FD - Defining Player

Grosseschnauzer:
The claim that this definitional sentence extends to anything outside of the Nationstates realm is totally absolute BS.

All four words appear in the Constitution and the Legl Code, and have for a long time. The disingenuous argument being advanced, that it extends to real life or to Cybernations or anything else is the rediculous use of an ad honium argument that is just patently absurd.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry I believe an ad hominem attack is an attack on the person (OOC: Or in this case character) making the argument, such as "voting for this would be treason".

What you are looking for is the term "strawman", indicating arguing against something other than what is actually being argued by the other side which is easy to argue against-- making yourself a straw man to attack.

What we have here on the other hand is a case of semantics, shifting the argument to terminology :P :fish:

Now let me quote the proposed addition: (OOC note: Because this legislation involves OOC so much, a good part of my following statement is OOC. I'm sorry, I can't be bothered to sort out which part is which.)

Unless the context of such terms clearly indicate a contrary intent, the words “Nation,” “member nation,” or “member” as used in this Constitution, or in the Legal Code, or in any other law of The North Pacific, are synonyms and refer to an individual player.
Click to expand...

Firstly, this effectively gives way too much power to the courts by saying "you can interpret when there is 'clear contrary intent'" this is like attaching an "ignore me if you feel like it" addendum to a law.

The nature of this proposal is to create a clause that allows the Judiciary to dispense with players.... if it has cause to and wants to. Now I'm not saying that our Judiciary would abuse this power as I trust our current Judges. But our system has Judgeships change fairly often so I do not think we should give them that power.

This proposal says that (with the aforementioned caveat) Nation = member nation = member = player in the constitution. Firstly, we do not want member nation = nation as there are nations who are not in TNP who we do not want to put in the same rules. Secondly this proposal makes all these terms mean 'player'. So when it says Nation it means Player. This proposal would make it so that it was not Eluvatar, not Eluvataran Isles, but ***** * ***** who was subject to this constitution's laws and rules. Just the way I said it makes clear how this is ridiculous-- I, like many others on this forum, am not willing to broadcast my real life name. I come to this forum for entertainment purposes, to play a game. While this game involves playing at being a government and forming governments, it is not real. I, ***** * *****, am not a North Pacifican. I am not a Taiji or a Lexi. I am Russian-American.

By saying that the Constitution in fact means player in every mention of nation or member, (except where the Judges say otherwise) this proposal attempts to make me, ***** * ***** subject to this forum. Please stop trying to say otherwise.

Yes the Constitution already relates to players, in order to prevent players from making the game not fun by dominating TNP through multiple nations, and to prevent abuse of independent nations to repeatedly break the law. The existence of slightly OOC laws to stop multis, criminals returning with new nations, and spies makes sense. In my opinion TNP can hold people responsible for their actions in TNP and there only (except in cases of the breaking of actual RL Law, like with forum hacking).

This bill has a number of effects. Let's look at what they are (NOTE: In my quotations of the constitution and legal code below I have taken the liberty of replacing Nation/member with player to show the change)

ARTICLE II. Membership and Registration.

Section 1. Requirements.

In order to remain as legal members of The North Pacific, a Nation is expected to adhere to the following requirements:
1) Each player will abide by the Constitution of The North Pacific and The North Pacific Legal Code enacted pursuant to Article IV of this Constitution.
2) Each player shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other nation or region in a manner inconsistent with the Constitution of The North Pacific.
3) Each player shall refrain from giving assistance to any nation or region against which The North Pacific is taking defensive or enforcement action. Exceptions shall be given to players acting with official authorization of the North Pacific Army or the North Pacific Intelligence Agency, and is subject to the consent of the Cabinet minister having appropriate jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

What does this do?

1. The laws of TNP apply to players. I, ***** * ***** am declared subject to TNP law. :eyeroll:

2. I, ***** * *****, am forbidden, as a player, to use the threat or use of force against any other nation or region. So, Eluvatar of Taijitu can't threaten regions or nations. In fact, not very creative interpretation would mean that this would forbid Eluvatar from threatening a smaller nation in Taijitu RP.

