Review of Claim Rules

*math math math*

So that would be an approximate population density of 15561 people per square kilometer, or, unless I'm mistaken, almost 500 people per square meter? These calculations are highly rushed, but I'm pretty sure that the only way that's possible is if the entire country is one humongous building that goes up and down as far as is possible by the limits of modern engineering.
 
If you're not rping with her, why does it matter?
 
Syrixia and Nebula. There are other nations out there that claim equally insane populations like Archegnum who claims almost 3 Billion. Aurora Orb who claims almost 5 Billion and Norvalkin who by his own factbook cliams ~332 Million just for his capital city and 2.6 Billion just for his 10 largest cities. Just because a number is claimed does not mean its has to be recognized as canon, that is why I set up the population thread and started helping people calculate such things.
 
We are all entitled to recognize the canon existence of nations as we see fit. For example, Sytarrene doesn't exist for me. It just doesn't. All actions by dragons in Darcania are recognized as being by humans. (Sorry, Darcy I still think you're beautiful.) The same goes for Andulus's sphere-people. I occasionally recognize Syrixians as gun-wielding chimpanzees, but that depends on my mood at any given time. All Nessunians are worms, and all Nierrians are purple-skinned. Avalon is still in the canon in my book, but we have no relations with those folks.

Anywhence, that's my take on the subject. Yours likely differs, but I don't care, I love it.
 
Will there be any other exceptions to the maximum size standards, aside from a history of service with TNP? And to clarify, will the total area of all one player's existing claims be taken into account in determining newer claims?
 
Nierr:
This map is not the property of the North Pacific nor am I beholden to her laws.

I own the map images and all related files, aside from the allied systems maps and anything else Lord Lore has created. Lore further has limited contributors rights to the claims map.

There is no catching people out here. I've always approached claims on a case-by-case basis and I think that you in particular should think twice before making large, emboldened declarations considering all the hours the cartography team has wasted trying to accommodate you and your frequently unacceptable claims and behaviour.

If the way I run this map - and saved this map after your and Alunya's hideous mismanagement of my creative content - is so unacceptable to you, then you're free to start your own map, using your image. I highly doubt you'll receive the response from the community you'd like, however.
Click to expand...
This.

There's just a couple of things I need to get off my chest.

A little attitude adjustment from the region-at-large would be welcomed. The map is a gift from Nierr to this region. It is dismaying to see nations making demands with an air of entitlement. Hardly anyone says "Please," or "Thank you." Didn't your mum teach you manners?

I am puzzled that representation is not widely accepted for ALL nations who call TNP their home, whether or not they are actively engaged on the RP forum. It's still all one community.

And as for GBM's population density, the Mummers are extraordinarily diminutive, so it's not a problem. :jack:

Anyway, the map is quite lovely, and I appreciate all the time and effort that has been put into it. :clap:
 
Great Bights Mum:
Nierr:
This map is not the property of the North Pacific nor am I beholden to her laws.

I own the map images and all related files, aside from the allied systems maps and anything else Lord Lore has created. Lore further has limited contributors rights to the claims map.

There is no catching people out here. I've always approached claims on a case-by-case basis and I think that you in particular should think twice before making large, emboldened declarations considering all the hours the cartography team has wasted trying to accommodate you and your frequently unacceptable claims and behaviour.

If the way I run this map - and saved this map after your and Alunya's hideous mismanagement of my creative content - is so unacceptable to you, then you're free to start your own map, using your image. I highly doubt you'll receive the response from the community you'd like, however.
Click to expand...
This.

There's just a couple of things I need to get off my chest.

A little attitude adjustment from the region-at-large would be welcomed. The map is a gift from Nierr to this region. It is dismaying to see nations making demands with an air of entitlement. Hardly anyone says "Please," or "Thank you." Didn't your mum teach you manners?

I am puzzled that representation is not widely accepted for ALL nations who call TNP their home, whether or not they are actively engaged on the RP forum. It's still all one community.

