22
Dispatch → Bulletin → News
by 
The Inhospitable Ski Slopes of Agalaesia.
.
238 reads.
The Rejected Times Issue LXIII - History, Editorial Independence and a Story
Index
Regionalism: A Goal and Progress Orinted Player Experience -
HumanSanityA Discussion with Dilber, Delegate of The West Pacific -
AgalaesiaWhy Discord Isn't Destroying NationStates - Kraljevstvo rata
Editorial Independence, an Essay -
AgalaesiaWhat is the Best Part of NationStates? -
Eastern New EnglandThe Rejected Times Collaborative Writing Contest - Various Contributors
Premade Questions - Kraljevstvo rata
Seeking Out History: RRA
INTERVIEW | WRITTEN BY Vincey | EDITED BY
AgalaesiaThe history of the Rejected Realms Army (or RRA) is relatively unknown, even to me, an RRA Soldier. In my attempt to discover more about the history of this organization, I reached out to High Commander Frattastan.
n-vince: When was RRA founded, by whom and with what motive?
Frattastan: This happened long before I joined NationStates, but it's well established that it was founded in May 2003 by Gres. Gres was a member of an imperialist organisation called the Atlantic Alliance, which even controlled some feeders at the time, and had been sent to TRR (which had been created less than a month before that) to occupy it on behalf of the AA. However, after becoming delegate instead of doing the AA's bidding he went rogue and decided to recruit local ejectees to seek revenge against the delegates that had banned them.
So, at the very beginning it was an invader army, pretty much (even if it only did a handful of invasions). After an infamous invasion attempt of The East Pacific (whose ruler at the time, 1 Infinite Loop, was particularly ban-happy), the RRA shifted to defending over the summer of 2003. Gres was still in charge, formally, but the transition was mostly the doing of other officers like Siggi and Crazy girl, as far as I know.n-vince: Were there any predecessor armies from which RRA was born out of?
Frattastan: None really, unless you count the AA because of Gres's membership. But it was very much just a personal initiative that made an army out of nowhere (not to mention that the AA then became the RRA's main opponent in the following months), so it's really no predecessor. Before then barely anything had happened in TRR until then, so you won't find predecessor armies, or predecessor organisations in general.
I think the Pacific Army was influential after the RRA's creation, but don't know what the extent of that was. The PA was the defender army of The Pacific before Francos Spain couped the region in August 2003. Its members were purged and some settled in TRR (CG, Zyonn, gettersburg). You can probably find something about this in our Library forum too.n-vince: What’s the present Structure of Command, and who have been prominent people in those position (present and past)?
Frattastan: The current officers are myself as High Commander (CG also has that rank but she doesn't take an active role anymore), Guy and Karputsk as Commanders, Catalyse, Jamie and Sarah as Lieutenants. We consult each other on general matters like applications, planning of large liberations, deciding how training should be conducted and what our policies should be, etc.
There is also a Sergeant rank for people who can and are willing to lead updates, which is often a stepping stone to becoming an officer.
This setup has been in place for a few years now, although it changed a few times before then, especially for the intermediate ranks and the internal structure (at one point there were 'Captains' and the army was organised in 'platoons', each under the responsibility of a specific person).
Among prominent officers of the past I can name Siggi, CG and Greymarshes (all of whom have sections of our forum named after!), who were the RRA's leaders during the early years, Geo_X and Kickin' Boots, who kept things going during a time of declining NS activity in 2007-08, as well as Wopruthien in more recent times. There are a few that should be mentioned but that I'm missing, probably. :P
n-vince: How much TRR Government influence does the RRA have and how much does the RRA influence the Govt.?
Frattastan: Not very much, I would say. In the past there have been frictions over specific issues (which doesn't mean 'influence'), but most of the time government and army don't get involved in each other's day-to-day affairs, and when we need to cooperate things are pretty smooth: if a treaty requires TRR to defend a region or help with a delegate transition, the delegate asks and we just say yes (and I can't think of a case of that not happening), when we asked to send regionwide recruitment telegrams or pin dispatches for the army the delegate always said yes, and so on.
n-vince: Why isn't citizenship required to join the RRA?
Frattastan: It's a reflection of the RRA's status as an independent organisation. Historically the reason is that the Army was the region's first institution and pre-existed a government structure, and this was upheld while Kandarin was delegate (he was an officer in the RRA, but the High Commander was Siggi). This was recognised after Kandy's retirement too, in part for the reasons I mentioned and in part to defuse tensions over whether TRR should be a defender region at a time when there were many new members and the region was re-evaluating its identity (and, conversely, whether TRR should accept and even elect to office people regardless of their personal opinions on invading and defending or if that meant renouncing its defender legacy).
