The Miniluv Messenger: TEP Liberated!

[Evil Wolf]

The key part of this is defenders are always pushed out, dismissed as unpatriotic, untrustworthy etc. It's the oldest story in the book.

Unibot, the last defender to be "forced" out of TEP was you, and that was under Bach when TEP was at it's most Defender. You have no leg to stand on, do better.

Funkadelia, Aleister (Lamb Stone), Evil Wolf, and now Fedele have demonstrated over the past couple years what a bad idea it is to elect raiders as Delegates of Feeders and Sinkers.

Cormac, I've been the Delegate of a GCR I think 7 more times than you have and yet, somehow, I have fewer coups than you do. Funk is in the same boat, more times, less coups.

So if my one coup demonstrates that electing raiders is a "bad idea" throughout all of NS, what exactly do your numerous coups say?

[Klaus Devestatorie]

If Todd McCloud is a raider plant, he's not a very good one. He's been there 12 years and TEP still isn't raider.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Cormac, I've been the Delegate of a GCR I think 7 more times than you have and yet, somehow, I have fewer coups than you do. Funk is in the same boat, more times, less coups.

So if my one coup demonstrates that electing raiders is a "bad idea" throughout all of NS, what exactly do your numerous coups say?

I think everything that can be said about me pretty much has been said about me at this point, don't you?

That said, you're not wrong. I tend to be very bad for regions, often unintentionally and despite my best efforts. Most people have picked up on that, which is why most GCRs won't even let me participate, let alone be their Delegate. Just wondering when they're going to finally pick up on it with you and your ilk.

[Jar Wattinree]

If Todd McCloud is a raider plant, he's not a very good one. He's been there 12 years and TEP still isn't raider.

He needs to upgrade to planet.exe.

[Unibot III]

The key part of this is defenders are always pushed out, dismissed as unpatriotic, untrustworthy etc. It's the oldest story in the book.

You were more interested in your defender agenda in TEP than you were in how it was tearing apart the community. I'd call that more loyal to an agenda than to a region's best interests. Also, you ran from a trial because you couldn't be convicted or your oath to UDL would have been broken. Nobody forced you to run.

My Scarlet Oath would have remained intact. I left because I didn't feel the trial was worth the stress. Part of the testimony raised by Todd McCloud was literally a transcript of me having a panic attack -- suffice to say, I wasn't in 'a good place' at that time and I regret that the East Pacific community got dragged into the personal drama.

I was supportive of The East Pacific adopting The Defender Act, as were you - and a great number of TEPers, including the majority of TEP respondents. The Defender Act didn't pass unilaterally. When the Defender Act was struck down, I drafted a compromise for the sake of the community, The Identity Act - which made TEP a "non-aligned" region. I sought to be a trustworthy, contributing member in the East Pacific as I had in the Rejected Realms and the South Pacific.

[Old Hope]

Cormac, I've been the Delegate of a GCR I think 7 more times than you have and yet, somehow, I have fewer coups than you do. Funk is in the same boat, more times, less coups.

So if my one coup demonstrates that electing raiders is a "bad idea" throughout all of NS, what exactly do your numerous coups say?

I think everything that can be said about me pretty much has been said about me at this point, don't you?

That said, you're not wrong. I tend to be very bad for regions, often unintentionally and despite my best efforts. Most people have picked up on that, which is why most GCRs won't even let me participate, let alone be their Delegate. Just wondering when they're going to finally pick up on it with you and your ilk.

I think the issue with you is more that you are both not a good delegate and trying to be delegate than you having to be bad for regions. You might be a good minister/officer(media perhaps?), or a good lower level contributor, though, if you don't try to be delegate.
It reminds me of being tempted to take part in WA proposal drafting... it ends badly every time.

[McMasterdonia]

You were more interested in your defender agenda in TEP than you were in how it was tearing apart the community. I'd call that more loyal to an agenda than to a region's best interests. Also, you ran from a trial because you couldn't be convicted or your oath to UDL would have been broken. Nobody forced you to run.

My Scarlet Oath would have remained intact. I left because I didn't feel the trial was worth the stress. Part of the testimony raised by Todd McCloud was literally a transcript of me having a panic attack -- suffice to say, I wasn't in 'a good place' at that time and I regret that the East Pacific community got dragged into the personal drama.

