Southern Journal - Issue XXVII: PM Powers, Missing Cabinet

[Roavin]

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.

....eh?

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.

The Southern Journal is principally run by the Ministry of Regional Affairs, but has a long tradition of not having government-approved/government-sanctioned/government-dictated content, in the interest of better and more independent journalism. It's right there in the introduction:

Southern Journal is a newspaper owned and operated by the South Pacific Ministry of Regional Affairs. It was established to provide the South Pacific with detailed and objective news on regional events, to present a diverse range of opinions regarding issues of public interest and to hold government officials accountable to the public.

Our only agenda is information and transparency, which is why our government ownership does not preclude us from publishing articles or opinion columns critical of the government. We provide an outlet for different citizens to make their case and for the people of the South Pacific to know what happens in their region.

And you can see this in action — this latest release is quite critical of two Cabinet members (Tim and myself).

[McChimp]

I love this newspaper.
Where else can I see defender subversives, other defender subversives in the same region and actual defenders arguing?

[Glen-Rhodes]

I love this newspaper.
Where else can I see defender subversives, other defender subversives in the same region and actual defenders arguing?

Or am I secretly working for Souls? Hmmmmm

[McChimp]

Or am I secretly working for Souls? Hmmmmm

Manipulating you? Seems worthy of a condemnation if you ask me.

[Tim Stark]

Cute article, Glen. I'm not going to waste time on you here. My DMs aren't very hard to find if you ever want to actually talk about it, instead of just whinging.

I always appreciate content which helps us stay on the top page.

[Unibot III]

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

Sorry what did you say? My hearing isn’t so good anymore. *shakes cane at DYP*

[Glen-Rhodes]

Cute article, Glen. I'm not going to waste time on you here. My DMs aren't very hard to find if you ever want to actually talk about it, instead of just whinging.

I brought up Westphalia and had a fairly decent discussion with Roavin and others about it on TSP's Discord, a couple weeks prior to this issue coming out. When you popped in, this is the stuff you had to say:

- "I don't consider you a defender or at all relevant of opinion within the faction"
- "I don't defend to help natives, I defend to beat invaders. Helping natives just means less wins for invaders"
- "Unlike you, I've made an R/D career out of more than just being Unibot's lapdog"
- "[Glen] considers me to be the Satan of the Defender world"
- "After all, GlenLogic doesn't believe in looking at all of the facts that aren't convenient to it"
- "Apparently because I'm not a moral defender, I'm the f***ing scum of the faction"
- "What makes you equipped to tell me what makes a good representative of defending? What have you done?"
- "I mean clearly you don't pay active attention to R/D, because you seem to think that moralism is a viable path"
- "Please, Glen, enlighten me what relevant experience you're bringing to the table that should make me give a **** about your R/D musings"
- "To be fair, Roavin, I prefer to talk to Glen as little as possible usually, especially on R/D topics"
- "You really drank the Unibot kool-aid hard, eh?"
- "Glen was more or less Unibot's R/D lackey for a lot of 2012/2013"

So I can only imagine what your response would've been in a DM not subject to moderation rules.

Anyways, this notion that criticism must be made privately and not subject to opinion articles, or really any form of forum post, is frankly crazy. No region or organization is immune from public criticism. Certainly no government official is free from being criticized for their actions. Welcome to democratic accountability, I guess?

We're trying to run a newspaper (or magazine, more accurately), not a propaganda outlet. I'll note that nobody seems to be attacking me for calling Wolf a liar, Funkadelia insecure, Balder/TWP wannabe propagandists, or painting The Black Hawks/Unknown as killers of innocent regions. I seem to have struck a cord by being critical of some defenders. And from the responses, it's because there's an underlying assumption that I shouldn't publicly criticize TGW because I support the defender cause? That's certainly not healthy. The Grey Wardens was founded on basically being the anti-UDL of the defender world. This is very UDL-ish behavior-- I should now, I was Unibot's lapdog.

