The Pacific bans RMB spam

The Government is interested in the opinions of North Pacificans over if we should follow the same route as The Pacific, and to what degree we should allow for certain exemptions or other stipulations.

From my personal standpoint, I am in full support of Krull's initiative, and I believe that we should try it here in The North Pacific. Although I acknowledge that it will still be legal by game mechanics for recruiters to post their messages on the feeder RMB, I am in support of having the Delegate undertake a ban-on-sight (please note the terminology) policy against those who do post recruitment messages on our RMB.

Every North Pacifican should expect to see a clean RMB for which they can communicate to their fellow residents and other friendly individuals. I have seen many RMB conversations, games, and other activities over the years both in TNP and across the feeders be completely ignored by disinterested recruiters. If recruiters do wish to recruit, they can telegram residents, which has been proven to be more productive to their recruiting activities than littering the RMB with their spam, which disrupts conversations that we wish to pursue.

That being said, I do not dislike all recruiters, in fact I enjoy seeing those who actually contribute to the conversation, or who wish to be good neighbours and be respectful to our region. Brightonburg, for example, is someone who I would exempt to the ban-on-sight policy.

As I mentioned before, we would like to hear your opinions on this matter. Should we ban-on-sight all recruiters, exempt certain "friendly recruiters", require recruiters to post their ads in various humourous styles depending on the day, or something else? The Government will then formulate a policy statement that is in line with the needs and wishes of the citizens.
 
I agree. I think it would be a good policy to implement a ban on site for ad spammers. We certainty aren't getting anything from this eye sore on our RMB everyday. Let's ban them.

Also it's not illegal to do so. Posting ad spam is legal to do game wise, and as far as MOD action goes, It is perfectly legal for us to do, and perfectly legal for the delegate to banject any nation he chooses, for any reason he chooses, gamewise.
 
Apparently the Mods think it is illegal, but with influence, Delegates can do whatever they please.

The North Pacific should follow suit and challenge the mods. In fact, all Feeders should follow suit.

There should be a summit between the Feeders to ban AdSpam, and then post with a single united front on the Official forums as an official challenge to the mods.
 
I have no problem with this, except that I am concerned that the delegate might use up valuable influence banning adspammers, leaving him vulnerable and unable to ban a genuine threat to the region. Remember, NK only has minnow influence.

That being said, most adspammers would have so little influence that banjecting them would have little effect.
 
flemingovia:
I have no problem with this, except that I am concerned that the delegate might use up valuable influence banning adspammers, leaving him vulnerable and unable to ban a genuine threat to the region. Remember, NK only has minnow influence.

That being said, most adspammers would have so little influence that banjecting them would have little effect.
Click to expand...
99% of adspammers would have zero influence. Not as in nearly zero but actually zip squat zilch zero.
 
I disagree. It seems a bit too despotic to ban recruiters on site. It is a feeder and therefore a free region?

I just think that we appear to have a spam problem because we the residents make so little use of our lovely RMB. I have watched the East Pacific and they do not have this problem so much because they all actively post on their RMB.

Overly long adverts aren't right though and maybe the delegate could just ban those.
 
I think we can choose not to ban all adspam, but I think the Pacific has a sovereign right to do so. I would actually prefer we didn't ban all adspam: making them post haiku and such is far more fun :)
 
Perhaps we could set up a "Recruitment Registration" office or something. If a region wants to recruit from our region, then they need to be registered and would be required to follow our guidelines.
 
That is certainly an option. Requiring them to register on our forums, and apply for "friendly recruiter" status or something would allow them the opportunity to see our region not as an area to recruit from, but an actual region.

Plus... we could always tie the haiku idea into that, if we wish.
 
I do wonder at the effectiveness of the Pacific's policy. If I were a recruiter I would just create a disposable puppet every time I wanted to recruit.
 
flemingovia:
I do wonder at the effectiveness of the Pacific's policy. If I were a recruiter I would just create a disposable puppet every time I wanted to recruit.
Click to expand...
That does, however, involve more work by the recruiter. The RMB recruiters tend to be lazy.
 
I have noticed certain regions wanting to do that type of thing. From a personal observation, even as a minnow Delegate back in 2007, I could banject all the recruiters I wanted within a 2 hour period of their visit to our region. One thing that made me chuckle at the irony of this game was comments on "Alliance of Dictators" RMB who were crying about Krull being a totalitarian dictator, when they should, given their regional ideology, be celebrating that. There is no pleasing some people, it seems.

