An Open Letter to the MCS
Moderator: Staff
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
The problem for me here is that many of those who oppose this letter just point out some possible small faults in this letter. This letter might very well not be perfect but it is a step into the right direction. I am suprised with the fact that so many people react to this letter in such strong, dismissive, terms while on the other hand they themselves do nothing to battle the problems we face.
The claimsmap is slowly becoming greener and greener and more and more nations face forced removal. I am sure that I am not the only one who can name at least 5 nations currenly on the claimsmap who are in serious danger of disappearing from this map.
Our fight is against the green, our fight is to uphold an active and increasing collective of nations and to provide opportunities for personal initiative and creativity.
I welcome all to join this fight.
The claimsmap is slowly becoming greener and greener and more and more nations face forced removal. I am sure that I am not the only one who can name at least 5 nations currenly on the claimsmap who are in serious danger of disappearing from this map.
Our fight is against the green, our fight is to uphold an active and increasing collective of nations and to provide opportunities for personal initiative and creativity.
I welcome all to join this fight.
Porque las estirpes condenadas a cien años de soledad no tenían una segunda oportunidad sobre la tierra.
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
I was going to reply to this thread, but Jack said pretty much what I was going to say, so instead I'll just leave him a .
Hâlian, Magic: The Gathering player/baseball and gridiron fan/computer guy/conlinguist and worldbuilder/tabletop and video game fan too
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
EDIT: While I was preparing this post, several others posted too. Sadamara has covered a lot of the same ground as I have, but since I bothered to carefully phrase this all, I'm still posting it anyway.
Gosh, we do like arguing over minor details, don't we. It's probably a good thing we don't recwar anymore
Permit me to shed a little light on some of the relevant reasoning and background discussions regarding the proposals in the letter, as that's probably helpful to add at this point. All of this is said in the same spirit that the letter was intended - I love the MCS, I have far more positive memories of the MCS than I have negative memories, and Craitman, you have been a fair and dedicated AG for a number of years and we can't thank you enough for your work in regular updates
- The big thinking on relaxing the three month rule was that for some people, land development is a crucial part of micronational development, and the prospect of developing specific land (and taking account of the geography, climate, natural resources, neighbouring nations etc.) for a good 2-3 month stint, only to find that someone claims it a week before you get to start, is a real downer on the whole project. Sure, some people are more interested in developing political systems and structures and land is secondary - for them, specific land claims don't matter as much; but for others, it matters a lot (and I can't remember the exact anecdote, but I'm fairly sure the scenario I suggested in the first sentence has happened at least once or twice before). Moreover, on the offchance that we get new blood into the hobby starting a whole new nation (I know, rare, but I'm an optimist), being on the map helps place them in the geo-political sphere and gives their neighbouring nations at least some incentive to start diplomatic relations. And that's really important and valuable, because it's a chance to welcome these guys into the hobby and help introduce them to our style of micronationalism - but lets be honest, a lot of us are too busy now to go out of our way to look out for the new guys if there's no particular reason for us to be doing it (like, say, because they're our neighbours). That last one may just be me , but you get my point . I think the idea of a probationary period (with potential removal if the nation doesn't last the full three months, or whatever criteria you think appropriate that you would use to currently justify an initial claim after three months) is a good compromise to allow land development without getting the map flooded with one-week nations .
- The one man nation thing does appear to be a genuine misunderstanding - thanks for clearing that one up, Craitman . A contributing factor to that, especially for older guys like me who haven't followed the most recent round of charter ammendments, might be that the charter link is broken, but the MCS policy post in this very subforum states a 'one-man nation need to get more citizens' policy very clearly (see point 4). Might want to delete/modify that thread if it's no longer relevant, and update the Charter link.
- I was never too fussed about the inactivity part of this letter, so I won't comment on it further.
- The expansions suggestion seems to have been well received, and there's some support for the annexation one. There are legitimate concerns about abusing the latter, and these concerns were also raised by the people discussing the original letter (I assured them, as I assure you now, that under no circumstances will Gralus be annexed by Shireroth. And we are working our way towards folding up the nation and getting most of the land reduced. Honest . We just want to go out with a bang (even if the fuse is three or four years long). Moving on ... ). But it is a bit scary as an old guy to look at the map and be like "Woah, there's a lot of green these days." Clearer guidelines on what the council are looking for in justifying expansions (including potentially appropriate timeframes, e.g. older bigger nations should only expect small (relative to their current size) claims, and only once every 8-12 months, or something) would help there.
