TNP vs. Fulhead Discussion
- Thread starter Fergi the Great
- Start date
Hersfold
TNPer
I can make a nation called "The Colony of HersfoldLand" and have that nation declare itself to be under the control of "The United Federation of Hersfold". That's what a puppet nation is, a nation under control of another. When FL declared the UN nation on his RA application, he was in effect having that nation declare itself under the control of his TNP nation, or vice versa. Either way, one of the nations controls the other and as such is responsible for the nation's actions.
You have to love the fearmongers and conspiracy theorists. Kat, the Treason law would have had no effect on this trial whatsoever. The charges Fulhead is being brought up for took place well before that law, and its definitions, would have passed. Common sense is a wonderful thing...
Katinare:
You have to love the fearmongers and conspiracy theorists. Kat, the Treason law would have had no effect on this trial whatsoever. The charges Fulhead is being brought up for took place well before that law, and its definitions, would have passed. Common sense is a wonderful thing...
Southwest Asia
TNPer
Laws cannot be ex post facto.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
Actually, no, the declaration of the UN nation is purely an OOC requirement of the oath!! It does not say in any way, shape or form that the nations are under control of the other!! The fact that the oath supplants OOC into the IC Constitution is something of an anomaly, but the Constitution refers to member nation, not player!! So, yes, you could create two nations and done to be the controller of the other, but that would be your prerogative with regards to how you role play your nations!!
Making a "player" declare the UN nation in an oath to allow their TNP member nation to join the RA is an OOC requirement outside the scope of a "player" role playing his or her nations as separate entities!! Using this requirement to enforce TNP law on non-TNP nations and by extention players behind the nations is not legal under the Constitution as it now stands!!
Southwest Asia
TNPer
Ok, so now you're saying that only the nation in and of itself and not the leaders/player of the nation can be held responsible for crimes against the region.
But nations in and of themselves have no ability to act. How the hell can we hold them responsible?
And what would the punishments be? The only ones I could envision would be:
1. Banning of the nation in quesiton
2. Seizure of the nation
But nations in and of themselves have no ability to act. How the hell can we hold them responsible?
And what would the punishments be? The only ones I could envision would be:
1. Banning of the nation in quesiton
2. Seizure of the nation
Poltsamaa
TNPer
This is a game, people role play nations in it!! Laws of regions, at least this region, apply to member nations, not players!! Nor should they pertain to players as it restricts people's ability to play this game unfairly, in my opinion!!
So, of course, only the nation can be found to have breached the laws of the region!! If a has been found to provide intelligence to another region then they are committing a crime against the region and that nation should be held accountable!! Having laws applying to players is not feasible as people can be accused of a crime for merely having a presence in another region!!
If a member nation is found guilty of treason then they can be banned from the region, the RA or both!!
As for comandeering the nation...err...yeah, sure!!
Monumental Proportions
TNPer
Polts, even in RL, a nation can't commit treason, it is the leaders of the nation. So the nation cannot be held accountable for anything, seeing as how when each of took the RA oath, we said:
And you seem to be very into upholding law, don't you?
Making it so that is the player commits treason, it is the player that should be put on trial. Legally.RA Oath:
And you seem to be very into upholding law, don't you?
Poltsamaa
TNPer
Actually, no, the oath is submitted by the RP leader of the RP nation!! It is not taken by the player, unless of course you use your real name in the oath!! Which, I'm guessing, Fulhead Land didn't!!
Secondly, its is the Constitution that refers to member nations with respect to applicability of the laws, not me!! Are you saying the Constitution is redundant as a legal document for this reeason?!
Yes, I am into upholding the law as it stands, not the twisted version you are trying apply to get your desired result!!
I think this sums up Polts' argument neatly: People should have the ability to play this game unfairly.
I disagree. If Fulhead Land takes an oath to uphold the Constitution of TNP with one nation, and at the same time actively works to overthrow the government and unseat its elected Delegate, then he is playing at cross purposes with himself.
It's every bit as silly to accept that as fair play as it would be to accept Sheepylegs running an unendo campaign against GBM. Could I exercise my freedom to roleplay like that? Is it my right? Wouldn't such actions render my oath meaningless?
Poltsamaa
TNPer
Quite a quantum leap there!!
Even when the Constitution that is swarn to be upheld refers to member nation, not player?! It seems to me that fulhead and myself are the ones upholding the Constitution as per our oaths while others are trying to circumvent it to remove people they don't want to be here!! That aside, I've not seen evidence that Fulhead Land sought to overthrow the government at all!!