I was supportive of The East Pacific adopting The Defender Act, as were you - and a great number of TEPers, including the majority of TEP respondents. The Defender Act didn't pass unilaterally. When the Defender Act was struck down, I drafted a compromise for the sake of the community, The Identity Act - which made TEP a "non-aligned" region. I sought to be a trustworthy, contributing member in the East Pacific as I had in the Rejected Realms and the South Pacific.

But not The North Pacific! (Bold mine )

[Aclion]

If Todd McCloud is a raider plant, he's not a very good one. He's been there 12 years and TEP still isn't raider.

There's difference between having sympathies that put your region's security at risk and being a raider plant.

[Lord Dominator]

Fascinating article in any case

[Unibot III]

My Scarlet Oath would have remained intact. I left because I didn't feel the trial was worth the stress. Part of the testimony raised by Todd McCloud was literally a transcript of me having a panic attack -- suffice to say, I wasn't in 'a good place' at that time and I regret that the East Pacific community got dragged into the personal drama.

I was supportive of The East Pacific adopting The Defender Act, as were you - and a great number of TEPers, including the majority of TEP respondents. The Defender Act didn't pass unilaterally. When the Defender Act was struck down, I drafted a compromise for the sake of the community, The Identity Act - which made TEP a "non-aligned" region. I sought to be a trustworthy, contributing member in the East Pacific as I had in the Rejected Realms and the South Pacific.

But not The North Pacific! (Bold mine )

*shrugs* I tried hard to be a good Minister of WA Affairs and was grateful for the early cabinet opportunity via JAL/Eluvatar. I felt the North Pacific's leadership (Evil Wolf) at the time of Warhammer was using the prosecutor (Punk Daddy) and the judiciary (Gaspo) as a battering ram against defender-leaning citizens - as was the region's new WA voting policy and internal operational changes to the NPA; In the Rejected Times, I editorialized the North Pacific's gradual rejection of liberal democracy and internationalism as it embraced 'the Independent Manifesto' and its way of governance.

I'll note that while TEP Citizens are calling me out, it was a prominent group of the East Pacific's citizens, not I, that interfered in elections in the South Pacific and the Rejected Realms. The purpose of which was to stop the election of people (Myself & Glen-Rhodes) who were perceived to be too defender-leaning. I just sought to be the best Speaker and the best Delegate I could, but the message was clear: if you're an independentist wanting to block a defender from exercising their citizenship, no institution is sacrosanct, the end always justifies the means: electoral interference, voter fraud, non-justificable persona non grata, bogus charges, political exclusion, and extra-constitutional political action. I remember sworn constitutionalists hand-waving away a coup of the South Pacific because the target of the coup was defenders and the justification was an revival of Hileville's Independentist "Republic." What was the North Pacific's response then? Endorse Hileville! Claiming, of course, that supporting the couper was a treaty obligation! I assume following from that line of thinking, the North Pacific will materially support Fedele if his actions develop into a coup d'etat. RE: The North-East Pacific Security Treaty.

[Newark Aristocracy]

Very big crap show involving Davelands Being over the Endo cap,me wanting people to endorse him on TEP RMB.

[Lord Dominator]

Hmm, somehow doubt they would/will.

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

But not The North Pacific! (Bold mine )

*shrugs* I tried hard to be a good Minister of WA Affairs and was grateful for the early cabinet opportunity via JAL/Eluvatar. I felt the North Pacific's leadership (Evil Wolf) at the time of Warhammer was using the prosecutor (Punk Daddy) and the judiciary (Gaspo) as a battering ram against defender-leaning citizens - as was the region's new WA voting policy and internal operational changes to the NPA; In the Rejected Times, I editorialized the North Pacific's gradual rejection of liberal democracy and internationalism as it embraced 'the Independent Manifesto' and its way of governance.

I'll note that while TEP Citizens are calling me out, it was a prominent group of the East Pacific's citizens, not I, that interfered in elections in the South Pacific and the Rejected Realms. The purpose of which was to stop the election of people (Myself & Glen-Rhodes) who were perceived to be too defender-leaning. I just sought to be the best Speaker and the best Delegate I could, but the message was clear: if you're an independentist wanting to block a defender from exercising their citizenship, no institution is sacrosanct, the end always justifies the means: electoral interference, voter fraud, non-justificable persona non grata, bogus charges, political exclusion, and extra-constitutional political action. I remember sworn constitutionalists hand-waving away a coup of the South Pacific because the target of the coup was defenders and the justification was an revival of Hileville's Independentist "Republic." What was the North Pacific's response then? Endorse Hileville! Claiming, of course, that supporting the couper was a treaty obligation! I assume following from that line of thinking, the North Pacific will materially support Fedele if his actions develop into a coup d'etat. RE: The North-East Pacific Security Treaty.

