by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .2,0472,0482,0492,0502,0512,0522,053. . .2,6342,635»

Envirm wrote:getoutofmyheadgetoutofmyheadstopitstopit

*Leans in and whispers*

Nooo

Verdant Haven wrote:Just taking a moment to note the CTE of Karock :-/

With Errin's CTE, I believe Karock was the eldest tree in our forest, predating even Ransium. It was Karock's endorsement of Errinundera that made Errin our first ever UND, back before the early refounding.

Hopefully they'll be back with us, but for the moment, another sad loss.

Dang, Karock, in case it's been missed, is someone who appears even as far back as the very first page of the RMB. The loss of such an ancient individual is deeply saddening, all jokes left aside.

Ransium wrote:Okay, great, can’t say this is making me feel young guys!

Aw, it's OK. Now, come on, you're going to be late to bingo.

Nation of ecologists wrote:Not like my opinion really matters, given that I cannot vote, but five more day until the election and im considering campaigning for a candidate. Ill decide in due time.

Your enthusiasm for the coming undead nightmare is well appreciated mortal! It is refreshing when people look past their fear of death and -

*gets stuff whispered in ear*

*Looks at the RMB post right above this one*

WHAT?!

Shalotte wrote:Let it be known that whomsoever assists with my laziness and collects into a central place each Forest Keeper candidate's manifestos to save me going looking for them, shall automatically get my vote even if they're not running.

I can do you better- I gave the grim truth and totally not obvious propaganda about all of my rivals in one place in the RMB. Much more informative than any manifesto. Welcome to the ghoul train.

Terrabod wrote:

I have additional questions for all candidates, but especially the serious candidates (tagging: The Cypher Nine, Hommeres, Lord Dominator, Roless and any others).

Firstly, name one real-world issue which is important to you that you want to raise awareness of during your tenure as Forest Keeper. How will you do so?

Secondly, how do you intend to increase participation in the regional events you intend to hold over the next six months?

And finally, what separates you from the other candidates? What do you bring to the table that the others cannot?

These are all based on particular perturbations of mine. The first relates to the promotion of Forest's environmental agenda, which is for me an important part of Forest but has stagnated over the last few months due to our Founder issues. The second relates to decreased regional activity and a lack of events to bring us together as a region, which again is a result of the issues we've had of late. The final question is (I hope) a way of differentiating the candidates some more - the specific thing you choose should tell me as much about you as your actual answer does.

1) The frailty of the mortal condition is an extremely under-discussed pressing issue in the world today, which I aim to completely solve by turning everyone into horrible undead nightmares.

2) Seeing as everyone will be zombies enslaved entirely to my necromancer will, I will ensure that participation in regional events is 100% as long as I remember to attend them. With numbers like that, we will utterly blow away all other regions with our enthusiasm for the time honoured events that make our embassies special!

3) As the only still running candidate promising to literally burn down the forest, I can only presume this question was an honest attempt to try and differentiate my mortal rivals from each other. I sympathise with the sentiment. The living lack the distinct identifying features that we undead use to differentiate one skeleton from another. However, once the undead nightmare is established, it should be very easy to figure out who is who.

McClandia Doge 2 wrote:No. No.. NOOOO

Well, ... yes? Like, I dunno you're not giving me much dialogue to really feed off of.

...

OK, you get abducted by the stolen spaceship now. You can pretend we're aliens if you like.

The most serene republicans wrote:Maybe Raider Bele Levy Epies would be a more apt candidate?
The animation is crazy smooth though.

Cypher 6 deserves a honorable mention for promoting the use of condoms and educating about STDs.
(out of all my puns i'm proudest of this one)

1) Nah, that guy's a raider, why would you ever want to get a raider or former raider to be in such a position as - *keels over from self-awareness starvation*

2) Animation? Nah, that's real life film, trust me, it's just the camera's so good it looks like animation.

3) Hey, look, Cypher Six did serve a good public function, I agree, but I'd argue that was all undone when Cypher Seven Ate Nine.

Kawastyselir wrote:But Chan, you and I and everyone in Forest knows that you would be the first Forest Keeper ever to fly a flag without any shades of green. Surely that also makes you unfit. How do you reconcile such an unconscionable fact?

The discrimination against non-Green bearing flags in this region is an appalling part of its history, and it wounds me and so many that you seek to rip open those old tensions again. However, I will be the bigger nation and promise to be a Forest Keeper for all nations, green flag or no.

All will equally be undead skeletons.

Shalotte, Mount Seymour, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, and 10 othersTerrabod, Simbolon, Lura, McClandia Doge 2, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, Envirm, Garbelia, Difinbelk, and The most serene republicans

I’m actually immune to being zombified as I am already a drone of the american capitalist system.

