The Organization of Active Micronations
Moderator: Staff
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Picking them out with special disclaimers with large cautionary exclamation marks does indeed denote some form of value judgement.
Currently playing:
Nathan, a person
Nathan, a person
-
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 7:36 am
- Contact:
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
It's just a template:
Like I said, this will be changed in the future.This article, Template:Fantasy, contains information pertaining to a fictional micronation, a fictional micronationalist or other fictional element of a micronational society or culture.
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Putting it in a Fictional category would be fine. I only objected to the banner at the top of the articles. Removing them would be an excellent way to avoid the views so many in your community have about "fictional" and "non-serious" nations.
Currently playing:
Nathan, a person
Nathan, a person
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Whether you keep the category or not, can you change the name to "Simulationist" please? That's what we're used to calling ourselves, and what we like to be called. For me, "fictional" makes me think of a nation that only exists in a real micronation's backstory, and "fantasy" makes me think actual fantasy (you know, dragons and magic and other fun stuff) and not ... well, put it this way. I would never see Ashkenatza or Alexandria as appropriately in a "fantasy" category, for example.
Andreas
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
See, we over here would make the case that we're the ones grounded in reality since we know we'll never actually be running real countries and are content with our simulated hobby, and the secessionists are the ones running fictional micronations because their claims to real territory are about as fake as fake can be since they'll get bored of the whole thing when they realize that starting an actual country is a bit more trouble than a middle school student is willing to devote their lives to.
But I'm not reaalllly starting to cause trouble.
But I'm not reaalllly starting to cause trouble.
- Guido Zambelis
- Posts: 2854
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:26 pm
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Mind you, we're not worried about social acceptance or anything like that. It's OK for MicroWiki people to have whatever opinions they have of Micras nations. It's just that, you know, if you're running a nation whose legislature has representation from the Stay Out oblast, the representative being the Right Honorable Randomguy, and you're going around slapping "this is fiction" templates on every Micras-related thing you can find, then you're either a bit on the immature side or have a blind spot (and maybe shedding light on that spot would make your micronational experience more fulfilling?).
So, yeah, basically, once that amusing flamewar you're been having over the wiki move issue subsides, someone ought to tell that guy to, you know, be a bit more specific about the precise reason why his backyard nation isn't fantasy and Yardistan is (he didn't actually put a fantasy banner on the Yardistan article, but he did on the Shireroth article, and Yardistan is a part of Shireroth). I expect at least someone would learn something in the exchange
So, yeah, basically, once that amusing flamewar you're been having over the wiki move issue subsides, someone ought to tell that guy to, you know, be a bit more specific about the precise reason why his backyard nation isn't fantasy and Yardistan is (he didn't actually put a fantasy banner on the Yardistan article, but he did on the Shireroth article, and Yardistan is a part of Shireroth). I expect at least someone would learn something in the exchange
Jesa habe Ljo kju Ljo toka par tokajj Ljo kju De habe!
- Guido Zambelis
- Posts: 2854
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:26 pm
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
As Philip Fish has now said, twice, the templates are under review and will be changed. Enough.
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
I think we all understand that. We are merely offering our own opinions, suggestions and our rational for that review so that our two communities can be on equal footing in the eyes of each other. So we can, like you are saying, get past this futile argument.Guido Zambelis wrote:As Philip Fish has now said, twice, the templates are under review and will be changed. Enough.
Currently playing:
Nathan, a person
Nathan, a person
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Actually, I just like being unhelpful to secessionsits. But we can pretend it's that other thing you guys keep talking about. Equal footing, yeah, that.
-
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 7:36 am
- Contact:
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Well I think I've got the jist of it nowNathan wrote:I think we all understand that. We are merely offering our own opinions, suggestions and our rational for that review so that our two communities can be on equal footing in the eyes of each other. So we can, like you are saying, get past this futile argument.Guido Zambelis wrote:As Philip Fish has now said, twice, the templates are under review and will be changed. Enough.
