[freeciv-data] Re: SV: Re: rules for nations? (was: new german.ruleset)

["R. Miller" <richere@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 15:55 01-01-13 +0100, you wrote:


>----- Original Message -----=3D20
>From: R. Miller <richere@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 3:55 PM
>Subject: [freeciv-data] Re: rules for nations? (was: [Freeciv-Dev] new =3D
>german.ruleset)
>
>
> >=3D20
> > At 21:33 01-01-05 +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
> >=3D20
> > >A nation is 'modern' if its name it suggests identification with a
> > >nation that actually exists today, unless it is explicitly part of a
> > >historic or fantasy nation ruleset.
> >=3D20
> > Have you considered simply including as a modern nation
> > any nation that is now a member of the United Nations Organisation?
> >=3D20
> > Also, I suggest a slot for "cultural nations".
> > My own preferred example would be Qu=3D3DE9bec.
> > I won't burden you with the details, but even many of the stauchest=3D3D
> >  adversaries
> > of Qu=3D3DE9bec's separation from Canada would admit that the =3D
>"Qu=3D3DE9becois"
> > represent a culture that is different from their own -  mostly =3D
>anglophone=3D3D20
> > Canadians.
>
>Maybe they belong to the french culture and should play the frensh =3D
>ruleset. Just add some Qubec cities to the french ruleset for them.

I do hope that was meant as a joke (though I've heard it before).

I did not suggest using the term "cultural nations" specifically for Qu=E9be=
c -
that was only an example. I thought it might also apply to the Kurds or to
American natives, and other cultures that do not presently have a=
 geographical
country but who still consider themselves a nation distinct from any other=
=20
nation.

Robaire



 =20