It probably got skipped, but y'all should really read the Publisher & Editor's note at the beginning of this issue: "[The] Southern Journal will hopefully get debate flowing, grab readers' eyes, and provoke genuine community discussion of various issues and happenings in the game. Our focus will be on editorial content, rather than mere reporting, and we will strive to have pieces that reflect a diverse set of interests, politics, and cultures." This isn't a defender listserv. We'll be critical of raiders, defenders, Indys, and everything in between, when they do things that deserve criticism. This issue was critical of LWU, TBH, and TGW. The next issue will probably have something to say about Gameplay happenings, too. The sole purpose of NS journalism/commentary isn't to fluff anybody's image. Nobody's perfect, and the only way to get better is to hear criticism, take it in, and decide if it's worth applying. Your decision is yours. We'll still be writing no matter what!

[Sarakart]

Keeping everything under wraps is boring. Public critique brings it into an arena where regions have to defend their actions to an audience, not just the backroom wheelers and dealers, and that means image management, public relations, and all the infrastructure associated with a culture of discussion and debate. That does not mean you have to take critique, but I am surprised that there is very little in terms of a culture of diplomatic statements and dividing on/off the record statements for big regions. It helps flesh out gameplay into something more interesting and natural.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Keeping everything under wraps is boring. Public critique brings it into an arena where regions have to defend their actions to an audience, not just the backroom wheelers and dealers, and that means image management, public relations, and all the infrastructure associated with a culture of discussion and debate. That does not mean you have to take critique, but I am surprised that there is very little in terms of a culture of diplomatic statements and dividing on/off the record statements for big regions. It helps flesh out gameplay into something more interesting and natural.

I'm not really sure when diplomatic statements went out of style. Used to be half the GCRs would write statements about the latest big Gameplay event. That'd be an interesting article to research and write! A lot of Gameplay politics does happen behind the scenes nowadays, and it seems people have grown to expect that as the only legit way to do things. But during my heyday (2014ish), things were mostly out in the open. That had the benefit of not only knowing where people actually stood on things, but also let newbies follow along and learn the niche game themselves

[Nakari]

As far as I can tell, TGW as an organisation has no plans to stop anyone from criticising it - nothing in the world is perfect, everything needs criticism and improvement. Let's not let these things drive us apart too much.

[Escade]

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.

Pretty much agree with most of the points here.

We already have a small but loud swath of players who have nothing better to do than attack us for merely having the audacity to not bow down to their petty ratchet behavior. I'm not sure why we would dance for them. If most of GP is doing things behind closed doors, then why are you playing the emperor with no clothes here. It seems to go from being constructive to player bashing and needless brawling.

The COI issue is also one that has kept a few of us from taking natural steps and its actually one that I'm still unsure about. Why the hell should we care what the majority of the other side of the ideological spectrum spouts?

There are a handful of opposing players who engage in a way that is not disingenuous. People who you can talk to IC and OC without revulsion. The rest, I really don't care if they tell me they like something I'm doing or hate it because I don't care what they think. The majority of the opposition, well if you listen to your haters you might as well stop existing because they won't stop until that happens.

If someone on my team tells me something and it feels constructive rather than reductive, that should be advice or words I consider. For example, while I've strongly or lightly disagree with the people I think of as "my team," in cases its private and also doesn't cross lines. It's safe because I can trust them not to try to harm me in some way over it or create spectacle. Also we'll kiss and makeup.

All this dialogue really did is confirm my ride or die for defenderdom, I genuinely like the defender community and players even when being silly or melodramatic but especially when being sweet and honorable, and love how like awesome most of this conversation was with them.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

I brought up Westphalia and had a fairly decent discussion with Roavin and others about it on TSP's Discord, a couple weeks prior to this issue coming out. When you popped in, this is the stuff you had to say:
- "I don't defend to help natives, I defend to beat invaders. Helping natives just means less wins for invaders"

Sig worthy. Oh, and you’re not doing too well at that anyways, Tim.