Again with this idiotic example?! I have shown twice now that it holds no relevence to this situation at all!! You'd be most welcome to roleplay like that, it'd just be inane!! Would it render your oath meaningless?! No!! Sheepylegs is not a member of the RA and GBM has not broken any laws, unless you consider being the victim of an asinine unendorsement campaing a crime!! If you want to use duality to shoot yourself in the foot, so be it!!
Forget about my foot. It's about the region. TNP has every right to cry foul if I were to engage in such duplicity.
No difference here.
Monumental Proportions
TNPer
Again, the nations of Sheepylegs and GBM would not have done anything, it would be the leader who broke the law, because it was them who signed the RA oath, real name or not.
The names we put down as the leader of our nation are, in fact, our own, we simply place an alias there for privacy matters and for the fun of it. And until you realize that treason laws and the RA oath have nothing to do with the nation itself, but rather the player behind the nation, then you don't have any basis for an argument.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
Except, of course, the entire Constitution we swear to uphold refers to the "member nation"!! You keep skipping that part in your determination to make a point that has no validity!!
My oath was taken by Poltus Exclamatus, better get the government onto that guy, he hasn't ever lodged a tax return!! That is because he does not exist, but is a role played leader of a roleplayed nation!!
It is scary that there are people like you who think this game is real!!
Poltsamaa
TNPer
I'd cry foul but because the region elected such an idiot as Delegate!! Taking into account your "player is responsible angle", why bother with an inane unendorsement campaign when you could get GBM to do whatever you like as Delegate?! Taking the "nation is responsible" angle, then GBM has done nothing illegal and would not be punished, which under the Constitution is the correct way in which things should be dealt with!!
Monumental Proportions
TNPer
Please tell me where you saw where I made any inclination to myself thinking that this game is real, because I would really like to know where you get this stuff.
Do you think that I want the actual player to go through a real trial in real life for committing treason in this fictitious game? I don't. That would be absurd. There is a large difference between NS and RL, but that does not mean that the player that commits the crime can get away with it.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
If you can point out where a player can be held accountable to a crime in the Constitution, then be my guest!! Posting that the oath to uphold the Constitution is somehow a real-life oath taken by a player and that somehow means that the player is held accountable to the laws of TNP is what is absurd!! The oath simply states that the leader of the nation that is resident in TNP swears to uphold the Constitution, the Constitution that states throughout "member nation" and "nation"!!Please tell me where you saw where I made any inclination to myself thinking that this game is real, because I would really like to know where you get this stuff.
Do you think that I want the actual player to go through a real trial in real life for committing treason in this fictitious game? I don't. That would be absurd. There is a large difference between NS and RL, but that does not mean that the player that commits the crime can get away with it.
You are blurring the line between game and real-life because you are telling people they cannot roleplay other nations as they wish if they wish to have a nation in TNP!! You are ignoring the very contents of the Constitution in order to drive people you do not agree with from the region!!
What is the grave danger that having players have nations in TNP that also have nations in The Lexicon?! Show me where nations such as Fulhead Land, by merely having a membership of the RA, have plunged TNP into peril!! I haven't seen it, I haven't seen how one single vote from someone with a different political viewpoint to yourself throws the region into turmoil!!
Fulhead Land is here, open, obvious, no deception!! So what is the problem?! I've not seen a shred of evidence that Fulhead Land, TNP member nation, has done anything even remotely treasonous!!
If you want real-life examples, do the people walking around with "Bush is a Terrorist" t-shirts warrant being tried for treason?! Removed from the voter roll?! Or do people just leave them to their own devices and rest safely that such ideas would never have majority support?!
This is game, a roleplaying game!! If you want to purge everyone from the region who has a connection to a region not on good terms with TNP, then go ahead!! Not much I can do to stop you!! I'm sure the Treason legislation will be resubmitted over and over in some way, shape or form until it is passed!! So be it!!
But the law as it stands now does not support the allegations being made against Fulhead Land or similar charges against other that may arise in the future!!
Katinaire
TNPer
Polts, this is why I don't get involved in the politcal part of regions. It sucks all the fun out of playing the game. I've been complaining about the separation of game and life practically since I got here because of the dumb treason law. But if I were to get involved in the game aspect, I would create a back story for my nation and RP as the leader of that nation. If I have a dictator, I would vote and suggest laws as that dictator regardless of how I felt about the issue in real life. Because this isn't real life.....well not for me anyway....I have a wife and family and friends....maybe these people don't have those, Polts. Maybe this IS their life. Sad....but quite possibly true.
Fulhead Land
TNPer
*Fulhead Land waves. Hi
Emperor Matthuis
TNPer
It always amuses me when people fall back on this last line of defence.