Chan island, Jutsa, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, and 4 othersThe void territories, Lura, Nation of ecologists, and The most serene republicans

Post self-deleted by Cuillin.

Chan island wrote:*Leans in and whispers*

Nooo

*SCREAMS IN SR PELO*

Chan island, Jutsa, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, and 4 othersMiddle Barael, Nation of ecologists, The most serene republicans, and Myuscao

The Cypher Nine wrote:——————
Secondly, how do you intend to increase participation in the regional events you intend to hold over the next six months?
——————

We need more tangible rewards. Positive reinforcement is the best way to change behavior and I don’t mind putting my money where my mouth is. Literally.

——————

I appreciate the good intention here, but unfortunately monetary rewards are illegal according to the site rule on monetization:

One stop rules shop wrote:Monetization/Gambling: It is against site rules to use money, a substitute thereof, or any good/service with equitable use (NS Store purchases, game keys or vouchers, e-giftcards, etc.) to incentivize or monetize any activity on NationStates, to include but not be limited to: joining or participating in a region, joining or participating in a thread, joining an alliance (roleplay or gameplay), etc. Similarly, it is against site rules to use the same as a "reward" for participation in any of the aforementioned or any "game," "contest," etc.

EDIT: However, I now realize that you said literally putting your money where your mouth is. If wearing dollar-bill facemasks brings you enjoyment and would help increase participation in regional events, then you do you I suppose. :-)

Jutsa, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Uan aa Boa, and 4 othersMiddle Barael, Nation of ecologists, Garbelia, and The most serene republicans

I decided to vote against the proposed WA resolution, simply because article 3 states, quote:
"In regards to Article 2, an exception shall be provided for receiving states that enter into a lawful, written contract that assures the extraditing state that the persons in question shall not receive the death penalty."
This sounds like a great thing, however, consider this. You're running a nation and you really want to kill someone, so you strike a deal with some seedy nation that likes killing people - one who's not in the WA - which will gladly take your money or, even better, pay you (realistically the latter's pretty outstanding) to write a contract that declares that they will not kill the person you send over to said nation, and then proceed to kill that person. Now, sure. They technically broke the written contract. But as long as your nation doesn't complain, and given it's not a contract signed by the World Assembly itself, and especially given there's no clause regarding the plausible extension to such a contract which states that the deporting nation can't disregard the contract. After all, section 3 only states that the receiving end assures the deporting state no death penalty; it does not necessarily grant the individual airtight protection, but the deporting state, which might at a later time wish to dissolve said contract after the deportation process has been completed.

In other words, it's basically a giant loophole to a ban on capital punishment. (Admittedly I have no idea if this is a thing or not but either way I thought we already had legislation regarding extradition which I thought was why I didn't work on my own resolution regarding extradition but whatever.)

Chan island, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Terrabod, and 4 othersMiddle Barael, Nation of ecologists, Garbelia, and The most serene republicans

Lord Dominator wrote:Wow - the most of three months I’ve spent as a cashier presently is hellish enough, I can’t imagine 17 more!

Much obliged The Most Serene Republicans.

I'd still be doing that, too, if it weren't a) pandemic got worse locally [at-risk mom] and b) weren't going to college, which itself probably wouldn't have happened if a) I could miraculously afford it, b) if I weren't really passionate about doing something to help the environment through public administration, and possibly even c) the more spontaneously miraculous fact that I can afford college more than I can afford food xD

Chan island wrote:Is Jutsa terrible candidate. Jutsa the worst.

I bet you Chan't even come up with a good reason, Chan you?

Chan island, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Simbolon, and 5 othersMiddle Barael, Nation of ecologists, Garbelia, The most serene republicans, and Valbona

Mount Seymour wrote:I appreciate the good intention here, but unfortunately monetary rewards are illegal according to the site rule on monetization:

EDIT: However, I now realize that you said literally putting your money where your mouth is. If wearing dollar-bill facemasks brings you enjoyment and would help increase participation in regional events, then you do you I suppose. :-)

I mean who wouldn’t love a reward of me throwing money around on myself/face?

Jutsa wrote:I support state-sanctioned killings.

Well, there's #443 which prevents WA nations from "extraditing, except to World Assembly judicial institutions or jurisdictions without capital punishment, any person charged or likely to be charged with a capital offence" - so even extraditing to non-WA nations that will kill your man is currently illegal under WA law whether guilty or not.

The Cypher Nine wrote:I mean who wouldn’t love a reward of me throwing money around on myself/face?

*makes it rain*

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, and 1 otherThe most serene republicans

Terrabod wrote:Well, there's #443 which prevents WA nations from "extraditing, except to World Assembly judicial institutions or jurisdictions without capital punishment, any person charged or likely to be charged with a capital offence" - so even extraditing to non-WA nations that will kill your man is currently illegal under WA law whether guilty or not.