You have a very interesting view of how thing went during the Hileville incident, especially considering TNP's support of him ended when he couped. But never let the facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

[Unibot III]

*shrugs* I tried hard to be a good Minister of WA Affairs and was grateful for the early cabinet opportunity via JAL/Eluvatar. I felt the North Pacific's leadership (Evil Wolf) at the time of Warhammer was using the prosecutor (Punk Daddy) and the judiciary (Gaspo) as a battering ram against defender-leaning citizens - as was the region's new WA voting policy and internal operational changes to the NPA; In the Rejected Times, I editorialized the North Pacific's gradual rejection of liberal democracy and internationalism as it embraced 'the Independent Manifesto' and its way of governance.

I'll note that while TEP Citizens are calling me out, it was a prominent group of the East Pacific's citizens, not I, that interfered in elections in the South Pacific and the Rejected Realms. The purpose of which was to stop the election of people (Myself & Glen-Rhodes) who were perceived to be too defender-leaning. I just sought to be the best Speaker and the best Delegate I could, but the message was clear: if you're an independentist wanting to block a defender from exercising their citizenship, no institution is sacrosanct, the end always justifies the means: electoral interference, voter fraud, non-justificable persona non grata, bogus charges, political exclusion, and extra-constitutional political action. I remember sworn constitutionalists hand-waving away a coup of the South Pacific because the target of the coup was defenders and the justification was an revival of Hileville's Independentist "Republic." What was the North Pacific's response then? Endorse Hileville! Claiming, of course, that supporting the couper was a treaty obligation! I assume following from that line of thinking, the North Pacific will materially support Fedele if his actions develop into a coup d'etat. RE: The North-East Pacific Security Treaty.

You have a very interesting view of how thing went during the Hileville incident, especially considering TNP's support of him ended when he couped. But never let the facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

TNP intervened militarily to support Hileville while he was illegally pushing a forum move and couping the South Pacific in 2016. Members of the Council of State Security (CSS) were directing TNP and Balder to -not- enter the South Pacific while Hileville & SillyString (on behalf of TSP/TNP) claimed incorrectly that the CSS's security opinion was constitutionally and legally irrelevant.

Some relevant remarks from that time....

I'm not sure how it helps the situation to get TNP and Balder involved.

Regardless, neither region is authorized to have troops in TSP piling on the Delegate. Such authorization must come from the CSS, which it has not. Not even our treaties authorize this. Both treaties only allow foreign troops to enter our region and pile on the Delegate in the event of an invasion or a coup. There is no invasion, and Hileville can point to no internal coup he needs help fending off.

I'm politely requesting that TNP and Balder recall their troops from TSP, unless and until the CSS authorizes a piling operation, or the relevant treaty clauses are acted upon under a valid request against an invasion or coup.

I cannot find any clause in TSP's law, or in the TNP-TSP treaty, which requires CSS authorization of NPA movement into TSP. I'm not an expert on TSP law, though, so if there is something I'm missing I'd appreciate it if you could quote it for me.

From what I can tell, the legal delegate of TSP is authorized to request assistance in the event of an internal or external attack, and TNP is obliged to comply. At other times - that is, when there is not a current internal or external attack - TNP is not obliged to comply, but I see no clause prohibiting that from happening. It is possible that under TSP law it is the Foreign Affairs Minister who must make that request, as the Charter says that the FA Ministry "is responsible for all interactions with foreign regions". My understanding is that Sopo has approved and authorized this request, but as I spoke to Hileville and not Sopo, I have reached out to the latter to get confirmation.

TNP may not be obligated to deploy to TSP in this case, but we have chosen to do so in order to keep a very tense situation from escalating. It was certainly conceivable to us that an interested party might take this opportunity to attempt to coup the region, or to frame someone else for doing so - for example, flooding foreign endorsements onto an unknowing CSS member. As Hileville remains the legal delegate of TSP, having not been recalled, and there is no other contender for that status that might make things murky, in our judgement NPA presence in TSP benefits the Coalition's security.