I have plenty of friends and a girlfriend, my life is perfectly fine, I go on NationStates on weekdays when I am bored or in the holidays when I am not playing sports or with friends
What is perhaps sadder is people who go to other regions to tell them that they are sad and need a life. Well my life is damn well alright thank you very much.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
I wouldn't have a clue about other peoples' personal lives and prefer it to remain that way!! I won't cast aspersions over anyone's private life either!! none of my business and I'm genuinely not interested!!
There will always be people who take games too seriously, that is their prerogative up until a point where their attitude encroaches on others' abilities to play the game too!!
The game as a concept is a roleplaying game, I roleplay a few characters around NS, not as many as I used to but still have a few!! It will be a sad day when anyone who wants to do that sort of thing is not permitted to reside in and become a citizen of this region based on unfounded paranoia and what can only be attributed to political sterilisation of the region!!
I hope you all enjoy a region devoid of debate where you can preach to the choir!! I'm sure it'll be greatly eantertaining for you all!!
I play NationStates because I enjoy debate, I enjoy the conflict and I enjoy the banter that these produce!! Conflict is what makes NS tick, when there is no conflict, there is nothing!! Now, I'm guessing someone is about to post "but polts, we have a community" or similar!! I ask what forged such a community and what keeps it together?! In NS, and looking over the history of TNP, there has to be a villain to keep the "community" together!! How many people left once the NPD stood down?! Quite a few!! Why?! There was no enemy to fight, no one to argue with!! Without raiders would there be an ADN?! Of course not!! No point!! Would NS be better for having no raiders and no ADN?! I don't think so!!
Legislating "players" out of the region is a huge step to removing the dynamics that create interest in a region in NS!! Why do you think rogue Delegates occur?! Have they ever occurred at any point in time other than apparent peace?!
There will always be people who take games too seriously, that is their prerogative up until a point where their attitude encroaches on others' abilities to play the game too!!
The game as a concept is a roleplaying game, I roleplay a few characters around NS, not as many as I used to but still have a few!! It will be a sad day when anyone who wants to do that sort of thing is not permitted to reside in and become a citizen of this region based on unfounded paranoia and what can only be attributed to political sterilisation of the region!!
I hope you all enjoy a region devoid of debate where you can preach to the choir!! I'm sure it'll be greatly eantertaining for you all!!
I play NationStates because I enjoy debate, I enjoy the conflict and I enjoy the banter that these produce!! Conflict is what makes NS tick, when there is no conflict, there is nothing!! Now, I'm guessing someone is about to post "but polts, we have a community" or similar!! I ask what forged such a community and what keeps it together?! In NS, and looking over the history of TNP, there has to be a villain to keep the "community" together!! How many people left once the NPD stood down?! Quite a few!! Why?! There was no enemy to fight, no one to argue with!! Without raiders would there be an ADN?! Of course not!! No point!! Would NS be better for having no raiders and no ADN?! I don't think so!!
Legislating "players" out of the region is a huge step to removing the dynamics that create interest in a region in NS!! Why do you think rogue Delegates occur?! Have they ever occurred at any point in time other than apparent peace?!
Fulhead Land
TNPer
Polts is emminantly sensible, but I await him being shot down
Well thank you for that Durnia. Though it seems rather an accurate self description.
You point one finger and you get 3 pointing back...
Well thank you for that Durnia. Though it seems rather an accurate self description.
You point one finger and you get 3 pointing back...
Southwest Asia
TNPer
Surely you cannot think that roleplaying as a supposed repectful citizen of a nation and also as one that purposefully attacks it, both at the same time, would go unpunished by the established RP laws of the game. Our trial here is part of the roleplay.
Fulhead Land
TNPer
The point is you cant use a roleplay court on a roleplay nation that is outside of the roleplay constitution.
Southwest Asia
TNPer
Says who? Even in the real world, people extend the jurisdiction of their courts arbitrarily.
But even more to the point, we're not. We're using the rp court against the rp nation of FL in TNP, who has ties to other nations that you rp.
But even more to the point, we're not. We're using the rp court against the rp nation of FL in TNP, who has ties to other nations that you rp.
Fulhead Land
TNPer
To follow in the footsteps of the delegate I shall use hypotheticals
Say nation X is a TNP RA member. The player behind nation x also has nation y. Nation X is your standard TNP-er, but in the serach for fun, nation y becomes a raider. Nation Y then fights the NPA.
Now, Nation Y does not come under TNP law. So you cannot punish nation x for Ys actions. because X has broken no laws.
What?!
Thats crap! Thats like saying the police here in the UK can just arrest people in the USA. Thats crap, it requires a lengthy process of warrents and extradition.