Well then why doesn't the proposal* just ban death penalty under military law and nothing else? For that matter, why did the death penalty ban have that exemption in the first place?

Also I realize I'm saying this, being a WA nation that has death penalty. I'm working on getting rid of it I've just been too busy ignoring my issues.

Edit: Either way I'm still voting against this resolution on the fact that, should a casual repealer think 443 be outdated on account of the death penalty bans, overlook this little fact, we'd have a potentially massive problem.
On top of the fact that it's wholly unnecessary in the first place, because of 443, it's enough for me to still be voting against.

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Simbolon, Middle Barael, and 2 othersNation of ecologists, and The most serene republicans

Jutsa wrote:For that matter, why did the death penalty ban have that exemption in the first place?

Apparently the author of the Death Penalty Ban wasn't sure that WA nations would support a total ban of the death penalty - a fair assumption in my view because many nations oppose the ban on the grounds of war criminals avoiding execution. They hedged their bets and wrote a proposal that banned the death penalty in all cases excepting within the military while allowing further legislation to ban even that in the future. This resolution fills that gap in a way that is consistent with WA law.

Jutsa wrote:Either way I'm still voting against this resolution on the fact that, should a casual repealer think 443 be outdated on account of the death penalty bans, overlook this little fact, we'd have a potentially massive problem.

Is "someone might repeal a different piece of legislation" a rational argument to vote against in this case? I think it better to pass the current proposal at any rate because of the bigger loophole present without a military death penalty ban - namely that WA nations prevented from executing civilians via the Death Penalty Ban can simply conscript those individuals into the military and sentence them to death. This in my mind is a more significant and concerning loophole than the one you describe and it is one that exists at present.

Jutsa wrote:On top of the fact that it's wholly unnecessary in the first place, because of 443, it's enough for me to still be voting against.

I don't understand - #443 doesn't in any way ban the death penalty from being used in your nation (within the military or otherwise), it just prevents you from extraditing someone to a foreign nation that will sentence them to death. The current proposal bans the death penalty within the purview of military law.

Jutsa, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Middle Barael, and 1 otherNation of ecologists

Terrabod wrote:I don't understand - #443 doesn't in any way ban the death penalty from being used in your nation (within the military or otherwise), it just prevents you from extraditing someone to a foreign nation that will sentence them to death. The current proposal bans the death penalty within the purview of military law.

I meant that sections 2 and 3 were wholly unnecessary in light of resolution 443. My bad. That said, again, if this is a proposal that bans death penalty for military law, why does it even have these sections in the first place? (ed: much less sections that only serve to basically make its own purpose meaningless were it not for existing legislation.) They simply do not belong in this legislation.

Terrabod wrote:Is "someone might repeal a different piece of legislation" a rational argument to vote against in this case? I think it better to pass the current proposal at any rate because of the bigger loophole present without a military death penalty ban - namely that WA nations prevented from executing civilians via the Death Penalty Ban can simply conscript those individuals into the military and sentence them to death. This in my mind is a more significant and concerning loophole than the one you describe and it is one that exists at present.

That is a valid point, and honestly, I'd agree with you and vote FOR if it weren't for the fact that it's likely to pass anyway. But even then, I don't approve of the way it was written, and honestly I'd rather just see a single resolution flatout banning capital punishment and phasing out the existing ban Cretox has made.

Of course, for whatever reason, the world assembly keeps repealing and replacing legislation that's more blanketed, so maybe having an arbitrary amount of resolutions achieving the same ultimate end goal is where we are at now.

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Terrabod, Middle Barael, and 1 otherNation of ecologists

Jutsa wrote:I meant that sections 2 and 3 were wholly unnecessary in light of resolution 443. My bad. That said, again, if this is a proposal that bans death penalty for military law, why does it even have these sections in the first place? (ed: much less sections that only serve to basically make its own purpose meaningless were it not for existing legislation.) They simply do not belong in this legislation.

Yeah, I don't know why these clauses were included (I'm guessing the writer wasn't quite up to scratch with their GA knowledge) but clause one alone (and the fact I don't see the other clauses as having negative impacts) is enough for me to approve. As with yourself, I don't like superfluous legislation - I'd look into the proposal in more detail to try to find out the author's rationale for including those clauses (or if/why another nation suggested they be included) but if I'm honest I need to go to bed.

