Endorsement Caps

If we do implement this, then I would be in favour of a multi-stage floating endorsement cap, based on forum activity, rather than age.

We also need to consider how to run independent elections if we were to implement an endorsement cap.

I think we should keep the following criteria in mind; the system should:

• Not deter entrance and activity to the region.
• Possibly incentivise activity through higher caps, etc.
• Provide notable disincentives to raider sleeper cells (e.g. high forum activity, etc.).
• Be clearly codified, to avoid arbitrary justice.
• Provide a large enough cap that no reasonable invasion force could seize control through a straight barrelling.
• Possibly provide large, old nations who clearly demonstrate dedication to CP's best interests (past delegates?) with a large enough cap that they could seize the region back in case of an invasion or internal tyranny.

 

I feel a cap based on forum activity would be difficult to judge as each individual would have a opinion as what should be deemed as "active" and so solidifying as well as monitoring activity would be more intensive on nations to keep track of... The reason I am against a floating cap is similar. The delegate's number of endorsements is changing daily which means this cap could change value daily making it difficult for nation to not violate the cap. A flat cap and nation age are much easier to monitor and make voting on the values more simple.

Afforess, you concisely described my multi-stage endorsement cap much better than I would have however, the plan is a little miss interpreted. The idea was that once a nation's influence increases to vassal status there would be no more endorsement caps on the nation. One to encourage forum activity and one to ensure they have been in the region for an adequate amount of time. When the nation is a vassal and above, they are unrestricted. This guarantees the nation has been living in CP for a little more than a year before they are unrestricted.

In addition to Panageadom's list, I believe the system should be easily monitored not only by nations charged to do so but also by any nation who endorses which is why a flat cap and something like regional influence could be used for quick and efficient checks.

 

I could possibly be persuaded to support Acarios multi stage defination.

 

The multi-stage sounds like a good idea to me.

 

There is much support for the multi-stage cap. If we were to use this endorsement cap, where would these caps be placed? I was thinking 10 or 15 endorsements for those not apart of the forum. This is quite low but is easily lifted by joining the forum. The cap for minnow nations would be 40 endorsements. I believe this would be a high cap for minnow nations since there is only one minnow nation currently above 40. Few would hit the cap. Anyone against these values? Are there values which would be better?

 

A few points:

1) Firstly, I don't think that this forum is particularly representative of the overall mood of CP. I'm not sure that the majority support an endo cap.
2) I am uncomfortable with rolling this kind of thing in before we've taken a serious look at the "activity" alternatives; as I understand it, Afforess is working on (for example) this forum and a list of recruitable nations. I think we need to give an activity-based defence more time.
3) I think consulting large, defender organisations on what a sensible cap is is legitimate. I know you're there, Unibot!
4) If we want to start talking about endo-caps, we need a clear alternative method of election before we even start formalising things.
5) I'm still uncomfortable about a status based endo cap, which rewards long-term inactive nations over "new blood".

Oh, damn it, I can't seem to get user links to work.

 

I do not believe the majority support the endo cap; however, I do think people support implementing something rather than nothing regardless of whether its the endo cap or some sort of activity alternative. The RMB discussion after the raid illustrates people want something done. An activity-based defense is preferable though it seems such a defense will take some time to create and implement, so maybe put an endo cap into effect while flushing out an activity defense. Even if we do not, there is no harm in flushing out an endo cap and activity defense options. Then we would be able to choose from two fully form ideas. They might work well together and so both could be used. The worst option for us right now is to do neither. I am waiting to see what Afforess can provide for activity assessment though this is difficult because a definition for activity can vary. Activity can be described in terms of time online, posts, views, number of log ons... Some of these definitions might be too lax while stricter definitions such as posts made would neglect people as well. For one, I have been in CP since the days of FASTERCAT of delegate, on NS daily and only posted maybe four to five messages on the RMB; though, I have read every RMB which was posted. I think a silent but active member would be overlooked in an activity defense. A number of posts system would reward one group of members over another group of members just as they endo cap rewards long term nations over new blood. If number of log ons was utilized, then this would probably be ineffective in stopping raiders.

