NPA Doctrine - WFE/Flag Removal change

Lennart:
flemingovia:
So would the NPA be happy with replacing clause d with:

"Restore region to its original state before leaving with a tag marking the NPA's presence in the region"

Because i think removing clause d altogether gives too much scope for abuse should future commanders of the NPA be less virtuous than the current command.
Click to expand...
^ I like this idea.

I do not think the NPA would become a tag-raiding force and I mean no disrespect for our army in any way, but it would be an unnecessary and tasteless display of force. I thought we were more elegant than that.
Click to expand...
This is a good compromise.
 
flemingovia:
gladio:
we have to follow the new trends
Click to expand...

There, in a nutshell, you have the philosophical debate that underlies this proposed rule change. Do we want the North Pacific to merely follow the trend, or do we want to set the standard?

And our standard has been that we respect the places we raid, even if they are not very active regions. We leave the regions as we find them, which is what we would wish for our own created regions (I know many of us have created our own regions in the past).

A compromise has been suggested that allows the NPA to leave its mark on a region without destroying anything. I fail to see how this does not satisfy the needs some feel to mark their achievement.

We may be an arny that raids, but we are not vandals.
Click to expand...
After some thought, I don't mind this idea. I would prefer for the NPA to be able to tag proper, but this idea isn't bad. Something similar to this (or exactly the same) has been practiced before in Warzone Australia earlier this year, when the EPSA and then the NPA raided the region, kept the old WFE and whatnot but left a little spoilered note at the bottom of the WFE serving as a tag. This worked well, and actually allowed two regions to tag a region at the same time.
 
It seems the proposer is not minded to accept a compromise, so I give the regional assembly this promise. If this proposal is voted down I will bring the compromise motion to the RA myself.
 
flemingovia:
It seems the proposer is not minded to accept a compromise, so I give the regional assembly this promise. If this proposal is voted down I will bring the compromise motion to the RA myself.
Click to expand...
You will have my support if you wish to do so
 
I can support Flemingovia’s compromise. Hopefully it will not be needed in a second vote.
 
I think this is a better compromise:
3. The NPAF must follow all of the following criteria on every mission in foreign regions, except against designated enemy regions:
a. Minimize collateral damage;
b. Respect the culture of the region and the wishes of the natives;
c. Minimize threat to The North Pacific and allies;
d. Restore region to its original state before leaving; Provide natives with the means to restore the region to its original state before leaving;
d. Contact the most recent native delegate when acting proactively;
Click to expand...
I would interpret this as meaning that we would have to give the natives of the region a copy of the WFE and flag that we replaced, or links to the archives mentioned elsewhere in this thread. The easiest way to do that would probably be to include links in the WFE itself. Also, I would note that (a) and (b) restrictions that remain in place prohibit some common practices such as closing embassies.
 
I think, out of fairness to Gladio, at this stage this thread ought to debate the merits or otherwise of his proposal. If this motion fails we can debate the exact wording of the compromise as a new proposal.
 
I see absolutely no reason in opposing this bill. I give full and absolute support for it.

:tnp: :agree:
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
I think this is a better compromise:
3. The NPAF must follow all of the following criteria on every mission in foreign regions, except against designated enemy regions:
a. Minimize collateral damage;
b. Respect the culture of the region and the wishes of the natives;
c. Minimize threat to The North Pacific and allies;
d. Restore region to its original state before leaving; Provide natives with the means to restore the region to its original state before leaving;
d. Contact the most recent native delegate when acting proactively;
Click to expand...
I would interpret this as meaning that we would have to give the natives of the region a copy of the WFE and flag that we replaced, or links to the archives mentioned elsewhere in this thread. The easiest way to do that would probably be to include links in the WFE itself. Also, I would note that (a) and (b) restrictions that remain in place prohibit some common practices such as closing embassies.
Click to expand...
^I think this is a good compromise, It will allow us to change the Flag/WFE and at the same time preserve the old one, we could post links of the old WFE/Flag In the RMB or use the mass-TG option to send It to every native In the region or do both. Additionally, I think we could also add an exception for this rule for spam and nazi regions.


Lennart:
I do not think the NPA would become a tag-raiding force and I mean no disrespect for our army in any way, but it would be an unnecessary and tasteless display of force. I thought we were more elegant than that.
Click to expand...

I've already said this many times now, tag-raiding Is a standard way of training that's being used by all NS militaries Including our allies. For those who are saying that It's tasteless and vandalism, do you also consider our allies to be vandals ? In your opinion are : Europeia, Balder, The South Pacific, Albion, The East Pacific etc vandals ?
 
As a defender myself (albeit not a very active one), I support this compromise.
 
gladio:
For those who are saying that It's tasteless and vandalism, do you also consider our allies to be vandals ? In your opinion are : Europeia, Balder, The South Pacific, Albion, The East Pacific etc vandals ?
Click to expand...

I think i have been absolutely consistent, over many many years, concerning what I think about practices like tag raiding. I do not think i have ever made a single post that suggests otherwise, no matter who is doing it.

So yes, I do not condone it, even if our allies are doing it. But i am not a citizen of Europeia, Baldur and the like, and I have no sway over their policy. In a political simulation like Nationstates I would not expect to agree with every policy of our allies. I'm quite comfortable with that.

i am also one nation among over 9000 in TNP. I am not a member of government, not even a deputy minister. If i were the delegate or minister of defence, I can see that our allies might be concerned. As it is, i doubt they will be losing any sleep over my opinions.
 