Jutsa, Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Middle Barael, and 1 otherNation of ecologists

Terrabod wrote:Yeah, I don't know why these clauses were included

In their defense, at least they're getting a passed resolution. *looks sadly at badges*

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Terrabod, Middle Barael, and 1 otherNation of ecologists

I hate prisons because in my theory, prisons doesn't correct a person, they only make them suffer. They only make people suffer and when they get out, they can't get a single job or hard to get one. Also, it makes a person turned into a alien. I conceive prisons as a barbaric practice of correcting people. (I'm pro prison abolition)

I want a rule like this: You murder a person, you go to military and become a soldier. You sell crack, you become a merchant. You robbed an item, you became a sculptor or artist etc...

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, and 1 otherGarbelia

Verdant Haven wrote:1) Section 2.3 of the Constitution states that the elected government of Forest is to act in "an open, verdant, and democratic manner." What do each of those qualities mean to you?

Openness: I believe that Forest should open it's doors to everyone, regardless of identity or belief and without elitism, SO LONG AS they use the RMB well and use the scientific method to in discussions and to prove points.
Verdant: verdant haven? I believe Forest should promote a scientific approach to push back against increasing mistruths about environmentalism (eg. wind turbines freezing over)
Democratic: I don't believe voting is democracy in and of itself. Therefore I believe regular consultation with residents should be held especially regardly major decisions like refounding, but that probably goes with saying!

Verdant Haven wrote:2) That same section dictates that the government shall place the interest of Forest and the greater good above their own interests. Can you think of any examples of where you feel you may need to put your own interests aside for the region's benefit, and are you willing to do so?

Since I don't have many outside interests, I don't think this will be a problem.

Verdant Haven wrote:3) Speaking of the Constitution, do you feel that there are currently any amendments needed? If so, what are the most pressing changes that you would like to see brought to a vote during your administration? Are there parts that you feel strongly should be left precisely as is?

I think it's great, and amazing that article 7 includes such detailed plans for when the Founder CTEs, something I didn't really expect to happen. I think the criteria for assessing embassies is very strict and reduces the amount Forest has decided to accept in comparison to other regions but then again I'm not sure that is a con.

Verdant Haven wrote:4) If you are elected, how do you envision the structure of your cabinet? I don't mean specific people – just what jobs do you expect to have, and how would the structure work?

I think the previous structures have worked very well. Deputy, mozworld, conscience, community, cartographer, communications, diplomatic etc. Though since some have become inactive the system might deserve two cartographers if possible.

Verdant Haven wrote:5) Do you have any previous experience administering, or helping administer, game-based communities? Do you have any other experience (game or real-life) that you'd like to share, that you feel gives you experience and a leg-up in handling the operations of a sizeable UCR such as Forest?

Only in another browser based game. And to be honest, I'm much more familiar with Discord as a medium of community than the RMB. As I understand it many regions seem to be organised on Discord basis and Forest is a 100% RMB exception.

Verdant Haven wrote:For any candidates who are running as a joke/humor/gag, or who consider themselves "outsiders," or who just feel like answering anyway:
The one other time we've had anything like this many candidates, it spread the vote and forced the election to a run-off (9 candidates, summer 2018). Incidentally, that also occurred during a period of instability, in that case caused by the resignation of the Forest Keeper mid-term. A packed field means votes can go all over the place, and stranger things have happened, so humor me for a moment – what will you do if you actually win? I mean it seriously. What will you do if you find yourself elected as the leader of hundreds of other nations, in a decade and a half old region full of tradition, with three dozen alliances on the line and a strong record in game events. What will be your response when you start receiving 40+ personal telegrams per month and your responses may dictate the experience for numerous other players around the world, real people who have invested time and effort into their nations and this region we share? Some of you I know and suspect would handle it quite well, and some of you I just don't know. Tell us what to expect!

I would probably invest heavily in delegation... as I understand a lot of the Gameplay/Diplomacy of Nationstates takes place within the forum community which I am not too familiar with. I'm familiar with some embassy regions. I think I'm familiar with game events–I joined Forest because it's record was so strong (Or was that the commend?). I hope Forest can be raised from 2nd and 3rd to 1st next times... it's nothing a few hundred puppets can't solve 🙂
I don't think 2018 was really all that unstable. I find it hilarious sapnu puas was 5th, supported of course by sapnu puas and another nation. If I remember correctly that was also when 3 ministers resigned. Well, since it was about real life concerns I'm sure that was the correct move to make and was much healthier in the end. I don't think instability then could be blamed on much more than coincidence, besides a black hawks incident (or was that a different time, forest history is hard).
Yes, I am a joke candidate. 🙂 I will probably be voting for Lord Dominator or Chan Island. Since pre-ib exams are coming up, I will probably have even less time than I originally thought... With N-day coming up...