It's very clear that the treaty does not require TNP to endorse the delegate just because he or she asks. "Military assistance in case of a military attack, either internal or external," (from TNP's treaty) directly assumes that it could be the delegate, having gone rogue, who is the source of the attack. Defining "other signatory" as strictly "the delegate" is illiterate as far as the South Pacific's laws are concerned - if you read said treaty by replacing "other signatory" with "the delegate", the treaty becomes unintelligible. For example, "This treaty shall come into effect upon its ratification by the duly authorized individuals or bodies of both the signatories," is unintelligible if you read it as "both of the delegates". It's clear the treaty means signatories are the regions and the use of "other signatory" is specific to who is authorized constitutionally to do what on behalf of the region according to each region's local laws and constitutions.

The Assembly holds the sole authority to pass treaties, so we can interpret from that that the final section of the treaty applies to the Assembly not the delegate or the CSS (in theory, the Assembly can pass treaties even if the executive disagrees with them, which happened in at least one case.) The CSS, however, constitutionally holds jurisdiction over identifying security threats and "military attacks" - not the delegate - and therefore it's inconsistent with how the rest of the treaty is to be interpreted to just hand the clause to the delegate by default without specification. It's also prima facie a silly notion since it's usually delegates who are the people the CSS wants to see treatied allies deploy against (e.g., Milograd, Stujenske).

TNP may not be obligated to deploy to TSP in this case, but we have chosen to do so in order to keep a very tense situation from escalating.

I'm no expert or anything, but you may want to reassess how well NPA presence is preventing the situation from escalating

From what I can tell, the legal delegate of TSP is authorized to request assistance in the event of an internal or external attack, and TNP is obliged to comply. At other times - that is, when there is not a current internal or external attack - TNP is not obliged to comply, but I see no clause prohibiting that from happening.

Agreed. There is no prohibition on that. However, that would preclude a signatory invoking the TNP/TSP treaty as justification for the influx of foreign troops (particularly when it is being debated whether these troops have lawfully entered TSP or not). On the one hand, it could be a signatory providing military support against a potential security threat. On the other, it could also be potentially supporting an illegal political coup. I'm not privy to the specifics of this power struggle in TSP, but a foreign military buildup in the region seems premature and could exacerbate an already tense situation. Let the citizens/government of TSP sort it out.

And while TSP was in dire straits, the height of an illegal coup d'etat:

To the South Pacific Government, I continue to offer my support to the legitimate elected government. I hope that the South Pacific can move forward from this incident with a renewed sense of unity and vitality for the challenges that will rise in the future.

No acknowledgment of Hileville's extra-constitutional activity, just yay to "the legitimate elected government." Completely poppycock. The reasoning that the North Pacific provided to support Hileville's coup could be used against almost any of their other treatied allies where a mutual defense clause applies.

[Ramaeus]

Re: Fedele's/Scardino's hissy fit -- he needs to grow up and realize he's sucking the life out of that region. It's sad to see a grown man throw a tantrum over a video game. Especially a video game he isn't very good at.

I'll note that while TEP Citizens are calling me out, it was a prominent group of the East Pacific's citizens, not I, that interfered in elections in the South Pacific and the Rejected Realms.

Inaccurate. No genuine attempt was made to interfere in those elections.

[Frattastan IV]

I'll note that while TEP Citizens are calling me out, it was a prominent group of the East Pacific's citizens, not I, that interfered in elections in the South Pacific and the Rejected Realms.

Inaccurate. No genuine attempt was made to interfere in those elections.

"Genuine" is a very ambiguous qualifier.

Hobbes and Todd, among other gameplayers, did plan to cause trouble in case of Unibot's election as TRR delegate: tarting, calling foreign support, etc. It was "a joke" only because it was unrealistic, and too stupid to actually work (people made suggestions like "does TRR close its citizenship during elections? we could just rush in and pile CG"), not because they didn't genuinely support the idea.

[Cormactopia Prime]

There are many possible things the Miniluv Messenger could mention to update folks on the ongoing constitutional crisis in The East Pacific, as there have been numerous developments since the last story. Unfortunately I don't have time to write another full story, but here are some of the highlights:

• Ejection of Davelands by Todd McCloud for violation of the endorsement cap despite the Delegate knowingly and willfully letting him violate it.
• This ejection significantly drained Todd's influence, but Davelands is back in the region, endorsements wiped but influence intact, tarting again.
• Viziers have been reappointed as Regional Officers and once again dismissed, seemingly for no rhyme or reason.
• Davelands has filed an election complaint alleging interference, in an attempt to reset the Delegate election.
• Funkadelia has inexplicably been appointed as a Regional Officer titled "Hall Monitor," with Border Control.
• Funkadelia has also published a dispatch and forum post laying the groundwork for a coup regime to declare TEP's laws illegitimate.

