[SA]Define Legit? The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Day 838, 20:46
•
Published in Brazil 
•
by
•
by Dishmcds
Since I'm not elected, nor representative anymore, here's my take on the background of what most of you are going to refer to as "channers" in Erepublik, and what you will say or think about their actions. While I may or may not agree with what they are doing in South Africa, since most of you are questioning the legality of it, I ask of you to question your own knowledge of the situation first.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away....
Okay, I'm done with the Spaceball/Star Wars references, but what most of you refer to as "chan invasions" didn't start with 888chan, or 7chan. They started long ago, back in the beginning of Erepublik, with the introduction of groups from both /v/ and /b/ into Iran, Pakistan, and a few other various countries. For those unfamiliar with a chan invasion, here's how one normally works:
1. A leader, or someone well known in a country starts by recruiting in a chan. They bring an initial wave of people into Erepublik by posting detailed information in the chan they belong to on where to register, where to work etc.
2. Of these, a group of management is usually selected to be the outward voice of the chan in Erepublik, and a group is usually selected to be the trolling population. Usually the latter outweighs the former.
3. The group of management sets itself just big enough to gain majorities in Congress and then eventually Presidency (if the takeover is successful).
4. ???
5. Profit.
Sound familar?
Oh, wait. That doesn't take a chan. It also sounds an awful like MMO or Forum recruitment, doesn't it? I remember when most of Sweden was recruited from Flashback, which used the same MO, I remember when almost every baby boom pre-Hungary was based on this method. Step 1, look for a large, Nationality based forum, Step 2, recruit based on being taken over, etc until you are now a power in Erepublik.
It's been working like this since the beginning of time in Erepublik, each just a bit more shocking than the other. The most recent, obviously, is the takeover of South Africa by channers. Was this the first time they have taken over a country? No. Was this the first time they had acted maliciously towards a nation because of the host nation not wanting to give up it's nice little comfort zone? No.
In short, this was not all about the channers. The issue here, largely, is our inability to actually trust or accept those from other mediums who happen to already be organised. In the UK, it would be like the Tories joining Labour, and expecting Labour to treat them with open arms.
Can you prove that this is not within Erepublik Law? Can you prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that the channers were not just more organised and capable than the host nation was capable to fend off?
In short, no. The channers were run out of Venezuela, via Brazil, and moved into South Africa, with their dreams of having a Nation of their own to operate. Have we seen this type of situation before?
Well, to be frank, yes, you have. Especially in South Africa.
Not too long ago, the Croatian Majority, without a country of their own, took over your small nation for something along the lines of 5 months, until the administration created Croatia. This was led by long time EDEN/ATLANTIS friendlies such as Sucko, whom I've worked with before, as well as against.
Would you call Sucko a channer, because he didn't have a country of his own?
Would you call the Croats, whom apparently are your allies, channers, when you call channers "liers, cheats, and thieves" on a daily basis?
I think not. It's about perspective, really. Many of the old /v/ population turned out to be very good at Erepublik, even if they do troll quite often. I have no doubt that the channers in South Africa would have eventually gotten bored anyway, but many of them might have stuck around.
So this basically begs the question: Do we fear people in our own countries just because they're different than we are? Do we protect "our" countries under some false sense of bravado or even lie to our population because we're afraid of losing our own majority within that country, and the say to how it's run along with it?
I think perhaps, for some, it's time to readdress what they think of as "Legit". While many will not condone a PTO, it's not against the rules, and your view of the mountain top may just be different than theirs. That doesn't make it wrong, however.
Hugs and Kisses,
Just Another Guy
A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away....
Okay, I'm done with the Spaceball/Star Wars references, but what most of you refer to as "chan invasions" didn't start with 888chan, or 7chan. They started long ago, back in the beginning of Erepublik, with the introduction of groups from both /v/ and /b/ into Iran, Pakistan, and a few other various countries. For those unfamiliar with a chan invasion, here's how one normally works:
1. A leader, or someone well known in a country starts by recruiting in a chan. They bring an initial wave of people into Erepublik by posting detailed information in the chan they belong to on where to register, where to work etc.
2. Of these, a group of management is usually selected to be the outward voice of the chan in Erepublik, and a group is usually selected to be the trolling population. Usually the latter outweighs the former.
3. The group of management sets itself just big enough to gain majorities in Congress and then eventually Presidency (if the takeover is successful).
4. ???
5. Profit.
Sound familar?
Oh, wait. That doesn't take a chan. It also sounds an awful like MMO or Forum recruitment, doesn't it? I remember when most of Sweden was recruited from Flashback, which used the same MO, I remember when almost every baby boom pre-Hungary was based on this method. Step 1, look for a large, Nationality based forum, Step 2, recruit based on being taken over, etc until you are now a power in Erepublik.
