The Rejected Times

[Unibot III]

There is accordingly no issue of the kind you indicate.

Just saving this for posterity, I can't believe you sincerely believe there's no issue with citizens signing an oath before they have access to the laws of the region.

It's a Monty Python skit waiting to be written.

Moreover, while she linked to the Law Book, she made no commitment that it would remain open in perpetuity. Nowhere did it require that a re-masking on our forums should result in an external announcement.

She literally said it was a technical oversight that had gone unreported (a lie, I'll note - I reported it many a time prior to that) and that Balder was one of the most open regions in NS. Her superlatives most certainly constitute an ongoing commitment to government transparency in Balder which was reversed quietly the moment you found out about it.

the Statsminister speaks for Balder

You mean I read five years of Rachel's posts for no reason!?

I'd rather you have coughed tuberculosis at me.

So just to clarify, when the Monarch was going around talking about how open and crap, Balder is - she was doing so with no more authority than the court parakeet, and effectively blowing smoke up our asses? And if NES and other future Monarchs go around speaking how open their region is, and making other proclamations about government policy - we should attribute zero legitimacy to these remarks?

under the legal position in February 2017 and the legal position that exists today, the Statsminister speaks for Balder. We have never attempted to hide that reality.

Well actually you do attempt to withhold information regarding the organization of Balder: the constitution that outlines the role of the Statsminister versus the Monarch is not public. And you've venomously defended not publicly releasing this information. That's the whole point of this conversation.

Balder might have the most stringent restrictions on access to official areas among the GCRs, but plenty other GCRs and other major regions impose other kinds of restrictions on access to information. T

Access of information is limited in all GCRs, most have levels of privacy to their legislatures - for instance.

But Balder is at the bottom of the gradient. The very bottom, below self-identifying dictatorships. You provide access to neither your laws nor legislative discussions nor cabinet discussions.

In terms of government transparency, no GCR is as opaque as Balder and that, I personally consider a black mark to its claim of being democratic.

There is no reason whatsoever for linking these two processes

The link was made because you said the public had no business with the affairs of Balder's government. A principle you contradict routinely on a selective, ad hoc basis for the sake of publicity.

You will learn more accurate information about Balder from what I say than you will from Unibot's conspiracy theories.

It's not a conspiracy "theory" when you've spelled out a confirmation of everything I've said with thrice as many words as necessary.

Given this lack of trust for my words, I am sure you will understand why Balder does not trust our enemies to have access to our official areas in the name of "transparency". For any region, there are inevitably reasonable trade-offs between total transparency and the interests and security of the region.

There is no trade-off here, no security vulnerability. You're protecting your government's image, not the security of the region. TRR/TNP/TSP/TEP/NPO et. al. aren't less safe because they share the text of their laws with residents and the public at large. Indeed, most regions use the opportunity to remind residents of their legal responsibilities.

We have discussed the possibility of using dispatches to provide an array of additional information, including the Basic Laws, in the not too distant past, and it is possible that we might look at publishing laws in dispatches for promotional purposes in the same way as other on-site dispatches in the future.

So now you're shifting your defense back to the earlier "it's a technical oversight" argument, rather than standing exclusively on the principle that the public should not be able to see your laws. We're supposed to believe that the only reason why Balder has been internally conflicted over the promulgation of its own laws for the past four years is because its Prime Minister hadn't discovered Dispatches yet!?

TRR had a public Law Index dispatch in Jan 2015, I know because I created it. Simultaneously, Balder closed its legal index to the public - reacting to a lecture that had been done on Free Speech in the GCRs.

[Marilyn Manson Freaks]

The Prince of Bal-der Theme Song

Now this is the story all about how
My life got flipped, turned upside down
And I'd like to take a minute just sit right there
I'll tell you how I became the prince of a region called Bal-der

In west TNI born and raised
On the battleground where I spent most of my days
Freaking out, running about, acting like a fool
And all posting some o-walls outside of the school
When a couple of guys, they were up to no good
Started making sense in my neighbourhood
I got in one little war and my mom got scared
And said "You're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bal-der"

I whistled for a cab and when it came near the
License plate said "1Mp3rial1$m"" and had dice in the mirror
If anything I could say that this cab was rare
But I thought nah, forget it, yo homes to Bal-der!

I pulled up to a region about seven or eight
And I yelled to the cabby "Yo, homes smell you later!"
Looked at my kingdom I was finally there
To sit on my throne as the prince of Bal-der

Just a messy first draft but what do you guys think?

[Bobberino]

Manson, stop being up to no good.

I'm proud I call you my grandfather. I just wonder where the creativity gene shapeshifted to musicianship.

Now play WW with us, scrub.

[Onder Kelkia]

There is accordingly no issue of the kind you indicate.

Just saving this for posterity, I can't believe you sincerely believe there's no issue with citizens signing an oath before they have access to the laws of the region.

It's a Monty Python skit waiting to be written.

Given that you don't offer any arguments in response, I can only repeat the part of my reply to Glen-Rhodes you opted not to show, which I do in a spoiler:

Firstly, if upon being granted citizenship they suddenly discover a law that they disagree with so strongly that they would not wish to apply in the first place, then they there is of course nothing to stop them leaving at that point. I have never known this to happen, presumably because our branding as a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy is not at all misleading, but there is nothing to prevent someone leaving if they felt that way.

Secondly, a large majority of our applicants undergo a period as Non-Voting Residents (soon to be renamed Viking Residents) prior to finally being granted citizenship. During this time, they have access to most citizen-only areas, including the Law Book. As such, in most of these cases, if they discovered something they disliked, they could withdraw their application before it was approved. In practice, residents can see laws before they gain citizenship.

Thirdly, you refer to our oath. Our citizenship oath reads:

I, @@NATION@@, pledge to vote, discourse, and hold any offices in Balder with the interests of Balder in mind and no other region or organization.

As you can see, this says nothing about allegiance to any laws or any institution. Citizens are of course obliged to be loyal to the region and abide by its laws while they remain citizens, but not as a result of the oath. As such, swearing the oath should not provide any obstacle to anyone renouncing citizenship on the basis that they, upon gaining citizenship, discovered that they disagreed with our laws so strongly they did not want to be a citizen.

There is accordingly no issue of the kind you indicate.

She literally said it was a technical oversight that had gone unreported (a lie, I'll note - I reported it many a time prior to that) and that Balder was one of the most open regions in NS. Her superlatives most certainly constitute an ongoing commitment to government transparency in Balder which was reversed quietly the moment you found out about it.

No, "an ongoing commitment" would be a specific statement that the Law Book would remain visible in the future.

Whether Balder is the "one of the most open" regions In NationStates is different from a future commitment on a single issue. You could argue that Solorni's claim was wrong without keeping the Law Book visible to everyone in the world, but you can't read in a commitment that was never made.

You mean I read five years of Rachel's posts for no reason!?

I'd rather you have coughed tuberculosis at me.

So just to clarify, when the Monarch was going around talking about how open and crap, Balder is - she was doing so with no more authority than the court parakeet, and effectively blowing smoke up our asses? And if NES and other future Monarchs go around speaking how open their region is, and making other proclamations about government policy - we should attribute zero legitimacy to these remarks?

On the one hand, you deride Balder for not being a democratic region. On the other hand, you refuse to take 'yes' for an answer when you are expressly told that the elected leader of the region determines its policy and that the Monarch is mainly a figurehead insofar as the executive government is concerned.

The Statsminister determines and represents regional policy. The role of the Monarch is not empty - they are a guardian of the in-game delegacy and a symbolic figurehead of the region as head of state. There are also a small number of specific statutory powers vested in the Monarch. However, the Statsminister is the chief executive of the region, including in foreign affairs. That does not mean the Monarch has no legitimacy as a figurehead, but it is therefore the Statsminister who represents regional policy positions. The distinction between the two figures should not be difficult to understand.

The reality is that certain people don't want to understand this because it is inconvenient for them.

Well actually you do attempt to withhold information regarding the organization of Balder: the constitution that outlines the role of the Statsminister versus the Monarch is not public. And you've venomously defended not publicly releasing this information. That's the whole point of this conversation.