Despite the ongoing constitutional crisis caused by the Delegate, the election administrator(s) have decided they'll take their sweet time counting the votes in the Delegate election that just concluded, announcing it will take approximately a week to tally the votes and announce the results. I've never seen it take more than a day or two at the most for any Feeder or Sinker to tally and announce election results. You would think with the Delegate continually escalating a constitutional crisis that has many of TEP's allies and other regions (not to mention natives of TEP themselves) wondering if a coup is imminent, the election administrator(s) might act with a little more haste to announce the new legal Delegate. Seriously, a week? How does counting take a week?

[ArenaC]

Speaking as a TEPer myself, I’m extremely worried for the region which our Delegate is currently making a constitutional crisis within.

• Funkadelia has also published a dispatch and forum post laying the groundwork for a coup regime to declare TEP's laws illegitimate.

A coup regime? OH GOD.

Also, the elections are presumably being rigged by Fedele in Marrabuk’s favor, which is probably why the tallies are going to take a week. Fedele and most likely the Marrabuk delegacy campaign are buying themselves some sweet, sweet time.

TEP is indeed in a constitutional crisis, and at this point, there is no turning back. I’m sure at this point that I might have to leave.

[Roavin]

• Funkadelia has also published a dispatch and forum post laying the groundwork for a coup regime to declare TEP's laws illegitimate.

#1, #9, #33 are basically Milograd's playbook from 2013.
#4, #23-#26 serve to justify disregarding the coming election results.
#12 is pretty much Ivan's playbook from the past 16 years.
#38 is exactly the kind of thing that Funk and Lamb started with when they destabilized Lazarus in 2017.

And the kicker is #16:

16. The role of the Vizier is largely irrelevant to game mechanics of 2019. No effort has been made to rectify this.

That dispatch is literally coup propaganda.

[Lord Dominator]

You missed #35 to match #38 there Roavin

35. The legal structure of the East Pacific Sovereign Army is extremely limiting and prevents a wider possibility of policy options for the entire region.

[Lord Dominator]

Oh hey, for more fun, look at this tg sent 2 hours ago:

→ region: The East Pacific, +tag: wa
107 minutes ago

Greetings, [nation redacted].

I come to you as a fellow nation in The East Pacific. As you know, The East Pacific has been ruled by a certain set of laws for over a decade now. However, these laws have been flawed and patched over time and time again over the years. You can only put on so many band-aids before something needs to be done to correct the root cause of the problem. So, I decided to publish forty-five itemized points of disputation of the laws of the region. I think it would be great if everyone reads these and understands them, and recognizes that we ought to move forward and correct these problems for the good of all nations in the region.

Please check it out and send me your feedback, or better yet, start a discussion on the RMB!

Yours,

-F

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1269078

[Great Algerstonia]

Speaking as a TEPer myself, I’m extremely worried for the region which our Delegate is currently making a constitutional crisis within.

• Funkadelia has also published a dispatch and forum post laying the groundwork for a coup regime to declare TEP's laws illegitimate.

A coup regime? OH GOD.

Also, the elections are presumably being rigged by Fedele in Marrabuk’s favor, which is probably why the tallies are going to take a week. Fedele and most likely the Marrabuk delegacy campaign are buying themselves some sweet, sweet time.

TEP is indeed in a constitutional crisis, and at this point, there is no turning back. I’m sure at this point that I might have to leave.

Nope. TEP elections have always been that way. And what are you going on with buying Marrabuk's campaign more time? There's literally nothing Marrabuk can do to influence the ejection in his favor. The election is closed.

[Kurnugia]

You missed #35 to match #38 there Roavin

35. The legal structure of the East Pacific Sovereign Army is extremely limiting and prevents a wider possibility of policy options for the entire region.

The killing joke about this is that Fedele made it that way. Before, EPSA had quite a lot of playing room. /shrug

But then, I am of the opinion that every region gets the government it deserves.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Update: It's been announced the TEP Delegate election results will be announced sooner, "possibly within the next two days."

[Zukchiva]

Update: It's been announced the TEP Delegate election results will be announced sooner, "possibly within the next two days."

\o/

It'll be done as soon as possible. Most likely within the next two days, but never make promises you can't keep for certain.