It's been working like this since the beginning of time in Erepublik, each just a bit more shocking than the other. The most recent, obviously, is the takeover of South Africa by channers. Was this the first time they have taken over a country? No. Was this the first time they had acted maliciously towards a nation because of the host nation not wanting to give up it's nice little comfort zone? No.
In short, this was not all about the channers. The issue here, largely, is our inability to actually trust or accept those from other mediums who happen to already be organised. In the UK, it would be like the Tories joining Labour, and expecting Labour to treat them with open arms.
Can you prove that this is not within Erepublik Law? Can you prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that the channers were not just more organised and capable than the host nation was capable to fend off?
In short, no. The channers were run out of Venezuela, via Brazil, and moved into South Africa, with their dreams of having a Nation of their own to operate. Have we seen this type of situation before?
Well, to be frank, yes, you have. Especially in South Africa.
Not too long ago, the Croatian Majority, without a country of their own, took over your small nation for something along the lines of 5 months, until the administration created Croatia. This was led by long time EDEN/ATLANTIS friendlies such as Sucko, whom I've worked with before, as well as against.
Would you call Sucko a channer, because he didn't have a country of his own?
Would you call the Croats, whom apparently are your allies, channers, when you call channers "liers, cheats, and thieves" on a daily basis?
I think not. It's about perspective, really. Many of the old /v/ population turned out to be very good at Erepublik, even if they do troll quite often. I have no doubt that the channers in South Africa would have eventually gotten bored anyway, but many of them might have stuck around.
So this basically begs the question: Do we fear people in our own countries just because they're different than we are? Do we protect "our" countries under some false sense of bravado or even lie to our population because we're afraid of losing our own majority within that country, and the say to how it's run along with it?
I think perhaps, for some, it's time to readdress what they think of as "Legit". While many will not condone a PTO, it's not against the rules, and your view of the mountain top may just be different than theirs. That doesn't make it wrong, however.
Hugs and Kisses,
Just Another Guy
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
pertamax
Segunda.
Goood stuff
A newspaper not full of crap: http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/veritate-211416/1" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/ve[..]416/1
Good article Dish.
Though I still feel its wrong for the Channers to just based on the grounds that they want to do it because they want to screw over another country. They don't want their own country given to them, they want someone else's taken away.
And before someone says "What about if the channers PTOed a Phoenix country?!", then I would probably be posting this same thing because while I think normal PTOs are okay because they make the game more fun, Channers are jerks
I thought the Chan's were some sort of sect... and that they were going to take over the world. Funny how things we don't understand become secretive, underground cults that are bent on destroying us all. I blame the news.
Good article 🙂
Good article Dish. Voted.
@Trent: As an elected Gov't, however, who's to say that isn't their right? You're basing this on moral views, not game views. I could use the PTO of Denmark as an example of the same thing, actually, so it would negate any moral argument you had.
Also, Syrup: If you're unable to see things from another viewpoint, I feel quite sorry for you walking across two way roads. Hope you stick to one way streets, for your own safety.
Voted
as i come from the chans but wasnt involved with this i approve 😃
Hugs!
Well said... this is a phonecall for admins
This time i completely agree with you. If they did their thing legit, within the rules of the game that should work the same for each and every one of us, then it would be hypocritical to point fingers at those channers simply because they messed up some of our game plans.
it's tough to argue against that.
I don't like what the channers did, but I agree with you. PTOs are legal. And if they pulled all of this off legally, without any bots or anything like that, then good for them I guess. It's unfortunate for those who want to move eSA forward, but the channers aren't really doing anything wrong until they do something illegal.
Nice article. Voted
v!
The Croats though didn't destroy the country, the Channers did.
Although I agree with you here, I just know that if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be screaming about injustice and other PEACEnik bullshit, just like you did when Japan happened.
Voted!
Also, there is absolutely no reason for that movie title in your title.
@Jeep: I'd ask you to look at some of Esteban Delgado's writing from way back then. They thought the Croats were just as crap as any "foreign" group, much like they do now. I also think they've been taken over by the Swedes at one point, although I can't recall exactly.
@Emerick: The point isn't the PTO itself, but the legality of it. Most of the crap around this is that the channers are doing it "illegaly" and etc etc, while there isn't any solid proof of it. If we had a country PTO'd, we'd probably be upset, but there's a difference between combatting a PTO, and trying to get the admins to "Fix it" because they couldn't stop it.