You don't need to see a copy of the specific statute to know the distinction when we repeatedly and constantly explain it.

There is nothing wrong with Balder publicly explaining our system. Indeed, we use what is a fairly well-known and not uncommon system in real life called constitutional monarchy. If you want to ignore that explanation and our categorisation as such, then you are making yourself ignorant.

Access of information is limited in all GCRs, most have levels of privacy to their legislatures - for instance.

But Balder is at the bottom of the gradient. The very bottom, below self-identifying dictatorships. You provide access to neither your laws nor legislative discussions nor cabinet discussions.

In terms of government transparency, no GCR is as opaque as Balder and that, I personally consider a black mark to its claim of being democratic.

Access to information is a question of degrees, as I observed.

Your argument, that regions that are self-evidently more dictatorial than Balder appear to have more "transparency" than us, actually indicates democracy and "transparency" are distinct concepts that should not be conflated. Indeed, when you talking about a forum-based representative democracy, the key criterion isn't external transparency and it is perfectly possible for a region to operate democratically without opening it up to everyone.

You can have transparent dictatorships that are open about their dictatorial approach to controlling power and, on the other hand, democracies that favour less freedom of information. There is no reason why these concepts must always co-exist together in NationStates regions.

If you think that not having some laws in a pinned dispatch turns us into a dictatorship, then that is an extremely superficial analysis.

The link was made because you said the public had no business with the affairs of Balder's government. A principle you contradict routinely on a selective, ad hoc basis for the sake of publicity.

Just because non-citizens have no stake in Balder's government doesn't mean that Balder's government isn't allowed to disclose anything to them.

To repeat my language earlier: "The government of Balder is only the business of Balder's citizens, but others are welcome to learn things as the permitted guests of Balder's citizens." The business of Balder's government is for Balder's citizens and no one else has any right to be involved in it. Countries, organisations and individuals put information into the public domain all the time when the general public has no legitimate right to access it.

The key point is that the right of access only belongs to Balder's citizens. Access to everyone else is at the discretion of Balder's citizens through their democratically elected government. There is no reason why declining to give access to official areas of our forums should stop us releasing press releases.

It's not a conspiracy "theory" when you've spelled out a confirmation of everything I've said with thrice as many words as necessary.

On the contrary, it is a conspiracy theory to suppose that Balder is secretly operating under a different system of government than the one we claim to be.

There is no trade-off here, no security vulnerability. You're protecting your government's image, not the security of the region. TRR/TNP/TSP/TEP/NPO et. al. aren't less safe because they share the text of their laws with residents and the public at large. Indeed, most regions use the opportunity to remind residents of their legal responsibilities.

On the contrary, there are security issues consider. For example, knowledge of an enemy's laws could be a valuable intelligence asset if one was, for example, planning an infiltration, and wanted to know which institutions to target or what obstacles might be encountered. Such knowledge is easier to obtain if foreign intelligence agencies have access to information at a click of button, rather than only through an agent who is already in the region.

So now you're shifting your defense back to the earlier "it's a technical oversight" argument, rather than standing exclusively on the principle that the public should not be able to see your laws. We're supposed to believe that the only reason why Balder has been internally conflicted over the promulgation of its own laws for the past four years is because its Prime Minister hadn't discovered Dispatches yet!?

TRR had a public Law Index dispatch in Jan 2015, I know because I created it. Simultaneously, Balder closed its legal index to the public - reacting to a lecture that had been done on Free Speech in the GCRs.

This is what I said, in full:

The examples you cite (based on dispatches) differ from the issue Unibot raised (opening up the Law Book as a section on our forums to public viewing). At one level, the same principle applies (that the government of Balder is for the citizens of Balder), but dispatches are less intrusive than re-designating areas of our forums, when we do not allow non-citizens to access official government areas in general (and the Law Book is included as part of this). We have discussed the possibility of using dispatches to provide an array of additional information, including the Basic Laws, in the not too distant past, and it is possible that we might look at publishing laws in dispatches for promotional purposes in the same way as other on-site dispatches in the future.

We don't grant access to official areas of our forums to most non-citizens and our official business is our citizens' business. The official areas of our forums are not something that anyone in the world has the right to see unless we as a region grant them permission to do so. The Law Book is part of that.

As a matter of principle, outsiders we have no relationship with do not have an automatic right of access to the official areas of our forums.

The Government displaying dispatches with specific content is a separate question, but I don't think creating such a dispatch is important or has much value one way or the other. Neither displaying nor not displaying such a dispatch makes Balder more or less democratic. Possibly some kind of display of laws could have some cultural value, but I don't at all buy the argument that the quality of democracy is in any way affected by such an initiative.

The fact that this hasn't been done via dispatches is not a "technical oversight". There are plenty of things that a government could do and might be willing to do, but hasn't done yet and does not currently plan to, without the absence of these things constituting a technical oversight or any kind of oversight. Rather, creating such a dispatch is a policy option which we have not decided to pursue yet and which there is no great necessity to pursue.

As I say, you are attaching vastly too much significance to the question of whether such a dispatch exists. That is not what makes a democracy.

[Unibot III]

Your argument, that regions that are self-evidently more dictatorial than Balder appear to have more "transparency" than us, actually indicates democracy and "transparency" are distinct concepts that should not be conflated.

On the contrary, that is a logical failure on your part to distinguish between sufficient and necessary elements. You're confusing exclusivity here with sufficiency.

Transparency is not a sufficient condition of democracy, it is a necessary condition. The NPO's public display of the Civil Code does not qualify the NPO to call itself a democracy, but subjecting non-citizens to a legal and political system whose rules they are not privy to, without swearing an oath to the region, is in fact a black mark on Balder's claim to democraticness.

Transparency - freedom of information - and democracy are regarded as associated concepts because public promulgation is necessary for a true and fair rule of law and the development of a rights consciousness, but it also subjects the government itself to public scrutiny with regards to its administrative processes and practices. The rule of law, political and civil rights, and free, informed scrutiny are all elements dependent on openness and information, and all necessary elements that comprise a healthy, working democracy.

but I don't think creating such a dispatch is important or has much value one way or the other. Neither displaying nor not displaying such a dispatch makes Balder more or less democratic. Possibly some kind of display of laws could have some cultural value, but I don't at all buy the argument that the quality of democracy is in any way affected by such an initiative.

I'm mystified how a government official can't figure out how transparency - legal promulgation - is a necessary element of democracy. We call it legal certainty.

It's been pretty well established as a theory since the 17th Century. Where's Rachel, when you need someone to quote Locke unnecessarily!

Just because non-citizens have no stake in Balder's government doesn't mean that Balder's government isn't allowed to disclose anything to them

Selectively referring and disclosing the activities of your government and its laws is no acceptable substitute for providing the law proactively on a free, open basis.

When you can selectively choose what to disclose, you control the conversation and the image you present; you obstruct critics from knowing what questions to ask.

No, "an ongoing commitment" would be a specific statement that the Law Book would remain visible in the future.

I think any reasonable person could have interpreted the Monarch's decision as a commitment for the Law Book to remain visible in the future. If the Monarch had announced her intentions were for the Law Book to remain visible for a short, arbitrary period of time - I think that would not have received a warm welcoming from anyone.

On the contrary, there are security issues consider. For example, knowledge of an enemy's laws could be a valuable intelligence asset if one was, for example, planning an infiltration, and wanted to know which institutions to target or what obstacles might be encountered. Such knowledge is easier to obtain if foreign intelligence agencies have access to information at a click of button, rather than only through an agent who is already in the region.

I don't think that anyone could seriously consider that a significant barrier to an enemy with intelligence capabilities and intentions to infiltrate.

Whether Balder is the "one of the most open" regions In NationStates is different from a future commitment on a single issue.

'The most open with regards to information', was actually her boast specifically. The Monarch said that Balder was one of the most open regions with regards to information - and as you've admitted, not only was that claim not true, it wasn't true after, and you don't believe there is no reason to improve your government's transparency.