[Escade]

. In August-September of last year, Wolf and his pack of seeking alphas called the Lone Wolves United, propped up Funkadelia’s coup d’région in Lazarus. The dessicated army of this new Undead Dominion denied fervently that the Lone Wolves were in power, to the belief of no one. It was a native-backed uprising against electoral fraud and foreign entryists, of course.

It was only natural that Funkadelia pay back during the ides what was owed-- control of Lazarus, in full, to the Khanate of wolves in sheep's clothing. (Quite literally; look at Aleister’s flag.) Wolf has regained a semblance of relevance again, thanks to the hard work of Funkadelia and the propagandists in Balder, Osiris, and The West Pacific who protected the flock from the pesky truth.
 

Keeping everything under wraps is boring. Public critique brings it into an arena where regions have to defend their actions to an audience, not just the backroom wheelers and dealers, and that means image management, public relations, and all the infrastructure associated with a culture of discussion and debate. That does not mean you have to take critique, but I am surprised that there is very little in terms of a culture of diplomatic statements and dividing on/off the record statements for big regions. It helps flesh out gameplay into something more interesting and natural.

See above. You only have to look at the Lazarus thread here to see what the culture of NSGP has become because of the sophistry. We truly live in the era of Trumpism when the scavengers feeding on dead flesh call themselves wolves.

Critique on public forums is only viable when players like the above poster don't use it to try to bait players. That is why if you are trying to build someone or something you do it privately where it won't be used as ammunition against them. And when you do it publicly you highlight an adversarial relationship. Some people pursue adversarial relationships

[Academy of Ancient Greek Sophists]

See above. You only have to look at the Lazarus thread here to see what the culture of NSGP has become because of the sophistry.

What is wrong with Sophistry?

[RiderSyl]

TGW as an organisation has no plans to stop anyone from criticising it

I'm pretty sure y'all do...

"Has this player criticized us?" is a deciding factor in whether someone can be a Warden or not. I learned that the hard way. So, that definitely discourages any internal criticism. And TGW is obviously discouraging any external criticism. Either y'all are purposefully discouraging ALL criticism, or just doing it out of ignorance. Malicious or dumb. Not good optics either way...

[Sarakart]

Obviously it's time for glasnost among defenders.

[Escade]

Obviously it's time for glasnost among defenders.

Is that a type of drink or a pagan festival? If the former I'd like something with a pineapple, tropical flavor. If the latter then defenders are p good at those

[Sarakart]

Obviously it's time for glasnost among defenders.

Is that a type of drink or a pagan festival? If the former I'd like something with a pineapple, tropical flavor. If the latter then defenders are p good at those

It's a Russian concept relating to the openness of government used by Alexander II and Mikhail Gorbachev, but I think I like your interpretation better

[Gibraltarica]

Obviously it's time for glasnost among defenders.

Is that a type of drink or a pagan festival? If the former I'd like something with a pineapple, tropical flavor. If the latter then defenders are p good at those

Government reform drives me to heavy drinking as well.

[Escade]

Is that a type of drink or a pagan festival? If the former I'd like something with a pineapple, tropical flavor. If the latter then defenders are p good at those

It's a Russian concept relating to the openness of government used by Alexander II and Mikhail Gorbachev, but I think I like your interpretation better

Oh I don't know Russian history, now a bit of Russian music yes, but not history or politics

I'll make sure to send you an invite when we host the next party, they're pretty lit

[The Honest Defender (Ancient II)]

Wait, who am I supposed to support now?

[Gibraltarica]

Wait, who am I supposed to support now?

The hypno-toad. All hail.

[McChimp]

The hypno-toad. All hail.

http://r33b.net/

[Of The Toads]

I agree all hail ME!

[United States of Vietnam]

Obviously it's time for glasnost among defenders.

It is already happening. Every forum post of defenders tells you what you need to know. None internal conflicts didn't make its way to the forum.