Southern Journal - Issue XXVII: PM Powers, Missing Cabinet

[Sarakart]

I'd concur. The Westphalia part was my favorite, although I didn't mind the Llamas either. That said, how much of what was written in terms of TGW complaints about the region not cooperating with their suggestions was actually the opinion of TGW officially, rather than Tim-Opolis? It's not really clear to me either way, reading some of the backlog.

[Glen-Rhodes]

I never thought I'd see the day I'd compliment you, Glen, but very well done op-ed on Westphalia.

It's funny the private reactions I've seen to me being critical of defenders I've had opinions for the past decade!!

I'd concur. The Westphalia part was my favorite, although I didn't mind the Llamas either. That said, how much of what was written in terms of TGW complaints about the region not cooperating with their suggestions was actually the opinion of TGW officially, rather than Tim-Opolis? It's not really clear to me either way, reading some of the backlog.

Given that multiple TGW officials, both here and on public Discord servers, said the same things, I think it's safe to attribute those stances to TGW as an organization itself. If TGW disagreed with the native-blaming, they certainly haven't made a public effort to correct the record.

[Cormactopia Prime]

It's amusing to me to see Glen-Rhodes turning on his only political allies in the South Pacific because a) he lost an election for Minister of Foreign Affairs to Tim, which is what this is really about, and b) they aren't marching in lockstep with him and Unibot and the vision those two share for defending.

I guess when it comes to subverting the South Pacific and disrespecting those who disagree with him, even fellow defenders aren't safe. Maybe it's time to acknowledge that the problem with Glen-Rhodes isn't that he's a defender. The problem with Glen-Rhodes is that he is Glen-Rhodes.

Certainly the South Pacific would benefit from acknowledging that and finally doing something about it.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Not that it was particularly mandatory for your piece, but it is worth noting the one group that did not drop the ball at all *after* the raid - while the natives may have made missteps before it to allow it to happen, while SWORD, TGW, and everyone else couldn't pick a path after it went down, they were solid in theirs. They moved right to a new region, with alts, leaving their mains in Westphalia and contacting as many people as possible to WA up and cross up. They made sure to reclaim nearly every active player from TRR to their new region as they were ejected from WP. They did not flame, or spam, but resisted as effectively as they could alone and with dignity. They did kept their allies and embassies up to date on things. They spoke up in the second Lib thread especially. If they'd crossed harder prior in their existence and built up even more base influence in the first place, or had as much as the top 4-6 nations had on a dozen or two nations, it would not at all have been possible to clear in a month...as is, it took 9 or our 11 Ro's, and having nearly all of them use the delegate's seat to avoid double costs, to get it done in that timeline.

---

One thing about this operation remains curious to me, though. Maybe the natives can answer it. Who *is* Etlara, author of the first lib? Does anyone actually know them? Are they a puppet of someone else? Are they active on Discord? Because they're sure not very active on site. One page of forum posts, only a few pages of RMB posts, mostly in one chunk a few months ago with sporadic posts since. And yet they showed up and wrote what is, for all intents and purposes, a fairly good lib, with only minor rules violations. That's with no visible experience, again. Maybe The Grand Puffle Republic, the co-author, actually did most of the work and just found a native to submit it? I don't know. It's just odd, odd enough that I got seriously asked more than once if this was a raider sleeper meant to sink the odds of a later lib by pre-empting with a "meh" one. (It's not). Unibot played that up. Around the same time he claimed he did not ghost write this one, only most native libs. The whole thing was just an extra layer of odd behind most all mainstream defenders actively fighting a liberation.

*shrug* It's not really consequential, in the long run. I'd just certainly be interested in an investigative piece on the topic.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

I....I am going to have to retract the first half of the above post. That's about all I have to say.

[Roavin]

It's amusing to me to see Glen-Rhodes turning on his only political allies in the South Pacific because a) he lost an election for Minister of Foreign Affairs to Tim, which is what this is really about, and b) they aren't marching in lockstep with him and Unibot and the vision those two share for defending.

I guess when it comes to subverting the South Pacific and disrespecting those who disagree with him, even fellow defenders aren't safe. Maybe it's time to acknowledge that the problem with Glen-Rhodes isn't that he's a defender. The problem with Glen-Rhodes is that he is Glen-Rhodes.

Certainly the South Pacific would benefit from acknowledging that and finally doing something about it.

What's the issue? It's harsh, critical journalism. It slams me almost as hard as it slams Tim, it shows where things went wrong, and .... I don't have a problem with that! That's the point of journalism.

