Page 1 of 1

North and South Poles

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:42 am
by Craitman
It's been brought-up in Admin Discussion that a couple of people dislike the labels at the north and south poles (the "so-and-so reached it first" ones).

Just want to see what other people's views are on them. Like them? Hate them? Don't really give a toss? :P

As they're not 100% cartographic, it's probably best to see if the consensus is to keep them or remove them, and it's not as if they're a majorly important part of the map anyway ;)

So yeah, the floor's open. Try not to fall in...

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:16 pm
by Dr Bjorn Olsen
It showed initiative. They were accepted onto the map previously, I don't see why it should bother anyone that it is there.

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:39 pm
by Erik Mortis Brookshire
Yes, but they have nothing to do with Cartography. They only relate to the culture of 2 individual nations, culture that other might not agree with. If anything it could discourage new nations from trying to write stories about how THEY reached the poles.

Further, it's not the place of the MCS to get involved in stories, fictional histories, and cultural matters of this nature. The MCS makes maps, physical and political. Did all nations agree that those nations get their first?

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:50 pm
by Colonel Vilhelm
Since the MCS starting judging claims, i.e. as far back as anyone bar probably Erik Ryan and a few Shirerithians can remember, the MCS has not just been a cartographic society. We do not simply produce maps anymore. We haven't done for years and years. Because, in an attempt to make the MCS map in some way relevant to the particular kind of micronational internet-based simulation we all participate in, the MCS has an administrative council which votes on whether any given claim should be accepted. This is not done on the basis of whether it is cartographically viable, although that is the most fundamental way of judging a claim. We consider things like activity, like community, like culture, regardless of whether you like it or not, Erik.

In the spirit of that, the pole claimants are shown on the map. To be honest, remove them, keep them, it's not that consequential. Who cares about other people's efforts anyway, especially if they're not here to defend them. But when you start making assertions that are just plain false, I will not stand by and let it happen.

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:01 pm
by Guido Zambelis
I cannot believe we're actually going to bother arguing about this.

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:17 pm
by Craitman
Erik Mortis Brookshire wrote:Further, it's not the place of the MCS to get involved in stories, fictional histories, and cultural matters of this nature.
Urm, those are a couple of the factors we often take into account in accepting/denying claims, so it is our place really.
Did all nations agree that those nations get their first?
Do all nations agree to, say, a nation being annexed by another on the map? Not always, no. This is no different.

Anyway, we've received no complaints about them until now, and the latest one (Stormark's) was met with no opposition whatsoever.

This all just seems to be needlessly petty nit-picking right now, if you ask me...

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:02 am
by ari
I think that in principle the MCS should not record history on the map. Sure, it looks cool when you first put it in there, but you know, if nobody takes it out, it's still going to be there five years later. Even if the nation that made the accomplishment is long dead. Claims are different, claims only exist on the map as long as the claimant nation is active, and whoever's next in the space gets to do whatever the hell they want with the ruins. I'm not saying this is different from the real world, it's not like a nation can't accomplish things and then lose sovereignty later, but... I do rather value the MCS map's quality of being up-to-date and reasonably minimalistic, and I think it matches up well with the somewhat ephemeral yet creative nature of internet micronations. As far as I'm concerned, since the issue has come up, now would be as good a time as any to remove those notes from the map.

(the map archive is obviously a different and separate thing, I'm talking about recording history in the current claimsmap)

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:08 am
by ari
Colonel Vilhelm wrote:Since the MCS starting judging claims, i.e. as far back as anyone bar probably Erik Ryan and a few Shirerithians can remember, the MCS has not just been a cartographic society. We do not simply produce maps anymore. We haven't done for years and years. Because, in an attempt to make the MCS map in some way relevant to the particular kind of micronational internet-based simulation we all participate in, the MCS has an administrative council which votes on whether any given claim should be accepted. This is not done on the basis of whether it is cartographically viable, although that is the most fundamental way of judging a claim. We consider things like activity, like community, like culture, regardless of whether you like it or not, Erik.

In the spirit of that, the pole claimants are shown on the map. To be honest, remove them, keep them, it's not that consequential. Who cares about other people's efforts anyway, especially if they're not here to defend them. But when you start making assertions that are just plain false, I will not stand by and let it happen.
That's sort of beside the point, though. Figure skating judges don't go jumping around at their table because they examine the skaters' jumps to score them. The MCS shouldn't be recording history just because it judges nations by their history.

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:36 am
by Jess
I've always disliked them. Mainly because of settlements (i.e. Leng) that have lived by the poles.

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:46 am
by chrimigules
Erik Mortis Brookshire wrote:Further, it's not the place of the MCS to get involved in stories, fictional histories, and cultural matters of this nature.
MCS used to get involved in some of that. Biggest example that I know of is that MCS updated the map to reflect the conditions of the Red Antilles War:
http://micras.org/Archive/maps/Claimsma ... -6.8.0.png (look to the islands on the far right of the map near the equator)

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:49 am
by Erik Mortis Brookshire
A political change.... unless I'm looking at the wrong thing.

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:54 am
by dr-spangle
yeah, seems that way to me

Re: North and South Poles

Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:58 am
by chrimigules
It was reflecting occupied territory as it stood during that point in the war. There hadn't even been a claim made to have it reflected as occupied.

EDIT: Regardless, I do agree with the sentiment that they don't belong.