Myordas wrote:I hate prisons because in my theory, prisons doesn't correct a person, they only make them suffer. They only make people suffer and when they get out, they can't get a single job or hard to get one. Also, it makes a person turned into a alien. I conceive prisons as a barbaric practice of correcting people. (I'm pro prison abolition)

I want a rule like this: You murder a person, you go to military and become a soldier. You sell crack, you become a merchant. You robbed an item, you became a sculptor or artist etc...

I think there's definitely merit in how prisons have no correctional ability. However I think that unless your country is very rich... they do serve a very practical purpose. What someone does after coming out of prison is rather unpredictable, and I suspect entire dependent on outside forces and your country environment. But zero imprisonment for crimes might not make the imprisoned more dangerous, but would definitely wreck a developing country as the family of their victims reject the government that failed them and take matters into their own hands, spawning also sorts of unstable organisations or even mafias. I don't think decentralisation of that sort is working for Somalia much: the people took up arms themselves to defend their shores against predatory fishing from other countries since the government did not even have a coast guard: now they're being hunted down by the world for piracy.
I would be more moderate and say prisons should be reformed as a tool/structure that is scientifically proven to work for rejoining them into society. I think that's likely going to be rehabilitation/reeducation. As such I don't think a murderers to soldiers rule would be efficient, and is probably a misunderstanding of the symptom...

Jutsa, Mount Seymour, Lord Dominator, Uan aa Boa, and 4 othersMyordas, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, and Garbelia

The most serene republicans

Myordas wrote:I hate prisons because in my theory, prisons doesn't correct a person, they only make them suffer. They only make people suffer and when they get out, they can't get a single job or hard to get one. Also, it makes a person turned into a alien. I conceive prisons as a barbaric practice of correcting people. (I'm pro prison abolition)

I want a rule like this: You murder a person, you go to military and become a soldier. You sell crack, you become a merchant. You robbed an item, you became a sculptor or artist etc...

Being from a country with an absurdely violent ongoing war between criminal factions, I always end up being sympathetic to prison abolition, because not only did that war start within and because of prisons, the prisonal system is also where most of it is planned. If you want the worst possible situation in a prisonal system, look no further:

Prisions here are usually controlled/dominated/governed by one specific faction, and criminals are almost always sent to prisions dominated by their own faction to avoid conflicts. The two most powerful factions have similar origins: CV (Red Command) started out in the 70's with the collaboration of regular and political prisioners to oppose the abuse they suffered in the prisions, and PCC (First Command from the Capital) for the same reasons in the 90's. PCC was formed right after the massacre of 101 prisioners by the military police, during a rebellion in a detention center (which means most people there hadn't even been judged at that point). Nowadays both factions are primarily just motivated by money though, and in a violent war against each other since 2016, which, surprise surprise, is lead by the leaders of each faction from inside their prison cells.

Today the main function of prisions is to serve as a) a human deposit for keeping "undesireables" until they die in their life as criminals and b) a recruiting ground for these criminal factions. The amount of people dying is staggering, and none of the abuses that resulted in the creation of both factions - two of the largest mafias in latin america - has changed at all. Literally anything, any other possible alternative for prisons, has to be better than this. Hell, I don't think you could intentionally create something worse than what we have now. Bolsonaro has been trying though...

Atsvea wrote:but would definitely wreck a developing country as the family of their victims reject the government that failed them and take matters into their own hands, spawning also sorts of unstable organisations or even mafias.

Prisons have, historically, not really been very good at stopping that. In developed or developing countries.

I can't say I'm a prison abolitionist, mainly because I'm just not well versed enough on that topic to have a well formed opinion, but I find that perspective very appealing, especially in the sense of promoting restorative justice rather than punishment.

Atsvea wrote:I think there's definitely merit in how prisons have no correctional ability. However I think that unless your country is very rich... they do serve a very practical purpose. What someone does after coming out of prison is rather unpredictable, and I suspect entire dependent on outside forces and your country environment. But zero imprisonment for crimes might not make the imprisoned more dangerous, but would definitely wreck a developing country as the family of their victims reject the government that failed them and take matters into their own hands, spawning also sorts of unstable organisations or even mafias. I don't think decentralisation of that sort is working for Somalia much: the people took up arms themselves to defend their shores against predatory fishing from other countries since the government did not even have a coast guard: now they're being hunted down by the world for piracy.
I would be more moderate and say prisons should be reformed as a tool/structure that is scientifically proven to work for rejoining them into society. I think that's likely going to be rehabilitation/reeducation. As such I don't think a murderers to soldiers rule would be efficient, and is probably a misunderstanding of the symptom...

