The Founderless Regions Alliance

[Whiskum]

It seems the nature of political manipulation has gone over your head.

Obviously when you want to get rid of someone you don't say "Because this guy is a jackass" or "Because this guy is a thorn in my side".

You use a complicated, controversial situation to bring back around to them and cause problems for the guy that is causing you problems.

The basic point is that with everything that was going on at the time and all the chatter, you can't draw a direct line from "Remove Unibot" to "Support TSP Coup".

If the incident involving The South Pacific is the reason they adopted, pretext or not, then it is perfectly reasonable to judge them by that position.

Half the FRA Assembly voted for a motion to remove Unibot on the basis of TSP and he subsequently resigned with a threatened membership walk-out.

Indeed, regardless of Unibot was targeted with personal material unrelated to TSP, his stance on TSP would have been a reason for targeting him.

And I'm not revealing anything, anyone who had their ear to the ground at that time knew how ugly and personal it was getting. Just look at how Sedge reacted when Biyah and Dali revealed him, and how Biyah used to talk about Sedge and CG.

It was an ugly slugfest that became about political power not about the issue of the TSP coup.

Not everyone reading the NS Gameplay forum is plugged into the many squabbles that affect the FRA behind closed doors as you perceive them.

I am not making any comment on whether or not there was any personal content. Really, airing this issue in this manner is simply not appropriate.

The fact is that we are well within our rights to use the incidents leading to Unibot's resignation to judge the FRA and TRR in relation to TSP.

[Inspired By The Novel]

Yes, it is within your right to be wrong.

It may be reasonable, but it isn't a very impressive analysis from someone in your position to just go by the pretext and then go no further.

[Nierr]

Archchancellor Sedgistan may be known for couping TSP, but invader pundits tend to overlook Archchancellor Unibot's declaration against Sedgistan. I like to think we would hold FRA to the standards of its acting archchancellors, not their retired ones.

Mall would like to point out that if we're going by looking at the FRA's acting AC then Archchancellor Unibot's declaration is irrelevant, whereas the coup of TSP perpetrated by Milo and Friends is important.

Hello fwend.

[Whiskum]

Yes, it is within your right to be wrong.

It may be reasonable, but it isn't a very impressive analysis from someone in your position to just go by the pretext and then go no further.

One is not claiming or seeking to be conducting an analysis of all the sordid details about what FRA and TRR members allegedly claimed about each other.

Half the FRA Assembly voted to impeach Unibot over his position on The South Pacific and he was subsequently pressured into resigning.

If they were induced to do so using personal material (which I make no comment on), then Unibot was still originally targeted due to TSP and in any case they voted for the motion on the basis. The entire affair, regardless of any other aspects, is one arising from Unibot's handling of Sedge's coup.

When judging the FRA's standing as regards to The South Pacific, it is appropriate to judge them on the fact they repudiated Unibot on that basis.

Whether or not there was personal content thrown into the mix against Unibot, that hardly mitigates the stance they took on TSP either.

It is merely an additional matter alleged against them as regards this affair.

It is very straightforward and what is more all the other issues you seem to want to air about this really have no bearing on the point I originally made.

[Zaolat]

He actually pretty explicitly was talking about the actions of acting ACs, not about how each individual FRA person thinks, so his point holds.

And he also mentioned that people apologized to him after there was more clarity about what actually happened. And once Unibot left and started the UDL, during that period, the FRA was dead. Unibot took defending with him when he left the FRA. The FRA was nothing back then.

So really, you can say he got kicked out but it was more like they lost their star player over a lie and then became irrelevant for a good chunk of NS history.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about, because you're wrong.

[Inspired By The Novel]

It doesn't mitigate the stance on TSP, it confounds it and thereby makes it impossible to draw a direct line from "Remove Unibot" to "Support the Coup".

If you want to keep going by mere pretext though, then that is your prerogative.

[Whiskum]

It doesn't mitigate the stance on TSP, it confounds it and thereby makes it impossible to draw a direct line from "Remove Unibot" to "Support the Coup".

