Eastern Pacific News Service

[Glen-Rhodes]

Onder, don't play dumb. Nobody is your successor, because you were not a legitimate delegate. Don't make me break out the WWII analogies.

[Whiskum]

Onder, don't play dumb.

People are not 'dumb' simply because they choose to read the actual historical record rather than one bowdlerised to conform to your idea of 'legitimate'.

My remark has gone from a minor aside to this discussion solely because of certain people's inability to come to terms with that reality.

Nobody is your successor, because you were not a legitimate delegate.

Simply because you do not deem a delegate to be 'legitimate' does not vanquish the historical fact of their Delegacy from existence.

Regardless of whether a delegate is judged to be legitimate or illegitimate, they have been delegate, with other delegates coming before and after them.

The fact that you deem a delegate to have been illegitimate does not somehow banish that delegate out of the sequence of delegates.

As has already been made clear, my reference was to the actual Delegacy, not the 'legitimate delegates' as construed by you and Unibot.

Don't make me break out the WWII analogies.

No one here is making you break out anything, never mind 'the WWII analogies'.

If you wish to make comparisons between the events of the Second World War and invasion of The Rejected Realms, then that is entirely your decision.

[Venico]

Onder sometimes I swear you're a robot and run on circuits...and I love you for it. =P

[Glen-Rhodes]

Here I thought the UIAF tended to rise above to stupid rhetorical games of this forum. Nice to know an apparent ally of the GCRs doesn't care about democratic elections.

[Unibot III]

Onder, don't play dumb.

People are not 'dumb' simply because they choose to read the actual historical record rather than one bowdlerised to conform to your idea of 'legitimate'.

My remark has gone from a minor aside to this discussion solely because of certain people's inability to come to terms with that reality.

Nobody is your successor, because you were not a legitimate delegate.

Simply because you do not deem a delegate to be 'legitimate' does not vanquish the historical fact of their Delegacy from existence.

Regardless of whether a delegate is judged to be legitimate or illegitimate, they have been delegate, with other delegates coming before and after them.

The fact that you deem a delegate to have been illegitimate does not somehow banish that delegate out of the sequence of delegates.

As has already been made clear, my reference was to the actual Delegacy, not the 'legitimate delegates' as construed by you and Unibot.

Under this logic, this would make Mahaj the last legitimate delegate of Concosia.

[Frattastan II]

Here I thought the UIAF tended to rise above to stupid rhetorical games of this forum. Nice to know an apparent ally of the GCRs doesn't care about democratic elections.

Much like sovereignty, democracy is an abstract principle often subject to arbitrary reinterpretations, which has no inherent value.
The merits of each 'democratic' election should be rationally evaluated on a case-by-case basis depending on the interests of the UIAF blah blah blah random imperialist nonsense.

[Whiskum]

Here I thought the UIAF tended to rise above to stupid rhetorical games of this forum.

Quite, the United Imperial Armed Forces is not the party seeking to write delegates out of the historical record through an inapt rhetoric of 'legitimacy'.

It is those who would exclude delegates based on such criteria who are engaging in 'stupid rhetorical games' here.

Nice to know an apparent ally of the GCRs doesn't care about democratic elections.

We are no ally of The Rejected Realms, indeed the LKE and TNI are at war with then.

Naturally, our attitude to those regions we are not engaged in hostilities against is rather different.

In spite of that, if we did not take note of democratic elections, then I would hardly be commenting on the awful message sent by electing Unibot.

People are not 'dumb' simply because they choose to read the actual historical record rather than one bowdlerised to conform to your idea of 'legitimate'.

My remark has gone from a minor aside to this discussion solely because of certain people's inability to come to terms with that reality.


Simply because you do not deem a delegate to be 'legitimate' does not vanquish the historical fact of their Delegacy from existence.

Regardless of whether a delegate is judged to be legitimate or illegitimate, they have been delegate, with other delegates coming before and after them.

The fact that you deem a delegate to have been illegitimate does not somehow banish that delegate out of the sequence of delegates.

As has already been made clear, my reference was to the actual Delegacy, not the 'legitimate delegates' as construed by you and Unibot.

Under this logic, this would make Mahaj the last legitimate delegate of Concosia.

Actually, you will find that there is nothing in that logic whatsoever which seeks to determine who was the 'legitimate delegate' of anything.