Since the RRA is autonomous then the government cannot decide what's required for its membership (including citizenship).
In practice, though, the absence of the citizenship requirement hasn't been too important. All soldiers still need to have a nation in TRR, and we aren't going to accept or keep around people who have been stripped of citizenship for security reasons. There have only been a handful of people who at some point were in the RRA but not citizens, and usually it was just people who wanted to defend but weren't too interested in lawmaking, elections, or other political activities. We could introduce citizenship as a formal requirement too, but I'm not sure what the practical effect would be.n-vince: How is RRA different from other defender armies?
Frattastan: Wow, too difficult. :^)
When you have different people in a group you always end up with a different atmosphere, so even aside from policies, history and public image - which differ for everyone too - you'll find that each army is different from the other. There are a lot of things that I could say but I feel like I would just end up describing what TRR is like, or what we (as in, the people who make up the RRA) are personally like.
As you can see, RRA has a long history almost as old as I am. I would like to that thank Frattastan for his time and help.
Regionalism: A Goal and Progress Orinted Player Experience
DIALOGUE | WRITTEN BY
HumanSanity
This article is part of the new "TRT Dialogues" series. A companion article presenting different ideas will be posted in the next edition.‘Regionalism’ and ‘cosmopolitanism’, as compared in these two essays, are often poorly defined terms when thrown around in casual Discord “debates”. The most common definition I remember is to define regionalism as “having one citizenship” and cosmopolitanism as “having more than one citizenship”. Ultimately, those definitions are both reductionist and useless for comparison.
In this essay, I think a lot of people expect an argument about regional sovereignty, the integrity of a region’s political process, and keeping citizens engaged and dedicated. This is not the argument for regionalism I wish to present. My argument is about the positive experience a player who uses a regionalist lens for the game – the way that regionalism allows a player to have a stake in gameplay beyond the ups and downs of a given moment.
A better frame for defining regionalism and cosmopolitanism is based on the political philosophy and strategic approach of the player. Comparing experiences based on how many citizenships someone has is functionally useless – every player and their experiences are different, their contributions will vary based on their skill set, overall investment in NS, and investment in specific activities and ideas. Under my definition, one could adopt a thoroughly cosmopolitan ethic without even having a single citizenship or one could approach with a thoroughly regionalist lens while having a dozen. Accordingly, this essay defines regionalism as an approach taken by the player to NationStates as a political simulation game. I argue for a regionalism where the goal of the player is to contribute to the success of a single region where success is defined by whatever metrics that player chooses. This definition of regionalism is not exclusive with engaging with others and changing one’s ideas and visions for their region, but it is exclusive with ever deviating one’s goals from the success of their region. It’s also worth noting this vision of regionalism primarily applies to those who define themselves as “gameplayers” and in terms of how they engage in gameplay as an activity.
NS is different from most other games because it allows players to set their own objectives and players can set their own objectives. In many games, there is a single vision of “winning” the game. NationStates, by comparison, is never fully “won” and can be “won” in many ways.
This variety of options for how to play the game is part of what makes NS a more inclusive and creative game – after all, a single vision of success excludes those who are uninterested or unable to access that vision of success. However, this diversity can also lend to an absolute relativism about the game we are playing and what our goals are. The underlying goal is to have a positive player experience for as long as we are here. However, we set in-game goals for ourselves because ideas, goals, enemies, allies, conflicts, and mechanics all give the game greater texture beyond just a social networking platform and bolster our social engagement by giving ourselves goals to accomplish together. Moreover, everyone benefits from a game with defined objectives that we compete over.
Into this need jumps “regionalism” as a gameplay frame. Regionalism enters to answer the fundamental question of “what is our goal in NationStates?”. A regionalist believes that our goal in NationStates is to build, advance, fight for, contribute to one region. That region may be motivated by any agenda or cause, it may list any number of regions as friends or allies, and its members do not have to be exclusive to that one region. However, a regionalist chooses to set their success or failure, their winning or losing, in NationStates by the success or failure of that one region.