[Vincent Drake]

Given that multiple TGW officials, both here and on public Discord servers, said the same things, I think it's safe to attribute those stances to TGW as an organization itself. If TGW disagreed with the native-blaming, they certainly haven't made a public effort to correct the record.

It's a personal opinion, not an organization opinion.

Tim very clearly stated that his comment was his own personal opinion and not TGW's official stance. We obviously discourage native-blaming, although when things get heated and tempers flare, stuff gets said. Losses, particularly those that are easily preventable, sting. You know how it is, when you did what you could, but it was not enough, and things happened outside of your control. It is frustrating, it feels good to blame someone in that moment. But, then, a new day comes, and it's time to move on to more productive action.

We remain fully committed to defending arbitrary, innocent regions regardless of the setbacks along the way. We still tried to defend Westphalia during the initial raid, it's not like we dropped them (the raiders simply had higher turnout). No amount of mistakes or advice ignored changes our core mission. Remember, I was a founderless native, as much as they frustrate me, that was me! I remember BT practically begging us to ban the raiders after logging in 5 hours after update. BT would scold us about not instituting an endo cap or utilizing BC ROs. What we did or didn't do never stopped him from jumping to defend EU (bad pun is bad), which is the heritage that TGW still stands by.

We do actually analyze our past losses and mistakes, improve/change standard operating procedures when necessary, and learn moving foward. However, we also don't have any obligation to fill your GP forum drama needs or otherwise serve as your public entertainment. I don't do the "rehash the past until the horse is long past dead" thing that seems to be extremely popular in GP. Some of the criticism in this article is pretty valid and has been taken into account, however, much of it comes across in bad faith (like going ahead and attributing personal opinions to official policy despite being originally told otherwise in clear language). There is literally no reason to do that unless you have an agenda to push.

If you have genuinely productive criticism without the smear agenda, you know where to send it.

[Cormactopia Prime]

It's amusing to me to see Glen-Rhodes turning on his only political allies in the South Pacific because a) he lost an election for Minister of Foreign Affairs to Tim, which is what this is really about, and b) they aren't marching in lockstep with him and Unibot and the vision those two share for defending.

I guess when it comes to subverting the South Pacific and disrespecting those who disagree with him, even fellow defenders aren't safe. Maybe it's time to acknowledge that the problem with Glen-Rhodes isn't that he's a defender. The problem with Glen-Rhodes is that he is Glen-Rhodes.

Certainly the South Pacific would benefit from acknowledging that and finally doing something about it.

What's the issue? It's harsh, critical journalism. It slams me almost as hard as it slams Tim, it shows where things went wrong, and .... I don't have a problem with that! That's the point of journalism.

I think Vinny has done a pretty good job of demonstrating the issue. Some of his criticism may have been valid, but much of it wasn't, and all of it reads like a smear campaign that isn't so much designed to improve anything as to grind an axe against Tim, against you, against the Grey Wardens. He seems much more interested in tearing down the Grey Wardens than in building up defending, and the last thing defending needs right now is an armchair "defender" -- I hesitate to even call him that, more on that in a minute -- tearing down active defenders and propagandizing against them.

Which brings me to my next point: When is the last time Glen-Rhodes defended a region? Say what you will about the Grey Wardens, but they do it every night. Glen-Rhodes' interest in defending is political; he couldn't care less about the actual defense of regions, he cares how it plays in Feeders and Sinkers, and how it can further his political agenda in Feeders and Sinkers. His beef with how Westphalia was handled has nothing to do with any concern for Westphalia and everything to do with how it looks to Feederites and Sinkerites. If he actually cared at all about Westphalia or any other region, he'd stop sitting around in the South Pacific moaning and groaning about actual defenders who are doing actual defending, and he would mobilize his WA nation to actually defend the regions he claims to care so much about. At least Unibot used to do that. Glen-Rhodes has never consistently done that. He is not a defender -- he is a gadfly with an agenda, who uses defenderism as a prop. Defenders should ignore him. But then, everyone should ignore him.

[Escade]

What's the issue? It's harsh, critical journalism. It slams me almost as hard as it slams Tim, it shows where things went wrong, and .... I don't have a problem with that! That's the point of journalism.

I disagree with some of the points in the opinion and stated so but still respect Glenn's right to share his point of view and perhaps create and engage in dialogue with the parties involved. Often times its possible that things look a certain way from a perspective and people can come to some sort of clearer understanding or actually learn something on how to improve things.

