About the Endorsement Cap

[Brutland and Norden]

Hello! I am Brutland and Norden and I would like to explain about the concept of the endorsement cap.

 

The endorsement cap is there to help protect the delegacy from unscrupulous people who might want to take it. The mechanics of NationStates delegacy in a founder-less region such as the South Pacific means that the delegate wields a lot of power. As we have seen, that power was used by Milograd to nearly destroy the region. If the delegacy falls in the hands of a person with bad intentions, we'll experience once again what we had just went through.The endorsement cap is there so that nobody will take the delegacy by surprise and without informing the region first. It helps force nations who want the delegacy to introduce themselves to TSPers and give TSPers the opportunity to decide whether s/he is fit to be the delegate. Because the nations of the South Pacific have to know the person who will take over such a sensitive and powerful position in the region. That is why we have Delegate elections, and not simple jockeying for the delegacy via endorsements only.

 

On a personal note, I also had been under the endorsement cap for the greater part of my seven years in NS. In fact, I had been under it for six years, and I didn't deem it oppressive. I think I had broken it once or twice, but the people here in TSP had been lenient about people with what I call "excess tarting syndrome" - in which you gave out a lot of endorsements and the people that had been returning it are pushing you above the cap. As long as you don't give out more endos when you are above cap, you'll be fine.

 

In addition, TSP has one of the highest endorsement caps around NS. The Pacific for instance, has an endorsement cap of 20. TSP's original endorsement cap of 100 is actually enough to get you a badge of top 1% in the World for Most World Assembly Endorsements.

 

Our endo cap is currently set at 150, to accommodate those who have tarted in order to secure their position within TSP (ie so that they won't be ejected). We will be giving them time to reduce their endorsements by lowering the cap by 10 every week, until it goes back to 100.

 

If our population grows big enough and the delegate's endorsements reach 400, we might be open to increasing the cap for everyone to enjoy.

[HEM]

This is a very informative article. It answers quite a few questions people may have

[Phlontopia]

I have one question, is the endo cap for the amount I can have or the amount I can give out?

[Rebel-topia]

The cap is the legal amount you can have

[Helpful Whispers]

I like that you changed the quote from the potential embarrassing "us", as me and TAO were discussing on the rmb. Clears up some potential confusion. Nice job overall on the explanation.

[TheStonedSurfers]

The endorsement cap is something of a sticky wicket when it comes to NS.  You can have an election for WA delegate all you want, however, if someone really doesn't care to follow election results and keeps gaining endorsements--in spite of already violating the endorsement cap--there isn't going to be any real way to stop it beyond banjection.  After Milograd's banjection spree, there's a lot of people who feel it is a tool of oppression, thus, you find yourself in the position of defending a tool of oppression in order to protect the delegacy from  usurper and we go back to the beginning of this whole discussion.  There is nothing, apart from ejection to prevent someone from tarting their way into the role.  It's game mechanics.
 
Certainly I could defend the abandonment of the system of capping endorsements as much as I could defend the use of endorsement capping.  While people keep making that out to be the real argument, the problem isn't the virtues of either side.  It boils down to protecting the delegate seat from someone just sitting in the region, collecting endorsements and gunning for the seat without going through an election. The game doesn't know that you're holding elections for the position.  The game doesn't know that the person about to take over the seat has rogue intentions.  There's no safety device build into the game to prevent anyone from simply tarting their way up. No matter how much we discuss the virtues of capping or not capping, there really isn't a way to protect against someone with lofty goals who is willing to steal the seat from the rightful delegate.
 
But Milograd didn't tart his way into the position.  He had won the 8 April election.  He simply went rogue.  Once someone wins, if they have less-than-honorable intentions, there is no way to stop them.  They have the power, and they can stand on the election results (which is what Milograd kept reinforcing).  In that instant, under that circumstance, endorsement caps actually hurt because there wasn't really a way to properly defense against Milograd's rule.  He may have claimed whatever he wanted about oppressive regimes and endorsement caps being restrictive, but he was a bad man with bad intentions that won an election by duping the people.  Then, once in power, all hell broke loose.  You cannot convince me that the situation regarding Milograd's coup was anything to do with the endorsement cap rule.  It didn't factor into the equation. 
 