As to optimistic concerns about a flurry of new entrants - would it help ease everyone's conscience if the bigger nations (Shireroth, Natopia, Gralus (while it's still Gralus); maybe Alexandria and Stormark if they end up staying and not leaving as they've threatened to do) agree to a reduction if the amount of green land remaining decreases beyond a certain threshold? Seems a sensible compromise to me - use the unused resources while they're unused, but if others join and want to use them, graciously step out of the way ...
- As for quality (I place little stock in realism myself), the concern here is that the paint map is so early 2000, and we can do better, even while retaining easy editability. The German's OIK map was raised as one which is easy to edit and yet looks a lot better. Making .svg format the default would probably help with this - I'm sure Shyriath can grab the initial coastlines and borders from Gloria Mundi, and train the Council up to edit a more basic .svg version, even if some claimants still use MS Paint to submit their claims. Programs like GIMP and Paint.Net are free and easy to use; we can at least have a map with layers (seriously, I once spent a good chunk of time redoing the physical map based on the claimsmap of the day, and ensuring that every single line was a single pixel thick. You wouldn't believe how much the coastline changes over time when cities or city names cover it Layers are your friend here). An alternative (or addition) would be to place a special map (like Gloria Mundi, since Shyriath is keeping it up to date) on equal footing with the claims map, in terms of posting new updates, prominence on the website etc.
Gosh, we do like arguing over minor details, don't we. It's probably a good thing we don't recwar anymore
Permit me to shed a little light on some of the relevant reasoning and background discussions regarding the proposals in the letter, as that's probably helpful to add at this point. All of this is said in the same spirit that the letter was intended - I love the MCS, I have far more positive memories of the MCS than I have negative memories, and Craitman, you have been a fair and dedicated AG for a number of years and we can't thank you enough for your work in regular updates
- The big thinking on relaxing the three month rule was that for some people, land development is a crucial part of micronational development, and the prospect of developing specific land (and taking account of the geography, climate, natural resources, neighbouring nations etc.) for a good 2-3 month stint, only to find that someone claims it a week before you get to start, is a real downer on the whole project. Sure, some people are more interested in developing political systems and structures and land is secondary - for them, specific land claims don't matter as much; but for others, it matters a lot (and I can't remember the exact anecdote, but I'm fairly sure the scenario I suggested in the first sentence has happened at least once or twice before). Moreover, on the offchance that we get new blood into the hobby starting a whole new nation (I know, rare, but I'm an optimist), being on the map helps place them in the geo-political sphere and gives their neighbouring nations at least some incentive to start diplomatic relations. And that's really important and valuable, because it's a chance to welcome these guys into the hobby and help introduce them to our style of micronationalism - but lets be honest, a lot of us are too busy now to go out of our way to look out for the new guys if there's no particular reason for us to be doing it (like, say, because they're our neighbours). That last one may just be me , but you get my point . I think the idea of a probationary period (with potential removal if the nation doesn't last the full three months, or whatever criteria you think appropriate that you would use to currently justify an initial claim after three months) is a good compromise to allow land development without getting the map flooded with one-week nations .
- The one man nation thing does appear to be a genuine misunderstanding - thanks for clearing that one up, Craitman . A contributing factor to that, especially for older guys like me who haven't followed the most recent round of charter ammendments, might be that the charter link is broken, but the MCS policy post in this very subforum states a 'one-man nation need to get more citizens' policy very clearly (see point 4). Might want to delete/modify that thread if it's no longer relevant, and update the Charter link.
- I was never too fussed about the inactivity part of this letter, so I won't comment on it further.
- The expansions suggestion seems to have been well received, and there's some support for the annexation one. There are legitimate concerns about abusing the latter, and these concerns were also raised by the people discussing the original letter (I assured them, as I assure you now, that under no circumstances will Gralus be annexed by Shireroth. And we are working our way towards folding up the nation and getting most of the land reduced. Honest . We just want to go out with a bang (even if the fuse is three or four years long). Moving on ... ). But it is a bit scary as an old guy to look at the map and be like "Woah, there's a lot of green these days." Clearer guidelines on what the council are looking for in justifying expansions (including potentially appropriate timeframes, e.g. older bigger nations should only expect small (relative to their current size) claims, and only once every 8-12 months, or something) would help there.