In other news, because the Southern Journal of former times was a much more academic newspaper and this new journal will be a mixture of things stated in the note, we will be rebranding. Suggestions for names and also call for art and staff for this type of journalism - to become a writer, artist, comic writer\artist, or like a creative person involved, join the Ministry of Regional Affairs here -> https://discord.gg/yJHejwZ

[Glen-Rhodes]

If you have genuinely productive criticism without the smear agenda, you know where to send it.

I did give plenty in the article, and it's a shame you'd rather ignore it and call it a smear. It will only hurt TGW in the long run, if you guys aren't actually receptive to criticism. When the top brass of your organization are all saying the same thing, it doesn't matter if the posts are disclaimed with "this is just my personal opinion." Personal opinions seemed to dictate the strategy and the response. After all, these are officials talking about their beliefs on a mission they helped run. It's hard to disown that as mere 'personal opinion' that doesn't reflect how TGW operated.

As I say in the last part of my op-ed, defenders can and should do better. Far from a "smear agenda," I pointed out several problematic things that you guys should consider changing:
- Keep a leash on your commanders blaming natives for failure, because it's a bad look that doesn't endear TGW as a good org
- Cut down on COIs for your Wardens, so you don't get accused of subverting GCRs
- Realize that the natives you're there to protect aren't experts and will make many mistakes
- Listen to other defenders with longer resumes and more experience
- Rethink the political strategy of sinking Liberations, then reassess what the clear markers are for when a region is about to be destroyed (this was TGW's biggest mess up-- saying there was no clear evidence Westphalia was going to be destroyed)

Those are all pieces of "genuinely productive criticism"!

[Malphe]

The hills are alive with the sound of popcorn.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Which brings me to my next point: When is the last time Glen-Rhodes defended a region? Say what you will about the Grey Wardens, but they do it every night. Glen-Rhodes' interest in defending is political; he couldn't care less about the actual defense of regions, he cares how it plays in Feeders and Sinkers, and how it can further his political agenda in Feeders and Sinkers. His beef with how Westphalia was handled has nothing to do with any concern for Westphalia and everything to do with how it looks to Feederites and Sinkerites. If he actually cared at all about Westphalia or any other region, he'd stop sitting around in the South Pacific moaning and groaning about actual defenders who are doing actual defending, and he would mobilize his WA nation to actually defend the regions he claims to care so much about. At least Unibot used to do that. Glen-Rhodes has never consistently done that. He is not a defender -- he is a gadfly with an agenda, who uses defenderism as a prop. Defenders should ignore him. But then, everyone should ignore him.

The Grey Wardens certainly could ignore me and everybody else who has an opinion on Gameplay, but doesn't stay up all night to move their nation around. That's their prerogative, and given that Vincent Drake and I have never had a single conversation, he has no personal reason to listen to me at all.

As much as R/Ders love the line about ignoring anybody who isn't them, they're operating in a fundamentally political arena. TGW's reputation is shaped in part by political forces made up of players who don't raid or defend. I have a pretty good idea of what kind of things can sink an org in the long run, because I'm sitting in a GCR that contributes a slice of the political forces at play. Not only that, but TGW's leadership has a history of also being in political positions elsewhere, so they particularly should be sensitive to how important it is to take the temperature of the room from time to time.

I'm just one person writing an article here and there, so they shouldn't take my opinion for more than what it is. But I'm not the only "armchair" with opinions on R/D, who happens to be in positions of power that can translate those opinions into actual policy. Any R/D group is free to only listen to other military folks. They'll eventually find out they're not operating in a vacuum, and that "armchairs" tend to be the ones leading politics.

[Deadeye Jack]

If you have genuinely productive criticism without the smear agenda, you know where to send it.

I did give plenty in the article, and it's a shame you'd rather ignore it and call it a smear.

I don't want to get into a back and forth with you over this but you've latched onto one part of his post while ignoring the part where he said that plenty of what was included in the OP Ed was valid and that it was noted and discussed.It's not being ignored, in truth, there wasn't anything new that we hadn't already discussed before your piece. I've always found that if I have an issue with someone who is a friend or ally it's best to try to discuss that with them candidly in private instead of trying to make a show of it. Battling in the public arena trying to show someone up is a hindrance to your message getting through. I have that same philosophy whether it be speaking to a friend, an ally, a warden or a fellow commander.

As Vinny said, we're not here to fill the GP drama needs.

[Drop Your Pants]

- Listen to other defenders with longer resumes and more experience

I think I just pissed myself from laughing so hard. That puts me near the top of the list (well above you and Uni 'Gramps'), and my advice usually resloves around having fun and not listening to anyone who thinks age in defending is a good thing.