A move to vote was made some time ago. I second it (if a second is needed). I think all the arguments in favour and against this proposal have been clearly made, as have possible compromise motions should this fail.
 
Gladio:
Lennart:
I do not think the NPA would become a tag-raiding force and I mean no disrespect for our army in any way, but it would be an unnecessary and tasteless display of force. I thought we were more elegant than that.
Click to expand...

I've already said this many times now, tag-raiding Is a standard way of training that's being used by all NS militaries Including our allies. For those who are saying that It's tasteless and vandalism, do you also consider our allies to be vandals ? In your opinion are : Europeia, Balder, The South Pacific, Albion, The East Pacific etc vandals ?
Click to expand...
"vandals"? "vandalism"? I didn't say any of those words.

Still not very elegant.

Edit: there isn't much to add. Discussing our ideas on taste and elegance won't help. I would like to vote on this matter as soon as possible.
 
I have edited the op with the compromise that COE suggested which In my opinion Is the best solution, I would like to thank everyone for their opinion and I'm looking forward to the vote.
 
Since the proposal has almost completely changed I withdraw my second of the motion to vote, and I assume the Speaker will treat this as a new proposal and allow sufficient time for it to be debated?
 
Flem, on a point of order, once a motion to vote is recognized by the speaker, the bill enters formal debate for five days, after which the bill can no longer be edited, and a vote is scheduled no fewer than two days hence. The point of the two day gap is to prevent last-minute changes to the text from going to vote before the RA has time to review them. That being said, if you and enough other people feel there hasn't been enough debate, then once the vote is scheduled, you can object to the speaker's decision to schedule it. If enough people object, the speaker is forced to cancel the vote and debate continues.

I hope that my compromise, which Gladio has adopted, strikes the appropriate balance between allowing the military to function effectively, and keeping its conduct in line with the expectations of the citizenry.
 
Yes, I know the law. However, I note the speaker has not yet been recognised by the speaker, so we are not yet in the formal debar period. I hope the speaker would recognise that there is a difference between editing a proposal and adopting a fundamentally different proposal, and allow a decent debate period accordingly

Two compromises have been suggested; one has gained most support from the floor, but the proposer has adopted the other one. That deserves unpacking.
 
flemingovia:
gladio:
For those who are saying that It's tasteless and vandalism, do you also consider our allies to be vandals ? In your opinion are : Europeia, Balder, The South Pacific, Albion, The East Pacific etc vandals ?
Click to expand...

I think i have been absolutely consistent, over many many years, concerning what I think about practices like tag raiding. I do not think i have ever made a single post that suggests otherwise, no matter who is doing it.

So yes, I do not condone it, even if our allies are doing it. But i am not a citizen of Europeia, Baldur and the like, and I have no sway over their policy. In a political simulation like Nationstates I would not expect to agree with every policy of our allies. I'm quite comfortable with that.

i am also one nation among over 9000 in TNP. I am not a member of government, not even a deputy minister. If i were the delegate or minister of defence, I can see that our allies might be concerned. As it is, i doubt they will be losing any sleep over my opinions.
Click to expand...
I have to agree but I offer another stance, consensus is not an effective argument for this proposal, it doesn’t matter if every region in NS history has done it that doesn’t justify or make it right, I say it with respect but this is a weak argument
 
Thanks very much COE and Gladio for this new idea.

It is not what Flemingovia proposed, but I might abstain or even support it if those means to restore the region are mentioned on that region's WFE.
 
The motion is recognized and a vote has been scheduled to take place in 2 days.

Never mind:

I apologize for not recognizing the motion earlier and would like to make it known that the formal debate period ends 2 days from now at (time=1529360220).
 
The formal debate period is now over.

A vote has been scheduled to take place in 4 days.
 
I apologize, my Deputy Wonderess had said they were going to move it yesterday because it would be very early in the morning for me, but it seems they may have forgotten. I checked as soon as I woke up and noticing that it wasn't up for vote yet, moved it.
 
I decided to vote against this, even though the proposal that we got to vote on was much better than the original.

NPA might still be different, by no means your typical raiders, but from now on, if this passes... there will be no way to tell the difference.

Natives, and their WADs or founders may get the resources to restore the region, and that's good, but seen from the outside, the NPA defacing WFEs will make us look like any other raiding party. Can't say I'm happy, but it could be worse.
 
As much as I find this kind of gameplay interaction fascinating, Varagog is dedicated to international pacifism, hence our lack of military funding. I voted against this proposal.
 
Voted for this change, in my opinion, so long as there is no mischief or ill-intent involved in this, NPA should be allowed to leave a mark demonstrating their stay. While I haven't partaken in or truly observe the activities of NPA, I believe that they hold themselves to a high standard as to not vandalise the nation to the point where it is hard to recover. So long as the virtue of NPA is maintained, NPA should be allowed to use any non-destructive and reversible method to promote its value around NationStates.

The question is whether the content of the WFE and flag should be regulated too if this is set in motion. We would not want to leave poor image by leaving troll messages. Another question is whether attempts should also be made so that the original content of the WFE and flag are preserved, in order to assist their recovery. Not every region have backups of texts and pictures so I would recommend some effort to preserve them in case the native region requests for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top