The argument of that post, if you read it, specifically disclaims to be making any comment on matters of legitimacy or illegitimacy.

Mahaj was indeed the last Delegate of Concosia, before TNI foiled the UDL's refound attempt, although I am not sure what relevance that has to this.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Here I thought the UIAF tended to rise above to stupid rhetorical games of this forum.

Quite, the United Imperial Armed Forces is not the party seeking to write delegates out of the historical record through an inapt rhetoric of 'legitimacy'.

It is those who would exclude delegates based on such criteria who are engaging in 'stupid rhetorical games' here.

Nice to know an apparent ally of the GCRs doesn't care about democratic elections.

We are no ally of The Rejected Realms, indeed the LKE and TNI are at war with then.

Naturally, our attitude to those regions we are not engaged in hostilities against is rather different.

In spite of that, if we did not take note of democratic elections, then I would hardly be commenting on the awful message sent by electing Unibot.

You can't have it both ways. Your comments on the legitimacy of the delegate seat show that, to you, elections are unimportant. Elections have no legitimating power. You place the physical delegate seat on a higher level than the elected delegate. That is very concerning to me, considering The South Pacific has long refused to open diplomatic relations with The West Pacific for holding similar views.

It is further concerning to me, because our alliance with The New Inquisition is founded upon the guarantee that TNI will support the legitimate delegate in times of crisis, which requires that TNI recognize what is a legitimate delegate. It is not a mere intellectual fabrication construction by me and Unibot. Delegate legitimacy is the foundation of GCR governance.

[South Pacific Belschaft]

Quite, the United Imperial Armed Forces is not the party seeking to write delegates out of the historical record through an inapt rhetoric of 'legitimacy'.

It is those who would exclude delegates based on such criteria who are engaging in 'stupid rhetorical games' here.


We are no ally of The Rejected Realms, indeed the LKE and TNI are at war with then.

Naturally, our attitude to those regions we are not engaged in hostilities against is rather different.

In spite of that, if we did not take note of democratic elections, then I would hardly be commenting on the awful message sent by electing Unibot.

You can't have it both ways. Your comments on the legitimacy of the delegate seat show that, to you, elections are unimportant. Elections have no legitimating power. You place the physical delegate seat on a higher level than the elected delegate. That is very concerning to me, considering The South Pacific has long refused to open diplomatic relations with The West Pacific for holding similar views.

It is further concerning to me, because our alliance with The New Inquisition is founded upon the guarantee that TNI will support the legitimate delegate in times of crisis, which requires that TNI recognize what is a legitimate delegate. It is not a mere intellectual fabrication construction by me and Unibot. Delegate legitimacy is the foundation of GCR governance.

I think a reasonable distinction can be made between recognizing the legitimacy of people you are not at war with vs. not recognizing the legitimacy of people you are at war with.

[Whiskum]

Quite, the United Imperial Armed Forces is not the party seeking to write delegates out of the historical record through an inapt rhetoric of 'legitimacy'.

It is those who would exclude delegates based on such criteria who are engaging in 'stupid rhetorical games' here.


We are no ally of The Rejected Realms, indeed the LKE and TNI are at war with then.

Naturally, our attitude to those regions we are not engaged in hostilities against is rather different.

In spite of that, if we did not take note of democratic elections, then I would hardly be commenting on the awful message sent by electing Unibot.

You can't have it both ways. Your comments on the legitimacy of the delegate seat show that, to you, elections are unimportant. Elections have no legitimating power. You place the physical delegate seat on a higher level than the elected delegate. That is very concerning to me, considering The South Pacific has long refused to open diplomatic relations with The West Pacific for holding similar views.

What comments on the legitimacy of the Delegacy seat would these be?

I have expressed no view at all on the importance of a legitimate Delegate or on what constitutes a legitimate Delegate in the above posts.

Rather, I have distinguished between the actual Delegate in the game history and the legitimate Delegates of TRR as portrayed by you.

Drawing such a distinction does not mean that one believes there are no such thing as legitimate delegates or that such are always irrelevant.

It is further concerning to me, because our alliance with The New Inquisition is founded upon the guarantee that TNI will support the legitimate delegate in times of crisis, which requires that TNI recognize what is a legitimate delegate. It is not a mere intellectual fabrication construction by me and Unibot. Delegate legitimacy is the foundation of GCR governance.

The South Pacific's treaty with The New Inquisition does indeed require TNI to aid the legitimate Delegate in times of crisis.