By choosing one region to tie one’s stakes too, they can experience a more immersive gameplay experience with friendly competition. A gameplay experience isn’t just about political victories won or lost, raids conducted or defeated, offices held, and the friends you make along the way. It’s also a constructive experience about building something, building a region. Contributing to a region’s cultural, social, infrastructural fabric is a fundamental part of longer-term NS gameplay – it’s about building the resources you’ll need down the road and also building a community you can always come back to and enjoy in NationStates.
Now, a lot of people argue regionalism results in people limiting their social exposure in NationStates. I argue this is not an intrinsic part of regionalism: regionalists can visit any region they want, as long as they do not divide their loyalty from their original region. Being loyal to only one region does not make it impossible to engage with other regions. Rather, being clearly loyal to one region allows one to authentically engage with many regions – to meet new people without any misperception about the player’s goals or methods – being a regionalist means other players can understand where a regionalist is coming from and what motivates them. Regionalists in fact should socially engage with players beyond their region because it allows them to identify and incorporate best practices from other regions into their own region, while still identifying the parts of their home region that they cherish and wish to preserve.
A common alternate definition of regionalism is about the number of citizenships a player holds. This definition is reductionist and is intended to paint regionalism in a bad light – that regionalism is synonymous with social isolationism. Regionalism would maintain that one could actually hold other citizenships, but that those citizenships are in fact a bit dishonest because they would exist to serve the purpose of advancing the regionalist’s home region’s interests. If a regionalist holds multiple citizenships, then they are unable to divorce the interests of their main region from the interests of other regions, as these things inevitably conflict.
So, a long ramble comes to a close. I’ll summarize in bullet points in lieu of fancy paragraphs:
Regionalism is a frame for gameplay where a player contributes to a single region as a way of having a more fulfilling game experience
It is not synonymous with isolationism
It is about the political approach of the player and how it connects to a different way of enjoying the game
A Discussion with Dilber, Delegate of the West Pacific
INTERVIEW | WRITTEN BY
AgalaesiaI recently sat down with Dilber, the newly selected Delegate of the West Pacific. Here's our conversation:
Aga: So, you've been here for quite a while now. Have you ever wanted to become a GCR delegate at some point in your career before you re-joined the West Pacific?
Dilber: So the funny this is that this is actually the second time I've led TWP, but only my first time as a GCR delegate. The last time I led The West Pacific was in 2005, when we still had democracy and the head of government was an elected Prime Minister. I've also led the NPO in another world, and after a number of years I assumed my time in online leadership was over. When I came back it was originally to just talk to old friends and see what was going on. I ended up becoming active thanks to N-day and Z-Day which led to me having some fun with the region. Honestly, I never really expected to be super active again prior to rejoining.
Aga: What was your favourite position to hold on NationStates?
Dilber: Weirdly enough, head of the West Pacific Intelligence Agency. I've always loved the intel game
Aga: Oh, nice! Let's talk about the Intel game for a second. How did you get involved initially?
Dilber: Through work as a defender, and then really picked it up during the UPS and Great Bight takeover of TNP. I was 16 or 17 and had a lot of time on my hand and a willingness to learn I think the three people most involved in getting me into the intel game were TAO, Lake Lanier, and Blackbird.
Aga: Mhm. Do you have a favourite memory from your career in intelligence work? Something rewarding perhaps?
Dilber: Outside of the time we stole the IPs from the NPDs forum and unmasked a bunch of Ivan's people there? Less of a operation and more of a thing that was fun. JAL (Durka) bet me I wouldn't be able to create a persona that could fool him in Lemuria, and I did it within like 2 days.
It's a weird memory but it makes me laugh
Aga: How about your career as defender? Any pleasant memories there?
Dilber: Lots of them!
Defending was a lot of fun, especially at a time when there was no API or scripts to track things. There were a lot of really cool people I used to be talk to through update. The Stars of Skies op was still the "biggest" one to stick with me, but there were lots of little defenses that were just fun.
Aga: How do you think that defending has changed, and would you still be a defender today?
Dilber: The early conflict when I was there was less Defender vs Raider and more Defender vs NPO. It was a different political world. Raiders organizations weren't very good at the time, and were riddled with defender spies. Tagging wasn't a thing, so it was more defenses or liberations. It was also pre-influence and ROs, so it was more of an "all the marbles" kinda thing.
Today? If I had joined the same as I was then, probably. Don't forget TWP also super heavy-defender when I joined back then, which colored my views as well. TWP is independent now and will go wherever the fun is.