As to optimistic concerns about a flurry of new entrants - would it help ease everyone's conscience if the bigger nations (Shireroth, Natopia, Gralus (while it's still Gralus); maybe Alexandria and Stormark if they end up staying and not leaving as they've threatened to do) agree to a reduction if the amount of green land remaining decreases beyond a certain threshold? Seems a sensible compromise to me - use the unused resources while they're unused, but if others join and want to use them, graciously step out of the way ...
- As for quality (I place little stock in realism myself), the concern here is that the paint map is so early 2000, and we can do better, even while retaining easy editability. The German's OIK map was raised as one which is easy to edit and yet looks a lot better. Making .svg format the default would probably help with this - I'm sure Shyriath can grab the initial coastlines and borders from Gloria Mundi, and train the Council up to edit a more basic .svg version, even if some claimants still use MS Paint to submit their claims. Programs like GIMP and Paint.Net are free and easy to use; we can at least have a map with layers (seriously, I once spent a good chunk of time redoing the physical map based on the claimsmap of the day, and ensuring that every single line was a single pixel thick. You wouldn't believe how much the coastline changes over time when cities or city names cover it Layers are your friend here). An alternative (or addition) would be to place a special map (like Gloria Mundi, since Shyriath is keeping it up to date) on equal footing with the claims map, in terms of posting new updates, prominence on the website etc.
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: An Open Letter to the MCS
I do believe it, I've never bothered to look at the physical map when restoring coastlines... On the other hand, coastlines do shift in the real world too...Andreas the Wise wrote:You wouldn't believe how much the coastline changes over time when cities or city names cover it
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
I'm glad to hear that.Sadamara wrote:In retrospect, the claim shouldn't have been made,Rook wrote: At this point I'm really just trolling, as the fact that no one's willing to acknowledge that perhaps they were exaggerating a bit with the whole 'more people want this than don't' claim - and it's getting to be some rediculous justifications (and a big de-railing.)
The points you make in favor of a probationary period, especially when it comes to being able to hit the ground running with neighbors and geography, are valid. I think I've only seen a land snipe happen what, once, maybe twice? But even once is too many for whoever's project gets jacked. I would caution that a proper probation protocol should be put in place, because without it we have to wait ages to get them back off the map. Such protocols would have to involve automatic clauses that don't require council votes for me to be comfortable with them.Sadamara wrote:I'm strongly in favour of replacing the three-month rule with a three-month probationary period. Let's give a new nation a reasonable amount of land on the understanding that if a certain level of development hasn't been reached after three months, the land will revert to the MCS.
Not gonna lie, I can really empathize with that and your subsequent comments on the subject.Sadamara wrote:...this is me resenting the way a multi-moron nation is still accorded greater respect than a solo effort.
My concern isn't necessarily the Shireroth of today, but the pixel hungry nation of tomorrow. Complacency can go both ways, and safeguards against abuse should remain in effect so that they don't have to be re-ratified in response to an issue.Sadamara wrote:The Shireroth of today isn't the pixel-grabbing monster it once was;
I did say 'derelict crap' for a reason. I don't advocate green space for the sake of it, but to use your restaurant analogy, I'd rather eat in an empty restaurant than one full of mannequins. That actually sounds pretty terrifying. And I eat in empty restaurants all the time! Especially when I work midnight shift and my meal scheduled don't line up with traditional meal times, or when I have my 3 year old with me and I feel guilty disturbing a busy dining room because she's in a fussy mood. Actually I'm starting to loath this parallel, as there's nothing evil about an empty restaurant. But since we're starting to get the open conversation I was snarking wasn't here before, I'll just cut the pedantry short in the name of good will.Sadamara wrote:With all due respect, that's a very dangerous statement. From a marketing standpoint, a full world is more enticing than an empty one...because it suggests popularity and activity. I certainly wouldn't be rushing to join a world-sim that is mostly free space, just as I wouldn't eat in an empty restaurant.
Welcome to Micras, are you new here?~ (by the way the tilda means sarcasm.)Andreas the Wise wrote:Gosh, we do like arguing over minor details, don't we.
I am fully on board with the concept as long as it hits both those points: doesn't look dates and is easily editable. While I agree that the more advanced maps could have a more prominent and even official place in the MCS's archive of graphics and such, a 'minimum standard' map needs to be maintained if just for entry level members. Point of contention, I had to Google what .svg is and how to open it, and while no computer genius I am no Luddite and consider myself a fairly good analogue for an 'average' casual internet user.Andreas the Wise wrote:- As for quality (I place little stock in realism myself), the concern here is that the paint map is so early 2000, and we can do better, even while retaining easy editability.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
As I said, you could still let claimants use Paint and submit a png version if they want, but the version the council edits could be far more helpfully done as an .svg, and then just exported to .png format too (and I'd be surprised if it's hard for Shyriath to put a post together on how to edit the .svg format for new people, and a link to a program they can download to do it with, anyway, which should help most people make the shift ). And if not, at least layers for the actual map ...