It also says:

- TNI recognises the constitution, government and laws of TSP as legitimate and agrees not to undermine or overthrow them or to assist any other region in doing so. TNI further agrees to offer assistance in the event that another region or organisation attempts to overthrow the legitimate government of TSP.

We have committed to recognise the regional institutions of TSP as legitimate. TNI has never broken a treaty pledge.

We have made no commitment to The Rejected Realms recognising their government as legitimate, whereas we have to TSP.

We are in no way compelled to recognise the regional institutions of TRR as legitimate by virtue of a TNI treaty with The South Pacific.

What is more, it is completely inappropriate for you to seek to bring TNI-TSP business into this discussion.

[Glen-Rhodes]

What comments on the legitimacy of the Delegacy seat would these be? I have expressed no view at all on the importance of a legitimate Delegate or on what constitutes a legitimate Delegate in the above posts. Rather, I have distinguished between the actual Delegate in the game history and the legitimate Delegates of TRR as portrayed by you. Drawing such a distinction does not mean that one believes there are no such thing as legitimate delegates or that such are always irrelevant.

You've made dismissive comments about the entire idea of delegate legitimacy. You've dismissed it as a mere "idea" created by me and Unibot. You have stated several times that the legitimacy of a delegate doesn't matter -- what matters is only who had the physical seat. That is what you're saying when keep pointing to the "game history" and talking about how it doesn't matter what I "deem" legitimate. It's the same type of rhetoric we've heard from The West Pacific, a region that does not place value in elections as legitimizing delegates.

Does TNI recognize that an elected delegate is the legitimate delegate of a region? Does TNI recognize that delegate coming to power through means other than an election, in a democratic GCR, is not a legitimate delegate? Does TNI recognize Unibot as the legitimate delegate of The Rejected Realms?

I do not buy any kind of argument that you can make a distinction between TRR and other regions, just because you're a war with TRR. Either you believe in delegate legitimacy or you do not.

Edit: Furthermore, I did not force you to make comments that call into question your acceptance the core principle of GCR governance. You did that on your own. It would be remiss of me to not address it.

[Whiskum]

You've made dismissive comments about the entire idea of delegate legitimacy. You've dismissed it as a mere "idea" created by me and Unibot. You have stated several times that the legitimacy of a delegate doesn't matter -- what matters is only who had the physical seat. That is what you're saying when keep pointing to the "game history" and talking about how it doesn't matter what I "deem" legitimate. It's the same type of rhetoric we've heard from The West Pacific, a region that does not place value in elections as legitimizing delegates.

This is a gross misrepresentation of a discussion about whether I was or not in fact the Delegate of TRR.

I specifically distinguished the question of whether I was the actual Delegate in the game history from your idea of who was the 'legitimate delegate'.

I referred quite specifically to you and Unibot making choices about which delegates to recognise as a legitimate delegate in the case of TRR. That is once again entirely from crediting you with the idea with inventing the idea Delegacy legitimacy as an abstract concept.

I have absolutely not stated that the legitimate Delegacy does not matter - rather, it does not change the fact of whether someone is or is not Delegate.

Whichever individual is deemed to be Delegate by a particular government may indeed by highly relevant - to that's region's foreign policy.

That does not affect whether someone else actually had the Delegacy, with predecessors and successors, and TNI-TRR are at war in any case.

Does TNI recognize that an elected delegate is the legitimate delegate of a region? Does TNI recognize that delegate coming to power through means other than an election, in a democratic GCR, is not a legitimate delegate? Does TNI recognize Unibot as the legitimate delegate of The Rejected Realms?

First, I cannot give definitive responses to all these points, because I am not a member of TNI's elected Government and these are non-military issues.

Second, TNI is not in the business of establishing universal abstract principles of gameplay morality which are hold to be correct in all given situations.

Generally, someone elected following an election would be regarded as legitimate, but it would depend on the context.

However, that has no bearing on whether I was the Delegate of The Rejected Realms, which is what the initial discussion was about.

Finally, we regard all institutions in foreign states we are at war with, such as TRR, to be against our accepted standards.

Edit: Furthermore, I did not force you to make comments that call into question your acceptance the core principle of GCR governance. You did that on your own. It would be remiss of me to not address it.

I made no such remarks.

It is highly remiss of you to invent non-problems.

