Embassy of the South Pacific

[Glen-Rhodes]

That’s a valiant attempt, Rach, but you are probably the last person who is capable of having a good faith discussion on anything. You literally just called me sexist for pointing out sexism. Saying that HEM is engaging in a serious debate doesn’t discount the problematic behavior of others over the past year. Perhaps HEM just doesn’t say sexist things or treat femininity as non-serious? It’s actually a well-worn tactic to dismiss general claims of problematic behavior with specific examples of decency that aren’t representative of typical behavior.

How about everybody just acts like HEM?

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

I won't be accepting an apology from you or "your" region for attempting to silence me by attacking me as a subversive without any proof, without any evidence, and simply because of the herd mentality you argue you do not espouse. If it has become the norm that Euro attempts to slime individuals as subversive for criticism that doesn't align with your own then I guess the McCarthyism that has infected much of your sphere is indeed viral.

Ahahah.

In my recent experience, the ones shouting subversive without proof, evidence, or detailed claims, moving as a herd, haven’t been been any UCR, much less Euro! Weren’t you just a few posts up contributing to the recently enhanced “sliming” of me and my region that is ongoing without detail? Project much?

Bitch about baseless accusations of subversion *after* you’ve gone and called out the regions in your sphere of friends that are currently blacklisting others fully without providing any specific or evidence, and just shouting “subversion!” Until then, doesn’t ring very sincere.

[Onderkelkia]

Balder prescribes TSP even though we have no interest in Balder, Euro in the one chance it gets denies citizenship to the same players that Balder has proscribed. There are no lies here, action from Balder follows action from Euro in a consistent way.

Being highly familiar with the legal systems of both Europeia and Balder, I can tell you that Europeia has nothing like the same rules as Balder.

The denial of one person's application does not mean that The South Pacific is proscribed in entirety. Inferring that is over-reaching and ludicrously so. Proscription in Balder applies to everyone who doesn't have a specific exception. That means a great many more people are covered than a single citizenship applicant. Through your conduct in this thread, you have validated any concerns that Europeian officials had in denying your application.

Balder and TSP mutually break off ties because Balder thinks it can run our foreign affairs and that creates hostility

Sorry? When exactly did Balder try to run TSP foreign policy? This wasn't even one of the reasons you cited when you dissolved the treaty.

Balder never made any representations to TSP about their foreign policy choices. Indeed, the argument from some TSP officials at the time was that their problems with Balder came down to lack of communication. How can we have been trying to run your foreign affairs when we weren't even talking?

Once again, TSP officials are operating in the realms of fantasy.

Sopo, has supported the attempted coup of TSP just as Balder did in 2016. If you're such an independent region that does what it wants....why do most of your actions follow that of Balder?

Whatever your view of Sopo's actions, one way or the other, it is a fact that he was more involved than any person associated with Balder and in a more substantive way than Rach, as well as at an earlier stage. Therefore, even if for the sake of argument you conclude that Sopo bears responsibility (good or bad) and hold Europeia vicariously liable, how can this support a claim that Europeia was following in the direction of Balder? If you were going to make the silly argument that one region was following the other here, it would in fact be the other way round, as you have much more of a case against Sopo than Rach. Of course, it was Balder that The South Pacific chose to target in the first instance - even though our military deployed alongside The North Pacific - because the whole January 2016 affair was a pretext for ending Balder-TSP relations (both in July 2016 and February 2017). The real reason TSP terminated its treaty with Balder is that pro-defender politicians had hopes of manipulating Europeia towards their position but knew they had zero chance in Balder. Europeia, of course, proved to be far less gullible than the defenders in TSP had hoped for and now you are annoyed about it.

This narrative, that Europeia follows Balder, is nonsense. It only shows TSP's lack of appreciation for Europeia's own history as the premier Independent region. It is actually Europeia which, together with The New Inquisition, represents one of the prime long-term influences on Balder's model.

Ok I'm sorry but hasn't Onder and co repeatedly argued in the past that your often belligerent commentary doesn't represent Balder, even though you're the Queen?

Rach is not a member of the Balder Statsraadet (Cabinet), the executive body charged with running Balder under the direction of the Statsminister.