I don't like prisons look like in US. Beds aren't seperated, no green parks or trees or something that can make them happy. I want to make prisons look like a small town with farms and ponds to produce their food with some commercial stalls in which prisons will sell their products to their fellow prisoners (and if rarely, the outside) Also, 5 prisoners will have a house to live there so 1 house = 5 prisoners. They can marry fellow prisoners and freemen/freewomen, they can also have babies but they need to ask the higher sheriff. If they service of imprisonment is ended, they can live as a freemen/freewomen or as a prisoner for another 5 years or move to another prison.

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, and 2 othersGarbelia, and The most serene republicans

Myordas wrote:I don't like prisons look like in US. Beds aren't seperated, no green parks or trees or something that can make them happy. I want to make prisons look like a small town with farms and ponds to produce their food with some commercial stalls in which prisons will sell their products to their fellow prisoners (and if rarely, the outside) Also, 5 prisoners will have a house to live there so 1 house = 5 prisoners. They can marry fellow prisoners and freemen/freewomen, they can also have babies but they need to ask the higher sheriff. If they service of imprisonment is ended, they can live as a freemen/freewomen or as a prisoner for another 5 years or move to another prison.

I think calling prisons in the US prisons at all is probably being too charitable

Ownzone, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, Myordas, and 4 othersMiddle Barael, Nation of ecologists, Garbelia, and The most serene republicans

The most serene republicans

Atsvea wrote:I think calling prisons in the US prisons at all is probably being too charitable

The american system(s) have influenced a lot of what we have elswhere, especially but not limited to the global south. Besides, the consequences of having been in prison, even in a really good prison, last a lifetime. Less jobs, lower wages, etc...

Myordas wrote:I don't like prisons look like in US. Beds aren't seperated, no green parks or trees or something that can make them happy. I want to make prisons look like a small town with farms and ponds to produce their food with some commercial stalls in which prisons will sell their products to their fellow prisoners (and if rarely, the outside) Also, 5 prisoners will have a house to live there so 1 house = 5 prisoners. They can marry fellow prisoners and freemen/freewomen, they can also have babies but they need to ask the higher sheriff. If they service of imprisonment is ended, they can live as a freemen/freewomen or as a prisoner for another 5 years or move to another prison.

That's an interesting description you gave, because one of the side effects of the bad conditions of prisons in my country is that a version of this happened in many places.
In lots of prisons here, especially in more isolated areas, the lack of budget and overpopulation in prisons makes giving prisoners partial control of their own conditions the only viable choice. A lot of times, the open areas of prisons end up becoming little towns with community gardens, churches and, for some reason, almost always some sort of gym.

I make it sound way less screwed up than it is, these are areas that often have open sewage and very poor conditions, but my point is that prisoners are almost always productive and integrate into communities when given the chance. Meanwhile, in the US and places influenced by the US they're still seen as some sort of violent animal...

Myordas wrote:I hate prisons because in my theory, prisons doesn't correct a person, they only make them suffer. They only make people suffer and when they get out, they can't get a single job or hard to get one. Also, it makes a person turned into a alien. I conceive prisons as a barbaric practice of correcting people. (I'm pro prison abolition)

I want a rule like this: You murder a person, you go to military and become a soldier. You sell crack, you become a merchant. You robbed an item, you became a sculptor or artist etc...

Well, prisons are to protect everyone else and the society from the wrongdoer and also to punish the person who broke the law, but basically what you are saying it would only reward the wrongdoer or give an easy way to do things that are against the law in many situations - let's say someone wants to go to the army but wants to kill someone first... Get the idea?

"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."

Just a thought, but basically there are some good reasons to have a prison system, althought practises in them variates a lot around the world like does the re-education system. I think people do not get enough punishment from many harsh crimes like from battery, rape, killing, murder and so on here in Finland and Northern countries and they get a way way too easily. I once met a guy after bars very closed. He had just got out from the prison I think. He had stabbed someone with a knife. I asked him would he do it again now? He said yes, because it's so easy and chill in prison... A lot of times people forget about the victims and the pain they have to endure and live with for the rest of their lives, the people whos life has been taken or that has changed forever.

Re-education is good, but still way too many people end up in prison again after they get out, so the small percentage of the people are causing problems all over again. There is a solution to that = Keep them in longer and don't make prisons like they are hotels and places where you go to have a chill time between the committed crimes... Over here you don't go to prison very easily and the sentences are short, way too short for the first timers. Also the human life is not so much valued when compared to the crimes that involves money... Seems like people who have committed financial crimes get punished harder than the ones who kill humanbeings... I guess because government looses money in a scam or tax fraud so it's more costly for the big machine and needs to be weed out with bigger sentences...