Also; Thanks for clarifying Japan, since everyone else pretty much denies it. 🙂
This would be a valid point, if they had legally pulled it off. Most citizens of eSA believe that: multiple people who are now government officials have used multi's before if not now. Look at the current president Roneli(with a capital i ) and the banned citizen Ronell. Both lived in SA, both published jokes and similar material in their articles, both are female, Ronell has a picture of a wolf for her pic, and until a few days ago Roneli's newspaper was "the Wolf Times", and with the capital "i" Roneli's name even looks identical to Ronell's. Coincidence? (Even on the erepublik wiki she is called Ronell, not Roneli)
And about our issues of not trusting: Why would we ever trust anyone who would gladly destroy our country because they are mad at us? Would you elect someone into office who would maliciously destroy your nation if they got bored or were mad for whatever reason? Of course not, you would elect someone who is willing to dedicate their time to the country to make it better.
Yes, the majority of channers are good and want to better their community, country and erepublik. This group of channers though do not want that. Look at the world map, does SA look better than it did 5 days ago?
Note: I am not accusing or suggesting any of the channers in the SA government of having multiple accounts(if so I apologize), I am just reporting the reasons many eSA citizens believe that the current government PTO'd them. I am also sharing some interesting coincidences between Ronell and a unrelated citizen, Roneli.
^ Can't report me!
while I do agree with you here dish, you as well as I know that there are serious questions hanging over the legality of the PTO, yes I am talking multis, and channers obviously have the ability to hide there actions (tor, proxies etc)
regardless, even if they did achieve their 'win' by multi, its not going to be overturned
I have no idea what your last comment to me was supposed to mean
THe same exact point I was making on IRC earlier, good article.
@Golgavar: Wow, the admin should really put you in the multi hunting department, you are world class. In all seriousness your methods of detecting multis are casual at best, let the people with the tools do it. Also, I think we both know that the channer's weren't the only ones multi-ing in eSA 😉
Lighten up Emerick.
selling weapons: 9 q1 for 0.5 gold, or 2.48 BRL per 1 q1! 120% safe delivery!
voted!
Nice article!
The same situation is happening in Peru, with polish players.
> Although I agree with you here, I just know that if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be screaming about injustice and other PEACEnik bullshit, just like you did when Japan happened.
So you agree that Japan was a PTO ? Good, that's a nice first step. Because I remember you and your FoH friends vehemently denying it in the past.
There's one big difference in asking admins to ban the PTOers or to try and warn the common population that the PTOers are in fact... PTOers, and will care more about other nations rather than the nation they're in (and follow their hidden agendas using the same nation they PTOed as a tool).
Get the difference here ?
Voted to hard.
Voted 😉
Personally I can't see the difference between Pto and Channing. Both would not happen in real life and both distort the traditional behaviour of the eCountry. I do not see why people would see Pto's as fun.
The fact that eSA could stop the Chan if they had united is not the point. When you have countries with 50k citizens and other with 3k, this will always be possible. And when it happens I see it as a imperfection of the game. I believe Admins have worked well to reduce the number of Pto's through citizenship but for smaller countries the problem is still there. It is not hard to think of methods that would reduce the chances of this occurring. In real life you only vote when you reach 18 and if you changed your citizenship there also limitation.
@John: Yes, we never see revolutions IRL. Sure.
Uh, wut.
Dish,
We see revolutions IRL. And we see war. I don't see how a PTO ressembles a revolution. A revolution is something outside the current legal framework which changes the current government. A PTO/Chan is the use of the current democratic to gain a majority in the country and changed significantly the behaviour of the government without warning(I maybe wrong but can't see it happen in real life).
> A revolution is something outside the current legal framework which changes the current government.
And a foreign population moving to settle areas such as FYROM and Kosovo are what, exactly?
asses
:3
Great article, voted.
Apparently you have no ideal why we hate this group channers. I'll refer you to this article written by Brendan E Austerion: http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/to-the-argentinians-and-brazilian-populaces-on-channers-arg--1240033/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/to-t[..]1/20
Can we sufficiently prove to the admins that the same people they banned are still in the eSA under different citizens names? No. Does that mean that those new citizens are different people? No, it just means we can't prove it to the admins(And that MUST mean they're not the same channers, because the admins approved them and the admins have such a great track record!).
And of course if one were a channer and was banned, they wouldn't come back to the game and redouble their efforts, they would give up and leave the game! Give me a break...
Note: Again, for any one who wants to report me, I am not suggesting anyone in the eSA is a channer, I am just pointing out the possibility of channers.
Very nice article dish. There is a definite tendency for the crying wolf in eRepublik. Every time a popular citizen doesn't get elected into congress: multis. Every time the favourite doesn't win the presidency: multis. Every time a country gets PTO'😛 multis.
Sometimes you've just got to stand up and admit you got beaten fair and square. We planned our operations in eSA for a long time, we made sure they didn't suspect a thing. You're wrong about us wanting our own country though, we don't want to play the game seriously. Unless they add eSomalia or something???
The losing side will always whine and the winning side will always rejoice, that's a fact of life.
EDEN/ATLANTIS brought this on themselves, they brought this concept into the game, so deal with it. The world always turns..