(I thought we used green font for sarcasm?)
(I thought we used green font for sarcasm?)
Last edited by Andreas the Wise on Mon Jun 16, 2014 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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: An Open Letter to the MCS
We do... I've never seen the tilde used to mark anything other than a range (usually opening times, and chiefly in Japan) or sing-song intonation.
Hâlian, Magic: The Gathering player/baseball and gridiron fan/computer guy/conlinguist and worldbuilder/tabletop and video game fan too
- pawelabrams
- Posts: 3207
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:14 pm
- Location: Novograd, Interland
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
Would something like this be m'kay?Rook wrote:I am fully on board with the concept as long as it hits both those points: doesn't look dates and is easily editable.
Sorry for dropping only a line, I will elaborate on other points of the letter in a moment
Pavel' Abramovic:, the President of Interland
IRL just a random guy from Poland. Still learning English.
IRL just a random guy from Poland. Still learning English.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
Firstly, thank you Sadamara and Andreas "wall of text" the Wise for their replies. Good to see more signatories entering discussions in the right vein. I'll get to you separately
Would you like to see a minimum age requirement scrapped entirely in favour of a probationary period? In other words, would nations be technically able to claim from day one? If so, I'd personally like to see a minimum of one month's worth development before accepting a claim. I don't think that much time would stifle a nation's growth just because they don't have land to begin with, and it would at least show they're more than just a name on the map legend. I'm happy to concede that three months is probably quite a length of time to try to develop without any definite land, but I wouldn't want to give land to any projects that were only started the same day, even with a probationary period.Sadamara wrote:I'm strongly in favour of replacing the three-month rule with a three-month probationary period. Let's give a new nation a reasonable amount of land on the understanding that if a certain level of development hasn't been reached after three months, the land will revert to the MCS.
Just to clarify, by "small", I didn't necessarily mean comparable to the Birgeshirs, just not on the scale of (as you say) Hamland or Natopia. As you're probably aware, Craitland and Sangun-Leichenberg are roughly the same area, and aren't particularly small, yet we both run them effectively by ourselves, respectively. There's definitely potential for other similarly-sized, one-man projects around, granted that they're well-developed.As long as these nations have a comparably small claim. Some of the most interesting and well-developed countries are one-person projects, or effectively so. Several have literally been around for years and represent a level of resilience and determination that many larger nations should envy. Now I would never suggest that a one-person nation should ever become as large as the Shireroths, Stormarks or Alexandrias of our world- or even the Hamlands and Natopias- but I do feel a little more generosity wouldn't go amiss. And no, this isn't me angling for more land for my own project...this is me resenting the way a multi-moron nation is still accorded greater respect than a solo effort. Yes, the MCS is much more accepting than it used to be...but there is still scope for improvement.
That is definitely true regarding the sporadic nature of activity, but for the sake of parity, we should approach responding to inactivity consistently the same way. In a perfect world, we'd be able to sift through and rate posts on importance-to-length axes, but that's never going to happen whilst micronationalism remains a hobby rather than a profession. I would like to see more cultural developments documented on MicrasWiki (without trying to plug its use to everyone) as that would give a level playing field for quality ahead of sheer quantity of posts, if people are worried about their lengthy backstories and such becoming lost as a figure in the masses of one-sentence forum replies around.I can see the need for some sort of standard, but I do have a number of concerns. Firstly, activity is often sporadic, particularly for one-person projects. I tend to be highly active for several months, then quiet for several more; given that I'm still running the same project I brought to this sector back in 2005, I don't think anyone can accuse me of "not sticking with my project" !
Secondly- and more importantly- it encourages people to post crap simple to satisfy the regulations. I've said this before and I'll say it again: a single high-quality piece of fiction, map, coat of arms etc. will often take longer to produce than thirty spam posts. Again, the MCS of today is far better about recognising this than it has been in the past...but we must not become complacent!