Aga: So, back to you currently. Do you think you would have joined TWP if it had its current government system in your early days of NS?
Dilber: If it had the same people it did then (which would have been unlikely as a bunch of the people involved were STAUNCH supporters of democracy).I did eventually go over to the PRP (NPO) near the end of 2005.
NS was a lot faster back then. Our elections used to be every 4-6 weeks I want to say
Aga: Do you think that speed was better?
Dilber: As an adult? NOPE. I don't have the time and energy for that :V
It was different, I wouldn't say better or worse - it's a lot of energy, which can lead to a lot of engagement, but it can also lead to really fast burnout.Aga: So, when you re-joined, what surprised you about TWP?
Dilber: Honestly? How many of the old faces were still around. It's an amazing thing of how long the community has lasted. I'd been checking in over the years so I knew stuff was different, so none of that surprised me, but I enjoyed still being able to just slip back into stuff with friends.
There was also a lot of new talent, and a lot of new faces that it was fun to get to meet and talk to.
Aga: That's good! So, what was your biggest challenge as a GCR delegate so far?
Dilber: There hasn't been any "major" challenges yet. The biggest one coming up is going to be building a consensus on the changes to our Hall of Nations. I want to bring it in-line with how we actually operate, and I want the citizens to really decide (within a framework) of what the perks of it should be, and what we can do to make citizenship more fun and engaging. It's work I enjoy doing, and I'm looking forward to the discussions on it.
Aga: Mhm. Lastly, have you enjoyed your GCR delegacy so far?
Dilber: Yeah! It's a lot of fun so far, and I'm enjoying the work. I've got some plans I'm looking forward to implementing that everyone will see over the next *waves hands* whenever.
Why Discord isn't Destroying NationStates
OPINION | WRITTEN BY Kraljevstvo rata
To be honest, I didn't know this was even an issue that presented itself within the NS community. Frankly, it seems ridiculous that this is even an issue, and I feel like it shouldn't be a question as to whether Discord is affecting Nationstates at all. There are various reasons that we shouldn't even consider this to be a serious thing, but here I am anyway, to discuss it seriously. When I talk about Nationstates, I mean onsite activity. This means no offsite forums, like region-themed ones, or certain other offsite activities.
I could write something way longer, but I'll confine this article to four points.
Point 1: Discord itself does not take away activity from the onsite platform. Most members of regions are both as active onsite as they are on discord, and even use discord to promote onsite activities, such as card sharing, as TRR's culture team has done, with games and other pastimes. There are also examples of some members of regions themselves keeping onsite movement, especially on the RMB, alive. Small shoutout to Hoffania and Thepeopl, who aren't on TRR's discord (in Thepeopl's case rarely), yet fuel the RMB and promote regional activity.
Point 2: Discord can actually knit together a stronger regional identity and, I don't really want to use the word, family. Discord allows you to continuously build a deeper relationship with the members of the region(s) you happen to be active in. Look at the South Pacific, or even that of the North Pacific. Each of their members are quite, how do you say it... close, to one another. It creates a bond that is quite strong, and while this bond may have started on the RMB, it can, and most likely will, deepen with more activity on this platform.
Point 3: Forum evolution. Discord is a much more efficient way of discussing topics and roleplaying across the different regions. Example is TRR's spam channel. You wouldn't see the amount of topics being discussed so smoothly in that of a forum. You can seamlessly go from one topic to another without the hassle of having to create a new thread. The same with roleplay. This is one way for an archaic way of discussion to modernize and become streamlined.
Point 4: When it comes to raiding/defending, this is another example of modern efficiency and streamlining. Discord allows regional armies to communicate information quicker, and easier than its older counterparts (if there even are older versions of this). It also helps security, by limiting the amount of people able to view the information being given by said armies.
Unfortunately, I couldn't gather enough statistics to completely seal my points. However, just look at what I say, and see for yourself, maybe you'll find that what I say is true after all.
Editorial Independence: an Essay
OPINION | WRITTEN BY
AgalaesiaOne of the Times’ most controversial editorial stances is its stance on Editorial Independence - for a start, the definition of “Editorial Independence” is hotly contested amongst many circles in NationStates. Some believe that a newsletter tied to a region cannot achieve Editorial Independence.
I strive to believe otherwise and think that any newsletter can adopt any stance whether it be a regional newsletter, an “independent” newsletter not tied to a region, or any other type of newsletter, whether it be regional or independent. Likewise, any newsletter can be stripped of its Independence and serve as an organ for the government of a region to express its opinion and thoughts to the wider NationStates social circle. This essay will define editorial independence, the forms it comes in, and how various newsletters relate to their governments.
