Little Narg

[Administrator]

I changed Little Narg to a non-member state, since they are a puppet. As a non-member state, he can still access general and the RP stuff, which is all it needs. We don't need narg posting in Parliament as Narg and Little Narg

[Kingdom of Grolsch]

Agreed. You probably know I've changed Little's custom title to "RP Puppet" right after he registered. I sent a PM about it to Narg and he said, "It's just Narg". lol...

[Goncar]

I agree as well.

[Deleted]

Agreed.

[Deleted]

I have made a new category in the List of Nations for role-playing puppet nations of which I currently have 2 - Little Narg and Surlaw.

[Administrator]

Okay cool

[Kingdom of Grolsch]

Okay, great idea.

[Deleted]

Is Buzbee Toys also a Narg puppet? Because if so that's a 3rd puppet of his which is clearly contravening our constitution.

I know we've accepted them as RP nations but we will have to draw a line somewhere. I mean, we can't really have one rule for one and one rule for another can we. Because the logical conclusion of this argument is everyone would be entitled to bring in Role-Playing nations who contravene our standards and suddenly where are we as a region?

Just a thought ???

[Avaerilon]

I don't think so; I think it's a genuine rogue nation. Incidentally, New Concordia is a full-on dictatorship, recently arrived... oo-er!

[Deleted]

I've mentioned New Concordia in the MoD section earlier today.

Buzbee Toys will be one of a handful of nations that I will be recommending for expulsion when I give my second report in the next 48 hours or so.

[Avaerilon]

Ah, good call.

[Kingdom of Grolsch]

Ok. It might be a good idea to change the Constitution and include a specific section on handling RP puppets.

[Deleted]

That's up to the region whether they want to do so - I'm just bringing up a point which I think needs to be considered because of the wider repercussions.

[Administrator]

As far as the Constitution is concerned, they are like any other puppet state

[Deleted]

Personally, I think that puppets and roleplay only nations should be limited to existing as text and image only. They shouldn't physically exist in the SLU region of nationstates.

This keeps our region's standing in tune with our values. Puppets that are with our values are welcome as long as they are reported. But puppets and roleplay tools that contradict our values should only exist as just that, a tool, a cyberspace creation not included within the region, only as something to fuel discussion in our community.

I see no reason to have a physical ns country in the SLU if it does not uphold our constitution, puppet or otherwise. If we want to roleplay with some egomaniacal dictatorship, lets create a factbook for it and an account on the forum and have it play as that on the forum, but lets not lower our point standards in the region by having an actual egomaniacal dictatorship join the SLU.

[Administrator]

Agreed. If they do wish to have a physical state, perhaps they should create a sister region to hold them

[Deleted]

Absolutely which is why I have sent out the same TG to them as to any other non-member nation that is in violation of our constitution.

[Millyland]

A sister region, would be fine. Otherwise, if these RP puppets such as Little Narg won't get their rights/freedoms up, then we should boot 'em

[Kingdom of Grolsch]

Somehow this Little Narg thinks he can have low freedoms because he is Narg, according to his RMB message yesterday. I believe this cannot be the case, and while I do not want to speak for others, it seems to me I am not the sole member with that opinion.

[Avaerilon]

You speak for me, there!

[Deleted]

Ditto. He has sent me a TG to that effect as well today. Do I have permission to write back and state that we do not agree with this and that he must improve on his scores?

[Deleted]

I was wondering about this issue myself and I'm in agreement with Michutopia. Puppets and separate forum accounts seem superfluous.

[Millyland]

Mar 10, 2012 21:25:26 GMT @cemaes said:

Ditto. He has sent me a TG to that effect as well today. Do I have permission to write back and state that we do not agree with this and that he must improve on his scores?

Would be a good idea.

[Deleted]

I will await agreement from Azerzia also before doing so.

[Administrator]

If he wants to have low values on an RP puppet, he can create an SLU roleplay region to hold it (I personally support the name SLURP for the name). If he doesn't want to do that, treat it like any non-member state who breaks the Constitution

[Deleted]

Great. This is the text of the TG that I just sent Little Narg...

"Hi Little Narg! Many thanks for your TG and whilst we totally understand what you're doing, we can not allow non-compatible nations to remain in the region because it totally undermines our efforts in dealing with those nations that are genuinely breaking our constitution.

Having spoken to Azerzia our WA Delegate, what we would recommend is that you create a SLU roleplay region to hold your RP nations. This would allow you to remain an active member of our Forum! Azerzia personally supports the name SLURP for the such a region. It will mean that you can keep your nations in a sister-region to the SLU which isn't governed by our constitution.

We must be fair and be seen to be fair to all nations here in the SLU and to properly enforce our constitution we would have to treat Little Narg and any other non-member states who breaks the Constitution in the way in which I indicated in my previous TG.

So to allow you to continue with your puppet regions, we would request that you start up a sister SLU RP region as mentioned above instead :-)"

[Kingdom of Grolsch]

Excellent! :)

[Avaerilon]

Yes, good job! :)

[Administrator]

Any word on this?

[Deleted]

Nothing though he doesn't seem to have been active on that account since just before I sent the TG so will await for activity in the coming days. If he is active and doesn't do anything about it by Friday, I will be recommending ejection for him but will wait and see what happens in the next 72 hours.