If you want to keep going by mere pretext though, then that is your prerogative.

The idea that it is wrong to attack the FRA for their stance on TSP by pointing to the positions which FRA members actually adopted is genuinely ludicrous.

That stance may or may not have been partially influenced by other factors, but they still adopted that stance and are liable to be criticised for it.

Moreover, the reason why Unibot would be targeted in the way you describe would have been in reaction to his opposition to Sedge's actions in TSP. Thus, regardless of how this is presented, it was still ultimately a case of the FRA elite and The Rejected Realms targeting Unibot over his actions regarding TSP.

The entire issue of whether there were personal attacks on Unibot is a red herring. FRA members took a contrary stance on TSP and should be judged on it. If they adopted that contrary stance for other reasons, then that may provide other grounds for criticism, but it does not reverse the stance they took.

[Frattastan II]

I did not target Unibot because of his intervention in TSP (and I always defended FRA's decision to intervene against Devonitians, even when it was an unpopular opinion in The Rejected Realms).

[Whiskum]

I did not target Unibot because of his intervention in TSP (and I always defended FRA's decision to intervene against Devonitians, even when it was an unpopular opinion in The Rejected Realms).

No one talked about what you personally did or thought, as opposed to the FRA and The Rejected Realms in general.

If you wish to expressly disassociate yourself from the actions of the FRA and TRR in this matter, then that is of course positive.

Roughly half the FRA Assembly voted for the following impeachment proposal, which only failed for lack of a super-majority:

RECOGNIZING the work and effort put into the Founderless Regions Alliance by Archchancellor Unibot, but

CONCERNED with a number of decisions and attitudes taken and expressed by the Archchancellor,

NOTING SPECIFICALLY

The Rogue Delegate Policy -- Introduced without consultation from the only game-created region which the Alliance counts as a member. This policy stands in stark opposition to the founding principles of the Alliance; namely that the Alliance would stand in opposition to invasion, defined as an external threat, but would remain neutral in the case of a civil war or internal coup. We believe that the application of this policy in the South Pacific was unacceptable because the policy itself is unacceptable.

Continued Disrespect for a Member Region -- In addition to the introduction of a rogue delegate policy, Unibot has, through careless actions, continued to show disrespect for the Rejected Realms. Unibot ejected and banned two prominent citizens of the Rejected Realms from the Alliance's IRC channel, without taking the time to ask them politely to leave, and accepted responsibility for the ejection and ban of another citizen of the Rejected Realms. His apology to all three members was considered to be backhanded and insincere, especially with regards to the insulting epithet used for one member's name.

The Rejected Realms feels that Archchancellor Unibot, in apologizing for a hasty and ill-conceived act, has demonstrated again his tendency to act without fully taking the time to appreciate the consequences, for himself and for the image of the FRA.

Breach Of FRA Law -- Archchancellor Unibot in this post on the NationStates official forums, delivered a statement on behalf of the Alliance without seeking, as dictated by the Policy on Statements requiring that the Archchancellor "inform the Regional Assembly of his intent no less than 24 hours prior to the statement being released." On the authority of the Rejected Realm's Regional Assembly Representative, no such information was given prior to the release of the statement in question.

BELIEVING that these examples show a disconcerting tendency to act quickly without regard for the consequences, and recognizing that, when coupled with other ill-conceived actions in the vein of posting FRA Ranger recruitment messages on foreign forums, these examples tend to provide a negative image, not just of the Archchancellor, but of the Alliance as a whole,

THE REJECTED REALMS, as member of the Founderless Regions Alliance, hereby calls for the impeachment of Archchancellor Unibot.

That is patently an objection arising from Unibot's stance on The South Pacific, backed nearly unanimously in TRR and by half the FRA Assembly.

Following that proposal, Unibot was pressured into resigning from the FRA, informed that if he stayed that many long-standing would go.

That was how the FRA reacted to Unibot's attempt to defend the integrity of The South Pacific against the coup of Devonitions.

For Unibot to then claim that his stance reflected the wider FRA view at that time, as he did in this thread yesterday, is therefore nonsense.