That being said, other feeder regions with the ban/eject button are also looking at the ban-on-sight policy and working on ways to best suit the needs of their region. I am also hoping that the feeders have the opportunity to meet together to chart a clear and effective direction on this matter.
 
Flemingovia: It is proving quite effective as a deterrent. I'm mainly banning the puppets of those whining about it than actual recruiters, and I've pointed those that are being reasonable to Nai's how to build a region thread on the NS forums.
 
Moany Old Gits:
I disagree. It seems a bit too despotic to ban recruiters on site. It is a feeder and therefore a free region?

I just think that we appear to have a spam problem because we the residents make so little use of our lovely RMB. I have watched the East Pacific and they do not have this problem so much because they all actively post on their RMB.

Overly long adverts aren't right though and maybe the delegate could just ban those.
Click to expand...
TNP is a feeder, and a free region, but at the same time it is our region, not theirs. They are not there to help our region, or contribute to it in any way. So why should we bend to their wishes?

Let them eat BBQ.
 
Whamabama:
Moany Old Gits:
I disagree. It seems a bit too despotic to ban recruiters on site. It is a feeder and therefore a free region?

I just think that we appear to have a spam problem because we the residents make so little use of our lovely RMB. I have watched the East Pacific and they do not have this problem so much because they all actively post on their RMB.

Overly long adverts aren't right though and maybe the delegate could just ban those.
Click to expand...
TNP is a feeder, and a free region, but at the same time it is our region, not theirs. They are not there to help our region, or contribute to it in any way. So why should we bend to their wishes?

Let them eat BBQ.
Click to expand...
We have no reason to bend to their wishes. I just think it would be entertaining to make them tapdance :P
 
I just think that we appear to have a spam problem because we the residents make so little use of our lovely RMB. I have watched the East Pacific and they do not have this problem so much because they all actively post on their RMB.
Click to expand...

To provide an East Pacifican perspective on this: Yes, we have less adspam than TNP because our RMB is more active. However, there are considerable obstacles to a similar solution in TNP. For one, not to brag, but TEP is considerably more active than TNP. This is the result of a great deal of involvement by a wide range of players and a great deal of behind-the-scenes internal affairs of a kind that I don't see signs of here. I'm not sure how TNP could replicate that, as I'm not a North Pacifican. In addition, even in TEP it took a long time and a lot of effort to get people involved on the RMB and cultivate those that were already involved. The presence of seemingly hopeless levels of RMB spam in and of itself was also a powerful psychological obstacle to regional RMB involvement.

In short, getting TEP-like results in TNP would be very difficult for all of you - and that difficulty could be reduced by instituting TP-like policies toward adspammers.
 
As I stated on the thread, if the mods declared it illegal then it is, and that overrides any policy or law set forth by any NS region, feeder or otherwise.

Now if you disagree with their ruling, surely you can approach them and have a civil discussion with them about that? :ADN:
 
As you seemed to have missed, the mods did not say that "a delegate banning ADSPAM in their region" is illegal, what they said was that "a delegate cannot come whining to the mods when adspammers refuse to abide by the delegates rules, and that they cannot change the hard-coded rules (like the once per-24 hour policy). If the delegate has influence to do something, then they can do it, no matter what it is. Here's the bit you seemed to have missed:

Reploid Productions:
Since people still seem to be getting confused about the exact legality of this player-imposed ban, let's get it spelled out crystal clear here.

The delegate of a feeder can attempt to ban recruiting posts from the region. Not sure how much luck they'll have at it, but they can certainly try. Between the disposable nature of most recruiter nations and the cap on the banlist though, I can't help but see the effort as tilting at windmills.

The moderators will not assist in enforcing this ban. If a recruiter, or group of recruiters rotates through multiple puppets to keep posting their allowed once-per-24-hours recruitment post, it's all on the delegate to try and keep them out.

Nothing is stopping recruiters from getting clever and finding ways around this player-made ban. Sleeper puppets could easily idle in a feeder or act as locals until they post a recruiting message, at which point they will cost at least some influence to banject. For that matter, nothing is stopping invaders from using such tactics to try and lure a feeder delegate into wasting more influence. I would honestly be surprised if this hasn't already started happening.

RE: Quoting an ad verbatim: This is a tricky grey area. There may be times where quoting part of an ad is relevant to the discussion. If you think it's being done simply to subvert the once-per-24 hours rule, report it and we'll take a look. We're leery about blanket-banning the action of quoting an ad, as there may be legitimate reasons to do so in conversation. I personally would advise people NOT to quote an entire ad and thus avoid running the risk of being looked at as skirting the rules in the first place.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top