3. I, the player, can't give "assistance" to any nation or region against which TNP is fighting. What exactly "assistance" consists of I am not sure, but perhaps one could argue that by accepting the existence of a DEN embassy in Taijitu I am giving "assistance" to a region against which TNP sometimes takes action. Oh, and Blue Wolf? He's long gone. I mean, clearly by participating in LWU the player behind Blue Wolf is clearly assisting a region which TNP might take action if LWU invaded some region and TNP heard about it. Even if the UN nation of the player behind Blue Wolf wasn't on that raid, by helping maintain LWU's forum he can be considered to be "assisting" LWU.

Article III:
B - The UN Delegate for the Region shall maintain the Delegacy in accordance with this Constitution. The UN Delegate for the Region shall securely hand over the Delegacy to the player that is duly elected as the successor to the office of UN Delegate in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. The Delegate's primary role shall be to represent the interests of The North Pacific's UN member Nations through votes on UN resolutions at quorum; it shall be understood that this objective can be best achieved through open and regular communication with member Nations at The North Pacific off-site forum, via private message at that forum, or by telegram through NationStates.net. The Delegate shall have authority to approve proposals submitted by UN member Nations for consideration in the UN at the discretion of the Delegate.
Click to expand...

What does this do? It means that the Delegate can interpret that as meaning they should hand over the Delegate nation to the new leader, not the best of situations. Fortunately our Delegate would not to do-- unfortunately who knows what the future would bring nine months from now or later.

Article V:
Section 3. Civil Proceedings.

A - Any player that believes some other player in The North Pacific has caused injury to any right, liberty, privilege, protection, or other duty that belongs to that player as a matter of right under the Constitution of The North Pacific, or The North Pacific Legal Code, and which does not rise to the level of a criminal offense, that player may file, or may request the Attorney General to file, a civil complaint.
B - The Court may adopt procedures for trial of a civil complaint, which may be tried with or without a jury.
Click to expand...

Now, my rights, privileges, liberties, protections, and duties as a North Pacific member under the Constitution form a very long list. Some notable ones are:

Article I:
7. When charged with criminal acts, players of The North Pacific shall have a fair, impartial, and public trial before a neutral and impartial judicial officer. In any criminal proceeding, a player is presumed innocent unless guilt is proven to the fact finder by reasonably certain evidence. A player may be represented by any counsel of the player's choosing. No player convicted of a crime shall be subject to a punishment disproportionate to that crime.
Click to expand...

Hmm... what have we here? This means that if I am tried in a criminal trial, I have the right to sue the player, I mean Nation who tried me if I don't like their verdict. Wait, this is true even without the proposal. Nevermind this example then....

The big change that can't be waved away in the red tape here is the change that specifically makes it so that players cannot threaten or use force, or fight on the other side from the NPA in a conflict. This change is real and exists. Why should we make this change? Why is it so important that we make this change that we create a huge potential problem with the whole constitution? Why do we risk interpretations that lead to ridiculous consequences?

If you want to change that section of Article II, (and its parallel in Article V), propose that change, and state your intentions by doing so.
 
Elu, you've made a fundamental error in your argument, and it is this.

The definitional sentence declares the four sets of words/phrases as synonyms, and not that the other words would mean player.

As to your argument about the NPA, you are overlooking the fact that under currentlaw, opposing the NPA in a conflict only becomes an ooffense if the NPA deployment is authorizd under current law.

I have no problem with letting this go to a formal vote. My self-esteem is not at stake in its outcome. My commitment was to try to find a resolution to the issue over duality, and at this point, this point is the closest to a median that we have available.

Absolute duality doesn't work because there is a history that shows that it is often faked to the detriment of TNP. So why should this region allow itself to be betrayed over and over by people such as Fulhead Land, who had no relunctance to betray this region to the Lexicon, and for all I know is still doing so? Fulhead, don't even pretend that has not been the case; the Limitless Events affairs amply showed that to be the case where you are concerned.