[Escade]

I did give plenty in the article, and it's a shame you'd rather ignore it and call it a smear.

I don't want to get into a back and forth with you over this but you've latched onto one part of his post while ignoring the part where he said that plenty of what was included in the OP Ed was valid and that it was noted and discussed.It's not being ignored, in truth, there wasn't anything new that we hadn't already discussed before your piece. I've always found that if I have an issue with someone who is a friend or ally it's best to try to discuss that with them candidly in private instead of trying to make a show of it. Battling in the public arena trying to show someone up is a hindrance to your message getting through. I have that same philosophy whether it be speaking to a friend, an ally, a warden or a fellow commander.

As Vinny said, we're not here to fill the GP drama needs.

This, pretty much. Are you actually trying to help or create drama? It's pretty much easy to tell based on the approach people take. Want to help make things better, slide into DMs.

Then, the fact is update isn't all night and especially when it comes to the topic of liberations - people could choose to become pilers. It's a struggle that defenders face - so if you aren't updating or piling then you are choosing something else, whatever it may be, as more important.

Finally, regardless Tim is a great and active defender who has helped countless natives. TGW as an organization has helped countless natives and do so every night. Want to help, hit them up because they will train you well and also give you the opportunity to help natives.

[Unibot III]

My own thought is that defenders were probably right to campaign against the initial "Liberate Westphalia" - I thought the behaviour of the authors seemed unusual (they didn't engage with people in the drafting thread and pursued a liberation full stream ahead against the advice of most folks). If they pulled a Douria/Environmental Rebels and brought the resolution to vote with a vote stack already planned and organized against their own resolution, the results could have followed as a major strategic blunder that fatigued the entire international initiative. Especially when Rolemec himself pioneered the "false flag" WA Liberation.

That underscores the need for defenders to outsource their WA efforts to experienced authors - so they'll be assured they'll get the right timing, proper campaigning, and a reliable draft.

In and around 2009-2011, that outsourcing from FRA would have fell in the lap of Sedge, GRO, Topid, and myself. Later on, Dharma took on a lot of those cases. I think that's something that I don't see as much of (in part because the SC became inactive) - and if I were defending today, I would just take guys like Fauxia, Aclion, Thatcher and Lenlyvit who are already interested in the SC and essentially recruit them as your SC pointmen. It doesn't have to be done on an official basis, but if you've got a group of authors who know their shit, you can essentially recruit them to spearhead projects. That would have been a big help in Westphalia's case because the resolution going to vote would be something reliable with an authorship team that's associated with defenders and essentially, knowledgeable.

There were some communication issues I also had with Westphalia's case, but I think that was more an issue with Tim than TGW.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Y'all keep saying tim running his mouth is a Tim issue, and yet I've never seen much from Roavin or now Vinny in the way of actually disciplining the way he's representing the org/affecting it's image.

[Unibot III]

Y'all keep saying tim running his mouth is a Tim issue, and yet I've never seen much from Roavin or now Vinny in the way of actually disciplining the way he's representing the org/affecting it's image.

Errr, I think that would be unfair to Tim. It's more of a communication problem than a problem specifically about Tim. It's just a matter of making sure the position of the organization is distinguishable, which can get difficult when there are individuals in an organization which are prominent publicly.

I suspect all defender organizations have to confront this issue at some point. UDL certainly did. It can be difficult when you're running a 'big tent' organization and you're trying to include a lot of defenders with different views because the temptation is for the organization's executive to remain agnostic on topical debates.

[Escade]

Y'all keep saying tim running his mouth is a Tim issue, and yet I've never seen much from Roavin or now Vinny in the way of actually disciplining the way he's representing the org/affecting it's image.

Excuse you? Tim's not a child to be disciplined for being human and having emotions. I've been a defender for about a year now and I can see and understand the frustration of trying to help people who don't listen to you. Right now it makes me feel sad but I imagine if it happens enough times I might be more frustrated and be upset because guess what defenders like Tim and members of TGW put hours and hours into trying to protect players and their communities. It seems like you'd love to see Tim muzzled for expressing his thoughts, but in reality he's an exceptional member of the TGW team with a great set of skills and a lot of personal charm.

Glenn's criticisms had a few valid points but were also excessively focused on player bashing. Here's the thing, when you're trying to improve\support\build something or help someone you focus on how to get better rather than dwelling on the failures or trying to scapegoat people. For every Westphalia, TGW has a ton of successful liberations including Philippines, Japan, Eireann, the Monarchist Entente, St Abbaddon, and others where things did go right. If you can't acknowledge the successes and just focus on what is convenient to attack, that is highly problematic.

