This is a question bout posting

Helgraf

Helgraf

TNPer
So ive been trying to post a reply on the roleplay thing with like embassies and things yet when I try to post on them (all except for map things) that they say that im not allowed to post on that forum and im part of the NPA and I dont know why I cant post there.
 
Nor do I.

Can you link to precisely the forum area you are trying to post in? It could be that your mask does not include that permission, could be that you have been left out of an alternative permission set. A little more info will help.

EDIT: Looking closer at your mask, you are a member of the group "army" and have the following permission sets: "army" and "member".

this is perhaps the problem, but info about where you tried to post would be helpful.

best fix: Join the Regional Assembly.
 
Yeah. Your mask allows viewing of those areas, but not posting. For the simplest solution which will not entail months of debate about extending the mask, see my post above.

If you are a RA member you would be able to post in the roleplay area.
 
yeah im assuming i can be a member of the NPA and RA at the same time but anyway i will join the RA.
 
Of course you can. In fact, it is welcomed.

Never got to say: welcome to TNP. Remember the friendly and accommodating Admins are here for all your masking needs. We also supply doughnuts. d
 
I will note becoming a citizen will also accomplish much the same result and is easier to maintain than RA membership. But it's good to be in the RA so that you can vote on laws and elect people! :)
 
It used to be the practice that as NPA applicants were security checked they would be masked as Citizens.

Was this discontinued? :eyebrow:
 
Eluvatar:
It used to be the practice that as NPA applicants were security checked they would be masked as Citizens.

Was this discontinued? :eyebrow:
Click to expand...
I...did not know of that. Unless I see a post in citizens I've been going with member/NPA and NPA group. If they're NPA they're still supposed to maintain a nation but we wouldn't know what nation that was unless they posted in the thread.
 
I remember raising a small fuss over the fact that NPA members were not required to be citizens, so I'm not sure what Elu is talking about.
 
I was under the impression that since NPA required security checks, as did "registered citizens" new NPA would also get the "citizen" masking, and if they left the NPA they would keep "citizen" or move into "former citizen" masking as appropriate, and if they were in the RA, they'd keep that instead.
 
But this is not simply a matter of what checks have been done. I remember the "small fuss" that COE refers to, and the upshot was that it was said that members of the NPAF are not required to be members of the regional assembly or citizens of tnp.

I disagreed, but meh, that is nothing unusual.

In my opinion it would be entirely inappropriate to give the citizen masking to someone who had not expressed a desire to become a citizen.
 
......

This is ridiculous.

All we ask to mask people as Citizens is that they have a TNP nation and describe themselves as a TNPer.

Joining the Army of TNP, with a nation required, seems to be a superset of that to me.
 
The issue is that citizens must maintain a nation in TNP. The Speaker is now actually keeping track of such things. So what happens if the person has no desire to maintain an additional nation as a stationary nation?

Elu, if you think it's so ridiculous, how about you craft some legislation to fix it? :P
 
Eluvatar:
......

This is ridiculous.

All we ask to mask people as Citizens is that they have a TNP nation and describe themselves as a TNPer.

Joining the Army of TNP, with a nation required, seems to be a superset of that to me.
Click to expand...
Those might be the qualifying criteria, but they should not mean that we automatically presume to mask someone as a citizen without their asking for such.

For example, a person might have real life theological objections to describing them self as a "citizen of TNP" because their church tells them that they are only a "citizen of heaven". On principle, they would object to being masked as such.

More in-game, a person might be a citizen of another region and out of loyalty to that region not want to be a citizen anywhere else, or the rules of that region might forbid it.

etc.

People should be masked as "citizens of TNP" if they want to be. Not as an automatic result of serving in the NPAF.
 
I agree with Elu. I am also troubled by the fact that we don't allow active contributors to our region, such as NPA members, to take part in the RP section without a separate application for "citizenship". In fact, I didn't realize that was the case until now, otherwise I would have requested that this be changed earlier.

The objections Flem raises are independent of the forum access itself. They can get access to the roleplay forum without being given the title "Citizen of TNP".

Eras, given that the concept of "citizenship" is just an admin construction (there is legally no such thing as "citizen of TNP"), I don't see why legislation is necessary to fix it. Even if you don't want to automatically give NPA members the "citizenship" mask, forum access to areas such as roleplay can be given through the NPA mask itself.
 
I think that for the purposes of forum admin conception of 'citizenship', we can treat nations that are deployed outside of the region on NPA orders as in TNP. <_<

It doesn't come up very often though.

r3n, I've certainly been masking NPA applicants as citizens whenever I mask them.
 
The concept of "citizens" and "former citizens" was a construct by two admin in particular, Elu and myself. At a certain point after the NPA was re-established, Elu created a "registered citizens" mask for those who have had security checks done but who were not in the RA, had been removed for the RA although they retained a nation within TNP in game, or who had a security check done for the NPA, and then left the NPA but likewise retained a nation in TNP and had had a security check performed.

Because a security check has been performed, and as long as the player retained a nation in game in TNP, that should be sufficient for the citizen mask. When a player's nation CTE without leaving TNP on game, that was where the former citizen mask was primarily used. There is a subset of former RA members who chose not to post an amended oath for the RA at one point who are also former citizens, but that is the net result to the same conclusion as to their status.)
If we really need a law to formalize this, then fine, but I don't see the need to do so. The system works as it is, as long as the idea that a player and his TNP nation that has undergone a security check should be sufficent for the citizen masking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top