-
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 7:36 am
- Contact:
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Ok I just went through and added as many pages as I could find to a 'Micras' category: http://www.microwiki.co.cc/index.php?ti ... ory:Micras
Btw when I was going through it, I only found three pages with the 'fantasy' template related to Micras out of at least 50. Also, quite a few of the pages related to Micras nations on the wiki are under the 'improve' category, and, to be frank, aren't really organised that well/are of very good quality. I'll do my best to help improve them over the next few days, but the more help the better - especially from those who know what they're talking about re Micras
Btw when I was going through it, I only found three pages with the 'fantasy' template related to Micras out of at least 50. Also, quite a few of the pages related to Micras nations on the wiki are under the 'improve' category, and, to be frank, aren't really organised that well/are of very good quality. I'll do my best to help improve them over the next few days, but the more help the better - especially from those who know what they're talking about re Micras
-
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:05 am
- Location: Yabloko (Sydney, Australia)
- Contact:
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
Seeing as SaiKar seems so intent on being unhelpful, I shall return the favour.
First off, there is a large difference between territorial and secessionist. A territorial micronations means (from my pov) a micronation that claims to possess land on real territory (e.g. Earth). A simulationist micronation is one whose activity is largely simulated online or in an environment that is not IRL (meaning more or less all micronations are at least partially simulationist in nature). A secessionist micronation is one that holds real beliefs and serious aspirations to becoming a widely recognised macronation (e.g. membership in the United Nations). A fantasy micronation is one that is largely fictional (e.g. exaggerated land claims of which the claimer has absolutely no control over, exaggerated population, fictional land etc). Hence, under my definition at least, all Micras nations that don't claim any real territory are fantasy (you know what I mean when I say real). And, personally, I hold no fantasies that I will ever be the leader or founder of an actual country, hence Yabloko is not, in my opinion secessionist. But we are territorial and simulationist.
First off, there is a large difference between territorial and secessionist. A territorial micronations means (from my pov) a micronation that claims to possess land on real territory (e.g. Earth). A simulationist micronation is one whose activity is largely simulated online or in an environment that is not IRL (meaning more or less all micronations are at least partially simulationist in nature). A secessionist micronation is one that holds real beliefs and serious aspirations to becoming a widely recognised macronation (e.g. membership in the United Nations). A fantasy micronation is one that is largely fictional (e.g. exaggerated land claims of which the claimer has absolutely no control over, exaggerated population, fictional land etc). Hence, under my definition at least, all Micras nations that don't claim any real territory are fantasy (you know what I mean when I say real). And, personally, I hold no fantasies that I will ever be the leader or founder of an actual country, hence Yabloko is not, in my opinion secessionist. But we are territorial and simulationist.
Oh please. We're the Organisation of Active Micronations. Personally, and I know Philip Fish has the same views, I believe micronational and macronational claims are two completely different things. No micronation on Earth, by definition, can ever have complete jurisdiction or sovereignty over their territory. Hence we don't claim to have any authority over any Earth claims. We're just an organisation consisting of micronations that show some degree of activity. Hence the name. We're not a mapping society like you are and nor do we claim to be. Furthermore, we don't claim to have "rules" or something. But you seem to prefer one-way traffic whereby we join Micras and you don't do anything. Sounds fair.SaiKar wrote:Because the way I'm reading it, it sure sounds like you guys consider yourself the authority on Earth land claims and us not claiming territory on Earth is somehow not playing by your rules. That's a hell of a claim.
And yet you would have any of those in some fictional planet? Sure, you may have a legitimate claim to a bunch of imaginary land but you can only enforce it in your imagination. And neither you nor your presumed population live in your imagination (okay, you might but I don't know about the rest of them) hence you can't create an imaginary self-sustaining colony. Well, that's a lie because seeing as it's imaginary, you can pretend that you have anything you want. And I suppose you could create "serious plans" to run your imaginary country if you wanted to. But how does this make you any better than territorial micronations? At least territorial micronationalists can at least partially control their claimed land (in cases where the micronationalist actually lives within their claims).SaiKar wrote:I would have no legitimate claim to any Earth land, nor any means to enforce that claim, nor the population to create a self-sustaining colony, nor any serious plans to actually run an actual country.