Leniency towards expansions is definitely something we could implement almost immediately, as it wouldn't require a rewording of the Charter as is purely down to Council members' discretion, so I can see this occurring easier than a few of the other points discussedI think that would be greatly appreciated...and I would also encourage a litte more generosity. In my view, the one thing Micras lacks is medium size countries. We have several massive continent-spanning empires together with a host of really quite modest countries, some so small they're almost invisible unless you know where to look.
The only problem really is any cases where we're not able to tell if it's a genuine annexation or just a long-term plot for expansion being realised. If we are to not immediately accept the annexation of an entire nation by another which is decidedly large, and only allow a 75% chunk to change hands (for example), are we not in a creative enough position to backstory the presence of a rebel populace unwilling to be annexed by a foreign power. We have countries on Earth where the populations can't reach an agreement on the most basic of things, with terrorist governments having large control, so is there not room for Micrasian equivalents as explanations to why Annexia was unable to take all of Kubrikstan, or whatever?While I can understand that viewpoint, I feel these fears are overstated.
...
As with all things then, what we're really asking for is a more flexible approach to the issue. If an annexation has obviously been arranged simply to grab pixels, then I don't think any outside of the plot would be sorry to see it rejected. But where there is a genuine desire to preserve past work and encourage new growth, then the MCS could be a little more understanding.
Unless anything gets handed to me saying "Craitman out", I'm always willing to take criticisms about the MCS and work with them to try and better what we do and how we work. I'm not sure if there's an underlying view out there that I'm stubborn or anti-progressive, but I hope being able to participate in these discussions of genuine concerns and solid suggestions will prove otherwise if there is!I'd like to finish with a little statement of my own. While the letter was being drafted, I was very concerned to try to ensure that it wouldn't be taken as a personal attack on anybody.
If micronationalism ever needed a hobby-wide motto...We need to find compromise, not bicker!
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
I must say that that does look good, I am in favour of changing green for white anyway.pawelabrams wrote:Would something like this be m'kay?Rook wrote:I am fully on board with the concept as long as it hits both those points: doesn't look dates and is easily editable.
Sorry for dropping only a line, I will elaborate on other points of the letter in a moment
Porque las estirpes condenadas a cien años de soledad no tenían una segunda oportunidad sobre la tierra.
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
I also like that one better. Swapping green for white looks good. That could be the basis for the new claimsmap, and Gloria Mundi the basis for a new fancy map.
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
Could a viable time limit compromise be a one month waiting period for all, but the applicant nation can reserve a claim during that month. If the nation is active after a month, the claim becomes permanent. If it isn't, it reverts to the MCS.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
I'll ask you the same things I asked Sadamara in regards to probation. Would you like to see the minimum age requirement scrapped completely, so nations could in theory claim from as soon as they're founded?Andreas the Wise wrote:I think the idea of a probationary period (with potential removal if the nation doesn't last the full three months, or whatever criteria you think appropriate that you would use to currently justify an initial claim after three months) is a good compromise to allow land development without getting the map flooded with one-week nations .
No worries. I had no idea the Charter link was now dead - from what I can remember, it was hosted on Guido's site. I'll get a new link sorted and have it hosted somewhere more permanent. As far as the wording goes, there's literally no mention of requirements for one-man nations when claiming or afterwards. For the thread you linked to, it's almost seven years-old now (and we've had a couple of Charter changes since), so I'll unsticky it and let it drop to the doldrums-The one man nation thing does appear to be a genuine misunderstanding - thanks for clearing that one up, Craitman . A contributing factor to that, especially for older guys like me who haven't followed the most recent round of charter ammendments, might be that the charter link is broken, but the MCS policy post in this very subforum states a 'one-man nation need to get more citizens' policy very clearly (see point 4). Might want to delete/modify that thread if it's no longer relevant, and update the Charter link.
That may be a good suggestion. The main quibble I could see occurring is which bits would have to be reduced were we to get to that situation.As to optimistic concerns about a flurry of new entrants - would it help ease everyone's conscience if the bigger nations (Shireroth, Natopia, Gralus (while it's still Gralus); maybe Alexandria and Stormark if they end up staying and not leaving as they've threatened to do) agree to a reduction if the amount of green land remaining decreases beyond a certain threshold? Seems a sensible compromise to me - use the unused resources while they're unused, but if others join and want to use them, graciously step out of the way ...
