Kingdom of Great Britain | Embassy

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I suggest that nobody take King Alex up on his offer of accessing the AdminCP of a community that has doxxed people in the past, since you'd have to trust them with your IP address.

vpns exist, or I'm sure that one could go into a video chat as John gives you an access-all-areas tour of the admin cp

[RiderSyl]

I suggest that nobody take King Alex up on his offer of accessing the AdminCP of a community that has doxxed people in the past, since you'd have to trust them with your IP address.

vpns exist, or I'm sure that one could go into a video chat as John gives you an access-all-areas tour of the admin cp

Video chats don't protect anyone from IP harvesting. Also if you have to use a VPN to mask your IP while doing something, you probably shouldn't be doing it in the first place. Just common sense there.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

vpns exist, or I'm sure that one could go into a video chat as John gives you an access-all-areas tour of the admin cp

Video chats don't protect anyone from IP harvesting. Also if you have to use a VPN to mask your IP while doing something, you probably shouldn't be doing it in the first place. Just common sense there.

A video chat would preclude the need to connect directly to the acp, while making it pretty obvious if John was trying to hide something, which I doubt he would, by the way.
I have to use a vpn for work all the time, I should be doing that or else I'd be broke.

[RiderSyl]

Video chats don't protect anyone from IP harvesting. Also if you have to use a VPN to mask your IP while doing something, you probably shouldn't be doing it in the first place. Just common sense there.

A video chat would preclude the need to connect directly to the acp, while making it pretty obvious if John was trying to hide something, which I doubt he would, by the way.
I have to use a vpn for work all the time, I should be doing that or else I'd be broke.

Saying it's not a good idea to connect to the PC of someone that's a part of a community that doxxed people is a statement I didn't think I'd have to defend.

I hope you don't work for a tech company of any kind. Video chats don't make hidden motives obvious, blind faith is a security risk, and using a VPN isn't bulletproof protection. All I've done here is provide sound, common sense IT knowledge and all you've been doing so far is try to invalidate it. You probably feel like you need to "defend" KoGB from any possible bad publicity since you're a part of the region, and I've been there with worse regions so I understand, but honestly, this shouldn't be up for debate.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

A video chat would preclude the need to connect directly to the acp, while making it pretty obvious if John was trying to hide something, which I doubt he would, by the way.
I have to use a vpn for work all the time, I should be doing that or else I'd be broke.

Saying it's not a good idea to connect to the PC of someone that's a part of a community that doxxed people is a statement I didn't think I'd have to defend.

I hope you don't work for a tech company of any kind. Video chats don't make hidden motives obvious, blind faith is a security risk, and using a VPN isn't bulletproof protection. All I've done here is provide sound, common sense IT knowledge and all you've been doing so far is try to invalidate it. You probably feel like you need to "defend" KoGB from any possible bad publicity since you're a part of the region, and I've been there with worse regions so I understand, but honestly, this shouldn't be up for debate.

How would you harvest an IP address using a video chat?

[Consular]

I think they way the LKE invades and griefs innocent regions is pretty disgusting tbh.

You don't get to waltz on in here on some high horse when killing off communities, that exact thing you're throwing a silly tantrum over right now, is a celebrated activity in your garbage pile of a region.

Grade A deflection attempt. But this isn't about the LKE or Albion or wherever.

We could go over semantics about how inactive founderless regions are barely communities, but we don't need to because in my seven years on NationStates; I have never participated in a region destruction/refounding operation. I kinda wish I wasn't making my case in defense of KoGB, but this vindictive dogpile is disgusting to watch.

Lol righto. It isn't "deflection" to call you out when you're attacking me. Just because what I said makes your position look like shit, which is exactly what it is by the way, doesn't mean what I said was a "deflection". Your hypocrisy is entirely relevant. You are in zero way qualified to be an arbiter of the conduct of other people.

Region destruction operations aren't the only thing that damages and kills communities. Your raiding causes them enough grief as it is. Not that you care, because in your highly impressive seven years on NationStates, you surely would know that by now.

And now you're criticizing Syberis for demanding their founder too! Incredible really. He doesn't have "the right to play big brother"? You and your region wander about seizing random communities all the time. I don't think you have the right to do that. But you get different standards, right? It's ok for you to seize and control random places for zero reason, but it's entirely not ok for Syberis to want control of a place to keep the people there safe?