Escade is a member of the Cabinet of The South Pacific, not its figurehead delegate.

The correct comparison is between Balder and TSP cabinet members. If a member of the Balder Cabinet posted on foreign policy matters in Balder's embassy thread, and their views did not reflect Balder's position, they would almost certainly be relieved of their duties as a consequence.

[King HEM]

I was a member and citizen of Euro, and also have some legitimate criticisms of the region. In fact, unless there's an official Regional Affairs logo I speak as an individual on all NSGP venues. You're not the only one capable of criticism and you're criticism regarding a post that has a ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) face attached to it was ridiculous. You might argue that Tim's sense of humor wasn't as good as it usually is, etc, but you forced it quite a bit there to take pot shots.

But you lost your citizenship, hence your "right" to have those opinions again in Europeia. Europeia is a region that requires an active commitment, and if you fail to stay active, we strip citizenship. It isn't personal, as a matter of fact, it's the most routine thing we do.

If someone then tries to return, we look at the application again and consider whether it is our best interest to extend the full rights and privileges of citizenship. I'm sorry, but we aren't always inclined to let people in who have a history of bashing us in public. Just as you don't want "entryists" who seek to overtake TSP, we don't want players who are against us, either. I'm not sure how you can be making the points you are about subversive userites and not understand why we limit immigration for those who are publicly against us?

I won't be accepting an apology from you or "your" region for attempting to silence me by attacking me as a subversive without any proof, without any evidence, and simply because of the herd mentality you argue you do not espouse. If it has become the norm that Euro attempts to slime individuals as subversive for criticism that doesn't align with your own then I guess the McCarthyism that has infected much of your sphere is indeed viral. Or perhaps you should build a culture of criticism at home where you can actually accept or even look at a response to you without piling on.

One of Europeia's most celebrated Presidents was a high-ranking member of the Founderless Regions Alliance. An organization he only left after it attempted to sabotage our region via espionage several times. We have had celebrated defenders join our region and attain positions of influence. This frequently through history put us at great odds with our imperialist allies.

Europeia has a rich history of allowing dissent. What we don't have is a rich history of allowing people the full privileges of citizenship who bash us in gameplay. This isn't that complicated.

It's not a simple process of being denied citizenship which was merely an example of the herd mentality; it's because you haven't been able to explain why Euro seems lock and step in following whatever it is Balder does. Balder and TSP mutually break off ties because Balder thinks it can run our foreign affairs and that creates hostility, and a bit later Euro breaks off ties under many guises but let's face it, you follow what Balder does. Balder prescribes TSP even though we have no interest in Balder, Euro in the one chance it gets denies citizenship to the same players that Balder has proscribed. There are no lies here, action from Balder follows action from Euro in a consistent way.

We broke off ties because we had no meaningful relationship and you were working closely with regions we are adversarial with. The writing was on the wall, and pretty much everyone here recognizes it was the right decision.

The President of Euro, Sopo, has supported the attempted coup of TSP just as Balder did in 2016. If you're such an independent region that does what it wants....why do most of your actions follow that of Balder? I guess it's convenient. Anyway, you aren't the only citizen or former citizen of a region capable of criticism of said former region. Perhaps, Euro should just come out and accept that they do what Balder does or wants because that is the relationship of imperialism. Or you can keep denying it as the evidence piles up.

You have so many anecdotes to support your arguments.

"Europeia has two Balder citizens in government, that must mean they are controlled by Balder."
"One of Europeia's citizens agreed on a policy issue with Balder, that must mean they are controlled by Balder."
"HEM and Rach both have Macbooks, so that must mean Europeia is controlled by Balder."

Again, I don't know how to "prove" that we aren't secretly controlled by Balder when the "evidence" of us being "controlled" is pretty much the exact same evidence of two close allies who share views on many, but not all, topics. But seeing as I'm President of Europeia, and don't take orders from Rach, I sleep pretty good at night.

[Deladara]

Escade has been playing this game for 5 years. She’s been a GCR Delegate and a long-time minister. She’s been involved in NSGP for years. If you disagree with her, then have a debate, like you would do any other player who isn’t “glittery” or feminine. There are a lot of male players who say the same damn things and are taken seriously as actual experienced players.