While this endo cap system does favor long-term nations over new blood, I do not believe it favors the inactive nation over the active one. Regional influence increases on time in region as well as number of endorsements received. An inactive nation will frequently have much less endorsements than the active nation as those who are active and endorsing will attract those looking to be endorsed. A new and active nation would increase regional influence much faster than an old and inactive one. Though I do see how it would favor the long-term over the new nations and there is a point where the long-term inactive would be favored over newer nations depending on how long ago the long-term inactive nation joined the region. I will think some more on this issue you have raised and try to come up with some solutions.

In short, I believe we need to be working and fleshing out both possible systems that have been proposed.

 

Oh, of course. By all means, we should format the ideas as far as possible (I still think some work on alternative elections in the case of an endo-cap remains a key issue). I do, however, think an endo cap acts to reduce the level of activity (in what is perhaps a worthwhile tradeoff), and hence damages the prospects of an "active defence". Unfortunately, and nothing against what you've done, but I think it's quite legitimate that we set up incentives to reward players posting on the RMB/forums (if we have to at all - something that we don't under an activity system); it's those players who bring flavour to the debate, while watching doesn't really do anything to "grow" CP. I also disagree that an endo cap is uniform in favouring active nations over inactive ones: often, a nation can do a broad round of endorsements in its early days, receive its counter-endorsements, and then go dark, slowly accumulating influence as our raider friends did. Because each endorsement is relatively "cheap" and hard to remove once issued, those counter-endorsements remain with the sleeping nation, making its influence grow over time despite its inactivity.

 

Do you have any ideas for incentives in mind?

 

Well, the ones we're discussing here (i.e. what behaviour is rewarded by an increase in one's endo cap) were the ones I was thinking of.

 

If number of posts is used then I can think of two possible methods.

1) There is an endo cap of 10 for those not apart of the regional forums. When a nation joins the forums then the cap is raised to 20. At 10 posts on the forums, the cap is raised to 30. This trend would continue; so 20 posts = 40 cap, 30 posts = 50 cap, so on and so fourth. If we wanted to make this more difficult, then change the number of posts needed for each increase of 10 endorsements.

2)The primary endo cap of 10 would remain as in method one and have the same requirement to lift the cap. After a nation joins the forums, for each post made on the forum will equal an endorsement. If the the nation posts once then the nation has a cap of 11. Another post then the cap is at 12.

Both methods would have the final cap at 50 endorsements, so once those requirements are fulfilled there would be no cap imposed on the nation. There are a few differences which I can think of between the two methods. The first method would have definite levels making it more of a multi-stage endo cap and the way posts values are set to cap raises in the example above it would be easier to complete. The second method would have no definite levels and every nation would have a cap unique to their activity; however, this one for one type of method is more difficult to complete.

I believe these can be incorporated with my idea of a regional influence cap lift. Say a nation joins the forum and has the 10 endorsement cap lifted but does not post then their cap will be 20 by method one or 10 by method two. If the nation remains in the region long enough to have their regional influence change from minnow to vassal then the nation is now not imposed by a endo cap. This would give a nation two different avenues to complete the endo cap system. At such low endorsement numbers it would take years to have the regional influence change and therefore the active posting avenue would be much faster and so it would be encouraged over the secondary avenue.

Any thoughts?

 

Yeah, seems reasonable to me.

A good policy, as it seems to me, would be to have a maximum limit on the endo-cap via forums (e.g. 50), and allow nations that have achieved that maximum band, and then have a sufficiently high regional influence, to act without a cap.

 

Which method sounds more reasonable out of the two I explained for an activity based cap?

 

Oh, a stratified one. Though I'd shuffle the numbers - remember, should this forum take off, it'd be quite easy to get through maybe four or five posts in a single day.

 

I think we need to start looking at ways to try to implement this idea in a democratic fashion. I would like to have some sort of election plan to present to the region so they can vote on the idea of an endorsement cap as Acario has been presented (once we flesh out the details).

 

elections could be help here http://www.ballotbin.com/

Thank you google

 

True but couldn't raiders hijack it by creating imposter profiles on the forums based on nations who have chosen not to use the forums. They could influence elections.