And you admit you made no attempt to correct the record because it could have been potentially embarrassing for the region.

On the one hand, you deride Balder for not being a democratic region. On the other hand, you refuse to take 'yes' for an answer when you are expressly told that the elected leader of the region determines its policy and that the Monarch is mainly a figurehead insofar as the executive government is concerned.

The Statsminister determines and represents regional policy. The role of the Monarch is not empty - they are a guardian of the in-game delegacy and a symbolic figurehead of the region as head of state. There are also a small number of specific statutory powers vested in the Monarch. However, the Statsminister is the chief executive of the region, including in foreign affairs. That does not mean the Monarch has no legitimacy as a figurehead, but it is therefore the Statsminister who represents regional policy positions. The distinction between the two figures should not be difficult to understand.

The reality is that certain people don't want to understand this because it is inconvenient for them.

I was mostly teasing you, Onder - relax, no need to rant. I accept that in a constitutional monarchy, the monarch may only have a ceremonial role in governmental affairs.

I do wonder though to what extent you felt it was inappropriate for the Monarch to announce policy changes that you had a longstanding disagreement with, and I'm baffled why you believe that it is a security risk to Balder for the public to know the "small number of specific statutory powers vested in the Monarch" without being dependent on your direct input.

[Alvalero]

In terms of government transparency, no GCR is as opaque as Balder and that, I personally consider a black mark to its claim of being democratic.

Speaking for myself, lest it get confused as an official statement:-

I find it amusing you're inferring, and have been for a very long time, that we're not democratic given that you wanted to change the voting procedure, that you came up with, midway through a vote just because you were losing an election and didn't want the person winning to get elected, wanting to give your votes to 2nd place instead, whom later admitted to not only trying to bribe someone to become Balder's root admin but also wanted to coup the region.
Ironic, speaking about the apparent lack of democracy in a region when you yourself had the audacity to try and undermine it out of nothing but spite and giving an election to someone who had the worst intentions in mind just because you were friends with them(or at least, they were on your side) at the time.

The long and the short of it is that you bashing democracy in Balder is laughable given the stunt you tried to pull.

[The Church of Satan]

On the contrary, there is plenty of evidence in the public domain illustrating that Balder is a democracy. Unless you think we are lying when we post reports about holding elections, and the Storting passing legislation and choosing the Statsminister. If we are lying, and we don't conduct regular elections, the Storting doesn't have legislative powers, or the Storting doesn't choose the Statsminister, then I think that information would have leaked by now.

The entire line of argument is nothing more than a spurious attempt to undermine Balder by individuals and regions opposed to it.

It's not an implication that Balder's updates are a lie. It's just that there is no publicly available means to verify them. It's that simple. Anybody could just say a given thing is happening but without a means to verify the information it is questionable at best. You wouldn't believe a fortune teller if he/she told you that you would come into a vast sum of money would you? You wouldn't launch an attack at a given place if your information was unverified would you? This instance is the same concept.

[Onder Kelkia]

On the contrary, that is a logical failure on your part to distinguish between sufficient and necessary elements. You're confusing exclusivity here with sufficiency.

Transparency is not a sufficient condition of democracy, it is a necessary condition. The NPO's public display of the Civil Code does not qualify the NPO to call itself a democracy, but subjecting non-citizens to a legal and political system whose rules they are not privy to, without swearing an oath to the region, is in fact a black mark on Balder's claim to democraticness.

Transparency - freedom of information - and democracy are regarded as associated concepts because public promulgation is necessary for a true and fair rule of law and the development of a rights consciousness, but it also subjects the government itself to public scrutiny with regards to its administrative processes and practices. The rule of law, political and civil rights, and free, informed scrutiny are all elements dependent on openness and information, and all necessary elements that comprise a healthy, working democracy.

Definitions of democracy range widely. Some are broader and narrower. In an online game, a minimalist definition is most appropriate. Balderan democracy does not depend on meeting Unibot's idealized conception of a democracy informed by particular liberal principles. We are never going to be your utopia.

As for transparency, the law of Balder is promulgated publicly - to the citizens of Balder, the people who make and follow it. Non-citizen residents of our region primarily only interact with our legal system in relation to the endorsement cap - which is displayed clearly on our World Factbook Entry. No one can claim to be ignorant of it. The Government undertakes proactive efforts to inform citizens of the endorsement cap and when they are in breach of it.

If non-citizen residents of our region desire greater participation, then they need to join the forums, which is strongly encouraged, and become citizens. Just because residents might become citizens without knowing the laws of the society beforehand does not invalidate our democracy. New citizens can easily renounce citizenship and/or leave the region if they find that they are unhappy with the laws that the existing members of the polity have created. In practice, this does not happen because our internal laws are exactly what we sell ourselves as - a constitutional moanrchy and a parliamentary democracy. Additionally, as I explained to Glen-Rhodes, most citizens are in fact classed as non-voting residents before they become citizens and have access to the laws during that intervening period. So from a practical perspective, there is no issue as regards non-citizen residents of the region.

Selectively referring and disclosing the activities of your government and its laws is no acceptable substitute for providing the law proactively on a free, open basis.

When you can selectively choose what to disclose, you control the conversation and the image you present; you obstruct critics from knowing what questions to ask.

"Selectively referring and disclosing the activities" is the only way any kind of government can operate. That is what every press release involves.

The law is provided "proactively on a free, open basis" - to citizenry, the collective and exclusive unit which comprises our democracy. What you are taking about instead is "transparency" towards external critics of the region. Fundamentally, that is nothing to do with our region's democratic character.

I think any reasonable person could have interpreted the Monarch's decision as a commitment for the Law Book to remain visible in the future. If the Monarch had announced her intentions were for the Law Book to remain visible for a short, arbitrary period of time - I think that would not have received a warm welcoming from anyone.

On the contrary, no "reasonable person" could have interpreted that post as making any such commitment.

It wasn't an announcement so much as a reply posted in a debate thread where she noted masking changes without referring to their future status. Nor did Solorni's reply, as actually posted, receive "a warm welcoming from anyone". It was an immaterial post and the sole response was you you attacking Balder, which was always your primary motivation, rather than any genuine concern for the health of our democracy. It has been blown out of proportion.

The idea that Solorni's post led to heaps of praise for Balder, which Balder then conspired to avoid alienating, is nonsense. The post was irrelevant.

And you admit you made no attempt to correct the record because it could have been potentially embarrassing for the region.

Actually, what I said was this:

As it happens, I don't even recall seeing Solorni's post in February 2017. I learnt of the masking changes that had occurred within Balder and the Government secured the change within Balder. The re-masking of the forums was reversed not in response to Solorni's post, but in response to the event itself. In any case, it is entirely reasonable for disagreements regarding regional policy to be handled behind closed doors without making a fuss. It would have been unreasonable and unprofessional to create a public spectacle of a disagreement with the Monarch over something as minor and irrelevant as our masking.

I am not even sure if saw the post. I learnt of the masking changes in Balder and responded to them there.

In general, of course, I would aim to resolve disagreements in private rather than in public. In no way was the actual change itself "embarrassing" - the disagreement with Solorni may have been slightly embarrassing, but I am entirely comfortable with my stance on non-citizen access.

I don't think that anyone could seriously consider that a significant barrier to an enemy with intelligence capabilities and intentions to infiltrate.

On the contrary, in my experience, intelligence agencies go for softer targets and any obstacles will often deter them from selecting your region.

I was mostly teasing you, Onder - relax, no need to rant. I accept that in a constitutional monarchy, the monarch may only have a ceremonial role in governmental affairs.

I am pretty sure that you have been "mostly teasing" me for most of this very silly exchange.

It's not an implication that Balder's updates are a lie. It's just that there is no publicly available means to verify them. It's that simple. Anybody could just say a given thing is happening but without a means to verify the information it is questionable at best. You wouldn't believe a fortune teller if he/she told you that you would come into a vast sum of money would you? You wouldn't launch an attack at a given place if your information was unverified would you? This instance is the same concept.

Unless you have complete access to the legislature of a region and its archives, you haven't got "publicly available means" to verify any published laws either.