If I weren't a member of the SPSF and attached to TSP in all things across time and space, I would join TGW in a heartbeat because they are the best at what they do in this era of defenderdom.

[Drop Your Pants]

It's just a matter of making sure the position of the organization is distinguishable, which can get difficult when there are individuals in an organization which are prominent publicly.

You'd know all about that 'Gramps'

cough FRA flags cough

[Guy]

- Cut down on COIs for your Wardens, so you don't get accused of subverting GCRs

You're the only one making this unfounded accusation. TRR is perfectly capable of identifying attempts to 'stack' its votes or to subvert its democratic processes. If your reasoning for this claim is Tim casting WA votes, it can be safely discarded.

Tim's public criticism of natives was unwarranted. Criticisms about the control (or lack thereof) TGW exercises over the public statements of its commanders is best delivered directly to TGW, rather than on the pages of NS forum threads.

With regards to the liberation, there were reasonable arguments to vote both in favour and against the proposal. Regardless of TSP or TRR's votes, it was extremely unlikely to pass given TNP's stance that violation of its recruitment standards is worthy of regional destruction, and that almost all other other major delegacies are pro-griefing.

[Cormactopia Prime]

When no defender agrees with Glen, but Souls does, I think it's fairly easy to see whose agenda Glen's article served -- besides, of course, his own.

Out of curiosity, whose decision was it to let Glen use the Southern Journal, TSP's official regional newspaper, as a propaganda platform against his political enemies in TSP? It's a bit odd to see the region's newspaper bashing and smearing the region's own elected Cabinet and implying they're subversive userites.

[Wopruthien]

I agree with a lot of Glen-Rhodes points. I think it is a stretch to say Tim is subverting TRR though.

I also think a lot of the issues raised are being discussed, or have been discussed within TGW and are in the process of being addressed (I hope). A lot of older defenders have aired their displeasure with how TGW handled the situation behind closed doors, but that doesn't mean we disagree with Glen's points just because you don't see us shouting about it on the NS forums. There is just certain ways these things are handled.

[Glen-Rhodes]

- Cut down on COIs for your Wardens, so you don't get accused of subverting GCRs

You're the only one making this unfounded accusation. TRR is perfectly capable of identifying attempts to 'stack' its votes or to subvert its democratic processes. If your reasoning for this claim is Tim casting WA votes, it can be safely discarded.

I’m not the one who you have to worry about accusing defenders of subverting GCRs, Guy I’m giving an opinion based on the experience we all saw with the UDL. The campaign by imperialists and “Independents” to paint the UDL as a corrupt subverting defender org was successful in large part because UDLers *were* active in many regions, and engaging in those regional politics. That’s a playbook that can be used again, if Wardens follow in the same footsteps of COIs.

Tim is singled out in my article because this is *The Southern Journal* and he’s currently our Minister of Foreign Affairs. Roavin got quite a lot of criticism for simply being the head of TGW, and he solved that COI recently by dedicating himself to TSP.

[Glen-Rhodes]

I've always found that if I have an issue with someone who is a friend or ally it's best to try to discuss that with them candidly in private instead of trying to make a show of it. Battling in the public arena trying to show someone up is a hindrance to your message getting through. I have that same philosophy whether it be speaking to a friend, an ally, a warden or a fellow commander.

As Vinny said, we're not here to fill the GP drama needs.

I’m not a Warden. I’m not a member of the defender establishment, either. While I’m a supporter of the overall defender cause, I’m not the Grey Wardens’ spokesperson or inspector-general. I believe that if defenders do something dumb, they ought to be called out on it, because change doesn’t happen if complaints must be lodged in secret.

For what it’s worth, I commented on Westphalia a couple weeks ago. This was the response: viewtopic.php?p=33549192#p33549192 Somehow I doubt the response would be any different had I DM’d Vincent Drake on Discord, had I received any response at all.

All I can say is, be prepared for bad press if you make poor decisions. Defenders can and should do better. If TGW’s response to a mildly harsh op-ed is to say they’re not going to listen to public criticism from defender supporters, then that’s TGW’s choice. Whatever discussions happening behind closed doors in defender group chats might be more convincing. Either way, people who share your ideological views aren’t obligated to be (and shouldn’t be) in lock-step with you, nor shield you from bad PR. (That’s what media officers are for!) That’s what we did with the UDL, and it set defending back years.