Why shouldn't TNP insist that those who participate in this society respect its institutions and agree not to take up active opposition to it? The NPA is the military of TNP; it predates the oiginal Constitution a an organization founded by and acting for TNP. And the region long ago gave it formal standing as the military forces of TNP.

The definitional sentence sets a starting point to work out a balancing act that allows duality where it is done with respect to others who practice it without deceit and deception, and allows those who are honest enough not to pretend a fake duality in the first place to be protected as well. The beef many have with duality are those who abuse it; and not one aspect of the contra argument has even come close to addressing how to remove that abuse.
 
Absolute duality doesn't work because there is a history that shows that it is often faked to the detriment of TNP. So why should this region allow itself to be betrayed over and over by people such as Fulhead Land, who had no relunctance to betray this region to the Lexicon, and for all I know is still doing so? Fulhead, don't even pretend that has not been the case; the Limitless Events affairs amply showed that to be the case where you are concerned.
Click to expand...

I've never come close to being found guilty of anything.

Retract that statement.
 
Fulhead Land:
Absolute duality doesn't work because there is a history that shows that it is often faked to the detriment of TNP. So why should this region allow itself to be betrayed over and over by people such as Fulhead Land, who had no relunctance to betray this region to the Lexicon, and for all I know is still doing so? Fulhead, don't even pretend that has not been the case; the Limitless Events affairs amply showed that to be the case where you are concerned.
Click to expand...

I've never come close to being found guilty of anything.

Retract that statement.
Click to expand...
This is no time to mudsling Grosse.

Grosseschnauzer:
The definitional sentence sets a starting point to work out a balancing act that allows duality where it is done with respect to others who practice it without deceit and deception, and allows those who are honest enough not to pretend a fake duality in the first place to be protected as well. The beef many have with duality are those who abuse it; and not one aspect of the contra argument has even come close to addressing how to remove that abuse.
Click to expand...

Where's the beef? I've never had a duality issue and I've presented my duality clause. In fact Blue Wolf II has done so multiple times. This argument of scheming anti-NPers is getting tiresome, either back it up with facts or your're out of order.
 
mr_sniffles:
This argument of scheming anti-NPers is getting tiresome, either back it up with facts or your're out of order.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Particularly considering his statement about Fulheads ADN comment in the other thread, I think it's a little hypocritical to be doing the exact same thing himself.


Anyway, on topic, I believe there might have been a better solution to this (apparent) issue. Part of the problem stems from the fact that we don't make the IC/OOC divide very clear, I think if we worked on that there would be IC solutions avalible to us, as things stand the IC/OOC divide is very muddy and vague- which people have used to their advantage. Instead we're apparently creating an OOC constitution, which is, as people have commented, a poor approach. The thing is as well, I'm not aware of any other region which faffs so much on this issue, if our legal system was more clear and less rapped up in lengthy and difficult to use legislation we might be better able to make it work.
 
Fulhead Land:
I've never come close to being found guilty of anything.

Retract that statement.
Click to expand...
Formal guilt or innocence isn't the issue.

It's my opinion and I'm entitled to express it in the context of the duality issue. You've been the most noticable abuser of duality, and sets the examble of why the abuse of duality needs to be addressed.
 
Haor, if you seriously believe there's an alternative way of dealing with the abuse of duality, then put your proposal on the table.

The proposal that Mr Sniffles and Blue Wolf put out didn't remove the abuse of duality, it would hve made it legal and uncontrollable. And the intent of that proposal wasn't really to deal with duality it was designed to destroy this region's tradition as a defender region.
 
With all this bitching about me trying to destroy the region by abolishing its defender roots I have yet to see any proof to support it.

I support whatever makes the region active, and this can be either defender or raider. As it is, the government will never allow an official raider army and the defender army is inactive, despite its recent attempts to prove otherwise.
 
Blue Wolf II:
As it is, the government will never allow an official raider army and the defender army is inactive, despite its recent attempts to prove otherwise.
Click to expand...
To defend the NPA a bit, we were actually pretty damn active in the period of time that Mesian took office and when we broke for Easter holidays. Currently, I believe we are garrisoning another region while the upper echelons are in discussions with the natives.