0: A Forward
Before I do embark upon this article, I must state that newsletters with “Editorial Independence” don’t work for each and every newsletter. Some regions that vary on the spectrum of democracy to autocracy will have a different attitude to Editorial Independence.
Regions that have a structured “top-down” power structure (that is a region that requires a very few amount of people to make final decisions) will likely prefer a newsletter that is operated and edited by the regional government, regions that have a strictly “bottom-up” power structure will likely prefer creating a newsletter that has Editorial Independence, and regions that have a “mutually non-exclusive” power structure (regions that operate on a mixed basis of “top-down” and “bottom-up” power structures) may prefer either, or a mixture of both. Many regions have not decided upon the amount of editorial independence to grant their newsletters, and some are government-operated but are fine publishing criticisms of the government.
This article is not intended as a criticism for how regions decide to operate their newsletters, and should not be taken as such. Editorial Independence on varying degrees might not be the best stance to adopt to ensure a newsletter's continued survival. This is purely a definition of editorial independence, and why some regions choose to adopt the stance of independence.
1: A Definition
The definition of Editorial Independence is hotly contested, and the phrase is often used as a series of meaningless buzzwords to highlight perceived competence.
There are two forms of editorial independence. The first one is “hard” editorial independence, which is based on the policy that the newsletter will not publish any content at the behest of the government, and subsequently does not have any right to the content published. Newsletters that try to adopt the stance of hard editorial independence, (such as The Rejected Times, the South Pacific Independent News Network, and arguably NationStates Today), usually adopt a policy that prevents regional governments from interfering in the newsletter, and do not publish any content or change any articles at the request of the government. Usually, this does not prevent members of the government from writing as themselves, but it is usually prohibited to write from the perspective of a cabinet member. In newsletters that adopt a stance of hard editorial independence, all staffers can write about any subject, and all articles of every viewpoint are published.
This, of course, can only be enforced to a certain extent, however, it is usually frowned upon when a government attempts to take control of the content posted in the newsletter.
The other type of editorial independence is “soft” editorial independence, which is based on the policy that governments can get involved with the newsletter, and publishes and changes content at the request of the government. The primary difference between a newsletter that adopts the policy of soft editorial independence and a newsletter that isn’t granted any editorial independence is that editors that work for a “soft newsletter” usually allow limited criticism of the government. Famous examples of this include the Northern Lights and most other Game Created Regions’ newsletters.
2: Hard Editorial Independence - Separation of Government and Newsletter
Usually, newsletters with hard editorial independence have a clear but distant relationship with regional governments, although a lot of it usually comes into question at certain points. Most newsletters that adopt a stance of “Hard Editorial Independence” strive to ensure that governments do not interfere with content. Notable examples of this include NationStates Today batting out at the Lazarene government and accusing them of trying to stop a news article that contained a leak (even though the article wasn’t ever published and NationStates Today had a content agreement with Lazarus, meaning that there is more to this story). Usually, regional newsletters that practice hard editorial independence are run by an official that is not a member of the cabinet or government of that region, to ensure complete separation between the government and the newsletter.
Newsletters that have a policy of “hard editorial independence” can have a regional tie or affiliation, however, the most effective newsletters that adopt the policy of hard editorial independence usually interview a large variety of people, and invite guest columnists.
Most newsletters that practice Hard Editorial Independence are also not hesitant to publish content critical of the government. This can often lead to a tug of war effect, where regional governments ask the newsletter to recall articles, however, all newsletters that practice Hard Editorial Independence would not recall any content in such a scenario.
3: Soft Editorial Independence - Relationship between Newsletter and Government
Regions that have the policy of Soft Editorial Independence usually exist in symbiosis with regional governments and are usually administered by regional cabinet officials or other leaders. Most regions that practice Soft Editorial Independence usually allow some content that is critical of the regional government that it is associated with, however, newsletters that practice soft editorial independence publish and recall content at the request of the government, and are operated by the regional government.
Most regional newsletters practice Soft Editorial Independence, as they are administered by cabinet officials and are an extension of government, but allow opinions divergent from governments from time to time.
Sometimes governments prevent some content from being published by the newsletter as the overall fallout from the publication would be too much for the government to deal with. The articles usually prevented from publication are articles about Foreign Affairs, and articles which may harm the region's reputation.