His real issue wasn't the fact that endorsement caps prevented him from becoming the delegate, it was that, at some point in the future, he was going to have to face the fact that another election would take place and he would lose his seat.  He didn't care about oligarchs, he didn't care about endorsement caps (because endorsement caps actually helped him out once he won the election), he didn't care about anything he was using as reasoning behind his regime.  He only cared about not losing his seat.  It was a power play to keep himself in charge.  You can sit there and tell me about all of his friends he had pour into the region to bolster his position, but, the fact of the matter is, at the end of the day, this was a man who wanted the power, was given the power, then decided he didn't ever want to lose power.  Defend endorsement caps all you want, but you're missing the point entirely. 
 
That's just my two cents.

[Belschaft]

Endorsement caps aren't designed to defend against a Milograd style coup; they're designed to defend against a Devontians style coup. Criticism of the endorsement cap on the basis that it didn't keep Milo out is comparable to criticism of my front door key for not opening by back door.

[Vejay]

i dont know about Devontians style coup, i guess it's where a group of raiders start endorsing one person to overthrow a delegate?
 
Maybe our priorities should change then. Having a cap of 200-250 should be a good defense vs the coup i discribed above and vs a milograd style coup.
 
The endorsement cap if not directly helped Milograd indirectly.

[Belschaft]

The Devontians coup was conducted by mass endo-tarting to seize the delegacy illegally, rather than a legally elected Delegate going rogue.
 
The endorsement cap did not assist Milograd, either directly or indirectly, in any meaningful way.

[Vejay]

Why not Belschaft? if more of us had higher endorsements he would not be able to eject and ban so many nations. The damage he dealt would have been way less than it is now, also would have drained his influence faster

[TheStonedSurfers]

I didn't criticize or defend endorsement caps.  I'm guessing you didn't read what I wrote.  But, there's no law against tunnel vision.  My points were that you cannot stop someone from stealing the delegacy, nor can you prevent rouge delegates through endorsement caps.  It is the way the game is constructed.  The only way to endorse endorsement caps is through ejection/banjection because of the way the game is set up.  I couldn't care less if there are or aren't endorsement caps.  It's neither here nor there.
 
For years, TSP enjoyed a peaceful transition between delegates.  People generally follow the rules regarding endorsement caps to the best of their ability.  I guess that your thoughts are on a one-way train ride.  The main point was Milograd wanted power, got power, then decided that he had to protect himself from ever having to give it up.  There's no defense for that.

[Rebel-topia]

There may not be a defense for it, but there was a way to gain the region back. And if it wasnt for B&N having stepped up to be a Vice-delegate, then we would still be running around endoing someone who only had 99 endorsements as of 2 weeks ago. It took a long while to get B&N past Milo with his foreign support.
 
But to your point of him worrying about losing his power in another election, he had another 3 months (if I remember correctly time-frame wise). Yes. It was about him having the power, but it wasnt about him losing it. It was about him showing that no matter if theres an offsite government or not, the Delegate can do as they please with little consequence... until they lose it, anyway...

[Belschaft]

I broadly agreed with your point Surfers, the point I've been trying to make for a couple of days now is that the opposition to the endorsement cap seems to stem from three points;
 
1. That not being able to have more than x number of endorsements is a bad thing in of itself
2. That the failure of it to stop Milograd showed that it doesn't work
3. That the endorsement cap helped Milograd
 
All three are at best simply wrong, and at worst fatuous.
 