I mean I'm not overly shocked. Wasn't Cephal, one of Don's unpleasant collaborators in KoGB, pretty important in the LKE? Makes sense that you defend this region, through whatever hypocritical arguments you can come up with.

On the subject of "barely communities", I think KoGB qualifies personally. It's a trash heap of political scandals and questionable morals, not a community.

[Onderkelkia]

I mean I'm not overly shocked. Wasn't Cephal, one of Don's unpleasant collaborators in KoGB, pretty important in the LKE? Makes sense that you defend this region, through whatever hypocritical arguments you can come up with.

Firstly, in his remarks in this thread, Thomas Insaniac is not speaking on behalf of the LKE - nor in fact has he claimed to do so. Indeed, I believe he has actively pointed out to others previously that he does not currently speak for the LKE on foreign policy. His official remit in the LKE pertains to his operational responsibilities as a senior officer of the Imperial Army. In the past, he has provided much-valued service in a number of ministerial positions, but he is not a current member of the the Imperial Government, or other executive bodies such as the Imperial House or the Guardian Council. There is accordingly no reason to associate his remarks with the LKE (as opposed to any of the other regions in which he holds citizenship). Insofar as Cornelius Talleyrand (Cephal) is concerned, Thomas Insaniac's own period of service in the LKE did not coincide with the period when Cephal held executive office in the LKE. Indeed, Cephal has been banned for the overwhelming majority of the time for which Insaniac has been active within the LKE. As such, it is inaccurate for you to attribute any views that Insaniac has on this matter to his service in the LKE or any association that Insaniac has with Cephal, as any contact between them in the LKE will have been minimal or even non-existent. Thomas Insaniac's views on this matter arise from his own judgement.

Secondly, despite his own prior record of service, Cornelius Talleyrand was permanently banned from the LKE on 3rd September 2017 as soon as we became aware of his actions. His involvement in the LKE in the year before he was banned was much more limited than it previously had been, after he stood down from the executive positions he had held previously in July 2016. Prior to when he retired in July 2016, he (like other senior LKE officials at the time) had actually been barred by the LKE from holding office in KGB and he was only able to participate in KGB politics again as a result of his July 2016 decision to stand down in LKE. To the extent that Cephal has factored into any LKE thinking about KGB since then, it has only been that we are angry that a former LKE official decided to waste his career there given KGB's previous record. His involvement in KGB did nothing to endear KGB to us. It had the opposite effect.

Thirdly - and most importantly - the LKE's consistent policy has been that we want nothing to do with KGB on any level. The region has disgraced itself beyond the point where there is any point in considering any future contact.

Following the September 2017 revelations, not only did we close KGB's embassy, but the Imperial Diet proscribed KGB under Section 2 of the Loyalty Act 2016. These are the same provisions which apply to the Grey Wardens and other hostile defender organisations. The decision to proscribe an entire region is not taken lightly, but reflects the gravity of our assessment of KGB's fundamental character and its threat to the LKE. It is accordingly unlawful for any LKE citizen to be a citizen of KGB and no waivers to this policy have been granted (unlike for some proscribed defender regions). KGB citizens who want to join the LKE have to resign their citizenship of KGB to be allowed in and LKE citizens have to renounce citizenship if they want to join KGB. We have enforced this policy consistently, including on former LKE-KGB dual citizens. But it was not only in September 2017 when the LKE realised that KGB was problematic.

Even prior to the September 2017 revelations, earlier that year, the LKE went as far as to protest to Europeia against their decision to sign a non-aggression pact with KGB on the grounds that our experience was KGB could not be trusted. We were not remotely surprised when KGB turned around and betrayed Europeia. We had foretold KGB's trustworthiness and unsuitability as a treaty partner. Indeed, even today, the LKE Monarchy continues to informally advise allies who have relations with KGB, or who have KGB members within them, that any such relations should be terminated and any internal pressure to re-establish relations with KGB should be fiercely resisted. Frankly, you should be aware that the LKE has been the victim of KGB's transgressions and unreasonable behaviour, which led us to terminate our treaties with them in October 2015, leading to a public spectacle. Even after their grovelling apology, we refused to entertain anything beyond the exchange of embassies with them, despite failed attempts to negotiate a treaty from the KGB side, which they desperately wanted. Your suggestion that the LKE has any desire to defend KGB is therefore completely misguided. The exact opposite is true.