[Glen-Rhodes]

This is a gross misrepresentation of a discussion about whether I was or not in fact the Delegate of TRR.

I'm not playing games here, Onder. I'm not dumb and neither are you. You know very well the political ramifications of dismissing delegate legitimacy as irrelevant. You are not innocently pointing out that you were once technically delegate of TRR. This is all very much a political game, and the UIAF is very good at politics.

First, I cannot give definitive responses to all these points, because I am not a member of TNI's elected Government and these are non-military issues.

I don't think anybody believes you're not in a position to officially comment on "non-military issues" for TNI. Regardless, these are very important questions. It is important that TNI recognizes the principles of delegate legitimacy.

Finally, we regard all institutions in foreign states we are at war with, such as TRR, to be against our accepted standards.

Just because you are at war with a region, does not mean you cannot accept that their elected leader is legitimate.

[Venico]

Onder is saying he was delegate of TRR and everyone who has come after has succeeded him.

GR seems to think he can talk around these facts.

Ok kittens, go back to pew pewing.

[Whiskum]

I'm not playing games here, Onder. I'm not dumb and neither are you. You know very well the political ramifications of dismissing delegate legitimacy as irrelevant. You are not innocently pointing out that you were once technically delegate of TRR. This is all very much a political game, and the UIAF is very good at politics.

This is now descending into the realms of conspiracy theory.

Nowhere did I dismiss delegacy legitimacy as irrelevant. I stated that because I was the actual Delegate of TRR, Unibot was my successor in that regard.

The fact that the existence of a delegacy is not extinguished by its legitimacy (or lack thereof) does not mean that the issue of legitimacy is irrelevant.

There is a massive distinction between saying that the issue of legitimacy has no bearing on whether a delegacy, such as mine in TRR, existed as a matter of historical record, and then on the other hand saying on the other there ire no such things as legitimate delegates.

Your argument implied that your perception of the legitimacy of the Delegacy affected whether that Delegacy was real or not. I reject that view.

Rejecting that view is utterly different from then saying there is no such thing as legitimate Delegate or that has no consequences.

This has absolutely no political ramifications for The South Pacific, because TNI is fully committed to its legitimate regional institutions, as is enshrined in our treaty and moreover as we have shown twice in our response to coup attempts against the elected Government of TSP.

I don't think anybody believes you're not in a position to officially comment on "non-military issues" for TNI. Regardless, these are very important questions. It is important that TNI recognizes the principles of delegate legitimacy.

Clearly, my views reflect on TNI and I am able to indicate what TNI policy is, but I am not able to make official statements on non-military issues.

Of course TNI acknowledges that some delegates are legitimate and some are not. Nowhere have we said otherwise.

That is completely different from saying that the issue of legitimacy is material to whether delegates actually should be considered to have existed.

Generally, an elected delegate would be legitimate, but that would depend on the context. Naturally, we will always uphold treaty obligations.

It is inappropriate for you to use your position as TSP Foreign Minister to seek answers from TNI in a public forum about utterly unrelated matters.

Just because you are at war with a region, does not mean you cannot accept that their elected leader is legitimate.

It depends what you mean by 'legitimate'.

If we are in a war with a region, then we are entirely hostile to that government and furthermore to its sovereign control over its territory.

Thus, we might recognise their elected or official leader as their representative, that does not mean we will in any way respect their right to rule.

There is nothing abnormal about adopting that position in a state of war.

[Cormac A Stark]

Glen-Rhodes, even a Delegacy that is not authorized by a region's official government is still a Delegacy. The Dourian Embassy was still the Delegate of Osiris in July 2013 despite his term having expired and having gone rogue, for example. He was just an unauthorized Delegate. You're making much more out of this than it is.

[Inspired By The Novel]

I am not sure if the GCRs still have a taboo on recruiting from one another, but I would like to see Unibot's TRR recruit actively so we can have enough people to prevent another Onder-dump on the delegacy, instead of relying on the current population or growth through drifters/rejects.

Maybe it is against the character of TRR to recruit like a UCR, but I would donate stamps to that purpose if Unibot was the delegate.

[Cormac A Stark]

It would generally be inadvisable for any GCR to recruit from any other GCR.

