goal: pursuit of regional interests through military policy, rather than advancement of rigid ideologies or apolitical, arbitrary military action. In the absence of a defender threat to their own military operations, it is becoming increasingly difficult for independents and imperialists to politically justify supporting The Black Riders' injudicious and aimless destruction of random founderless regions. For imperialists, who also prioritize the projection of their regional power upon the world stage, the absence of a defender enemy has led to an increase in liberation efforts against fringe invaders such as Right Wing Uprising and The Doom Squad as a means to this end.
While these conflicts between independents and imperialists on the one hand and raiders on the other largely remain limited to harsh words, in a world in which words mean everything they could quickly lead to military action. One wrong move against the wrong region could find The Black Riders, the largest and most active raider force, as the new enemies of an extensive and tightly interconnected network of independent and imperialist alliances. If defending remains a ghost of its former glory, NationStates gameplayers should not be surprised to see regional conflict taking a new shape as a 'Great War' between political independent and imperialist regions versus apolitical purveyors of random destruction.
." TSPers too were excited with the success of their squad. ProfessorHenn noted how Kringalia changed made the WFE orange to support the team and changed his national flag to the Netherlands football logo. This event was truly enjoyed by all who took part.