The LKE's position on KGB should be crystal clear.

[Consular]

That's fair enough Onder. I was wrong to insinuate and apologise for the Cephal statement. Whatever I think about the LKE, you've never tolerated the kind of shit that is everywhere in KoGB.

I don't retract the rest of what I said though. The region should be scrapped and I don't think it's disgusting at all for me to think that.

[Jakker]

Grade A deflection attempt. But this isn't about the LKE or Albion or wherever.

We could go over semantics about how inactive founderless regions are barely communities, but we don't need to because in my seven years on NationStates; I have never participated in a region destruction/refounding operation. I kinda wish I wasn't making my case in defense of KoGB, but this vindictive dogpile is disgusting to watch.

Lol righto. It isn't "deflection" to call you out when you're attacking me. Just because what I said makes your position look like shit, which is exactly what it is by the way, doesn't mean what I said was a "deflection". Your hypocrisy is entirely relevant. You are in zero way qualified to be an arbiter of the conduct of other people.

Region destruction operations aren't the only thing that damages and kills communities. Your raiding causes them enough grief as it is. Not that you care, because in your highly impressive seven years on NationStates, you surely would know that by now.

And now you're criticizing Syberis for demanding their founder too! Incredible really. He doesn't have "the right to play big brother"? You and your region wander about seizing random communities all the time. I don't think you have the right to do that. But you get different standards, right? It's ok for you to seize and control random places for zero reason, but it's entirely not ok for Syberis to want control of a place to keep the people there safe?

Just to confirm, are you suggesting that any player who raids is disqualified from having positive behavioral standards in NS or not able to advocate for a community?

[Salvarity]

Lol righto. It isn't "deflection" to call you out when you're attacking me. Just because what I said makes your position look like shit, which is exactly what it is by the way, doesn't mean what I said was a "deflection". Your hypocrisy is entirely relevant. You are in zero way qualified to be an arbiter of the conduct of other people.

Region destruction operations aren't the only thing that damages and kills communities. Your raiding causes them enough grief as it is. Not that you care, because in your highly impressive seven years on NationStates, you surely would know that by now.

Don't act like you're some genius with some silver bullet "he's in the LKE, he must be a bad person", what you said doesn't change anything. You still have a disgusting attitude to other actual communities in this game and attempting to paint me in the same brush does not make yourself look better.

And now you're criticizing Syberis for demanding their founder too! Incredible really. He doesn't have "the right to play big brother"? You and your region wander about seizing random communities all the time. I don't think you have the right to do that. But you get different standards, right? It's ok for you to seize and control random places for zero reason, but it's entirely not ok for Syberis to want control of a place to keep the people there safe?

Yes I am, because that is a stupid suggestion and you are completely disconnected from the reality of how communities actually operate if you think that's a good suggestion. And I stand by my assertion that he doesn't have a right to play big brother. He doesn't have that right, you don't have that right, and I don't have the right; I did not claim that right and I never will. Finally, if you think that raiding/invasions is the same thing as demanding a founder/root account; then you are blinded by your shoddy moralism.

I mean I'm not overly shocked. Wasn't Cephal, one of Don's unpleasant collaborators in KoGB, pretty important in the LKE? Makes sense that you defend this region, through whatever hypocritical arguments you can come up with.

I think Onder has clarified this enough, but a completely cheap and wrong shot.

I guess I shouldn't have expected better.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Lol righto. It isn't "deflection" to call you out when you're attacking me. Just because what I said makes your position look like shit, which is exactly what it is by the way, doesn't mean what I said was a "deflection". Your hypocrisy is entirely relevant. You are in zero way qualified to be an arbiter of the conduct of other people.

Region destruction operations aren't the only thing that damages and kills communities. Your raiding causes them enough grief as it is. Not that you care, because in your highly impressive seven years on NationStates, you surely would know that by now.