Our foreign updates are no more "unverified" than any other source of official information, unless you have complete internal information. In the same way that it'd likely leak if any region published a law it never passed, I am pretty sure it would leak if we falsely claimed that an election occurred.

[Cormactopia Prime]

This is a silly argument. Balder is no less democratic than the other regions that self-identify as democratic. I don't love that so much of their forum, and particularly their laws, are closed to the broader public either, but that's their choice and it doesn't mean their government isn't democratic.

I'll add that I thought Vulturett's point about working to improve democratic institutions was timely, and I hope that point doesn't get lost in this dispute.

[The Church of Satan]

Unless you have complete access to the legislature of a region and its archives, you haven't got "publicly available means" to verify any published laws either.

Our foreign updates are no more "unverified" than any other source of official information, unless you have complete internal information. In the same way that it'd likely leak if any region published a law it never passed, I am pretty sure it would leak if we falsely claimed that an election occurred.

The Rejected Realms legislature is viewable even to non-citizens. So not only are passed laws open to the public, passed treaties and elections are also not hidden from the inter-regional world. Our own updates are verifiable by anyone that visits our forum (and isn't banned). I'm sure we're not the only ones that are this transparent. Even so, many other democratic regions are undoubtedly democratic because in order to verify that you don't need to be a citizen or government member. You simply need a pair of eyes and internet access.

[Malphe]

Yikes. How do y'all have the energy to type out these constant text walls?

[Onder Kelkia]

Unless you have complete access to the legislature of a region and its archives, you haven't got "publicly available means" to verify any published laws either.

Our foreign updates are no more "unverified" than any other source of official information, unless you have complete internal information. In the same way that it'd likely leak if any region published a law it never passed, I am pretty sure it would leak if we falsely claimed that an election occurred.

The Rejected Realms legislature is viewable even to non-citizens. So not only are passed laws open to the public, passed treaties and elections are also not hidden from the inter-regional world. Our own updates are verifiable by anyone that visits our forum (and isn't banned). I'm sure we're not the only ones that are this transparent. Even so, many other democratic regions are undoubtedly democratic because in order to verify that you don't need to be a citizen or government member. You simply need a pair of eyes and internet access.

In your initial contribution, you argued that the matter could be remedied "without providing anyone access to your forum or government areas therein".

Now it has been pointed out that our foreign updates are as verifiable as any content contained in dispatches, you are arguing that the standard for being "democratic" involves adjusting our forum masking so everyone in the world can view our legislature and other official content, including elections. That does require us to give "[every]one access to your forum or government areas therein" and, yes, that level of access is intrusive with additional downsides. There are plenty of regions which restrict access to at least part of legislature or do not put their internal elections on display to public view. Such "transparency" is actively damaging and allows others to gather valuable intelligence at a click of a button without undertaking any effort.

The reality is that none of this has anything to do with the extent to which our elections are contestable with the possibility of the citizenry changing the government by voting them out. The fact that we have such elections at regular intervals (every two months) is what makes Balder a democracy.

[Eluvatar]

In terms of government transparency, no GCR is as opaque as Balder and that, I personally consider a black mark to its claim of being democratic.

Speaking for myself, lest it get confused as an official statement:-

I find it amusing you're inferring, and have been for a very long time, that we're not democratic given that you wanted to change the voting procedure, that you came up with, midway through a vote just because you were losing an election and didn't want the person winning to get elected, wanting to give your votes to 2nd place instead, whom later admitted to not only trying to bribe someone to become Balder's root admin but also wanted to coup the region.
Ironic, speaking about the apparent lack of democracy in a region when you yourself had the audacity to try and undermine it out of nothing but spite and giving an election to someone who had the worst intentions in mind just because you were friends with them(or at least, they were on your side) at the time.

The long and the short of it is that you bashing democracy in Balder is laughable given the stunt you tried to pull.

I appreciate the driveby reference to 2011. Really rewards me for my long memory.

Did anybody else get this?

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

Speaking for myself, lest it get confused as an official statement:-

I find it amusing you're inferring, and have been for a very long time, that we're not democratic given that you wanted to change the voting procedure, that you came up with, midway through a vote just because you were losing an election and didn't want the person winning to get elected, wanting to give your votes to 2nd place instead, whom later admitted to not only trying to bribe someone to become Balder's root admin but also wanted to coup the region.
Ironic, speaking about the apparent lack of democracy in a region when you yourself had the audacity to try and undermine it out of nothing but spite and giving an election to someone who had the worst intentions in mind just because you were friends with them(or at least, they were on your side) at the time.

The long and the short of it is that you bashing democracy in Balder is laughable given the stunt you tried to pull.

I appreciate the driveby reference to 2011. Really rewards me for my long memory.

Did anybody else get this?

I did. We're old.

[Alvalero]

Speaking for myself, lest it get confused as an official statement:-

I find it amusing you're inferring, and have been for a very long time, that we're not democratic given that you wanted to change the voting procedure, that you came up with, midway through a vote just because you were losing an election and didn't want the person winning to get elected, wanting to give your votes to 2nd place instead, whom later admitted to not only trying to bribe someone to become Balder's root admin but also wanted to coup the region.
Ironic, speaking about the apparent lack of democracy in a region when you yourself had the audacity to try and undermine it out of nothing but spite and giving an election to someone who had the worst intentions in mind just because you were friends with them(or at least, they were on your side) at the time.

The long and the short of it is that you bashing democracy in Balder is laughable given the stunt you tried to pull.

I appreciate the driveby reference to 2011. Really rewards me for my long memory.

Did anybody else get this?

It was a simpler time

[Unibot III]

No fair, Jack and Elu have memories like hawks. Mine is milky porridge.

Perhaps, I've blocked the memory out in pure self-agony. It's not something I'd do now, how ever panicked. Honestly, I don't remember calling for the vote to be altered mid-vote to be IRV. I recall I wasn't really even aware of IRV at that time (?), Eluvatar taught me the mechanics of it at some point. I do remember severely regretting running altogether and I regret not pushing initially for the votes to be conducted using IRV rather than a thread poll (which was more common back in those days.) Hell, I regret putting the adminship to vote, altogether. It was a huge mistake to run again SL, I overestimated my support and let my bitterness with the FRA get ahead of me. I don't think I was in charge of the vote, however - you said it was my call - but I think there was an independent electoral commission. (Was Bel on that?)

The consequence of losing that vote was that power shifted to Rachel near permanently, because imperialist votes coalesced around Rachel in that nascent, interim period and Rachel became the forum admin and the supreme personality/figure once the delegate, Lux, was gone, like a week later (something we couldn't have anticipated.)

Ironic, speaking about the apparent lack of democracy in a region when you yourself had the audacity to try and undermine it out of nothing but spite and giving an election to someone who had the worst intentions in mind just because you were friends with them(or at least, they were on your side) at the time.

Lux's intentions were not known. I was completely blindsided when Lux went rogue. And I'll note that when Lux did coup, Rachel contacted him privately with the hopes of collaborating!

It's over-idealistic (I was guilty of it) to call those early votes in Balder, "democracy" - they were my hope to start the region off right, with an open membership and an open vote. It was painfully naive of me. The electorate was naturally split along partisan, geopolitical lines with varied intentions. The region was a few days old. There were no real natives, no real residents. It was a free-for-all. You might accuse me of being a hypocrite, but I was always a public servant in the democratic regions that I participated in; I chaired TSP faithfully, and I led and contributed TRR to the best of my ability.

I'll note playfully: I brought IRV to TRR and Condorcet to TSP. Perhaps I learnt from some of my mistakes!