As a result of opposing Sedge's coup of TSP, Unibot was essentially run out of the FRA by the FRA elite and The Rejected Realms. Now, other allegations against Unibot may have been used to persuade people to oppose him, but TSP was the subject of the impeachment and TSP was why he was targeted.

[Unibot III]

I agree with Onder that most of TRR's statement was about my conduct regarding TSP. I've said this for years.

From the statement:

The Rogue Delegate Policy -- Introduced without consultation from the only game-created region which the Alliance counts as a member. This policy stands in stark opposition to the founding principles of the Alliance; namely that the Alliance would stand in opposition to invasion, defined as an external threat, but would remain neutral in the case of a civil war or internal coup. We believe that the application of this policy in the South Pacific was unacceptable because the policy itself is unacceptable.

In other words, their representative failed to approach his own region about the Rogue Delegate Policy and they were unaware of its passing before The South Pacific coup. They seemed to think I would fall for the baloney that The South Pacific was an "internal coup".

Continued Disrespect for a Member Region -- In addition to the introduction of a rogue delegate policy, Unibot has, through careless actions, continued to show disrespect for the Rejected Realms. Unibot ejected and banned two prominent citizens of the Rejected Realms from the Alliance's IRC channel, without taking the time to ask them politely to leave, and accepted responsibility for the ejection and ban of another citizen of the Rejected Realms. His apology to all three members was considered to be backhanded and insincere, especially with regards to the insulting epithet used for one member's name.

Those two "prominent citizens" that were ejected from the Alliance's IRC Channel were Sedgistan and Crazygirl, the night of TSP Liberation. They went inactive and we removed them before update. I think it was a good thing that we removed the coupers from the update channel when we were conducting a mission against them.

The Rejected Realms feels that Archchancellor Unibot, in apologizing for a hasty and ill-conceived act, has demonstrated again his tendency to act without fully taking the time to appreciate the consequences, for himself and for the image of the FRA.

Probably true, but not for the above reasons.

Breach Of FRA Law -- Archchancellor Unibot in this post on the NationStates official forums, delivered a statement on behalf of the Alliance without seeking, as dictated by the Policy on Statements requiring that the Archchancellor "inform the Regional Assembly of his intent no less than 24 hours prior to the statement being released." On the authority of the Rejected Realm's Regional Assembly Representative, no such information was given prior to the release of the statement in question.

I posted a statement in support of The South Pacific - The Rejected Realms wanted to criticize me for that too.

So yes, the vast majority of the statement was about The South Pacific and condemning me for participating on a different side - camouflaged as "ensuring law and policy is followed".

The problem for your argument, Onder, is that is as far as your argument holds water...

1. The FRA did not know "Sedge = Dev" until shortly after the passage of the impeachment vote. They probably did what they did out of political necessity, not some deep sated carelessness. The Rejected Realms was threatening to leave the Founderless Regions Alliance.

2. The Rejected Realms has changed quite a bit since that instance, three years ago. For one thing, the person they were condemning for supporting The South Pacific is now delegate. Secondly, The Empire is no longer a massive influence in The Rejected Realms - that largely ended with the very crucial victory of Sedgistan (after Biyah had tried to screw Sedgistan for Nai's benefit). Funny how history works, eh?

3. You're clearly unearthing some old news from 2011 to patently stir shit about a vague connection between Milograd and Sedgistan as TSP coupers. Milograd seems to be the propaganda cow that keeps on giving milk as far as your concerned. He's an active, prominent figure and probably exactly what The Founderless Regions Alliance needs as a leader. I doubt very much he was expecting to get a glowing endorsement from Onderkelkia, of all people.

[Drop Your Pants]

Speaking as an updater, whoever leads the FRA doesn't matter a toss. You can all argue about history till your blue in the face but we'll still be moving our WA's about like idiots every update.

And credit to Uni, we haven't had a FRA/UDL falling out in ages

[Port blood]

Can we please stop for a moment as appreciate how much ego inflating went into that news post?,I mean not only did they use screenshots from WWII propaganda movies,they also invoked godwins law and told blablant lies!