I could quite easily say the same about simulationist micronationalism.SaiKar wrote:The history of secessionist micronationalism is one of a nearly unbroken string of sad stories.
And yet you claim to live on Micras?SaiKar wrote:The most successful, Sealand, has pseudo-control over an oil rig - and they don't even live there.
My apologies.Guido Zambelis wrote:Oh for goodness sakes, the arguments do not need rehearsing. All they ever do is antagonise people. Please.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't hold any real aspirations to have a real country.SaiKar wrote:See, we over here would make the case that we're the ones grounded in reality since we know we'll never actually be running real countries and are content with our simulated hobby
- dr-spangle
- Technical Advisor
- Posts: 13072
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
I trust we fall under your simulationist bracket too?
So your definitions are as such:
Simulationist: Mostly online, more forum based communication than person to person based communication
Secessionist: Believes they will one day get independence from a macronation
Fantasy: Simulates most of what they do, simulates a population and land
Terroritorial: Claims land on earth
I'm only asking to confirm, I like to know how we all define things, it makes it easier to understand each other...
Generally over here, from what i understand...
Territorial tends to be the same as Secessionist in that both mean you lay claim to real world land
Simulationist tends to mean what you call Fantasy, it means you simulate your population, land, etc
Some micronations are both Simulationist and Territorial/Secessionist, e.g. new-empire, most the lovely sector.
Fantasy, by our definitions, tends to mean a huge variety of things depending on who you talk to...
Some people will say Fantasy means the micronation uses simulated magic systems, e.g. Gralus, etc
Other people might say Fantasy means it's a silly micronation, or doesn't actually exist, e.g. Examplestan
A few people might even refer to secessionist micronations as Fantasy, as it's highly unlikely they'll actually seceed, e.g. Long Island
These definitions are only what I've gathered vaguely, I wouldn't take it as gospel...
Basically my point is that although we both speak english, we still have different definitions for the same words because our communities have grown without much contact from each other and hence without much definition sharing, so this is why some people take labelling all our micronations as "Fantasy" is rather insulting, a nice real word example would be words such as "fag" (which means cigarette in British English) and "Faggot" (A type of meatball in British English) which have very different meanings in American English than they do in British English.
So your definitions are as such:
Simulationist: Mostly online, more forum based communication than person to person based communication
Secessionist: Believes they will one day get independence from a macronation
Fantasy: Simulates most of what they do, simulates a population and land
Terroritorial: Claims land on earth
I'm only asking to confirm, I like to know how we all define things, it makes it easier to understand each other...
Generally over here, from what i understand...
Territorial tends to be the same as Secessionist in that both mean you lay claim to real world land
Simulationist tends to mean what you call Fantasy, it means you simulate your population, land, etc
Some micronations are both Simulationist and Territorial/Secessionist, e.g. new-empire, most the lovely sector.
Fantasy, by our definitions, tends to mean a huge variety of things depending on who you talk to...
Some people will say Fantasy means the micronation uses simulated magic systems, e.g. Gralus, etc
Other people might say Fantasy means it's a silly micronation, or doesn't actually exist, e.g. Examplestan
A few people might even refer to secessionist micronations as Fantasy, as it's highly unlikely they'll actually seceed, e.g. Long Island
These definitions are only what I've gathered vaguely, I wouldn't take it as gospel...
Basically my point is that although we both speak english, we still have different definitions for the same words because our communities have grown without much contact from each other and hence without much definition sharing, so this is why some people take labelling all our micronations as "Fantasy" is rather insulting, a nice real word example would be words such as "fag" (which means cigarette in British English) and "Faggot" (A type of meatball in British English) which have very different meanings in American English than they do in British English.
- Guido Zambelis
- Posts: 2854
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:26 pm
Re: The Organization of Active Micronations
(The only purpose in continuing this discussion is if we think it might be a good idea to agree on some common nomenclature for micronations. Otherwise, it is entirely unproductive.)