BUT, there is also another side to this thing, like I mentioned - re-education is a good thing but still it's a double edged sword, too many people end up back in prison anyways. Life sentence in Finland is averagely 14 years and 4 months (2014). So people never actually sit the life sentence. So basically if you want to murder someone the price is 14,5 years averagely of prison time, manslaughter gives a lot lighter sentences, so don't leave any traces about malice aforethoughts and you can make out in 4-6 years easily as a firstimer...

I have slept under 5 h and going to be kinda busy with my studies in upcoming days but wanted to answer this one, because I have been really angry lately about this subject when I have read the news about crimes and those ridiculous sentences criminals are getting. Human life is actually pretty cheap over here when you think about it.

Re-aducation system is like this in Finland and it works for some of them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l554kV12Wuo

I think this guy in the video actually murdered a rapist and went to prison because of that. And the video says that only 1/3 ends up back in prison again, that's wrong, the right percentage is actually 50 % and we have one of the worlds best re-education system... So, it's not looking too good even with that. Some people are just F'd up and should be kept locked up, at least after they end up in prison again and again... There are also other solutions, but not going to get into that right now. Call me harsh, I don't care; harsh crimes deserve harsh punishment especially if they are done multiple times.

P.s. In your post you are only talking about the prisoner and treat him/her like a victim and you are actually forgetting about the VICTIM of a crime. I think it's best to start from there first and think about the wrongdoer secondly. I know people who have been raped so I think I know what kind of sh!t it leaves behind...

Chan island wrote:Outer Bele Levy Epies: I'm sorry, but Inner Bele Levy Epies is just cooler. Why would Forest vote for the obviously worse version?

Because free trees

Atsvea, Lord Dominator, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, and 2 othersGarbelia, and The most serene republicans

I think I should ask some questions to our candidates! I expect answers coming from The Cypher Nine, Roless, Atsvea, Jutsa, Chan island, Lord Dominator, Hommeres, and Outer Bele Levy Epies.
My topic: International Involvement

  1. A nation's involvement in the World Assembly is generally welcomed in NationStates. One of those involvements is participating in the passage of a resolution by voting. An active voter is good for the game, but an informed and active voter is better. What are your thoughts on improving resolution awareness amongst Forestians, especially those "follow the majority" and "follow the delegate" nations, assuming its existence?

  2. Forest currently has established relationships with no less than 36 regions, with the start of some dated around a decade ago. Do you have any plans for the region's international relations, including but not limited to embassy closure proposal, relationship's formalisation via any means, and embassy opening proposal?

  3. The ambassador program is a great way to increase Forestians' participation in the region. At its current state, one could argue that Forest's ambassador program isn't at its finest. What are your plans for the existing ambassador program? Do you have any improvement that's worth proposing to increase participation in this area?

  4. International participation and excitement towards Forest's events and agendas is something this region will accept to an extend. As far as I know (I'd love to be corrected), the region's annual Photo Contest is our only international event that is known to attract foreign nations' attention. Do you have any plans to increase international excitement towards Forest's events and agendas? Do you plan to introduce new events for Forestians to participate? If so, please elaborate!

I hope I haven't duplicated any other residents' questions. Thank you <3

P.S. Chan island, will your supporters receive free lifetime bone subscription program?

Chan island, Atsvea, Ruinenlust, Lord Dominator, and 5 othersTerrabod, Middle Barael, Nation of ecologists, Garbelia, and The most serene republicans

The most serene republicans

Love and Nature wrote:Just a thought, but basically there are some good reasons to have a prison system, althought practises in them variates a lot around the world like does the re-education system. I think people do not get enough punishment from many harsh crimes like from battery, rape, killing, murder and so on here in Finland and Northern countries and they get a way way too easily. I once met a guy after bars very closed. He had just got out from the prison I think. He had stabbed someone with a knife. I asked him would he do it again now? He said yes, because it's so easy and chill in prison..

To be fair, Finland has a very... unusual penal system compared to the rest of the world.

Love and Nature wrote:Well, prisons are to protect everyone else and the society from the wrongdoer and also to punish the person who broke the law, but basically what you are saying it would only reward the wrongdoer or give an easy way to do things that are against the law in many situations - let's say someone wants to go to the army but wants to kill someone first... Get the idea?

We're also talking about very different contexts here. In countries like the US and my own, there's a) a very big racial and economical divide between free people and prisoners and b) an enormous number of people imprisioned for victimless crimes (over 80% in the US). The vast majority of these crimes could have been prevented if these people had access to education or to jobs, which, as far as I know (don't quote me on that I'm 100% not familiar with the finnish context), a lot of the prisonal population in nordic countries had. The fact that Finland is ranked 12 on the list of countries with lowest criminal rates makes me wonder if most of preventable crime in Finland hasn't already been prevented, if that even makes sense.