And now you're criticizing Syberis for demanding their founder too! Incredible really. He doesn't have "the right to play big brother"? You and your region wander about seizing random communities all the time. I don't think you have the right to do that. But you get different standards, right? It's ok for you to seize and control random places for zero reason, but it's entirely not ok for Syberis to want control of a place to keep the people there safe?

Just to confirm, are you suggesting that any player who raids is disqualified from having positive behavioral standards in NS or not able to advocate for a community?

Could I also add, are you asserting that John controlling a regional founder is a threat to the safety of the regions citizens? What are you implying here?

[Consular]

Lol righto. It isn't "deflection" to call you out when you're attacking me. Just because what I said makes your position look like shit, which is exactly what it is by the way, doesn't mean what I said was a "deflection". Your hypocrisy is entirely relevant. You are in zero way qualified to be an arbiter of the conduct of other people.

Region destruction operations aren't the only thing that damages and kills communities. Your raiding causes them enough grief as it is. Not that you care, because in your highly impressive seven years on NationStates, you surely would know that by now.

And now you're criticizing Syberis for demanding their founder too! Incredible really. He doesn't have "the right to play big brother"? You and your region wander about seizing random communities all the time. I don't think you have the right to do that. But you get different standards, right? It's ok for you to seize and control random places for zero reason, but it's entirely not ok for Syberis to want control of a place to keep the people there safe?

Just to confirm, are you suggesting that any player who raids is disqualified from having positive behavioral standards in NS or not able to advocate for a community?

I am suggesting that someone who raids doesn't have any ground to stand on if they want to call out another player for thinking a region ought to be destroyed -- because they actively engage in destruction themselves, and against far less deserving communities.

Was that clear enough for you, Jakker?

And now you're criticizing Syberis for demanding their founder too! Incredible really. He doesn't have "the right to play big brother"? You and your region wander about seizing random communities all the time. I don't think you have the right to do that. But you get different standards, right? It's ok for you to seize and control random places for zero reason, but it's entirely not ok for Syberis to want control of a place to keep the people there safe?

Yes I am, because that is a stupid suggestion and you are completely disconnected from the reality of how communities actually operate if you think that's a good suggestion. And I stand by my assertion that he doesn't have a right to play big brother. He doesn't have that right, you don't have that right, and I don't have the right; I did not claim that right and I never will. Finally, if you think that raiding/invasions is the same thing as demanding a founder/root account; then you are blinded by your shoddy moralism.

I don't beleive I said it was a good suggestion. I think it's plainly unrealistic. I just said you're a hypocrite for saying that he has no "right" -- because you certainly have no "right" to seize any of the regions you raid.

Invading and controlling a founderless community isn't all that different to getting control of a founder in a foundered community. Either way you have total control over them. How is that moralism? That's the reality of the situation.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Just to confirm, are you suggesting that any player who raids is disqualified from having positive behavioral standards in NS or not able to advocate for a community?

I am suggesting that someone who raids doesn't have any ground to stand on if they want to call out another player for thinking a region ought to be destroyed -- because they actively engage in destruction themselves, and against far less deserving communities.

Was that clear enough for you, Jakker?

Yes I am, because that is a stupid suggestion and you are completely disconnected from the reality of how communities actually operate if you think that's a good suggestion. And I stand by my assertion that he doesn't have a right to play big brother. He doesn't have that right, you don't have that right, and I don't have the right; I did not claim that right and I never will. Finally, if you think that raiding/invasions is the same thing as demanding a founder/root account; then you are blinded by your shoddy moralism.

I don't beleive I said it was a good suggestion. I think it's plainly unrealistic. I just said you're a hypocrite for saying that he has no "right" -- because you certainly have no "right" to seize any of the regions you raid.

Invading and controlling a founderless community isn't all that different to getting control of a founder in a foundered community. Either way you have total control over them. How is that moralism? That's the reality of the situation.

You appear to have ignored or missed my question: do you mean to suggest that John is unwilling or unable for his regions members to be safe? I've never once felt threatened in KoGB, but perhaps you know something we don't? Either way, I'd love to hear your evidence.

[RiderSyl]

At best, John is unable to keep the community safe from itself. At worst, he's part of the problem in KoGB. I don't intend to try to find out which is which. IMO, this is a region that can't be reformed without sweeping changes to the way it operates.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

At best, John is unable to keep the community safe from itself. At worst, he's part of the problem in KoGB. I don't intend to try to find out which is which. IMO, this is a region that can't be reformed without sweeping changes to the way it operates.