Basically, lack of movement does not necessarily connote lack of activity. :P
 
With all this bitching about me trying to destroy the region by abolishing its defender roots I have yet to see any proof to support it.
Click to expand...

Well you are trying to make it commit an invasion, surely that counts as abolishing its defender roots?

As it is, the government will never allow an official raider army and the defender army is inactive, despite its recent attempts to prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

As already mentioned the NPA under new leadership is flourishing.
 
Well you are trying to make it commit an invasion, surely that counts as abolishing its defender roots?
Click to expand...

Hell no, if I wanted to get rid of The North's defender history and roots I would outright propose an abolishment of the NPA. Defender armies occasionally attack their enemies; it's a long standing tradition in fact. RLA, TITO, ADN, all of them participated in sanctioned attacks, usually against raiders in their native region.

As already mentioned the NPA under new leadership is flourishing.
Click to expand...

No, it's not "flourishing". If it were it would be out on a mission every night or at least once a week at least like most defender armies.

I know what I am talking about, don't patronize me.
 
Hell no, if I wanted to get rid of The North's defender history and roots I would outright propose an abolishment of the NPA. Defender armies occasionally attack their enemies; it's a long standing tradition in fact. RLA, TITO, ADN, all of them participated in sanctioned attacks, usually against raiders in their native region.
Click to expand...

I thought you already did?

No, it's not "flourishing". If it were it would be out on a mission every night or at least once a week at least like most defender armies.

I know what I am talking about, don't patronize me.
Click to expand...

Maybe flourishing is the wrong word I admit, but its activity is definately improving.
 
Point to the location where I proposed the amendment which abolished the NPA. I think your confusing me with someone else, but don't worry, that’s so easy to do.
 
My proposal was right in the middle of both opposing arguments, all it did was define nations as "member-nations" in the parts that says attacking the citizens of the North Pacific or the North Pacific government was a criminal act.

To protect those who fall into the defender/invader dynamic, I proposed the repeal the part of NP Law that made it illegal to give harbour or aid (such as citizenship) to invaders. Apparently that one out of numerous clause in the NPA Code would create hell on earth to the jingoistic faction residing here, they were speaking as if it would create massive lakes of fire and screaming sinners and everything.

And all those who claim to represent "the true NP tradition" and such wouldn't even allow proper debate or even a vote on these matters. Please tell me how not allowing the citizens to vote or dare question those in government possibly be AGAINST the North Pacific ideals and traditons. It sure is part of our heritage though, just ask UPS, Bight. and Pixie.
 
No, Mr. Sniffles, you just failed to understand the longstandng commitment of TNP to its defender hertitage.

That's also something Cathyy failed to understand. When she took the region out of the ADN, she did it in such a way as to betrays the region's historic committment to its defendanter stance. I've never endorsed adherence to the ADN (the withdrawal from the ADN took place jsut about the time I came into the game), but I did suport and concur with the defender philosophy and the resistence of invaider instrution into regions and the right of region's for self-determination. It has been possible in TNP to be pro-defender and not pro-ADN membrship.

If people confust Mr. Shiffles' proposals with Poltsamaa's proposald with Blue Wolf's proposals it's probably because the appear to sah a mutual self-interest to the exclusion of the rest of the region. Since it seems to recur quite frequntly, it can't be an accident.

But this discussion of that proposal really has little to do with this proposal. And I note, so far no one has put forth any alternative way of preventing abuse of duality; rather the discussion has been sidetrack to a discussion on something not involving this proposal.
 
mr_sniffles:
To protect those who fall into the defender/invader dynamic, I proposed the repeal the part of NP Law that made it illegal to give harbour or aid (such as citizenship) to invaders. Apparently that one out of numerous clause in the NPA Code would create hell on earth to the jingoistic faction residing here, they were speaking as if it would create massive lakes of fire and screaming sinners and everything.
Click to expand...
Wait...what? :huh:

Besides, the NPA Code only affects NPA members, which is set up to be a defender army. It's as good as scrap paper for the rest of you out there.
 