And as for GBM's population density, the Mummers are extraordinarily diminutive, so it's not a problem. :jack:

Anyway, the map is quite lovely, and I appreciate all the time and effort that has been put into it. :clap:
Click to expand...
I sure hope they live in shoes.
 
plembobria:
All actions by dragons in Darcania are recognized as being by humans. (Sorry, Darcy I still think you're beautiful.)
Click to expand...
I'm used to it. No matter how hard I try to balance my multi-species aspect and make it culturally unique and separate from the culture of humans, people will null/alter canon it, despite the supposed "acceptance" of TNP to multi-species.

I can see applying null/alter canon to godmodding, etc., but I don't see how applying null/alter canon to multi-species nations just because they're multi-species matches TNP's "acceptance" of multi-species after McM's RP convention.

But I digress. It's a worthless argument; I already tried it with Lord Lore and he didn't change his mind, either.
 
Great Bights Mum:
I am puzzled that representation is not widely accepted for ALL nations who call TNP their home, whether or not they are actively engaged on the RP forum. It's still all one community.
Click to expand...
This map is used for the RP canon and it is an RP map. Non-RPing players, imo, have no place in it. If you want to RP, make a claim. If not, there's no reason to. I am not criticizing Nierr's work on this map, which is very admirable, but I do have an issue with some of the claims that are accepted. McM is getting back into RPing and Añola made his claim smaller which justified his large claim, but yours so far lacks an RP basis and is only based off the fact that you have an extensive career of service to the region. This service has been mainly outside the TNP RP world, and imo, that means it has no power to justify such a large claim.

Just :2c: from a concerned citizen.
 
And its not for you to decide what is and isn't appropriate to go on the map.
 
Syrixia:
Great Bights Mum:
I am puzzled that representation is not widely accepted for ALL nations who call TNP their home, whether or not they are actively engaged on the RP forum. It's still all one community.
Click to expand...
This map is used for the RP canon and it is an RP map. Non-RPing players, imo, have no place in it. If you want to RP, make a claim. If not, there's no reason to. I am not criticizing Nierr's work on this map, which is very admirable, but I do have an issue with some of the claims that are accepted. McM is getting back into RPing and Añola made his claim smaller which justified his large claim, but yours so far lacks an RP basis and is only based off the fact that you have an extensive career of service to the region. This service has been mainly outside the TNP RP world, and imo, that means it has no power to justify such a large claim.

Just :2c: from a concerned citizen.
Click to expand...
:agree:
 
This is a Review of Claim Rules thread. You yourself asked us to review the current claim rules and discuss them. I am stating my own opinion on a very good example of why I am not impressed by the current claim rules. To sum it up, I believe:

1. All claims must be realistic in population and RP background, and must be not excessively big so there is room for other nations to claim spots on the map.

2. All nations with claims must be able to/are participating in the TNP RP universe. If a nation makes a claim and has no intention to RP using his/her nation and/or has not before, their claim has no reason to be accepted.

Again, this is a thread about the review of the claim rules. I have reviewed it, as I want to help and contribute to the discussion, and the above two points are what I think needs to be added.
 
Syrixia... I have to disagree and side with GBM on this. Though the map is located in the role play forum it should be inclusive and open to everyone who is a member of The North Pacific, be they a role player or not. Heck, if you want to go down the line of reasoning that only RP nations should be on the map, then the cartographers would be removing and then re-adding nations for those people who choose to take a break from role playing for a while. It's not practical. And anyways, I respect Nierrs decision on what gets added to the map, it is his work after all.
 
Syrixia:
1. All claims must be realistic in population and RP background,
Click to expand...
Really you of all people are saying this? This coming from the person who passionatlly tried to get us to accepted that a Super Volcano had erupted in your nation within the last 100 years, coupled with a Capital that was built next to a Sinkhole that was full of Lava?

If we used that criteria to get a map spot you would never have gotten one in the first place.
 
Lord Lore:
Syrixia:
1. All claims must be realistic in population and RP background,
Click to expand...
Really you of all people are saying this? This coming from the person who passionatlly tried to get us to accepted that a Super Volcano had erupted in your nation within the last 100 years, coupled with a Capital that was built next to a Sinkhole that was full of Lava?

