I know it's traditional for the nominee not to post in these threads, but I wasn't sure if there was anyone left in the game (and in the habit of posting on these forums) who would be qualified to answer. Please forgive the faux pas. People who dislike ancient NS history may want to look away now.
(Also, I apologize to the younger generations, but I can't think of any way to make this newbie friendly. If it doesn't make sense, don't worry - not many people will understand who weren't playing 3-5 years ago.)At the start of Equilism's Schism on October 20, 2006, I was a new player with less than 3 months in the game - certainly nowhere near the Founder nation. Equilism had been having discussions about what to do about The Pacific, and that was my first hint that anything like real politics existed in NS. Up until then, I thought it was a fairly silly browser game with a great regional community attached. When Westwind made his announcement, it felt like a physical shock. I can tell you exactly how I reacted at the time, because I wrote (in what was going to become a bad habit) a really long post - two of them, actually - about what I was and was not going to do concerning the new Imperial government. (The Bruce, you should have access to that last link... if anyone else is suffering from insomnia, I can send you the text.)When the founder state of Equilism was shared between two players, what part did Naivetry play in the 2006 schism of Equilism, when one player changed the password on the other and effectively crushed the regional government with the regional controls?
I knew from the beginning that I couldn't stomach the Imperial Government, but neither could I stand not doing anything to help the region; so, by the end of those long months, Naivetry was still trying to reconcile the two sides while my new puppet Defero Emprie proofread Foreign Affairs statements for the Government in Exile. In short, I sat the fence, because I valued the friendships I had made, and I dared to believe that our community could be whole again.
I couldn't have been more wrong... or more right. Bruce, you may have missed the revelation; I would recommend that you read this thread, if so. My opinion there is unchanged. You will not find a single member of Equilism from that time or since who considers the "Schism" anything other than one of the best moments in our history - a history of working together for the good of the region - despite all appearances to the contrary at the time.
In 2008, during the The Neutral Territory Forum, Equilism announced its decision to be raiders and Equilism invaded the North Pacific, led by the founder (using the nation: Lewis and Clark).
Equilism has never announced that the E-Army would raid. When it looked like we might be heading more in that direction this year (long after I'd effectively left for TRR), Equilism dissolved the E-Army entirely rather than dishonor its legacy that way. Nor did we say anything that could even be interpreted as "Equilism is going to raid!" during Neutral Territory. I think you may be referring to this statement, which came along a month later. At that point, The Merlion was still an E-Army Commander, and I trust his defender credentials are sufficiently well-established to dispel the charges that the E-Army were "raiders". He resigned shortly after because neutrality - NOT raiding, but simply not being defender ideologues (because we said we would be free to act as our foreign policy dictated) - was as good as being raiders for the FRA then, as for TITO and others still today.
For your other point, forgive me for rehashing a tired refrain, but this accusation is a sore spot for me still. It's a case of the pot badmouthing the kettle. Equilism "invaded" TNP, according to the FRA and others, by endorsing Lewis and Clark after he had been democratically elected on the z13 forums. That in itself was no more than many other defender regions and organizations, including the ADN and the FRA, had done in the past and which others have done since without comment. It's called 'assisting the delegacy transfer', and I seem to be one of the few people objecting to it these days.
Where we found criticism was in our continued support of Lewis and Clark after he switched forums and drew the ire of the z13 community. He'd also earned the enmity of the FRA for his perceived threat to turn TNP raider, and FRA member regions therefore invaded TNP to depose him. While all that was going on, the E-Army remained in TNP, but between missions, not full time - we continued to defend other regions throughout. People may draw whatever conclusions they like about who was right and who was wrong in that situation, but in my opinion everyone was at least a little bit wrong, or there wouldn't have been an argument to be made for either side. And that means today's players should be given the whole story, rather than a simplified version that suits the viewpoint of the teller of the tale.
I was still just finding my way in Equilism at that time, and it gave me my first opportunity to lead above a ministerial level. I was never personally involved in TNP, though I was aware of much of what West was doing. Not all, by any means... he kept secrets from everyone. When Khark spilled the Crimson Order forums, for instance, that was the first time I knew they even existed. But my role was always to take care of Equilism while West couldn't. While West played in TNP, Chaucerin, New Eunomia (aka Canada6) and I were the constitutional triumvirate of guardians for the government in Equilism. West had declared a State of Emergency and transferred primary control over the Founder to Chauce - I still didn't have access to it at that point. I helped pass a bunch of laws, but outside Equilism most of my time was spent arguing with the FRA about whether or not Equilism's actions constituted an invasion. (I said no, they said yes, it went around in circles and was quite frustrating for all involved.) The threads are over there in the FRA archives somewhere.Was Naivetry still in Equilism at that time and if so, what role did they play in these events?
Just to confirm that bit about the Foundership which someone mentioned earlier - I only started playing in early August of 2006, and Equilism was founded in 2004. I didn't become Co-Founder until (I think) May 2009.
(Though you did a pretty good job of keeping that one short! 
But I do ask for truth - for an enmity which is honest if it must be bitter - and that, not the vote, is what I missed.