[Unibot III]

What comments on the legitimacy of the Delegacy seat would these be? I have expressed no view at all on the importance of a legitimate Delegate or on what constitutes a legitimate Delegate in the above posts. Rather, I have distinguished between the actual Delegate in the game history and the legitimate Delegates of TRR as portrayed by you. Drawing such a distinction does not mean that one believes there are no such thing as legitimate delegates or that such are always irrelevant.

You've made dismissive comments about the entire idea of delegate legitimacy. You've dismissed it as a mere "idea" created by me and Unibot. You have stated several times that the legitimacy of a delegate doesn't matter -- what matters is only who had the physical seat. That is what you're saying when keep pointing to the "game history" and talking about how it doesn't matter what I "deem" legitimate. It's the same type of rhetoric we've heard from The West Pacific, a region that does not place value in elections as legitimizing delegates.

Does TNI recognize that an elected delegate is the legitimate delegate of a region? Does TNI recognize that delegate coming to power through means other than an election, in a democratic GCR, is not a legitimate delegate? Does TNI recognize Unibot as the legitimate delegate of The Rejected Realms?

I do not buy any kind of argument that you can make a distinction between TRR and other regions, just because you're a war with TRR. Either you believe in delegate legitimacy or you do not.

Edit: Furthermore, I did not force you to make comments that call into question your acceptance the core principle of GCR governance. You did that on your own. It would be remiss of me to not address it.

He only sees the legitimacy of The South Pacific's government because of his legal obligations, otherwise there is no such thing as "legitimacy" to him.

[Old Federalia]

It would generally be inadvisable for any GCR to recruit from any other GCR.

To what do you refer? When The West Pacific used a script to recruit, I do not remember it being a problem. Moreover, each GCR now has welcome TGs, so there really is no cause to be concerned that any GCR would be "poaching" from the others if they did recruit. Does it make a difference if a fellow GCR receives those nations that choose not to heed the welcome TG and stay, as opposed to a UCR?

[Glen-Rhodes]

Glen-Rhodes, even a Delegacy that is not authorized by a region's official government is still a Delegacy. The Dourian Embassy was still the Delegate of Osiris in July 2013 despite his term having expired and having gone rogue, for example. He was just an unauthorized Delegate. You're making much more out of this than it is.

Onder knows what he's saying. There is some crafty double-talk occurring in this thread, and I expect it's because Onder cannot affirm the principle of delegate legitimacy because he does not believe in it. There is no 'context' involved when determining the legitimacy of a delegate democratically elected under a free and fair election.

You don't dismiss delegate legitimacy as irrelevant, calling it a idea concocted by me and Unibot, and not expect backlash. We all know that this is more than just an innocent discussion on whether Onder technically held the TRR delegate position for a little over a week. Calling the newly elected delegate of TRR the successor of Onder's illegitimate and illegal usurping of the TRR delegate seat shows a disregard for the principle of delegate legitimacy. It means Onder does not distinguish between illegitimate and legitimate delegates, otherwise he would know that he was not a legitimate delegate and thus not part of any order of predecessors. This is a political game, and I would hope we all know how to read between the lines.

Making a flippant remark like that is gravely concerning to me, because it is a matter of regional security that our allies actually believe in upholding legitimate delegates, rather than merely acknowledging legal commitments. It has been my understanding that TNI signed a treaty with us because they believe that protecting GCRs against coups is important. That would be the case if Onder, as TNI's military chief, and TNI's government have a sincere normative belief in the principles of delegate legitimacy. If Onder cannot say so, then I suppose the government will have to provide reassurance.

I am not sure if the GCRs still have a taboo on recruiting from one another, but I would like to see Unibot's TRR recruit actively so we can have enough people to prevent another Onder-dump on the delegacy, instead of relying on the current population or growth through drifters/rejects.

It would generally be inadvisable for any GCR to recruit from any other GCR.

There was actually some discussion of this among TSP leadership a few terms ago. If inter-GCR recruitment is something TRR would like to discuss, I invite Unibot or his foreign affairs chief to get in contact with me. Of course, discussions under a different administration are never guaranteed to carry over into a new one. However, I have a personal interest in this area and would love to take input from as many leaders as I can.

[Whiskum]

Onder knows what he's saying. There is some crafty double-talk occurring in this thread, and I expect it's because Onder cannot affirm the principle of delegate legitimacy because he does not believe in it. There is no 'context' involved when determining the legitimacy of a delegate democratically elected under a free and fair election.

There is absolutely no 'crafty double-talk'. There is merely you seeking to attribute remarks to me that I never made.