1. There is manifestly no reason why any nation needs 100 endorsements, unless they are the Delegate - increasing a regions vote in the WA - or part of the security apparatus, so that they may react to a coup. Two endorsements are required to submit a WA resolution. That is, aside from questions of influence gain, the only direct benefit of WA endorsements. As for the issue of influence gain, there are multiple issues with that. Firstly, the popular conception of influence is not supported by the actual mechanics. There is no magic x amount of influence at which point you are safe from being ejected or banned. A nation van be ejected by anyone with a roughly 1/4 of their influence; ejected and banned by anyone with roughly 1/2 of their influence. To put it in perspective, to avoid being ejected by Milograd when he had 250 influence on the SPDR scale, you would have to have four times as much as he did. There is only one nation in TSP that met that criteria; Fudgie, who happens to be the most influential nation in the world, and has had an extremely high level of endorsement in TSP for... oh, seven years or so. High endorsements does not buy you an influence level making you unejectable. What it does, is make you less attractive to eject and ban than nations with less influence.
 
Conversely, whilst you will not be protected from ejection during a coup by someone with large amounts of influence, a larger amount of influence on more nations make a destructive coup more likely. The most likely form of coup is that of a nation not elected to the delegacy, but rather who seizes it; in such circumstances they usually have little influence, meaning their regimes fall quickly and they can do little damage. With a higher, or no, endorsement cap not only will it be easier to launch such a coup, but an individual doing so would conceivably have sufficient influence to extend their regime or eject more nations.
 
2. I repeat once more; the endorsement cap was not designed for, or intended to deal with, an internal coup by an elected delegate.
 
3. This is the most recent argument against endorsement caps. It is as false as the previous two. Milograd was in no way aided by the endorsement cap. His strategy from the beginning was to conserve influence by ejecting nations with as little influence as possible; these formed the vast majority of nations in TSP. In a supposed scenario where the half dozen or so people who attempt to gain as many endorsements as possible had been able to have more then there would have been no difference at all, as they already​ had sufficient influence for him to prefer other targets. If you'd add so much as 30 odd endorsements for a couple of months, Milo bypassed you for cheaper prey.
 
To conclude; There is no benefit to having more than 100 endorsements, or for that matter more than roughly 30 - the level needed to make you unattractive to a rogue delegate. Conversely, a higher level of general endorsements makes the region easier to coup, and provides the possibility of a couper doing more damage than normally so. The only people who need to have a large number of endorsements are those directly involved in regional security.

[Eluvatar]

Why not Belschaft? if more of us had higher endorsements he would not be able to eject and ban so many nations. The damage he dealt would have been way less than it is now, also would have drained his influence faster

El Markus may have a point. One need only compare <a class='bbc_url' href='http://forums.thesouthpacific.org/page/history.html'>our records</a> with <a class='bbc_url' href='http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/pages/sc-logs/'>TNP's</a> to see that higher endorsements on more nations lead to higher influence on more nations, and in fact also higher influence on all the nations they are endorsement swapping with.

(Alternatively one can compare <a class='bbc_url' href='http://forums.thesouthpacific.org/page/security.html'>our current status</a> with <a class='bbc_url' href='http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/pages/sc-alerts/'>theirs</a>.)

I realize I should also provide some statistics about the influence scores of the less highly endorsed nations, I will do so.

[Rebel-topia]

Very well put, Bels
 
:thumb:

[Vejay]

To conclude; There is no benefit to having more than 100 endorsements, or for that matter more than roughly 30 - the level needed to make you unattractive to a rogue delegate. Conversely, a higher level of general endorsements makes the region easier to coup, and provides the possibility of a couper doing more damage than normally so. The only people who need to have a large number of endorsements are those directly involved in regional security.

 
The thing is even the people who are involved in regional security can be risks. I still believe if we had an endorsement cap of atleast 200 it would still be really hard for raiders/or outsiders to overthrow our delegate who has 370 endorsements.
Like Eluvatar says the more endorsements on more nations the more influence on more nations. If another Milograd coup would happen that person could nowhere near eject/ban the amount of people Milo did.
 
That's just what im trying to say. 370 endorsements is still 170 endorsements away from the 200 cap if somehow the outsiders/raiders or endorse tarts still overthrow our current delegate then there is no one to blame but ourselves for not noticing sooner.

[Rebel-topia]

the problem lies when you try to pass the delegacy from one nation to another. If many nations have a high number of endos, they can easily tart quickly to surpass the legally elected delegate.

[Vejay]

the problem lies when you try to pass the delegacy from one nation to another. If many nations have a high number of endos, they can easily tart quickly to surpass the legally elected delegate.