The UDL was right to launch into Balder when it was created to act as a stabilizing force that could ward off other military powers who hoped to establish a long-term colony/occupation. But the approach that I took was impatient and naive - and reflected, in part, my inexperience with Political Gameplay (I hadn't been a Gameplayer for even a full year.) I remember I didn't want to get stuck in Balder, I didn't want to open up criticisms that I was a dictator. I just wanted to hold a few votes and see a healthy region off in its genesis. The result was that the imperialist powers, who were far more patient and more tactical, seized control of Balder and have more or less drained it of its relevance and its activity like a vampire for the past seven years. Balder became a colony because of my mismanagement of the interregnum, while Osiris became a warzone because of 10KI's ad hoc vote - neither of us wanted to stay long in possession of the region, we wanted to get out because it was uncomfortable as a defender to possess a GCR. I distinctly remember that being on the top of my mind, I was burning to pass the delegacy to Lux. I only put forth my name as admin because I had the technical skills and I didn't trust Rachel and SL.

We were playing different games with different levels of difficulty: the imperialist crew had plans to seize Balder gradually from the inside-out and introduce it to its foreign policy, namely its ongoing FRA-LKE war, as a crown jewel, a sinker they had conquered even more wholly and fundamentally than Lazarus - and the creation of the PRL encouraged them to intensify their efforts. I just wanted to foster an autonomous community with a democratic structure amendable to their needs and depart - I allotted a couple of weeks to accomplish this, rather than the months that would be required realistically without the whole project being usurped. It's an objective, which sounds naive now, that reflects the early raison d'être of the UDL: to transcend interregional politics and defend with probity and political independence. Colonizing a GCR would have been the opposite of what the UDL was created to do, we were a post-Devonitians organization.

This is a silly argument. Balder is no less democratic than the other regions that self-identify as democratic. I don't love that so much of their forum, and particularly their laws, are closed to the broader public either, but that's their choice and it doesn't mean their government isn't democratic.

I'll add that I thought Vulturett's point about working to improve democratic institutions was timely, and I hope that point doesn't get lost in this dispute.

Perhaps I've been misunderstood, I don't believe Balder is undemocratic solely because of a glaring transparency deficit.

(1) Severely controlled immigration with a geopolitical lens, (2) excessive use of political bans, (3) a 'monarch' executive, and (4) the second most strict endorsement cap among the GCRs - these are the main reasons why it is hard to entertain that Balder is a democracy. But these things are never a binary consideration. Illiberality is a scale. Everything adds up. At some point, it becomes inaccurate to accept a political self-identification. I enjoy bringing up the transparency issue periodically because you usually get about fifteen different responses from the executive, that both defend and concede, and inevitably result in no permanent resolution.

I personally think it's ludicrous that a TRR Speaker of the Assembly thinks Balder is a exemplar model of democracy. (And not just because he said I wasn't a good reject.) I have faith in the challenge system, however.

[The Church of Satan]

In your initial contribution, you argued that the matter could be remedied "without providing anyone access to your forum or government areas therein".

Now it has been pointed out that our foreign updates are as verifiable as any content contained in dispatches, you are arguing that the standard for being "democratic" involves adjusting our forum masking so everyone in the world can view our legislature and other official content, including elections. That does require us to give "[every]one access to your forum or government areas therein" and, yes, that level of access is intrusive with additional downsides. There are plenty of regions which restrict access to at least part of legislature or do not put their internal elections on display to public view. Such "transparency" is actively damaging and allows others to gather valuable intelligence at a click of a button without undertaking any effort.

The reality is that none of this has anything to do with the extent to which our elections are contestable with the possibility of the citizenry changing the government by voting them out. The fact that we have such elections at regular intervals (every two months) is what makes Balder a democracy.

I think you've misinterpreted the meaning of my previous post. I didn't determine or imply any standard of democracy. I only cited TRR's legislature as an example of transparency. My post you referred to remains a valid statement with regards to the laws of Balder. You can create a comprehensive index of Balder’s laws and the regional forum's masking can remain unchanged. I'm not saying or trying to imply that Balder isn't democratic. I'm only saying that even the bare minimum transparency could go a long way.

Somehow this conversation went from Balder’s laws to it's foreign updates and I lost sight of that. Sneaky Onder!

[Alvalero]

-snip-

It was Sovereign Liberties not Lux who you supported during that time and it's hard to take you seriously when you say you didn't trust him since you wanted him to get elected over Rach so badly you'd go against the voting system you yourself put in place and the 7 years of vitriol that have followed since.
I don't particularly care about the battle between defenders and imperials fighting for control given I went into Balder as a neutral, I care about those who wanted to help get the region off it's feet and work hard to build a community. It happened to come from neutrals like me and By Night and imperials like Charles, NES and Rach and its was then added onto by others who joined and served over the years who varied in belief.

You can have your opinions but given the 7 year vendetta it's hard, for me anyway, to take any criticisms you have seriously since I can't tell if you're just being spiteful or not.

[Drop Your Pants]

I appreciate the driveby reference to 2011. Really rewards me for my long memory.

Did anybody else get this?

What are you doing out of your bunker? Get back in there and make me Sheepstates.

[Unibot III]

-snip-

It was Sovereign Liberties not Lux who you supported during that time and it's hard to take you seriously when you say you didn't trust him since you wanted him to get elected over Rach so badly you'd go against the voting system you yourself put in place and the 7 years of vitriol that have followed since.
I don't particularly care about the battle between defenders and imperials fighting for control given I went into Balder as a neutral, I care about those who wanted to help get the region off it's feet and work hard to build a community. It happened to come from neutrals like me and By Night and imperials like Charles, NES and Rach and its was then added onto by others who joined and served over the years who varied in belief.

You can have your opinions but given the 7 year vendetta it's hard, for me anyway, to take any criticisms you have seriously since I can't tell if you're just being spiteful or not.

I'm not being spiteful. I supported Lux for delegate - he seemed the most independent and enthusiastic choice; I supported SL over Rachel, but I didn't trust SL (that's why I ran for admin initially), mostly because I didn't know him very well and he was an FRAer. I don't believe NES, Onder, and Rachel's intentions ever has been, or ever will be to create a region autonomous of their imperialist sphere.

I don't remember any blackmail/corruption charges against SL. I vaguely remember something about multing or a brother or something.

My hope at the time was Balder would grow autonomous of military powers, but I knew then, and anticipated that if the UDL didn't step in, Balder would be conquered. We didn't commit politically enough for our objective to be realistically achieved - the task would have required us to stay in a position of power longer than I would have felt comfortable with as a defender. I didn't harbor any ill-will with folks like CoN, you, or By Night. Indeed, I've always believed in hard work, cultural development, and political autonomy as a source of strength. That's been my polar star for most of my time in NationStates.

Also, I don't think I put in place that voting system. I'm pretty sure I appointed an electoral commission to decide those things - prompting a heated discussion over vote splitting. I recall Belschaft being on the commission, we were unaware he was trying to rig the election, and I was too naive to assume Rachel would also try to stack the elections. At this time, Belschaft didn't have a reputation for doing this sort of thing and I just wasn't the same player, I wasn't nearly as cynical as I am now.

[Marilyn Manson Freaks]

Sign up for The Rejected Times' Subscription Service here.

Issue XLIX | February 14, 2019

Media Officer: Marilyn Manson Freaks
Editor-in-Chief: Marilyn Manson Freaks
Deputy Media Officer: Rudy Gobert (Helga)

Index

"Love Strikes Back" | WRITTEN BY Senior Reporter Marilyn Manson Freaks and Correspondent Glacikaldr
"Liberate Politics Amino" | NEWS | WRITTEN BY Intern Malphe
"The Seraph Pacific" | INTERVIEW | WRITTEN BY Senior Reporter Marilyn Manson Freaks
"Franco and the Users" | COMMENTARY | WRITTEN BY Senior Journalist Frattastan IV
"The WALL: a boon or a curse? | OPINION | WRITTEN BY Intern Mysterio | EDITED BY TRT STAFF
"The Return of Decks" | NEWS | WRITTEN BY Intern New Xanderstralia

Love Strikes Back
WRITTEN BY Senior Reporter Marilyn Manson Freaks and Correspondent Glacikaldr

It's that time of the year again. On this day, Rejects come out to play. They do nothing but try to woo their boo or bae. You guessed right, it's Valentine's Day!