KoGB has had sweeping changes to the way it operates. KoGB under Don is not a region I would want to be a part of.

[RiderSyl]

At best, John is unable to keep the community safe from itself. At worst, he's part of the problem in KoGB. I don't intend to try to find out which is which. IMO, this is a region that can't be reformed without sweeping changes to the way it operates.

KoGB has had sweeping changes to the way it operates. KoGB under Don is not a region I would want to be a part of.

Counterpoint:

I only joined recently and I'm not a senior member. I'm not the best person to talk to about KoGB history.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

KoGB has had sweeping changes to the way it operates. KoGB under Don is not a region I would want to be a part of.

Counterpoint:

I only joined recently and I'm not a senior member. I'm not the best person to talk to about KoGB history.

I know the culture in KoGB, members it has gotten rid of, and I've spoken to current and former members of the region in the past. I know just enough to think, at the moment, that I wish to continue my membership. If that changes, so will my membership of the region.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

I'll happily take King Alexander up on his offer of poking around the ACP. My investigations might take a while, but I'm not particularly scared of handing over my IP address.

[Salvarity]

Yes I am, because that is a stupid suggestion and you are completely disconnected from the reality of how communities actually operate if you think that's a good suggestion. And I stand by my assertion that he doesn't have a right to play big brother. He doesn't have that right, you don't have that right, and I don't have the right; I did not claim that right and I never will. Finally, if you think that raiding/invasions is the same thing as demanding a founder/root account; then you are blinded by your shoddy moralism.

I don't beleive I said it was a good suggestion. I think it's plainly unrealistic. I just said you're a hypocrite for saying that he has no "right" -- because you certainly have no "right" to seize any of the regions you raid.

Invading and controlling a founderless community isn't all that different to getting control of a founder in a foundered community. Either way you have total control over them. How is that moralism? That's the reality of the situation.

It is a clear difference in how the situation is approached. When (most of us) participate in R/D, we do it because this is a game and that is one way to play a game. Raiders don't raid/invade because the region is a supposed danger to PEOPLE of this game. But, that is that Syberis is claiming in his desire for control of founder/root. (From how I am interpreting it) he believes KoGB's community is incapable of policing themselves and are incapable of protecting the people in the game from bad people; so he has the right to step in.

Which I consider bullshit and completely disagree with. He has no right to demand that from a community he has no investment in.

If Syberis wants to get all his friends and declare war on KoGB, he has the complete right to, hell I'd probably be on his side with that. It's when you start claiming that you have the supposed right to police other communities that I consider ludicrous.

If you believe this is the same as invading, then you really don't understand how this game works.

[Syberis]

Those with "Investment" have allowed those who enabled that behavior and openly cheered him on to return and begin to rebuild their power base after their disgrace.

Tell you what. I'll give a compromise. Doesn't have to be me. Does have to be someone uninvolved, with a strong history of being impartial from an OOC standpoint, to hold it solo, with no access given to the government or individuals within the region.

Treat it like a root admin should be - solely devoted to making sure that the region is kept safe.

I just know for sure I would be able to make sure it doesn't fall into the hands of Don again, and there's zero chance it would ever fall into the hands of someone in contact with him. That zero chance is critical. Even 1% is too much of a risk.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

I've heard nothing back from my offer, so I'm assuming they were bluffing.

[RiderSyl]

I've heard nothing back from my offer, so I'm assuming they were bluffing.

Thanks for updating everyone.

[Wabbitslayah]

I suggest that nobody take King Alex up on his offer of accessing the AdminCP of a community that has doxxed people in the past, since you'd have to trust them with your IP address.

Well then, I guess it's a good thing I'm a former admin of the region. They already have my info if they wanted it.

[Lord Dominator]

Personally, I'd point out that critically, the offer was to Badger alone.
For whatever weird reason

[RiderSyl]

I suggest that nobody take King Alex up on his offer of accessing the AdminCP of a community that has doxxed people in the past, since you'd have to trust them with your IP address.

Well then, I guess it's a good thing I'm a former admin of the region. They already have my info if they wanted it.

I wouldn't call that a good thing.