Hmm have not thought about that however 170 endorsements is hard to get in 1 update. it took me 3-4 days to get 177 endorsements and i even TG'd the people telling them that i endorsed them.
 
how does the passing over delegacy work at this moment?
Lets say B&N needs to pass it over to Hileville,
B&N has 370
Hileville has 250
 
B&N can stay on 370 endorsements untill Hileville gets close lets say 350 endorsements. then people will just unendorse B&N untill hileville has the most endorsements? While having the security check out if anyone is trying to overthrow the delegate.

[Belschaft]

There is also, as I have pointed out, no actual reason why anyone <em class='bbc'>needs</em> 200 endorsements. Wanting something does not mean you should have it, and I place regional security ahead of a small number of people getting to have an extra x number of endorsements that make them look important/popular but do nothing else.

[Vejay]

There is also, as I have pointed out, no actual reason why anyone needs 200 endorsements. Wanting something does not mean you should have it, and I place regional security ahead of a small number of people getting to have an extra x number of endorsements that make them look important/popular but do nothing else.

I've read your long post i know it does not give you a free ejection pass. But if you still get ejected it would cost the "couper" alot of influence, means he can ban less and less nations. His influence will run out alot faster which results into being able to retake the region much faster which also means there is less damage cause he wouldnt have been able to eject so much nations .
 
Unless i'm totally wrong with this?

[TheStonedSurfers]

Oy vey.  I'm NOT arguing for or against endorsement caps.  I want no part in that discussion because we have our views, but, the region itself has rules that must be followed.  And I never said that enough influence prevented you from being banned/ejected.  In fact, I stated that the only way to prevent abuse of the endorsement cap was to eject/ban.  I actually argued for ending the discussion of the whole cap idea since the rule is already set and it won't be changed.  I argued that, by us still arguing over it, Milograd still wins because the region is divided.

[Belschaft]

I've read your long post i know it does not give you a free ejection pass. But if you still get ejected it would cost the "couper" alot of influence, means he can ban less and less nations. His influence will run out alot faster which results into being able to retake the region much faster which also means there is less damage cause he wouldnt have been able to eject so much nations .
 
Unless i'm totally wrong with this?

Yes, because Milograd won't eject you. If you have 30 endorsements he won't eject you. He'll eject the guy with two endorsements and 3 influence, rather than the guy with 30 endorsements and 15 influence.

[Vejay]

Yes, because Milograd won't eject you. If you have 30 endorsements he won't eject you. He'll eject the guy with two endorsements and 3 influence, rather than the guy with 30 endorsements and 15 influence.

Ofcourse he will eject the one with less endorsements/influence. but if there are fewer nations with low influence/endorsements he will have to eject/ban some of the higher influenced nations if he wants to stay in power
 

Oy vey.  I'm NOT arguing for or against endorsement caps.  I want no part in that discussion because we have our views, but, the region itself has rules that must be followed.  And I never said that enough influence prevented you from being banned/ejected.  In fact, I stated that the only way to prevent abuse of the endorsement cap was to eject/ban.  I actually argued for ending the discussion of the whole cap idea since the rule is already set and it won't be changed.  I argued that, by us still arguing over it, Milograd still wins because the region is divided.

I know the rule has already been set but that does not mean we shouldnt discuss about increasing the cap. Discussing these things is a democratic way of changing peoples mind - discussion = good, makes things more interesting.
 
If everyone agreed on everything life would be very boring

[HEM]

I just want to remind everyone, this is shaping up to be a <em class='bbc'>great</em> discussion. I hope nobody gets frustrated because minds aren't getting changed quickly.
 
If anything, this debate shows how useful the forum is (not that anyone has strongly contested that to my knowledge). I am going to listen a little more before I say anything else though.

[Rebel-topia]

While I agree with the thought that more nations having higher influence means less nations ejected/banjected, I think that its a bit nearsighted. if EVERYONE has more influence, so does the sitting delegate. So when they start ejecting, they can eject the same amount as if EVERYONE had less influence... Yes?