I made a comment as an aside that Unibot was one of my successors, as he is due to become the subsequent Delegate of TRR.

That is unaffected by whether the Delegacy is legitimate or illegitimate - if a Delegate is illegitimate, that does not mean their term never existed. However, simply because one distinguishes between a delegate's existence and a delegate's legitimacy does not mean the latter does not exist.

Generally, an elected delegate will be recognised by non-hostile powers as a legitimate delegate - but that depends on a region's constitution, the integrity of the election and the obligations of all concerned. This has absolutely no bearing on TSP, whose institutional legitimacy TNI has recognised in our treaty.

Moreover, it is legitimacy that TNI has robustly fought for on two occasions. It is offensive for you to suggest that we would do anything but uphold it.

You don't dismiss delegate legitimacy as irrelevant, calling it a idea concocted by me and Unibot, and not expect backlash.

This is a lie.

I have never claimed the entire concept of delegate legitimacy was invented by you and Unibot.

I referred to you and Unibot making choices about who is and who is not legitimate in the case of TRR - that is your chosen application of the concept.

Moreover, I did not even dispute your application of the concept - I made no substantive comment on the issue of legitimacy in this case either way.

Rather, I maintained (as I still do) that whether a delegate is legitimate has no bearing on whether that delegate's time in office actually existed.

We all know that this is more than just an innocent discussion on whether Onder technically held the TRR delegate position for a little over a week. Calling the newly elected delegate of TRR the successor of Onder's illegitimate and illegal usurping of the TRR delegate seat shows a disregard for the principle of delegate legitimacy. It means Onder does not distinguish between illegitimate and legitimate delegates, otherwise he would know that he was not a legitimate delegate and thus not part of any order of predecessors. This is a political game, and I would hope we all know how to read between the lines.

You may want to view this discussion as more than 'innocent', indeed you are doing your best to do so, but referring to Unibot as my successor, because he became Delegate of TRR after I did, does not constitute a rejection of the idea that legitimate delegates can and do exist - that is an absurd leap.

There is a succession of delegates. That is shown TRR's regional history. If A is going to come after B, then A will become B's successor.

I referred solely to the passing of the actual Delegacy of TRR in this sense, not to the chain of delegates recognised by TRR's current Government.

You can talk about delegate succession in the latter sense (those recognised by TRR's Government), but made clear I was talking about actual delegates.

These are simple statements of historical reality. They make no comment on who is legitimate or whether the concept of legitimacy exists.

The fact you are so troubled by such incidental and basic statements of fact, seeking to make a mountain out a molehill, is bizarre.

You and Unibot need to come to accept the past for what it was, rather than trying to write unpalatable historical events out of history.

Making a flippant remark like that is gravely concerning to me, because it is a matter of regional security that our allies actually believe in upholding legitimate delegates, rather than merely acknowledging legal commitments. It has been my understanding that TNI signed a treaty with us because they believe that protecting GCRs against coups is important. That would be the case if Onder, as TNI's military chief, and TNI's government have a sincere normative belief in the principles of delegate legitimacy. If Onder cannot say so, then I suppose the government will have to provide reassurance.

The Government of TNI is not going to be bullied by the antics of an individual intent on manipulating this issue to disrupt TNI-TSP relations.

You are not going to be able to use your position as Foreign Minister of TSP to force unrelated ideological positions onto TNI.

We have a treaty commitment to The South Pacific and we will uphold that commitment.

I have spoken with the Delegate of The South Pacific. He confirmed to on reading this thread that TSP has no concerns about this issue.

He also confirmed that you have been speaking in a solely personal capacity.

If TSP has any further official submissions to make TNI's Government, it is most welcome to use the appropriate channels.

However, your own personal conduct in this thread, specifically misrepresenting my remarks to needlessly manufacture an incident and then deciding to conduct TSP-TNI discussions publicly has been a wholly inappropriate course of conduct for the foreign minister of an ally. An alliance is a relationship where any differences of view should be dealt with cooperatively in private, not engineered into a confrontation latched on onto an irrelevant public debate.

Such conduct is deeply unprofessional and regardless of other differences I would have expected better of you Glen-Rhodes.

