Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/09/20 in all areas

  1. From the Desk of Old Gobo Fraggle The Very Best Hobo Fraggle. Friends!! Friends!! Friends!! Let old Gobo catch some wind. Our old friend @Prefonteen had us over for some great lettuce. It was amazing until it wasn't. Let old Gobo grab a seat for a minute. The things Gobo heard.... So there we are, all of Fraggle Rock.... Let me grab some lettuce. In a square with our host in the middle. Great lettuce. We were honored. Let me go get Boober and see if he can explain this.... Old Gobo.....that was some great lettuce. Our old friend knows how to have a gathering. So.....me, Boober Fraggle, aka Old Boober, was enjoying the company....mighty fine company. You see, I brought a Doozer with me, unbeknownst to anyone. Well he escaped and fell into a hole. A hole you say? Yes, a hole. So we left the lettuce session minus one Doozer. Well then this little fella came back....with extra lettuce and a story. I'll let him tell it. It's a scam. Coalmas is just a Ponzi scheme. The lettuce man told me so. Well if this Doozer says so, it is. Let's stop this before it goes too far. Flood the coal mines!!!! Down with Exorock!!
    12 points
  2. Similar to the removal of downvotes, I think this could encourage people to instead reply physically (with malice), and the ND rules do not really stop people as is. As for reducing the likelihood of producing good faith reports, I'm not sure the reactions actually discourage people from making them, since downvotes don't have any baring on reputation. They're a tool to easily show dissent/disagreement, which you tend to see on reports made disingenuously, fall into a gray area, or a person merely disagrees with enforcement on whichever rule. Overall I think it is important to maintain reactions on reports because people will make bad faith reports regardless, and the community needs a way to publicly denounce them. Edit: Is is also possible that there isn't a lack of good faith reports as gauging the moderation subforum may make one believe, but that many of those reports are, instead, made privately, off-forum, due to the negative connotation associated with being a "whisteblower." I have personally received messages including nations to report because they don't want to make the report themselves.
    5 points
  3. Founded on May 3rd, 2020 by 5 like-minded individuals, Radiant Design Co. is a solution for all your design needs. There was a gap in the market, where many people who were seeking to customize their nations or alliances couldn't find the people they needed to help them with their graphic needs, or their existing options were too expensive for them, which is why we created the Radiant Design Company. The company has been a success and now we are hiring again! If you are skilled with Photoshop or have a talent for design and want to make yourself some PnW cash then Radiant Design Company is the place for you. For more information you can visit our discord server: https://discord.gg/NWDghwr DM me on discord for applications or more info surrounding becoming a designer at RDC: Eclipse#2657
    2 points
  4. Pretty self explanatory. Reports are getting politicized, with IRL and ingame politics, and this is reducing the likelihood that players will produce good faith reports, while increasing the chance that bad faith reports will be made. This is a natural extension of the non-discussion rule. Edit: I think I remember already suggesting this. Can't remember the outcome though.
    2 points
  5. Fraggle! Atlantis Misses you. Stop by sometime 🙂 Lots of newbies wondering who the great Fraggle is.
    2 points
  6. I've been playing this game for a year and I still don't understand your forum posts
    2 points
  7. I feel like there are quite a few nations out there with great / hilarious themes that get largely no recognition. I'm sure I'm missing quite a few myself. Share what your nation theme is and drop a link for us to check it out if you've decked it out enough. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=60967 Mine is obviously pirate-themed with a twist from the Princess Bride. Let me know what yours is!
    1 point
  8. Moved to the proper group (No Matching Nation). Of course, if they make a new nation they can be moved right back.
    1 point
  9. Thread: https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/29474-flood-the-coal-mines/ The OP of this thread is the offender. Nation Link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=5909 The 'Nation Link' directs to a nation that has been deleted. I searched for a nation/leader name with their current forum name, but couldn't find one. I'm guessing they either don't have a nation at all. If they do, they need to request a name change.
    1 point
  10. You can see why we are hiring 😂
    1 point
  11. Mine's based off a story I used to write sometime around high school/college. Never got even a little close to finishing it but had fun creating the background/characters, so when I joined here, I made it my theme.
    1 point
  12. Your ban will expire automatically after 89 days. At that point, you will be allowed to create a new nation and try again. To respond to your questions/protestations, your city names were things like "rayshard brooks deserved what he got" and "cops should get an RPG to deal wtih blm" which are statements that promote violence and arguably racism (at least the latter) which is not tolerated here.