Love and Nature wrote:Seems like people who have committed financial crimes get punished harder than the ones who kill humanbeings... I guess because government looses money in a scam or tax fraud so it's more costly for the big machine and needs to be weed out with bigger sentences...

Boy capitalism is great huh...

Love and Nature wrote:And the video says that only 1/3 ends up back in prison again, that's wrong, the right percentage is actually 50 % and we have one of the worlds best re-education system... So, it's not looking too good even with that.

But that's an incomplete statistic. 50% of murderers committing murder again is very different from 50% of tax-evaders committing tax evasion again. Different crimes have very different motivations and different types of solutions. I'll be feeling way safer to find out that some crime which has a lighter punishment in finland like (according to wikipedia) tax evasion is being commited again rather than rape or murder or teft.

Love and Nature wrote:P.s. In your post you are only talking about the prisoner and treat him/her like a victim and you are actually forgetting about the VICTIM of a crime. I think it's best to start from there first and think about the wrongdoer secondly. I know people who have been raped so I think I know what kind of sh!t it leaves behind...

Well, I also know someone very close to me who has been raped (and, coincidentally, is a prison abolitionist activist today), and I think most people know someone. I also know the kind of damage it does and I know that's damage that never fully heals. However, I gotta ask you if putting a rapist in jail will help that healing. That's something very subjective, it helps some people by making them feel safer or avanged, and it has no effect at all for other victims. This applies to murder as well. If we're thinking about prisons from the perspective of the victim of a crime, then we have a problem because every victim is individual and unique, and what we end up doing is projecting our own desire for revenge in a hypothetical situation in which the crime happened to us.

There is nothing wrong with revenge, but violent crimes don't have just a personal dimension, they also have a social dimension. If I know about a rapist who has just been arrested, emotionally I will secretly be very satisfied knowing what is coming for him in jail, but still somewhat conflicted because that's a human being there, and being a rapist doesn't make him less of a human. However, rationally, I will wonder if him being arrested will help the victim heal, prevent him from doing it again or in general make it so that less rapes occur in the world. That's the point of worrying about crimes after all, preventing people from being hurt again.

I think this is what appeals to me the most about reparative justice, it actually focus on solving each individual problem rather than giving everything a general solution. It's still very far from perfect, however... This debate could honestly go on forever because it's very complex.

Simbolon wrote:I think I should ask some questions to our candidates! I expect answers coming from [redacted]

My topic: International Involvement

  1. A nation's involvement in the World Assembly is generally welcomed in NationStates. One of those involvements is participating in the passage of a resolution by voting. An active voter is good for the game, but an informed and active voter is better. What are your thoughts on improving resolution awareness amongst Forestians, especially those "follow the majority" and "follow the delegate" nations, assuming its existence?

Forest is a nation that has a long history of being closely involved with issue writing, and the WA proposals. But I think in general that just means we often attract quality. We are fairly hands off in trying to force those things on the residents. With that in mind, there is a lot of opportunity in my cabinet for members interested in government but whom don’t want the responsibility of being Forest Keeper or who are not yet fully established. Its in those positions that I empower and appoint that those goals are met.

Simbolon wrote:

  • Forest currently has established relationships with no less than 36 regions, with the start of some dated around a decade ago. Do you have any plans for the region's international relations, including but not limited to embassy closure proposal, relationship's formalisation via any means, and embassy opening proposal?

  • The ambassador program is a great way to increase Forestians' participation in the region. At its current state, one could argue that Forest's ambassador program isn't at its finest. What are your plans for the existing ambassador program? Do you have any improvement that's worth proposing to increase participation in this area?

  • The big issue with ambassadorships is that many embassy regions ebb and flow differently than Forest. They might be faster or slower. They might be more communicative and less communicative. The purpose of embassies is to ensure Forest is involved in the community and currently it seems mostly that we allow them to come to us and not the other way around. As with everything, good ambassadors have to participate and be motivated. I am interested in developing ways for people to participate in government.

    Simbolon wrote:

  • International participation and excitement towards Forest's events and agendas is something this region will accept to an extend. As far as I know (I'd love to be corrected), the region's annual Photo Contest is our only international event that is known to attract foreign nations' attention. Do you have any plans to increase international excitement towards Forest's events and agendas? Do you plan to introduce new events for Forestians to participate? If so, please elaborate!

  • Again, my administration believes in devolution. There are individuals in this region and perhaps even the last minister for events who are passionate about creating and getting participants for regional events. The key is increasing engagement as well as setting expectations for the level of progress I wish to see from my ministers.

    Atsvea, Love and Nature, Lord Dominator, Simbolon, and 3 othersMiddle Barael, Nation of ecologists, and Garbelia

    «12. . .2,0472,0482,0492,0502,0512,0522,053. . .2,6342,635»

    Advertisement