Exploiting Shy's skills would definitely beneficial for this. As capable as I am with Paint, my competency with other programs leaves a bit to be desired. If an original could be created, I would maybe be able to train myself up enough to keep it updated as regularly as normal. With the Paint map, I try my best to make sure stuff like coastline is maintained as much as possible - I copy off the physical map so at least it matches, but layering should save any worries completely. Special maps are also a nice idea, but previous attempts to have a regularly-updated version have fallen short (other than Gloria Mundi, which is obviously not official), so a full change to the claimsmap is probably the best way to have an up-to-date, æsthetically-pleasing option available...Making .svg format the default would probably help with this - I'm sure Shyriath can grab the initial coastlines and borders from Gloria Mundi, and train the Council up to edit a more basic .svg version, even if some claimants still use MS Paint to submit their claims.
...
we can at least have a map with layers (seriously, I once spent a good chunk of time redoing the physical map based on the claimsmap of the day, and ensuring that every single line was a single pixel thick. You wouldn't believe how much the coastline changes over time when cities or city names cover it
...
An alternative (or addition) would be to place a special map (like Gloria Mundi, since Shyriath is keeping it up to date) on equal footing with the claims map, in terms of posting new updates, prominence on the website etc.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
This is also a good idea. Obviously reserving claims isn't the done thing at the moment, but as we're discussing even bigger changes, it might as well be an option. If we take the recent Maraguan claim, for example, we're waiting a month for them to get on their feet after restarting the nation, but they've made their desires known. If we were to relate that to this suggestion, we'd then no longer allow another nation to submit a claim on the land Maraguo wants until the month's up - as it is, someone else old enough/active could jump-in with an expansion and we'd not really have any genuine reason to deny them. That'd cause a bit of friction and annoyance, I'm sure, which would be nice to avoid!Malliki wrote:Could a viable time limit compromise be a one month waiting period for all, but the applicant nation can reserve a claim during that month. If the nation is active after a month, the claim becomes permanent. If it isn't, it reverts to the MCS.
- pawelabrams
- Posts: 3207
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:14 pm
- Location: Novograd, Interland
- Contact:
Re: An Open Letter to the MCS
OK, so most of what I wanted to say has been said already.
1. I'm trying not to be passive, but my Uni and work get in the way of being active here... I promise to get myself back to work as a Council member with summer holidays slowly starting in Poland.
2. 3-Month Rule: I'm either for 2-or-1-month instead of current 3-or-2 or just waiving the rule whatsoever and settle down with a probationary period. We can still go back in future if we want, when (if) the hobby becomes popular again.
EDIT: and yeah, land reservations for new countries should be a done fact now.
3. One-Man Nations: I don't see a problem
4. Inactivity: Certainly the criterion is harsh for two-or-less-man nations; it's hard to get close to 30 posts a month these days, and if there are so many, they're chat-like. If we had enough manpower, we could judge every country by its cultural, economic and scientific growth - but we don't. There is certainly room for discussion where the border should be - whether 10, 30 or some middle ground.
5. Expansions: but, but... but no bigger than Shireroth *looks at Aryasht* well, whichever country expands - the backstory impact must be seen.
6. moar maps: As I said, I once worked on a better-looking claims, but when I wanted it to be editable by anyone in MSPaint, it became more obfuscated in instructions - you must find two colors now etc.
Shyriath does great work on Gloria Mundi though. Bows to him.
1. I'm trying not to be passive, but my Uni and work get in the way of being active here... I promise to get myself back to work as a Council member with summer holidays slowly starting in Poland.
2. 3-Month Rule: I'm either for 2-or-1-month instead of current 3-or-2 or just waiving the rule whatsoever and settle down with a probationary period. We can still go back in future if we want, when (if) the hobby becomes popular again.
EDIT: and yeah, land reservations for new countries should be a done fact now.
3. One-Man Nations: I don't see a problem
4. Inactivity: Certainly the criterion is harsh for two-or-less-man nations; it's hard to get close to 30 posts a month these days, and if there are so many, they're chat-like. If we had enough manpower, we could judge every country by its cultural, economic and scientific growth - but we don't. There is certainly room for discussion where the border should be - whether 10, 30 or some middle ground.
5. Expansions: but, but... but no bigger than Shireroth *looks at Aryasht* well, whichever country expands - the backstory impact must be seen.
6. moar maps: As I said, I once worked on a better-looking claims, but when I wanted it to be editable by anyone in MSPaint, it became more obfuscated in instructions - you must find two colors now etc.
Shyriath does great work on Gloria Mundi though. Bows to him.
Pavel' Abramovic:, the President of Interland
IRL just a random guy from Poland. Still learning English.
IRL just a random guy from Poland. Still learning English.