You can't find ego inflating off the quality anymore! bravo!

[Drop Your Pants]

Its called a themed update PB. There's a higher chance of people actually reading it if its funny. Ego doesn't come into it.

You can't find ego inflating off the quality anymore! bravo!

We could look at your post history

[Port blood]

Its called a themed update PB. There's a higher chance of people actually reading it if its funny. Ego doesn't come into it.

You can't find ego inflating off the quality anymore! bravo!

We could look at your post history

Lets quote a few things shall we?

YOU can help defeat the enemies of freedom.

anzia would beg to differ I think

The FRA has successfully led the defence of Slavia. These brave founderless peoples had suffered multiple invasions, but never once did they let it lessen their resolve and determination to be a free and independent region. The FRA was proud to defend them, as we are proud to defend all those who need our help.

So FRA liberated Slavia? did i miss something?

(Image)

Godwins law right here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_We_Fight
comparison to nazi propaganda


and for the love of god,if you're spamming your new posts around other forums,please adjust the bb code

[Cormac A Stark]

Did I really set off this big a shitstorm with a single sentence?

[Whiskum]

The problem for your argument, Onder, is that is as far as your argument holds water...

1. The FRA did not know "Sedge = Dev" until shortly after the passage of the impeachment vote. They probably did what they did out of political necessity, not some deep sated carelessness. The Rejected Realms was threatening to leave the Founderless Regions Alliance.

2. The Rejected Realms has changed quite a bit since that instance, three years ago. For one thing, the person they were condemning for supporting The South Pacific is now delegate. Secondly, The Empire is no longer a massive influence in The Rejected Realms - that largely ended with the very crucial victory of Sedgistan (after Biyah had tried to screw Sedgistan for Nai's benefit). Funny how history works, eh?

3. You're clearly unearthing some old news from 2011 to patently stir shit about a vague connection between Milograd and Sedgistan as TSP coupers. Milograd seems to be the propaganda cow that keeps on giving milk as far as your concerned. He's an active, prominent figure and probably exactly what The Founderless Regions Alliance needs as a leader. I doubt very much he was expecting to get a glowing endorsement from Onderkelkia, of all people.

First, in relation to point 3, that is ridiculous: I have made no comments in relation to Milograd in this discussion.

It was you who brought up your role in the events in 2011. I merely commented that it gave a misleading impression.

You stated:

Archchancellor Sedgistan may be known for couping TSP, but invader pundits tend to overlook Archchancellor Unibot's declaration against Sedgistan. I like to think we would hold FRA to the standards of its acting archchancellors, not their retired ones.

I then pointed out the FRA's reaction to the stance you took hardly suggests that they were supportive of your actions.

So I have no idea where you get the suggestion I am trying to stir anything up from - I merely responded to your remarks.

The subsequent debate arose not because of me but because the facts, which you say you agree with me on, were disputed by 'Inspired By The Novel'.

---

Insofar as point 1 goes, whether Devonitions was Sedge or not in principle should have made no difference to the FRA in deciding whether your stance over TSP was correct. Of course, given Sedge initiated discussions regarding your impeachment, knowing that may have made them less inclined to back impeachment, but the impeachment was still about the FRA, as you have so aptly illustrated, disagreeing with the position which you took on TSP.

---

Finally, on point 2, you appear to be saying that TRR was wrong to have acted as it did then but that it has now seen the light with your election.

Once again, I did not make any comment on the current situation, I was merely debating the historical issue involving TRR and the FRA's stance.

Of course, if that pattern can be related to more recent figures - e.g. Milograd - people may deem that relevant, but I said nothing about that.

[Drop Your Pants]

anzia would beg to differ I think

Falc was being Falc not FRA

So FRA liberated Slavia? did i miss something?

Did it say liberated? I can't see the word "liberated" anywhere in the statement. A ranger managed to botch the refound then ban the raider when he came back. So to answer your question, yes you missed something.

Godwins law right here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_We_Fight
comparison to nazi propaganda

*sigh* Its part of the theme.

