| Welcome to The City State of Q102. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Should We Adspam?; Reputation vs Recruitment | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 21 2006, 10:14 AM (1,350 Views) | |
| Joe Bobs | Apr 21 2006, 10:14 AM Post #1 |
|
Former Delegate of Q102
![]()
|
A forum for debate has been requested regarding whether we should, as a region, be using adspamming methods to recruit. 'Adspamming' refers to the method of posting recruitment adverts on a feeder region's RMB (regional message board) by using a puppet (ours is the "Q102 Recruiter"). On one hand, this advertises the region to everyone viewing the regional page of that region, so we are advertising to already existing nations as well as newly founded ones. It's quick and easy, but we don't yet know how effective this method is. The main problem is that this form of advertising is very unpopular with those involved in the feeder regions and is often considered an underhand tactic. In The North Pacific, adspams cannot be any longer than 15 lines. In Lazarus and The Rejected Realms, adspamming is banned. It is frowned upon in all the feeders. This is the debate at hand. If the public feeling is not obvious from this thread, then a poll can always be set up. |
![]() |
|
| Nevareion | Apr 21 2006, 12:58 PM Post #2 |
|
Bringing fabulousness closer
![]()
|
Could this not be better debated in Parliament where more Citizens will see it and an official response from Parliament can be formulated? |
![]() |
|
| Joe Bobs | Apr 21 2006, 01:28 PM Post #3 |
|
Former Delegate of Q102
![]()
|
It is done. :) |
![]() |
|
| Zakaroo | Apr 21 2006, 02:44 PM Post #4 |
|
Priceless National Treasure
![]()
|
If no-one minds I will copy and paste my prior thoughts from the other post into this one. That indicated all my basic thoughts on this matter edited] As far as I am concerned I can see both points. I was originally shocked that the council have gone ahead and started doing this without any formal public dabate. In the past when I have suggested this, it has always met with a negative reaction. Like I explained in the Recruitment Thread, theres more at stake other then regional numbers, its the reputation of Q102 as a whole. However on the other hand, I would personally like to trial this idea. If the councill had suggested it and stated a trial period, of perhaps 2 weeks, things may be better. Afterall, on a personaly basis, I think this idea is one of few which hasnt been trialed, and I would like to see it carried out to just see if it does have any affect upon regional numbers. However I must say that I agree with nev on the fact that this should have been made public, and given the opportunity for open debate rather then councillors chosing this is to be so. I am disapointed at the councils actions. |
![]() |
|
| Nevareion | Apr 23 2006, 03:16 PM Post #5 |
|
Bringing fabulousness closer
![]()
|
Zak has stated all the issues. It might well be worth trying as these days we have far less contact with the pacific regions and less to loose. If it is done though I think there should be strict limits on it, maybe once every two days? |
![]() |
|
| Joe Bobs | Apr 23 2006, 03:39 PM Post #6 |
|
Former Delegate of Q102
![]()
|
Nev raises an interesting point. I am currently trying to re-establish relations with some of the feeder regions. Adspamming could hinder that. Perhaps it could go unnoticed. However, there is the wider issue of relations with the feeders vs. recruitment from adspam. Which would result in greater recruitment, as that is supposed to be the goal of this government. Improving international relations is a secondary priority, unless it directly increases recruitment. |
![]() |
|
| Nevareion | Apr 23 2006, 05:42 PM Post #7 |
|
Bringing fabulousness closer
![]()
|
Certainly when I was an ambassador in The West Pacific and The Pacific I made a point of saying that our official policy was not to and it went down very well there. They really do hate that they effectively don't get to have an RMB since they fill with ads so fast. There are also strict game rules on how many and how often per region that ought to be made clear if this policy is reversed. |
![]() |
|
| Zakaroo | Apr 23 2006, 08:28 PM Post #8 |
|
Priceless National Treasure
![]()
|
What regions are you trying to make contact with? If its not all four, and just TP and TWP then surely we could try it in the other three? Also I think there should be a strict limit on it. If this was my decision I would only target them when the most nations being created (usualy weekends right?) I really do think we should trial this, as I said, we have tried just about everything else, and once every few days is O.K in my book. I would like to see some comments from the rest of the council if possible. JB is doing a wonderful job, but can hardley speak for everyone ;) |
![]() |
|
| Joe Bobs | Apr 24 2006, 02:57 PM Post #9 |
|
Former Delegate of Q102
![]()
|
Thanks Zak.