    1 point
  13. 1 point
  14. https://gofile.io/d/EmNYk8 Here's the recording of the episode. I think it'll only be up for a few days, so download it while you can. I would've preferred to have it hosted somewhere for streaming but YouTube wouldn't allow it because it's to long. Oh well I guess. Nokia recorded this (big thank you to him) and he started doing so before the preshow. I'm not sure where everything is so it's best to just start from the beginning and have it on in the background as you do something else. If you just want to hear Nokia and James go at it, skip to 30 minutes in. This would've been up sooner, but my internet is trash and there's nothing I can do about it. Hope you guys enjoy it! I had a lot of people in my DM's asking about it. I think this will suffice.
    1 point
  15. What exactly was the problem with this though? There's really only two scenarios where you get beiged in an offensive war: Either you overextend on purpose in order to get beige time, which I don't see it as a problem because it gave people much needed rebuild time if they were struggling (which is basically the only time you'll overextend like that in the first place) and doesn't create any grey areas within the rules that could be debated. You get caught out by counters and are genuinely losing your offensive wars, in which case you really will need that beige time. To my knowledge, nobody considered baiting beige (through legitimate wars) as problems within the war system. If you manage to do so, that simply goes down to you taking the risk and being 'skilled' enough (with the relatively low skill ceiling there is) to bait the beige as well as your enemy being incompetent/unaware. It punishes lack of knowledge/skill and rewards having knowledge/skill. Alternatively, if you really dislike the 'abuse' of beige here, it's a much better suggestion to just reduce the beige time you get from offensive wars. It reduces the effectiveness of doing this, meaning that you'd only do it in more extreme circumstances while still making it viable.
    1 point
  16. Yes, I would say that's a fairly good description. The difference between this and the suggestions forum, though, is that it's difficult to have nuanced conversations about the pros and cons of any suggestion in the game suggestions thread because even if you write out a nice, detailed response people will come in and troll you, flood with short snarky comments, etc. that really just make it unproductive when it comes to discussions about actually fleshing out and implementing changes. We've seen over and over again polls brigaded by alliances that may be negatively impacted by a change (even if it's for the betterment of the game) etc. which is why having a more private discussion area with members that are less interested in advancing their own agendas and more interested in considering edge cases, potential issues / repercussions, etc. will be useful. Approval of any and all changes has always really been at my discretion, and that won't change. I am far from perfect and will be the first to admit that, but I do believe that my complete un-involvement in in-game politics leaves me relatively unbiased in making changes for the purposes of benefiting one side or the other. Ultimately my goals are to increase the number of players and the amount of fun that the game is, so my approval and feedback are really shaped by my beliefs on how any given change will impact those factors. Yes, it will be essentially like that but setup in Discord for easier discussion. I think that "secret" updates is probably a misnomer. I would say that we will want to review and approve what's shared out of the group to ensure that there are not really bad mischaracterizations. It is also possible that there may be fun "surprise" or "secret" updates that we wouldn't want to be released early. For example, if I were going to add some temporary global event, such as an outbreak of a new disease that turns your citizens in zombies around Halloween, we wouldn't want everyone to know everything about that way ahead of time. We would not, however, plan a whole secret change to the war system or some other major mechanic and prevent information from getting about that. I hope that makes sense.
    1 point
  17. I'd tell you but it'd be a real uphill battle getting you to understand.
    1 point
  18. LMAO, I got a game strike because Sheepy accidentally striked me instead of the person I reported for nazism
    1 point
  19. @ TCM allies... Escalate no balls
    1 point
  20. A lovely effort, but Alex hasn't been on this subforum before and never will be. Besides, these suggestions have been made before. He didn't care or indeed even notice.
    1 point
  21. I was issued a nation strike for supposed promotion of violence against a race. I disagree with this because the city names in question were regarding the BLM group and rayshard brooks, who is a person. while I can understand if you don't want me promoting violence, I was not, I was saying cops should be able to defend themselves against protesters and criminals. neither BLM or rayshard brooks are a race of people, and I was not promoting violence about either, I was saying cops should get an rpg for self-defense and that there was nothing wrong with the shooting of brooks, it was sad, but is what happens if you try to shoot a cop. I am not contesting my other two strikes for slot filling and racism, but I would like to note that I am a firm believer in the phrase all lives matter, and I believe racism is the lowest, most crude form of collectivism and should be shunned from polite society if it is real. I was also unaware what I was doing was slot filing, but I accept your decision on that. Ban ID: 1825
    0 points
  22. well this brings back memories like last time when we fought you make posts demanding members leave and make unjust claims lolz i look forward to the fun days ahead
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.