4: No Editorial Independence - the relationship between the Newsletter and Government
There are also quite a few newsletters that are granted no Editorial Independence. This means that the newsletter is just an organ of the government that is designed to be an organ to extend the opinion of the regional government abroad, without any disagreement or diversity of content in the newsletter.
Newsletters who have no editorial independence are maintained by the government and allow for no diversity of opinion in publications, and rarely invite guest columnists to ensure that a singular, clear, and consistent message is being promoted to the government’s citizens or the wider area of NationStates.
Newsletters with no editorial independence are often used for the purpose of efficiently spread a regional message and are often edited to be made easy to understand and engaging.
5: A Conclusion
Generally, regions find their preference and only change if they feel like their newsletter is on the wrong end of the independence spectrum. Usually, changes are either instigated by long time inactivity, a political catalyst, or staff discontent at how the newsletter is being managed if it is a newsletter that practices hard or soft editorial independence.
Each region and each newsletter will find the brand and method of editorial independence that suits them and will likely maintain that stance for a few years. There is nothing wrong with adopting any of the stances or methods, as long as it is maintained by the leader of the newsletter or changes with regional or governmental consensus.
This Tea I Made Up
RECIPE | WRITTEN BY Kraljevstvo rata
I'll try and make this recipe a bit more "personal," like CoS told me to.
Once upon a time...
Ah, whatever, too much setting up.I basically threw this together at night a few weeks ago, and holy moly, it tastes exactly like strawberry jam. If you don't like strawberry jam, I think you have no soul, but that's just me. This will probably be one of many tea recipes, because I tend to be a mad scientist with these little bags of joy and love. Anyway, to the recipe.
You will need:
1 16.9 oz (500 ml for our non freedom friends) bottle of water
2 bags of organic (or if you're part of the proletariat, regular) green tea
1 bag of chamomile tea
5 grams (one packet) of turbinado sugar
If you're on a diet, about 1/32 of a tablespoon (0.2g) of stevia
5-8 strawberries, with the greens cut off
A kettle, or one of those camping coffee kettle things
A mug.Instructions:
1. Take the tags off of the bags.
2. throw all your edible ingredients (minus the sugar/stevia) into the kettle.
3. bring the water to a slight simmer.
4. stir in the sugar/stevia into the mixture
5. bring to a raging boil, and leave it like that for a good 10 seconds
6. pour the tea in your mug.Now, this does seem like a haphazard way to make tea, and will likely offend the most British of brits, but it really does taste good (unless again, you don't like strawberry jam). Try it out, I guarantee that you'll like it (if you like strawberry jam. If you don't, go away).
What is the best part of NationStates?
OPINION | WRITTEN BY
Eastern New EnglandIn this article, I’ll be going through all the different aspects that shape NationStates and I will give my opinion on them.
Let’s kick this off with R/D Gameplay, also known as raiding or defending. Many players are involved in this aspect of the game, usually as a raider or a defender. Whether it is about morals or having fun, this is arguably the most controversial one as well. Personally, I do have some fun defending and update can create fun times, but I believe that it’d be better for NationStates without that feature. It seems toxic and it has definitely resulted in a divide between defenders and raiders. If I were to rate it, I’d give it 2/10.
The World Assembly is one of the core parts of NationStates, open to anyone who is interested. I like reading through the proposals at vote and seeing how and why other people voted as they did. It helps me better understand future proposals, so I can vote on them as wanted. It is also always interesting to see who is getting commended or condemned in the Security Council. On the other hand, I must admit that the General Assembly proposals sometimes can get very boring, be very dry to read through or be hard to understand. Overall, I’d give the World Assembly 7/10.
Cards are a rather recent addition to NationStates, compared to other aspects. I enjoy farming my puppets for legendary cards or trying to expand my card collections. It is also rather easy to get into, as it doesn’t require much explaining or training. I also like the freedom of collecting what you want and it doesn’t matter if that is cards with cats or cards from a specific region. Cards can be very time-intensive, though. It takes me a while to go through my puppets and farming gets monotone rather quickly. With that in mind, Cards get a solid 7/10, just like the World Assembly.