Say nation X is a TNP RA member. The player behind nation x also has nation y. Nation X is your standard TNP-er, but in the serach for fun, nation y becomes a raider. Nation Y then fights the NPA.
Now, Nation Y does not come under TNP law. So you cannot punish nation x for Ys actions. because X has broken no laws.
What?!
Thats crap! Thats like saying the police here in the UK can just arrest people in the USA. Thats crap, it requires a lengthy process of warrents and extradition.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
Then put Lexiconhead on trial in TNP as I've seen no evidence of any wrongdoing on by TNP member nation, Fulhead Land!!
Poltsamaa
TNPer
No it isn't, you have stepped out of the roleplay and are trying to legislate OOC!!
You claim to be continuing a roleplay by calling out players behind roleplay nations, that is absurd!!
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
I wasn't around very much during this past summer, so I hadn't looked closely at TNP Law 14.
The language of the law as enacted seems to settle whether the concept of "player" is recognized as part of TNP's framework of laws:
The language of the law as enacted seems to settle whether the concept of "player" is recognized as part of TNP's framework of laws:
Poltsamaa
TNPer
TNP is not at war with any region to my knowledge!! Looks like the horse has bolted on that one, Schnauzer!! Maybe you can redeclare war, kick out all the Lexiconians then declare peace!! Save us all the trouble of a trial!! The above law makes no mention of Court trials for treason but of an arbitrary banning based on a decision of the Security Council!! As peace has now been declared there is no state of war and no grounds to remove any nation from the Regional Assembly under this law!!
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
According to that part of the statute, a state of war with the Lexicon continues to exist until a formal peace treaty, surrender terms, or similar, is/are recognized to exist. How?
There hasn't been a peace treaty.
There hasn't been surrender terms.
There hasn't been "similar."
And the point I was making is that the use of the word "player" in TNP law pre-dates the recent amendment to the Regional Assembly oath by a couple of months. And TNP Law 14 passed with only 2 "no" votes cast against it.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
The law only refers to war time provisions, Schnauzer!! As people have told me endlessly, there is no state of war, at least thats what they said when Katinaire and Co expressed concerns about the treason law!!
If you want to kick Fulhead out under this law, then go via the Security Council, this law has no bearing on the case before the court!!
If you want to kick Fulhead out under this law, then go via the Security Council, this law has no bearing on the case before the court!!
Fulhead Land
TNPer
gross quickly forgets the end of hersfolds PM-ship, when they declared the war iver
Katinaire
TNPer
Not only that....lovely law 14 also only states for the duration of hostilities. However, it looks like the same single-minded, non-duality intellects came up with the wording essentially forcing you to choose one side or the other. You must either leave TNP or the other region during hostilities.
One more round of drinks for the "We can't do it so nobody can do it" Club at the Deep Blue Duality Bar.
One more round of drinks for the "We can't do it so nobody can do it" Club at the Deep Blue Duality Bar.
Apollo-Industria
TNPer
What exactly is Fulhead Land said to have done?
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
You mean, this statement issued after TNP Law 14 passed the RA?
Well from what I can tell, it is neither a peace treaty nor a surrender (or something "similar"); and since the Lexicon continued its belligerency for months after the statement was issued, one would be hard-pressed to call that Cabinet statement any of those things, either.
But my point is that the concept of "player" is clearly part of the legal concepts used in TNP, given TNP Law 14.
Well from what I can tell, it is neither a peace treaty nor a surrender (or something "similar"); and since the Lexicon continued its belligerency for months after the statement was issued, one would be hard-pressed to call that Cabinet statement any of those things, either.
But my point is that the concept of "player" is clearly part of the legal concepts used in TNP, given TNP Law 14.
Poltsamaa
TNPer
I have no idea!! From what I have seen so far he had a Lexicon ad in his signature at some point!!
Poltsamaa
TNPer
No, it is clearly part of TNP Law 14, nothing else!! As I said, prosecute whoever you like under law 14 but you'll need a state of war to do it, but I'm sure fabricating one won't be too difficult for you!!
However, with regards to the present trial, Law 14 has no bearing nor was the defendant charged pursuant to that Law!! In fact, no law was cited at all in the charges!!
If you believe a state of war still exists between The Lexicon and TNP, then pursue that through the channels detailed in the law you are citing!! Of course, your determination of state of war would fly in the face of the comments of many in the present government!!
Off-topic and OOC: Schnauzer, what changes did you make to the Legal Code yesterday?! I'm just curious!!
Apollo-Industria
TNPer
Was he a Lexiconian during the war?