If we used that criteria to get a map spot you would never have gotten one in the first place.
Click to expand...
That's beside the point, Lore. I believe this would be a good addition to the rulebook. At the very least, a country of 50 trillion cyborgs should at least not be considered canon.

And more importantly, I fail to see why players who do not intend to role-play should have spots on the role-play map. If they intend on role-playing at some point but cannot right now, fine. But for a role-play map, let's keep it for the role-players.
 
Syrixia:
1. All claims must be realistic in population and RP background.
Click to expand...
What exactly would the criteria for that be? I highly doubt my nation of dragons would count as realistic.
 
Darcania:
Syrixia:
1. All claims must be realistic in population and RP background.
Click to expand...
What exactly would the criteria for that be? I highly doubt my nation of dragons would count as realistic.
Click to expand...
I don't think it does and I don't think dragons belong in modern-tech RP.
 
Kannex:
That's beside the point, Lore. I believe this would be a good addition to the rulebook. At the very least, a country of 50 trillion cyborgs should at least not be considered canon.
Click to expand...
I believe you have ignored everyone who has said addition to the map does not mean that every nation has to Automatically accept something from the viewpoint of their nation. For instance for the longest time I didn't accept the existance of Wolfsea and New Sekai, while we have has sense recognized Sekai, Wolfsea is still iffy.

And to this day as far as Andulans are concerned Aurora Orb, and Archegnum don't exist.
 
Kannex:
I don't think it does and I don't think dragons belong in modern-tech RP.
Click to expand...
I link you to the 2015 Roleplay Convention, which ruled that multi-species is acceptable in canon TNP.

I link you to the RP Mod announcement, where Nierr appointed me as an RP mod and not you.

Finally, I link you to a reply I gave to Sytarenne when he idiotically claimed that I could not have dragons in RP.

Don't you dare tell me that I cannot have a nation filled with dragons. You are not a moderator. You are not me. It's not your decision.
 
Darcania:
Syrixia:
1. All claims must be realistic in population and RP background.
Click to expand...
What exactly would the criteria for that be? I highly doubt my nation of dragons would count as realistic.
Click to expand...
The Roleplay Convention defined what counts as realistic in TNP RP. I'm pretty sure it approved multispecies RP; thus dragons are realistic here.
 
Lord Lore:
Kannex:
That's beside the point, Lore. I believe this would be a good addition to the rulebook. At the very least, a country of 50 trillion cyborgs should at least not be considered canon.
Click to expand...
I believe you have ignored everyone who has said addition to the map does not mean that every nation has to Automatically accept something from the viewpoint of their nation. For instance for the longest time I didn't accept the existance of Wolfsea and New Sekai, while we have has sense recognized Sekai, Wolfsea is still iffy.

And to this day as far as Andulans are concerned Aurora Orb, and Archegnum don't exist.
Click to expand...
[/quote]No, I haven't ignored them. I said, unrealistic countries should at least not be considered canon. I'm in favor of the policy.
 
Darcania:
Kannex:
I don't think it does and I don't think dragons belong in modern-tech RP.
Click to expand...
I link you to the 2015 Roleplay Convention, which ruled that multi-species is acceptable in canon TNP.

I link you to the RP Mod announcement, where Nierr appointed me as an RP mod and not you.

Finally, I link you to a reply I gave to Sytarenne when he idiotically claimed that I could not have dragons in RP.

Don't you dare tell me that I cannot have a nation filled with dragons. You are not a moderator. You are not me. It's not your decision.
Click to expand...
Frankly allowing multi-species wasn't a good decision. And it doesn't matter if you're a moderator. I haven't told you what to do at all. I can't decide for you, but I can tell you I think dragons don't belong in modern tech RP. As Lore said, I won't be recognizing them. Feel free to not recognize Kannex.
 
Um, people really need to go re-read that RP Convention. Almost nothing about multi-species RP was 'decided'.