What about issues? Issues are the core mechanic to NationStates and it also acts as a “first impression” to new nations, seeing if they’ll stay engaged with the game or not. Issues are basic, that is what I like about them. They are straight-forward and easy to understand. I like slowly climbing up ranks in different stats and see my nation proceed. I also like that they only make slight changes, so you don’t have great stats within a short period of time. It keeps nations engaged for longer. As with most of the other things in this article, it gets boring and monotone. After a while, issues start recycling, and it takes real dedication to stay and answer issues even after that. I’m giving issues an 8/10, just for being such an important part of the game and one that I haven’t gotten tired of after 8 months of playing.
I saved my favorite one for last: the community. Whether you interact with your region mostly over the forum, the Discord server or on the RMB, most nations have interacted with a general community. The community is what kept me in the game. I don’t think the issues or the cards could have kept me this long. I have met many amazing people through NationStates, which I am very thankful for. I also enjoy the different cultural events and games that are planned each month and I am very happy that I stumbled upon this game. The community will of course get a perfect 10/10 rating.
Ther is something for everyone in NationStates, but I believe that the greatest thing about the game is what surrounds it.
The Rejected Times Co-Operative Writing Contest
CO-OPERATIVE | WRITTEN BY Various Contributors, compiled by Of altonianic islands
Recently, the Rejected Times ran a co-operative writing contest on the Regional Message board. This was a join writing event, with the authors told to expand upon the prompt. The final result of the join contest can be found here in dispatch form
and here in the Rejected Times forums:Read dispatch
https://rejectedrealms.com/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=10031797&p=10036302#p10036302.The final post counts of people who contributed in ascending order are as follows:
Agalaesia: 1
The final sith order: 2
Thepeopl: 3
Bribillichnoveroloriland: 8
Hoffania: 9
Of altonianic islands: 14Thank you to Of altonianic islands for compiling this!
On Premade Questions
OPINION | WRITTEN BY Kraljevstvo rata
Hi again. This is my fourth article for this issue, and today we're talking about pre-mades. What are pre-mades, you ask? They're, like the name suggests, pre-made questions submitted by TRT staff in order to make interviews or other articles a bit easier. My last opinion piece was... at the least weak, and this will hopefully be a bit stronger. I'm supposed to be paying attention to school right now, but what does that matter? People want to hear that juicy bias.
My take on pre-made questions is this: Pre-made questions can be beneficial, only if you're in a pinch and cannot think of anything else to add to what you're writing. And to be honest, this is a pretty great auxiliary function, and would've helped me with my interview two issues ago. I don't, however, believe that pre-mades should be the bulk of the questions a journalist asks, because the integrity of the article will not stand. Every journalist should try and come up with their own questions, as to make the interview/article more personable and relatable to the audience, and the interviewee (that's definitely a word).
Here's an example of a list devised by Minskiev:
1. What first got you into the cards game?
2. Any tips for new players?
3. What are some helpful tools you often use when working with cards?
4. Do you have any people you enjoy trading with?
5. Could you point out some common mistakes some players make when trying to handle cards?Generally, I approve of this idea, and think it can benefit our staff. However, I would advise to use this in moderation. I encourage creativity, but again, when you have a great deal of writer's block, this can save you a great deal.
NOTE: The Rejected Times does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Rejected Realms or the Editor-in-Chief.Discuss this Issue over on the NationStates forum
here.Find The Rejected Times Index here.
The Times gives our thanks for the ongoing support from our Subscribers:
Glacikaldr, Fauxia, Marilyn manson freaks, NOrTh pAcIfiC spY, Trabardia, Dixadoing, All Wild Things, Eseral, North prarie, Asdersland, Windchia, Apple-loosa, Crazybloxian Empire, Hydra Dragon, Jar Wattinree, Libetarian Republics, Zip, Frattastan iv, Free city of rigia, Imperium of the huron, Meggland, Ctesiphonis, Renegalle, Nintendo switch parental controls, Mynation, Morover, Hindu mahasabha, Bormiar, Zealandiana, The ivaland, Abbots, Carropia, Yen eef, Carstantinopipal, Democratic Republic Of Unified States, Lifeeeeee, Doge Land, Sensorland, The human core council, Outboundstagnate, The logictalian union, Babme merrourativa, Dogelore007, Information of the Communist Bloc, Lansaka, Eleutherosophia, Caduceo, The unified missourtama states, Pilgrimtown, The lazytown, Mitary, The hope hills, Mecotla, Minskiev, Homyland, La Republique Louisianaise, Ebonhand, Awesomeland012345, Comfed, Whole india, Nova vandalia, Croatian empaths, Of altonianic islands
Latest Threads