:D If we do go ahead, then it should certainly only be a trial period at first. I like the idea of "weekends only" too. Perhaps one in the morning, one at night, on a Saturday and Sunday. Then of course there's the problem of timezones. Where does most NS action come from? The US probably, so perhaps we should be running it in EST not GMT. I do think that if we run it in some, we should run it in all. Currently we are only trying to build relations with TP and TWP, but it doesn't seem right to do it in some and not others. But now I have a little Machiavelli in my head saying "don't care about morals if you want to succeed" and maybe he is right. Maybe it should only be done in TNP, TSP and TEP. Which brings me to this: four ads, spaced out over the weekend, and only in The East, North and South Pacifics. I'm still not sure about the timezones thing. |
![]() |
|
| Nevareion | Apr 24 2006, 05:21 PM Post #10 |
|
Bringing fabulousness closer
![]()
|
We are fairly unique in not doing this. |
![]() |
|
| Zakaroo | Apr 24 2006, 07:14 PM Post #11 |
|
Priceless National Treasure
![]()
|
Yes we are, however to be very honest this region is over a year old and we have never (ok, with the exception of just lately) adspammed. Surely that means we have showed respect etc to the feeders but if so many other regions does this why not use? We arent getting any thanks for not tbh, instead we constantly struggle to win new nations, especially those who will stay. If we arent in contact with the other three, and I dont see us being any time in the near future, I dont see what the problem is with advertising on their RMB. Yes its not nice, but there again, they are MASSIVE and have x amount of new nations created daily. They dont need to worry about their numbers, as I am guessing maybe 50% of nations created in the pacifics each day leave. The other 50% stay. I really woudl support a trial of this, and its not exactly OTT, at the end of the day its what 4 times a week, at the busiest times. |
![]() |
|
| Joe Bobs | Apr 25 2006, 04:04 PM Post #12 |
|
Former Delegate of Q102
![]()
|
Zak's point that is a good one. We do not get any reward for not adspamming. Also, I remind Paliament that this government's primary concern is supposed to be recruitment. I too support a trial period of this in the three regions mentioned. As it would be my department implementing this, I'd like to know that the region backed this or not. I'd like to hear the views of others, especially the council's. |
![]() |
|
| Nevareion | Apr 25 2006, 07:34 PM Post #13 |
|
Bringing fabulousness closer
![]()
|
Perhaps a law should be proposed to make sure that whatever is proposed does have democratic support and that it takes account of the rules of NationStates. |
![]() |
|
| Zakaroo | Apr 26 2006, 10:48 AM Post #14 |
|
Priceless National Treasure
![]()
|
sorry nev, I may be reading this wrong but surely by this now being debated in parliament that means its democratic? Its going to the citizens of Q102 for open debate. Granted originally this was not the case, but I would like to think that the councillors have learnt from this error. Also I am abit confused as to what you meant by taking into account NS rules. As far as I am aware, and have ever been told, there are many rules regarding this? yes some pacifics put a limit on how long a text can be etc etc, but thats a regional rule, not NS. I may be very wrong here and I apologise if I am. @JB It is a shame that others councillors and citizens arent choosing to debate this, it is very important after all. Perhaps parliamentary activity should be targetted by the internal affairs? |
![]() |
|
| Nevareion | Apr 26 2006, 12:34 PM Post #15 |
|
Bringing fabulousness closer
![]()
|
It means a democratic discussion but a vote means a democratic decision. From: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Parliament · Next Topic » |