Cupid has sure struck the Realms with his arrows this Valentine's Day. And, by Cupid, I mean Cupid the ultra-infectious epidemic that has spread across all of mainland TRR. Cupid is known as the sweetheart's disease thanks to the infection being associated with an initial outbreak from a recent hugging campaign between fenda and invader citizens; even the swiftest embrace, especially between these two parties, may spread Cupid. Heck, even our Delegate has Cupid!

"We had to section off The Greymarshes from the Reject's Palace to deter [the infection's] spread into the Assembly," explains former Media Officer and well-connected voice of passion Glacikaldr/Nequedum/PowerPAOK. "Yet, the current concern is how to best minimise the risk of getting infected while perusing the Gettersburg Market's hotspots such as Kandy's [sic] BBQ and Grill, or, worse yet, monitor the risk factor on behalf of other passengers attempting to use CrazyGirl's Ferry and their destination nations so as to best attempt to contain the outbreak."

It is as of yet unconfirmed if there have been any associated deaths, though paranoia and random acts of delusional behaviour are yet to be striked out from a list of possible effects. In fact, a number of the patients being treated remained bedridden over-valentine's-night after reporting similar stories regarding a werewolf and a disorganised local small-town detective, harlot and all included. What utter madness!

Liberate Politics Amino
NEWS | WRITTEN BY Intern Malphe

A recent operation undertaken by the Osiris Sekhmet Legion and allies- a raid and refound of small founderless UCR Politics Amino- has attracted some attention throughout the NS multiverse. "The raid on Politics Amino began as a recruitment gimmick in Osiris" describes Osiran delegate Altino, "what we did is take a region [...] and let Legionnaires hang out there RPing out a rebellion". It was intended to be a chance for recruits in the legion to stretch their legs and experience a raid, as well as having fun with a RP scenario. The 'rebels' were Osiran soldiers placed in lieu of natives, that would later raid the region in a 'rebellion' with the intention to refound.

But when "their former-delegate piped up upset that he didn't want to deal with the stress", as Altino describes, "We had to have a talk about whether to go on with the raid after that". It was decided by the Legion that they would go ahead with it, with the logic that the region had sustained raids before and wouldn't cease to be raid fodder if Osiris decided to leave. Osiris offered advice to the natives and standing Moshir Benjabobaria agreed to save the Regional Message Board for the natives after it had been refounded.

Later a Security Proposal written by Kuriko passed onto voting, which would liberate the region and make it vulnerable to liberation in the future. Moshir Benjabobaria's focus shifted to the liberation and beating it by refounding the region before it could pass, since he knew Osiris couldn't beat the liberation in votes. He succeeded and refounded the region before the liberation passed and gloated about it in the SC thread- "Not gonna lie, this resolution caused me a lot of stress and extra work in the last few days. But it only made my victory sweeter"- which Altino condemned as distasteful and became an issue with other gameplayers. Benjabobaria also neglected to carry through on his word to save the RMB, which worsened the situation further and caused some to question his capability to be Moshir. "We go over what he did wrong, why that has consequences, what we'll have to do to fix it, and what we could've done better so this wasn't a mess to begin with" Altino comments, "I don't think that he's created such an issue that he should be pushed out for it".

Kuriko, author of Liberate Politics Amino and staunch defender, has this to say to TRT journalists: "What can I say that I haven't already said? I'm saddened by the destruction of an innocent community, and upset that we couldn't save the region because of my failure to get the liberation to vote one update earlier".

The Seraph Pacific
INTERVIEW | WRITTEN BY Senior Reporter Marilyn Manson Freaks

TRT's Editor-in-Chief sat down with Seraph aka Erinor, freshly elected as Delegate of The South Pacific for a second time.

Hello Seraph, and welcome to my office, have a seat. Thank you for agreeing to do this interview!

Not at all! It means a lot to continue our connection with one of our oldest allies.


Let's just jump right in. How will this term be different from your first time as Delegate? What do you plan on doing that you didn't think of before?

I don't expect it to be very different in many ways. There'll be some differences bright about by the endorsement progress that was made during my last term and subsequently through the SWAN and I didn't manage to work much with the local council last time, which is like to rectify, but other than that it's really the same, but more - I aim to help us push our endorsement cap even higher, stimulate gameside engagement in the region and continue to serve as a caring focus for newcomers and regulars alike.


How long do you plan on staying Delegate? Do you plan on running again when your term ends?

One Delegate term in the South Pacific is six months long, so it's hard to say where my thinking will be at the end of term, but I'm seriously considering stepping aside to let someone else have a go. The quality of candidates in this election was very high and if some of the same people step up again next time, I'd be willing to throw my support behind them.


When it comes to major external issues like the Lazarene Civil War, how would you handle them if you were Prime Minister or Minister of Foreign Affairs?

That's a fascinating question, to which I can only answer that I am neither of it all, nor am I ever likely to be for I'd make a mess of things like this. Fortunately, as the Delegate of the South Pacific is legally powerless in these areas, I'd only have to do what my cabinet tells me.
Of course, I'm well aware that what the Delegate says holds much sway both within the region and externally, and as such I'd be very careful with what I said and the manner in which I showed my support or otherwise. In Lazarus, for example, I was for a time part of the resistance. I think that would not be appropriate whilst in my current role.


Could you tell us a bit about yourself? How did you rise to relevance in TSP?

Oh, where to begin? Well, I started playing the game on the recommendation of a friend in April 2016, tentatively got sucked into the forum community, got elected to the Local Council in July, became Minister of Regional Affairs in October and then held that position for two terms. After that I founded a political party, ran for Delegate and lost in the second round to Drugged Monkeys, was MoRA for one more term before winning the next Delegate election. I then left my political party in the summer and took a two month break from NS to help with Generalised Anxiety Disorder. I run a (very innactive) writers group for TSP and beyond called the Silicon Pens and I now regularly post spiritual reflections in the Church of the South Pacific. In real life, I'm a father, a charity retail monkey and a mediocre gamer.


What's your political party called? What tempted you to run for Delegate so early? Also, what's the Church of the South Pacific? Is it one of the Church of Zyonn's rivals?

The political party was the Southern Progress Party. It was created to be an alternative to the two parties that already existed and to encourage Continual Regional Progress, but it was t really a success. Parties as a whole have kinda died away now, though, so it is no longer needed. Also, I was encouraged to run for delegate by a few folk and I thought it fit well with my talents, time and profile.

The Church of the South Pacific is a project I started after my return. Its a safe place to share one's spirituality and seek advice and encouragement. Whilst I've approached it as a Christian and share Christian reflections there most weeks, it's open to all faiths and none. It's kinda a blossoming of one of the reasons I decided to stick with NS in the first place - the challenge of openly being and acting like a Christian in an open online community. It also ties in with my current efforts to explore the idea of ordination in the Church of England.


If you could change anything about TSP what would you change?

The level of separation between gameside and the forums: the are so many great active people across the two, but so little cooperation. If there was more, the region could be so much more in turn.


What would you do to unite both sides?

It's an issue we've had for a long time and to some extent probably always will - the vision I laud out before was, afterall, rather utopian - and so there had been a lot of discussion. For myself, I just intend to stand as a bridge between these two worlds, doing my best to constantly remind each other that the other exists and what is important to them.


Okay. Lastly, what do you have to say to the naysayers?

There are naysayers?


I'd assume so. Not everyone likes everyone. In this case I'd probably lean more towards TSP's naysayers, not yours personally.

I've seen a little resistance to me personally as a delegate, as I have held the position before and there are those who wish to see new blood in the role. To them I'd say, 'That time will come. What I offer is security with progress that, I hope, will help make TSP a more welcoming, open and inclusive region then ever before!'
To TSP's naysayers, I'd say, 'Chill! We're enjoying ourselves just fine down here. Maybe take a moment to enjoy the ambience and the banter in between salt portions once in a while, eh?'


Thank you for your time, Seraph.

You're very welcome!

Franco and the Users
COMMENTARY | WRITTEN BY Senior Journalist Frattastan IV


A leader of the war to free Europe from fascism (left) and Francisco Franco (right) share a warm embrace.

