Comments on The One-Stop Rules Shop

[Frisbeeteria]

In order to keep The One-Stop Rules Shop Sticky spam free, this topic has been created and that topic locked. If you have suggestions, recommendations, or seek clarification on any of these rules, please add them here. All comments will be read and appropriate edits made where needed. Thanks for your input.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator

Awesome job, Fris!

[Crazy girl]

fris, whether you like it or not, prepare for a bunch of hugs
love this passage!

The Gameplay forum is about how players manipulate their nations and regions. There is no roleplaying aspect to the Gameplay forum at all. Don't post roleplays here. Don't start roleplays here. Don't talk about roleplaying strategies here. Gameplay is not about roleplaying. That's why we have TWO roleplaying forums. Got it? Good.

also, if you want, i can write down the current invasionrules in short?

thats friking cool fris

[Tuesday Heights]

Very nice work, Fris! This will be a good resource for new and old players alike, as long as they read it.

Originally Posted by Forum-Specific - Nuts & Bolts --> Moderation

ONLY moderator statements are definitive, so don't use language that implies that you are 100% certain.

I know I have been accused time and time again that I am acting as a moderator, when in fact, the language I use is how I type everywhere and speak in real life, for the most part. This is why Karma or GMC, I do believe, made the statement that the "I'm not a mod" disclaimer was outlawed. If people can't figure out that a regular player is not a mod, perhaps, they should start reading the FAQ, Stickies and other resources before they ask a question that many of us can answer "definitely," per se, based on references to previous rulings, decisions and existing rules with links to these particular insights.

I just balk that people assume I'm a moderating because I have a wide usage of the English language, and when I read that particular statement, I felt a big finger was pointing to me (though I know that's not why it was said, lol). I just know I've been unofficially warned not to use certain language mechanisms to describe rules, when in fact, I really don't have any other way of getting my ideas out linguistically. If people assume I'm a mod and my post is definitive, that's their problem, not mine, especially if they can't figure out the difference between a mod posting a player posting.

[Frisbeeteria]

Originally Posted by Tuesday Heights

when I read that particular statement, I felt a big finger was pointing to me

Heh. Never even occured to me.

The difference here is simple.

"You can't do 'action'. Period." - That is definitive.

"I'm quite sure you can't do 'action'." - Is not definitive. Makes it obvious that it's personal opinion.

"According to <link>, you can't do 'action'." - Is not definitive. Link to prior mod ruling leaves open the possibility that different circumstances exist.

It's all in the phrasing. Only mods can say the first one, but helpful players could say #2 or #3 with no problem.

[Tuesday Heights]

Originally Posted by Frisbeeteria

Heh. Never even occured to me.

Sure... it's part of that big old mod conspiracy.

*shifty eyes*

Hands Fris wads of cash.

Originally Posted by Frisbeeteria

It's all in the phrasing. Only mods can say the first one, but helpful players could say #2 or #3 with no problem.

While I understand where you're coming from, and I understand the clear differences between the different phrases, I talk normally with the first phrase when dealing with situations that require rules/structures/etc. I take care while here though, now, to try to make sure I don't "sound" like a mod, I just wish I didn't have to make sure.

[Daistallia 2104]

Excellent. I was just thinking the other day that it was getting around time for one of these.

One suggestion: maybe a sticky copy of the rules in General.

[Bodies Without Organs]

Politely informing another nation that you are henceforth using the Jolt "ignore" feature is acceptable, but repeating it in different threads or over long periods is considered gloating. Other cases will be considered on an ad hoc basis.

Still no guidance on whether it is legitimate to use a puppet to circumvent a Jolt ignore (provided it isn't done so as to run into other forbidden actions) or quoting an ignored poster to bring their points to the ignorer's attention?

[Liverpool England]

Kudos, Fris. Well-written and well-presented.

And here's your payment for mentioning the sports threads, thanks.

Originally Posted by Bodies Without Organs

Still no guidance on whether it is legitimate to use a puppet to circumvent a Jolt ignore (provided it isn't done so as to run into other forbidden actions) or quoting an ignored poster to bring their points to the ignorer's attention?

I think they've said it before, but fris didn't say it here...

I dont recall what he said about puppets, but for quotes, if you see a:

Originally Posted by AGuyYouDontLike

Some sorta post

Just dont read it! \=Þ

*NOTE* Ish not a mod. If he was, there'd be no more antacids in the house. */NOTE*

[Frisbeeteria]

Originally Posted by Bodies Without Organs

Still no guidance on whether it is legitimate to use a puppet to circumvent a Jolt ignore (provided it isn't done so as to run into other forbidden actions) or quoting an ignored poster to bring their points to the ignorer's attention?

Unless this reaches the level of ...

Griefing: Harrassing a nation because of what they did or said. This often manifests when one player follows another around in thread after thread, abusing and flaming the target nation

... I don't see that it's something a moderator needs to deal with. If you don't get along with another player, that's not our problem unless or until site rules are broken.

[Frisbeeteria]

Another mod turned up this ruling by Cogitation: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.ph...6&postcount=36

Moderators hold it to be self-evident that if someone chooses to ignore your telegrams or your forum posts, then you are not allowed to circumvent that block.

I think that's adequately covered under a combination of griefing (the harrassment aspect), flamebaiting, trolling, etc, and does not need a separate mention as a ruling. My inclination is to not add it to the rule list as a separate item.

[1 Infinite Loop]

Nice thread, it looks well made, now if it were just part of the gameitself and "Set In stone" as it were.

I am most pleased with this

Requests for proposal approval may be telegrammed to UN delegates, except where the region's World Factbook entry designates otherwise. More than one request per proposal may be considered spam and should be avoided.

as I have had such a message saying not to lobby me up for over a year.
In fact I recently got complaints from Non EP members demanding I change my vote, LOL, I just forewarded them the link to the EP thread where the decision was made by the voters of the region.

[Bodies Without Organs]

Originally Posted by Frisbeeteria

Another mod turned up this ruling by Cogitation: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.ph...6&postcount=36


I think that's adequately covered under a combination of griefing (the harrassment aspect), flamebaiting, trolling, etc, and does not need a separate mention as a ruling. My inclination is to not add it to the rule list as a separate item.

This doesn't address the concerns that I raised later in the thread: take post

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.ph...5&postcount=42

for example and those following it.