[TEP CAEK]

Delegate Cleans Out Executive Offices: Dust Processing Sector Surges
Written by Bach

At the end last month Puffin Delegate Bachtendekuppen decided to put down his Banhammer, for a second, and take out the big broom. The age old Executive, a pile of historically build threads with barely any structure, was neatly organized in sub-forums, offices reflecting the various existing Executive services in TEP. The following subsections were born in to the light: 'Delegate's Office', 'Ministry of Foreign Affairs', 'Ministry of Culture', 'Immigration Service', 'EPSA Forum' and 'EPPS Forum'.

New are the Ministry of Culture and Education and the Immigration Service. These new departments will focus on the recruitment, orientation and education of new nations, while highlighting and organizing cultural events. New appointments for the leading positions of these departments are coming and the Executive, finally reformed after so many years, is stronger than ever.

East Pacific News Service

---

EPSA And NPA Take Warzone Asia
Written by Xoriet

In the spirit of cooperation and promoting the proposed treaty between their GCRs, the respective militaries of the East Pacific and the North Pacific embarked on a joint operation at Thursday's (8 May) Minor update. The target region, Warzone Asia, was caught completely off guard when the combined military powers of the North Pacific and the East Pacific seized the seat of Delegate from North Campbell Nation. The natives reacted with the usual outrage when they realized that the current delegate, Masopotani, had banjected the core of their government and half of the residents of the Warzone from the region.

Hotheaded declarations of retaliation and plans for liberation on the RMB of Warzone Europe and Lazarus forums, where the government-in-exile has at present taken residency, have ultimately been stymied by the solid number of endorsements behind the EPSA Delegate. Since taking the Delegacy, EPSA and NPA have accumulated thirteen endorsements behind the Delegate alone. Further support from the ISRA, BoM, and UK has resulted in a collective total of twenty-one endorsements. The LLA was petitioned for support by the government-in-exile, but the statement of a date of withdrawal precluded attempts to liberate the region by the deposed government.

All hail TEP! All hail TNP!

Editor's note: Meanwhile, EPSA assisted in the liberation of Liberal Haven, yet again cooperating with a large number of participants.

East Pacific News Service

---

Hobbes Commended: A New Tiger In the TEP Hall Of Commendations
Written by Bach

After 1 Infinite Loop, A Slanted Black Stripe, A Mean Old Man and Todd McCloud, yet another noteworthy TEP'er was Commended by the World Assembly Security Council. Passed by low margin, but passed nonetheless, the resolution honored the Tiger's in his short NS life. This includes all his contributions to both TEP and Lazarus, EPSA and the LLA, as well as his creation of RadioNS, the Lazarus Stock Exchange and the new .approx script for military operations.

Congratulations, Hobbes.

East Pacific News Service

[Xoriet]

Well, the fun part was that we ended with 29 endos and everything went rather well. Thanks to everyone who helped NPA and TEP out. Much appreciated.

WZ Asia had the fortune to be invaded shortly after we left, too. Bad luck there.

[TEP CAEK]

TEP | Commend Hobbes - A bit of a snag
Written by Vac

DISCLAIMER: Hobbes was actually in a car accident the day his commendation went to vote, and was hospitalized for about a day and his car was totalled. He agreed to make this satire article to make a joke out of the situation;


Nationstates - A liberation attempt was derailed Sunday, May 4th, when the van containing the update crew collided with another vehicle when it ran a red light on [violet] boulevard and Major Avenue, 30 seconds before the update of its intended region.

The occupant of the other vehicle, revealed as Hobbes, was cruising in his "brand new Bugatti" when the van ran the red light and collided with Hobbes, EPNS secured an exclusive interview with Hobbes from his hospital bed the next day. When asked about the vans occupants, he informed reporters that "The driver and the passenger both where wearing tights with a 'I <3 UDL' shirt tucked in, the driver had a quiver in his hair and a guitar, while the front passenger appeared to have a ton of maps and gear. He then said that he saw 'hordes of people, most in Tights and some in 70's era Soviet Officer uniforms, some with both.' exit the van, dissapointed that they had missed the update. When EPNS asked a member of the van, who spoke on condition of anonymity, why they ran the red light, he responded 'We had to rush to beat the update because our trigger sucked.'

When informed that it was infact the UDL update crew that caused his accident, hobbes went on a rampage, shouting 'NSILLUMMINNAATTITITITITITITITITITI!' as reporters where shuffled out of the room by nurses, while a doctor approached the tiger with a excessively large needle.

East Pacific News Service