During the recent crisis between the Pacific on one side and most gameplay organisations on the other, many players have alleged that the NPO is constitutionally predisposed to hate user-created regions, or even that its core identity is founded on a form of 'GCR supremacism'.
This sentiment was common in Europeia: when the IJCC was founded then-President HEM stated that Francoism claims "that only Game-Created Regions are worthy of greatness" and advocates "the relegation of all UCR citizens to a second class", while in the days after the declaration of war his successor Sopo said that he believed Francoism "questions [Europeia's] very right to exist, let alone co-exist". Both the Augustin Alliance and The North Pacific labeled the NPO's attitude as "GCR supremacist", and in his topic promoting a military attempt against the Pacific Galiantus accused the NPO of having "openly declared the citizens of user created regions traitors and enemies of the game-created regions". Many more have depicted them as a threat to UCRs, even if the Pacific's involvement in invasions or subversion plots against those has been minimal.

While these statements might be useful as a rhetorical device to drum up support for war, they seem amnesiac at best.
The truth is that the NPO, far from shunning them or treating them as inferior, has a rich and fruitful history of relationships with major user-created regions, as even a cursory knowledge would show.
At the peak of the war with the ADN The Pacific enjoyed profitable alliances with important UCRs of the time, like USSR and Gatesville. The former was among the first regions to recognise Franco's government and one of the few supporters of Great Bight's aggression against The North Pacific, while the latter was a strong partner of The Pacific for nearly a decade, despite their numerous plots to subjugate other feeders.
Ivan Moldavi himself (that Great Userite) was founder of New Sparrow, a decent-sized ADN member region that went on to form the Union of Sovereigns, an interregional organisation involving the Pacific with several UCRs that were at odds with defenders.
Notably the Union of Sovereigns took part in raids, including the battle of Palestine alongside DEN, and in later years was hailed by some imperialist commentators as a prototypical "Independent" group. Its formula was repeated at least once, when the Sovereign Confederation (SovCon) saw Krulltopia band together with Gatesville and Equilism in the pursuit of an ill-defined 'sovereigntism'.
Another prototypical independent region, Great Britain and Ireland, built on their links with UoS to sign a treaty with the Pacific at the dawn of the influence era. Years later Krulltopia too looked for UCR alliances, concluding one with Europeia in addition to the aforementioned SovCon.
Later in his rule, when the NPO tried to pursue closer relations with defenders, it made sure to negotiate a treaty with Mordor - a UCR founded by Wopruthien, leading member of an organisation that the Pacific itself had previously labeled as 'userite'. And even Pergamon, supposedly a deranged ideologue, tried to maintain a good working relationship with The Grey Wardens with varying success.
These formal and informal contacts with the UCR world, spanning various Emperors, are more developed than can be said for some other feeders (in two ways: there are GCRs who have had a lot less links with UCRs than the NPO, and the NPO has been on better terms with UCRs than with certain GCRs).

Despite some people taking it at face value Francoism is more clearly a 'veil', a mask to hide actual social relations, than other gameplay ideologies. It wasn't the spring that brought the "August Revolution", nor the driver behind the Pacific's early attempts to coup other GCRs.
It was concocted two years after Franco's rise to power, and one year after his retirement from the game. It's not a "theory": its function was akin to a founding myth, which existed mainly to justify the Order's existence and continued autocracy on the basis of a siege mentality, and sought to represent feeder tyranny as its opposite, feeder emancipation, to ensure that the Pacific had the ideological means to defend itself against its opponents. "Userite" exists only as a convenient representation of the foreign intruder or of anyone who opposes the régime's goals, and can be selectively applied at whim, as seen from the number of 'Userites' that rose in the NPO's ranks, or the treaties signed with 'Userite' regions, or the attacks against other GCRs.

The class struggle imagery, that has drawn unwarranted comparisons between Francoism and Marxism, perhaps owes more to Unlimited (main author of Proper Francoist Thought) than to Franco himself. Curiously Unlimited, who liked comparing the NPO's situation in the first years to Soviet Russia's isolation after the 1917 Revolution, should have known that the USSR signed treaties with capitalist or pre-capitalist countries - including those that violently suppressed their own communist movements, like Germany or Turkey - very soon after its establishment.
In the same vein as those agreements, the Pacific's attitude towards user-created regions and the various changes in foreign policy hasn't been driven by a supremacist ideology but by mere realpolitik: needing to defend itself it seeks allies wherever it can, it paints its enemies as hopeless subversives like every dictatorship does, and isn't afraid to take forceful action to pursue its goals. In practice, this means that it truly clashed only with UCRs that tried to build an opposing sphere of influence in the GCR world, out of fear that this might eventually erode the Pacific's autonomy and independence too. Even then, the harm done to these UCRs has been minimal. Looking away from the official propaganda, the near exclusive victims of the Pacific's foreign policy have always been the GCRs.

Furthermore, only a part of the NPO's upper echelons is Francoist in the strictest sense of the term.
From empirical observations of the results of his "Gameplay Alignment Test" Unibot proposed that NPO members could be grouped into three ideological clusters: "Francoists", who are strongly regionalist and ambivalent towards R/D, "Moldavists", who are raider-leaning, and "PRP" (named after the 'People's Republic of the Pacific', a 2004 makeover of the NPO that tried to defuse hostilities with the other GCRs via diplomacy), who are cosmopolitan-leaning. We won't delve into how accurate this classification is, but it's an approximation that can be useful to describe different approaches to the NPO's security that have prevailed at different times: Francoists' isolationism, Moldavists' militant opposition to defenders and support for 'independents', and the PRP (a much weakened group nowadays)'s promotion of political and military neutralism in other GCRs.
None of them will refrain from associating with UCRs due to a misguided belief of supremacy, because this belief would be out of step with the NPO's fundamentally realist approach to international relations. And neither will the UCRs refrain from associating with them. However, power shifts between various groups do make a difference when it comes to which UCRs they will associate with, and the ability to perform these shifts is a testament to the Pacific's ability to realign its foreign policy without undergoing régime change.
Before the 2018 crisis Francoists were a political majority, but the purge or voluntary departure from the Order of many of them will no doubt cause another shift.

While declarations made in the last few months make the war appear as something inevitable, an irreconciliable battle of ideologies that can only end with the unconditional surrender of one of the parties (not dissimilar those gameplay battles that will never end with a peace treaty, like the 'war' between defenders and raiders, or between fascists and anti-fascists), in truth the rivalries we have seen are only strategical and contingent.
Greater crimes have been committed by the NPO against other regions before and new ones will be made in the future. But in practice very few will keep distrusting the Pacific no matter how many leadership, policy, and image changes they go through. For example, the TNP-NPO distrust persists because of historical and cultural reasons, including the 2004 and 2005 coups and TNP's self-image as a promoter of democracy, peace, and self-determination, which carry symbolic value and help anchoring them to a specific attitude (an interesting side note is that this means that TNP's foreign policy too retains an idealistic component that cannot be reduced to context-specific regional interests).
That's the exception: even if the NPO might remain a threat to this or that GCR, many of their enemies will be willing to reconcile and even forge new alliances as soon as a favourable realignment happens, and the Pacific will be happy to call them friends (after all, what else would be the purpose of Pierconium and Elegarth's return to Francograd?). So much for class war.

The WALL: a boon or a curse?
OPINION | WRITTEN BY Intern Mysterio | EDITED BY TRT STAFF

This article isn't about Donald Trump's Wall. This article is about the World Assembly Legislative League aka “The WALL”.
According to the Gameplay thread of The WALL, it is an interregional organization formed in August 2014 to unite its signatory regions’ voices as one in the voting of World Assembly Legislations. Founding members were Balder, Europeia, International Democratic Union and The North Pacific. Europe joined The WALL in April 2018.

The WALL has been constantly criticized for its bureaucratic policies and for being an organization that's easily able to pass almost any kind of WA Resolution, like the now repealed GAR#454 “Debtor Voting Rights” which was proposed by Imperium Anglorum. That resolution was ridiculed for being too short by General Assembly standards and having a bunch of loopholes in it. Aspiring WA resolution authors are calling the organization a “tyrannical regime” over the World Assembly.