@ Grosse

So what your saying is, because we did it in the past we must always do it and never deviate from that course. Ah, that sounds very "progressive".

I do hope you realize just how silly that sounds.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
If people confusw Mr. Shiffles' proposals with Poltsamaa's proposald with Blue Wolf's proposals it's probably because the appear to a mutual self-interest to the exclusion of the rest of the region. Since it seems to recur quite frequntly, it can't be an accident.
Click to expand...
Where's my self-interest? How dare you place me in this anti-NP, pro-invader camp, I've never claimed to be anyone but this one Mr Sniffles. I've struggled in the times of UPS, Great Bight, Pixie; all in this name and nothing else. Please, everything I do I do for the good of the North Pacific. Including and especially when it comes to following the Constitution. This argument against Blue Wolf or Fulhead might hold some weight without presenting any real ideas might be all you have against their ideas but it holds no weight with me.

Where's the beef?
 
nice job posting where I cant reply BTW

That's also something Cathyy failed to understand. When she took the region out of the ADN, she did it in such a way as to betrays the region's historic committment to its defendanter stance. I've never endorsed adherence to the ADN (the withdrawal from the ADN took place jsut about the time I came into the game), but I did suport and concur with the defender philosophy and the resistence of invaider instrution into regions and the right of region's for self-determination. It has been possible in TNP to be pro-defender and not pro-ADN membrship.
Click to expand...

Again you rewrite the past to suit you.

The ADN ordered the NPA to move without any oversight by the regional Gov. She defended the regions authority. She never stopped the NPA being defender, or even tried...


look the real point here is that, regardless of the flames and attacks and rewrites of history, this law stinks. Its wording- crap, its effecte- crap, its intended message- crap. We acnnot blur the lines of player and nation. this is a game. This isnt life!
 
Fulhead Land:
look the real point here is that, regardless of the flames and attacks and rewrites of history, this law stinks. Its wording- crap, its effecte- crap, its intended message- crap. We acnnot blur the lines of player and nation. this is a game. This isnt life!
Click to expand...
QFT! As far as I'm concerned, that's EXACTLY what it comes down to.

I'm very pro-duality, not because I'm trying to get away with anything, but because that's how I play this game. I consider WV, Romanar, and any other nations that I control to be separate from each other. This proposal does blur those lines, and that blurring is why I object to it, not because I'm overly worried about any personal consequences.
 
Fulhead Land:
Again you rewrite the past to suit you.

The ADN ordered the NPA to move without any oversight by the regional Gov. She defended the regions authority. She never stopped the NPA being defender, or even tried...
Click to expand...
Lol, irony. Also, everything old is new again! <_<

The ADN couldn't order anything. Since I was MoD at that time, I can say that I--not the ADN--ordered whatever missions the NPA went on and that whatever issues regarding overstepping regional authority should have been directed toward me (and was).
 
Winter vacationers, keep in mind that other who protest that they absolutely observer duality, don't. They've abused it and did so in way that threaten this region.

I suppose one could go the other route and require every nation in the region to be in the UN on pain of ejection and banning, but that doesn't work for long under the influence rules.

As I keep pointing out the issue is abuse of duality; and so far not one proponent of absolute duality has been able to address it.
 
Not to allow this entire flamefles to engulf this but what have other regions done to absolve this issue? The West Pacific in particular, and also the South and the East? THe Pacific has been left out for obvious reasons but please prove me wrong without the massive bureaucracy of snitching and secret police.
 
I will speak for The East Pacific here.

We do not have any problems with people acting under duality, the closest we have is Kang/Willowinds posting in the Embassy sections and then thanking herself. Apart from that we have nothing to 'worry' about. However I would suspect that we would not allow a person to abuse duality in an attempt to harm the region, they would probably be put on a trial and then subject to whatever punishment. I would point out that our trials are quicker though.
 
The West has never had issues with Duality, but they use to have a disclosure act in which you had to state all the active positions you had under penalty of trial. But, they don't have the law anymore in ConCom III.

Edit: Wow, did I say East? I meant West. Silly me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top