We had a conversation, and the overriding feeling was that RP is limited by what the participants are willing to accept. If you're willing to accept dragons and other stuff in your RP, then that's fine. I, myself, limit myself only to humans and slight variations (and its long been my policy that elves etc etc are just oddly shaped humans).

If you are willing to play as or accept non-humans thats fine. If you aren't, thats fine too. Either hand wave it, or don't rp with each other. I don't want to get into the business of telling people that they can or can't RP in a certain way - and as an RP mod my role is limited to guiding RP, rather than controlling or corralling it.
 
Nierr:
Um, people really need to go re-read that RP Convention. Almost nothing about multi-species RP was 'decided'.

We had a conversation, and the overriding feeling was that RP is limited by what the participants are willing to accept. If you're willing to accept dragons and other stuff in your RP, then that's fine. I, myself, limit myself only to humans and slight variations (and its long been my policy that elves etc etc are just oddly shaped humans).

If you are willing to play as or accept non-humans thats fine. If you aren't, thats fine too. Either hand wave it, or don't rp with each other. I don't want to get into the business of telling people that they can or can't RP in a certain way - and as an RP mod my role is limited to guiding RP, rather than controlling or corralling it.
Click to expand...
:agree:
 
Thank you, Nierr.

On the issue of claims, would it be possible to remove players off the map if they are inactive on the RP forum for a certain amount of time? This would free up space and there wouldn't be a need for new continents any time soon.
 
Kannex:
Thank you, Nierr.

On the issue of claims, would it be possible to remove players off the map if they are inactive on the RP forum for a certain amount of time? This would free up space and there wouldn't be a need for new continents any time soon.
Click to expand...
Might I suggest 2-3 weeks, if they don't take a leave of absence?
 
:2c: I was taken aback when I first learned Darc intended to have his Dragons; it didn't fit the larger world I had developed in my head. But don't you see that's what is fantastic about collaborative role play? You DON'T get to make all the rules. It's challenging.

Nothing is stopping anyone from founding their own region and setting up an RP environment that suits their intentions. But to do that inherently limits the creativity of everyone else unless they are in complete agreement. With a feeder region this large and with constant influx of new people, that's just never going to happen.

The world in which my original ideas about Sadakoyama were set was "realistic" in every respect; except for the allowances I made that made only my country special. So for me to sit here and try and insist that everyone else accept the head canon I originally conceived isn't just god modding, it's being a dick.

Yeah, there are a lot of ideas that do horribly unbalance things (dragons are not one of those things, not the way Darc is employing them), but then not everyone has the same skill set. That's why collaboration is so great, we can help each other. So when the next Syrixia wants to put a city in a volcano, we can explain to him why that's maybe not a good idea and work with him to develop a refinement or even a better idea.

But let's not squat down like little Cartmans and insist that if it's not done our way the other people aren't playing right.
 
That was the policy in the past. It fell by the wayside when I was the only active cartographer for a few weeks, but will be picked up again now that Lord Lore is back.
 
Syrixia:
Kannex:
Thank you, Nierr.

On the issue of claims, would it be possible to remove players off the map if they are inactive on the RP forum for a certain amount of time? This would free up space and there wouldn't be a need for new continents any time soon.
Click to expand...
Might I suggest 2-3 weeks, if they don't take a leave of absence?
Click to expand...
2-3 weeks is much too short. We'll look at around a month, I believe.
 
Nierr:
Syrixia:
Kannex:
Thank you, Nierr.

On the issue of claims, would it be possible to remove players off the map if they are inactive on the RP forum for a certain amount of time? This would free up space and there wouldn't be a need for new continents any time soon.
Click to expand...
Might I suggest 2-3 weeks, if they don't take a leave of absence?
Click to expand...
2-3 weeks is much too short. We'll look at around a month, I believe.
Click to expand...
Sounds alright from my POV. :)
 
Piscivore:
So for me to sit here and try and insist that everyone else accept the head canon I originally conceived isn't just god modding, it's being a dick.
Click to expand...
God, this idea is applicable in so many areas of life.

You're great and I'm keeping you. ^_^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top