[PROPOSAL] Popular F/S Amendment to EPSA Griefing Provisions

The Magisterium
1

Following the Frontiers and Strongholds update to NationStates, and in line with the popular public opinion of the citizenry of The East Pacific, the following amendment to the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army Act shall be made:

…3.2. It is forbidden for the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army to grief any region.

…3.2.2. “Griefing” shall be defined as intentional acts to destroy a region and/or its community bythrough the following irreversible or hardly reversible actions such as, but not necessarily limited to: bans or ejections of native nations, passwording a region, or refounding a region, or transitioning the region between frontier and stronghold status.

…3.2.3. The griefing prohibition set out herein shall not apply to regions with a history of griefing other regions, regions at war with The East Pacific or an ally of it, regions that have or attempted to overthrow legitimate government of The East Pacific or damage its community, Warzones which do not hold official relations with the East Pacific, inactive Frontiers who are not providing a community to newly spawned nations, regions being liberated from raider control, or regions approved by a member of the Regional Administrative Office who does not hold Command within the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army, following proposal by the Delegate.

2

While I support us not griefing (it is cool to not destroy regions), I’m a little confused as to how this nessecarily aligns with popular opinion. Didn’t your survey show that the region generally supports griefing frontier “wastelands”? From what I can tell this doesn’t really allow for that

1 Like
3

Yeah id like to see an exception for wastelands before I consider supporting. Im open to discussing what statistics are used to define one as such, and can elaborate once im off work.

1 Like
4

Of course, I would also support an exception for wastelands. That surveys generally support wasteland dismantling is one reason to consider it. Another reason is practical: fewer wastelands helps feeders just as it does frontiers.

1 Like
5

I knew I was forgetting something

6

Okay so I added that back in and while we’re at it I removed the “following proposal by the Delegate” part of the RAO exception bc lately it’s been the OO asking.

7

though 99% of people will disagree and wont care, for posterity i am fully against the exemption against wastelands

(but i do think it hsoul dbe included if the aim of this is to match with the survey results, i just disagree with the popular opinion)

10

I motion this to a vote

11

I second.

1 Like