Although The WALL's reputation is being undermined day by day, the plan of creating an organisation dedicated to World Assembly legislation is not a bad idea unless it is only being used to benefit its signatories and their allies. An organisation dedicated to World Assembly resolutions should be used for spreading awareness among WA voters rather than making them feel like their votes don't matter as the outcome is already being decided by an organisation. The WALL should promote aspiring WA resolution authors and help them draft their resolutions rather than posing as a bureaucratic organisation that will pass any resolutions that are being drafted by influential people within their organisation. The WALL can help in passing Liberation resolutions in the Security Council that can prevent innocent communities from getting destroyed by the raiders which is a commendable effort.

The WALL can become a better organisation in the eyes of others if it is able to change its policies and become more inclusive in its decisions. It should evaluate the legitimacy of its resolutions before proposing them in the World Assembly. Being an organisation dedicated to World Assembly legislation, they should promote aspiring WA resolution authors by mentoring them and listen to the opinions of concerned WA Members before making decisions to support or stand against a certain WA Resolution.
We can't call The WALL “a boon” or “a curse” because it is the mixture of both. But it is up to them if they want to be like the five “Permanent Members” of the United Nations Security Council which can override any decisions made by the rest of the World or an organisation that thinks more about this Nationstates community than themselves.

The Return of Decks
NEWS | WRITTEN BY Intern New Xanderstralia

Decks have returned, and they have a lot of cool features. Issues now give card packs instead of timers. And we have a lot of notable card collectors already. For example, Captain Lard has a mission to collect every single copy of his own card. And Frisbeeteria is very well known within the original NS card exchange.
Let’s go into detail on how cards work. Each card has a rarity, from Common to Legendary. Card rarities are based on certain factors, like WA Resolution Writership, Delegacy, and more. People have a random chance to get a card pack from answering issues. Opening card packs gives 5 completely random cards.
The auction system works like this: People can bid on cards, and ask on cards. If an ask is equal to or lower than a bid, then it is matched with that bid, and an auction starts. If anyone else bids higher or asks lower, the auction length increases by a minute and the asks and bids are reanalyzed. The game tries to use as many bids as possible. However, card value does not necessarily depend on its rarity. For example, Captain Lard, a Rare card, is the 5th most valuable card, at 25.00, mostly due to Captain Lard’s mission to collect every copy.
Now, there are people who use the issue answering thing with puppets to their advantage. However, getting the cards to their mains is hard. The most reliable method is gifting, however it costs the gifter the Junk Value of the card they are gifting. Some people use auctions at ridiculously high prices, however other people use this to take the money by asking for their own copy of the card for a lower price, which matches the bid to the lower ask. All in all, it’s difficult to transfer cards without gifting them.
Deck Value is the ultimate goal of Cards. You want the highest deck value of everyone. However, it takes luck to get good cards. So, you’re probably not going to have the highest deck value. But selling cards and buying others is a really good way of making some bank. And then you could, in theory, take the top spot.
Of course, there are some quirks with the system. First, Season One cards, unlike all future cards, are frozen in time 8 months after they were created, and only nations that existed on April 1, 2018 have Season One cards. This means that the current TRR delegate, Frattastan IV, does not have a card, and as he was the delegate of TRR at the time of the freezing of cards, there is no card that says “Delegate of The Rejected Realms” on it. But there will be more seasons, and those cards will be frozen immediately, so there is guaranteed to be a delegate card for TRR next season.
Ex-Nation cards will become rarer and rarer, as no Ex-Nation cards will be generated in future seasons. Eventually they will be worth many times more than regular cards. That is why some people collect these cards while they’re still somewhat common. And there are other cards too that will become more and more valuable as time goes on. But that is all we have to say on the topic of cards.

***SPONSORED CONTENT***

Have you heard about the musical sensation sweeping through the Rejected nations?

~~~

The Rejected Realms’ POPMASTER contest has now been held three times, and the crowd just keeps growing. The format of POPMASTER is simple – each event consists of three rounds. Each round consists of 10 songs which fit a genre, theme, or other category. The objective is to name the title of the song and/or the artist before any of the other players. Participants get one point for getting one or the other, and three for getting both. If you’re not first, you get nothing! Round winners pick the intermission song between rounds, and overall game winners suggest a category for the next event.

~~~

POPMASTER was born on Jan 25th and 26th, originally hosted by Wop. In these two games, Naka and Deadeye Jack proved themselves to be leading players, with LR and Fratt in close pursuit. Ever-Wandering Souls signed on to host soon after, and held an event on Feb 9th that had a different winner for each wound, with Naka edging out the overall vote from Wop and LR. This event introduced the themed round, with tricky sound-alikes in “Double Takes” and holiday specials in “Love is in the Air.” Overall, Naka leads the POPMASTER -wide scoreboard, with Deadeye Jack in close second and LR in a not-too-distant third. Alk, W&S, and Wop chase a little further back.

~~~

POPMASTER returns in the TRR Discord for a fourth time this Sunday, at 4pm EST, 21:00 GMT, hosted again by Ever-Wandering Souls. This week’s categories will be Alternative, International, and Out of This World. Deadeye Jack is also expected to try his hand at hosting in the coming weeks, date TBA.

~~~

Do you have an ear for music, a mind for names, and fingers of lightning? Come show us that you can beat the pack, or just come for the music, but either way – come to POPMASTER!!

***SPONSORED CONTENT***

NOTE: The Rejected Times does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Rejected Realms.

Show your appreciation by upvoting this Issue's dispatch here.

Find The Rejected Times Index here.

[Cormactopia Prime]

The Rejected Times attacking WALL at the same time Glen-Rhodes is proposing a new WA bloc in the South Pacific. How surprising.

[Aclion]

There is no anyone opposed to WALL should feel obligated to refrain from setting up a rivil block. Setting up better orgs is the best way to counter it. Even the author recognise that it's not a bad idea.

[Cormactopia Prime]

There is no anyone opposed to WALL should feel obligated to refrain from setting up a rivil block. Setting up better orgs is the best way to counter it. Even the author recognise that it's not a bad idea.

Sure, but I think there should be honesty about what's happening here. The Rejected Times doesn't care about improving the World Assembly, it cares about propagandizing against WALL because the Rejected Realms is about to join a rival WA bloc called SIEGE. SIEGE won't be any better than WALL; it will push the agenda of its member regions in the World Assembly the same as WALL does for its member regions. So the article is dishonest propaganda.

Personally, given the three major regions likely to be involved in SIEGE -- The East Pacific, the Rejected Realms, and the South Pacific -- I'm rooting for WALL now more than ever before. I hope more regions will join WALL in order to counter SIEGE, if indeed the WALL regions are open to that. It would be good to see the Interregional Legislative Coalition (ILC) become a strong alternative option as well, and I hope progressive UCRs that would be a more natural fit for the ILC won't be lured into SIEGE. It would be great for example to see Forest join the ILC and advance efforts to raise environmental awareness.

[Marilyn Manson Freaks]

There is no anyone opposed to WALL should feel obligated to refrain from setting up a rivil block. Setting up better orgs is the best way to counter it. Even the author recognise that it's not a bad idea.

Sure, but I think there should be honesty about what's happening here. The Rejected Times doesn't care about improving the World Assembly, it cares about propagandizing against WALL because the Rejected Realms is about to join a rival WA bloc called SIEGE. SIEGE won't be any better than WALL; it will push the agenda of its member regions in the World Assembly the same as WALL does for its member regions. So the article is dishonest propaganda.

Personally, given the three major regions likely to be involved in SIEGE -- The East Pacific, the Rejected Realms, and the South Pacific -- I'm rooting for WALL now more than ever before. I hope more regions will join WALL in order to counter SIEGE, if indeed the WALL regions are open to that. It would be good to see the Interregional Legislative Coalition (ILC) become a strong alternative option as well, and I hope progressive UCRs that would be a more natural fit for the ILC won't be lured into SIEGE. It would be great for example to see Forest join the ILC and advance efforts to raise environmental awareness.

You're a bit behind, aren't you?