[Glen-Rhodes]

So much talk about TSP, but nobody talking can actually talk for TSP.

What exactly is everybody arguing about? What point is Onder trying to make?

[Consular]

Did I really set off this big a shitstorm with a single sentence?

Yes. Don't act like it's surprising in the slightest.

[Venico]

So much talk about TSP, but nobody talking can actually talk for TSP.

What exactly is everybody arguing about? What point is Onder trying to make?

Milo is new Archchancellor/Emperor or whatever of the FRA. Cormac brought up his coup of TSP in a joking manner (sorta?) and then Onder brought up how the FRA didn't react the best to Sedge's coup of it either. The rest is bullshit semantics and dancing with words in order to look like their side is coming off better. *shrug*

[Whiskum]

So much talk about TSP, but nobody talking can actually talk for TSP.

No one was presenting themselves as talking for TSP.

What exactly is everybody arguing about? What point is Onder trying to make?

Unibot claimed:

Archchancellor Sedgistan may be known for couping TSP, but invader pundits tend to overlook Archchancellor Unibot's declaration against Sedgistan. I like to think we would hold FRA to the standards of its acting archchancellors, not their retired ones.

I therefore pointed out that:

Yet what happened to Arch-Chancellor Unibot for declaring against the actions of Arch-Chancellor Sedgistan?

Wopruthien, representing The Rejected Realms, proposed impeaching Arch-Chancellor Unibot for his handling of The South Pacific affair.

The impeachment of course failed despite receiving half of the votes cast, but the volume of criticism led to Unibot's resignation.

That outcome hardly shows FRA support for Unibot's actions regarding TSP (although the other disasters of in his time as AC may have swayed them).

To summarise, Unibot argued that rather than looking at Sedge's actions as a former AC at the time of the coup, people should judge the FRA from his.

I responded by pointing out that the FRA repudiated how Unibot acted in response to that.

That is the only point that I made - the subsequent discussion evolved because 'Inspired By The Novel' disputed it.

Milo is new Archchancellor/Emperor or whatever of the FRA. Cormac brought up his coup of TSP in a joking manner (sorta?) and then Onder brought up how the FRA didn't react the best to Sedge's coup of it either.

This chronology omits the fact that it was Cormac who first raised the issue of Sedge's coup, not simply Milogad's coup:

Archchancellor Milograd is better known for his coup than for any liberations, so apparently they're attempting to return to the Sedge era.

Therefore, originally raising the question of Sedge's coup should not be attributed to me, as is implied in your post.

It further omits the crucial intervention by Unibot, namely the claim that Sedge's coup was negated by his own stance, as shown above.

My intervention, rather than highlighting Sedge's coup (which Cormac and Unibot had already discussed) was to correct Unibot's misrepresentation of the FRA's position, because in pointing to his actions as FRA Arch-Chancellor he neglected to mention he was essentially driven out of the FRA over it.

[Glen-Rhodes]

So, nobody here is actually trying to make a point? You're just arguing over history, for the sake of history? It sounded like somebody was trying to make it seem that Milograd being the Archchancellor is politically dramatic for TSP.

[Venico]

So, nobody here is actually trying to make a point? You're just arguing over history, for the sake of history? It sounded like somebody was trying to make it seem that Milograd being the Archchancellor is politically dramatic for TSP.

I don't think anyone here is even talking about TSP really. It's the fact that the FRA is appointing a non-apologetic couper and has a track record of not always condemning them. TSP could equal any generic GCR in this scenario.

[Inspired By The Novel]

Why do you say unapologetic? Milograd had to do community service after, just like Chris Brown.

And look what a nice reformed person Chris Brown ended up being.

[Weed]

So, nobody here is actually trying to make a point? You're just arguing over history, for the sake of history? It sounded like somebody was trying to make it seem that Milograd being the Archchancellor is politically dramatic for TSP.

FRA is pretty nice, but I doubt they are concerned that their leader is the political enemy of a big raider/imperialist region. That's kinda how it works. Except for Falconias, but that was just weird.