I confirm that I have:
read the instructions
the intent to participate in roleplay in the Pacifica canon
made sure that the plot hasnât been claimed by someone else
given each plot I claim a separate name
Link to NationStates nation in the South Pacific: Name for your plot: (The name of your country that you want to see on the map, which may be different from your NationStates nation name. Please keep it short.) Desired plot: (Please make sure the plot hasnât been claimed by checking the last few pages this thread.) Capital: (UPPER CASE LETTERS please) Location of capital: Customisation: (An image as illustration is always appreciated, accompanied by a list that allows copy/paste)
Already owned plot(s)*: (List the the name(s) of the plot(s) that you have been granted on the map, in any)
I confirm that I have:
read the instructions
the intent to participate in roleplay in the Pacifica canon
made sure that the plot hasnât been claimed by someone else
given each plot I claim a separate name
For worldbuilding reasons with Thestilva, Iâd like to appeal this decision. Nowhere in the rules governing plot ownership does it specify the âfirst claimâ has to still be on the map for the remainder of the rules to apply. And, if it did, then many of the previous applications would have been moot (including many of mine!). My first claim was in December of 2020, and it seems wrong to disregard almost 3 and a half years of participation in the canon because I wanted to leave for a month and had the common courtesy to say something instead of just quietly leaving.
Also, the worldbuilding reason: Iâd like to create a couple more states on the bottom of Bareland to create some more interesting RP. I feel that we donât have enough slow international RP in Pacifica, and Iâd like to create an example to show people how rewarding it can be instead of just complaining about the problem and not doing anything about it. And for concerns about my intent to RP⌠they are valid, sure, but if I really didnât want to RP here I wouldnât be making this post. In fact, I probably would have asked for Thestilva to be removed, because, as mentioned earlier, I have the common courtesy to say something instead of disappearing when I want to leave.
Not like that. All the information is in the first post of this topic.
Section 2 of the rules governing plot ownership says the following:
So yes, there must be a first claim on the map still. I also always make aware during Activity Checks, what our current interpretation of the rules governing plot ownership means, if players lose their plots.
I will not go into your other points for now, because I believe that it might be better to hear a third opinion by Qwert, Pronoun, Galaxiel or another roleplay moderator. Therefore Iâll leave the decision on your appeal open for now.
Before we moved to Google Slides, getting up to three plots immediately was the standard for the reasons you mention. The reason for capping it is that too many joined the RP at a whim with a massive map request that they soon forgot about, meaning a lot of work was wasted. Staying around and taking it slow is a proof of committent.
That still isnât a valid map application. Please thoroughly read the entire original post at the top of this thread and make sure that you understand it before making another application.
I did not lose my plot. I asked for it to be removed. There is a very clear distinction here. If I had lost my plot in an activity check, it would be different as I would not have shown the âcommitmentâ that Qwert talks about. What actually happened was, I had large RL commitments at the time that I wasnât able to resolve until a while after. Instead of staying and taking up plots on the map, I instead opted for the common courtesy of asking myself to be removed. If you would have preferred I stay on the map and only post low-quality boilerplate RPs whenever there was an activity check (like many others do) until I find a new stroke of creativity, effectively creating four dead plots, then youâre setting yourself up for disaster. Thatâs a terrible, terrible, terrible precedent to set. I donât see this discussion much nowadays, but back during COVID when there were a lot of new foundings and a lot of map requests, people complained a lot about how people who claimed large, high-quality plots and then didnât do anything with them. Youâre encouraging that behavior by saying âYeah, if you want to keep your right to multiple plots to the future, then just stay on the map while doing the bare-minimum until you get into a better RL situation/out of your writersâ block, while if youâd like to be polite and open up the plots youâre not using while youâre too busy for RP irl, then fuck you.â
The argument here is fine, but the reason is poor. If the load on the map managers is too high, then ask the community if they would like to become a map manager. Iâm sure plenty of people would respond saying theyâd be happy to.
Link to NationStates nation in the South Pacific: NationStates | The Empire of Peoples Guerilla Armed Coalition Name for your plot: Alcoalitania Desired plot: 167 Location of capital*: The black dot on the image below Customisation: Capital: Cintrala
Already owned plot(s)*: None
I confirm that I have:
read the instructions
the intent to participate in roleplay in the Pacifica canon
made sure that the plot hasnât been claimed by someone else
given each plot I claim a separate name
Already owned plot(s)*: Fatiniyya, Al-Youmna, and Khadar
I confirm that I have:
read the instructions
the intent to participate in roleplay in the Pacifica canon
made sure that the plot hasnât been claimed by someone else
given each plot I claim a separate name