A GCR Delegate? Gee golly why didn’t you say so!? Who needs to back up absurd accusations when you’re a former GCR Delegate

[Glen-Rhodes]

Bitch about baseless accusations of subversion *after* you’ve gone and called out the regions in your sphere of friends that are currently blacklisting others fully without providing any specific or evidence, and just shouting “subversion!” Until then, doesn’t ring very sincere.

It’s also possible that one bloc of this game actually engages in active subversion, rather gleefully. If we’re bothering to be honest here, TSP, TNP, and TRR are the only GCRs that haven’t tried infiltrating and manipulating another GCR.

[Roavin]

Onder,

you're saying this:

Once again, TSP officials are operating in the realms of fantasy.

... and at the same time, you claim this:

The real reason TSP terminated its treaty with Balder is that pro-defender politicians had hopes of manipulating Europeia towards their position but knew they had zero chance in Balder. Europeia, of course, proved to be far less gullible than the defenders in TSP had hoped for and now you are annoyed about it.

Now that is outlandish. There are many reasons to terminate a Balder-TSP treaty, probably from either side. Europeia didn't enter into it whatsoever (I just checked all the related records, both forum-side and Discord-side - Euro is mentioned exactly once on an off-topic matter).

If you want actual reasons, how about:

• Neither side was ever really invested in it
• Solorni's demonstrable and provable support for the coup government in early 2016
• Continuous slander of TSP, in particular by Solorni but also by others
• The attempt to strong-arm TSP through backchannels to disassociate itself from Lazarus and TRR

There's probably more I can't think of right now.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Bitch about baseless accusations of subversion *after* you’ve gone and called out the regions in your sphere of friends that are currently blacklisting others fully without providing any specific or evidence, and just shouting “subversion!” Until then, doesn’t ring very sincere.

It’s also possible that one bloc of this game actually engages in active subversion, rather gleefully. If we’re bothering to be honest here, TSP, TNP, and TRR are the only GCRs that haven’t tried infiltrating and manipulating another GCR.

Then there should be proof of that, and that proof should be provided, especially before treating people on par with harassers and Nazis, and anyone who desires to maintain the integrity of such accusations and blacklisting as a whole should demand (or provide if they’re the accusing party) said proof in full.

And hey, that sounds like a great reason not to join the anti-UCR propeganda of the leading org for intra-GCR skullduggery.

[Solorni]

Roavin and Glen-Rhodes posts are perfect examples of why people do not believe they are posting on good faith. Absolutely shameless.

[Drop Your Pants]

Roavin and Glen-Rhodes posts are perfect examples of why people do not believe they are posting on good faith. Absolutely shameless.

Pot meet kettle.

[King HEM]

The attempt to strong-arm TSP through backchannels to disassociate itself from Lazarus and TRR.

Alliances exist because two regions share common interests. If one of those common interests is foreign policy, and if Region A starts getting very close to adversaries to Region B, there is cause to be concerned by that and try to react to it. If Region A decides that having relations with the adversaries is more important than the concerns of Region B, that is fully their right, but it isn't irrational for Region B to then take their chips and go home.

I think the narrative of "it's wrong for you to be mad at us for making friends with your enemies!!!" is a bit overwrought. There's a balance to be had in respecting the individuality of your partners, but there may also be a logical point of no return.

[Razzle Dazzle]

Roavin and Glen-Rhodes posts are perfect examples of why people do not believe they are posting on good faith. Absolutely shameless.

What are you talking about? Where were any of Roavin's posts in "bad faith?"

[Glen-Rhodes]

The attempt to strong-arm TSP through backchannels to disassociate itself from Lazarus and TRR.

Alliances exist because two regions share common interests. If one of those common interests is foreign policy, and if Region A starts getting very close to adversaries to Region B, there is cause to be concerned by that and try to react to it. If Region A decides that having relations with the adversaries is more important than the concerns of Region B, that is fully their right, but it isn't irrational for Region B to then take their chips and go home.

I think the narrative of "it's wrong for you to be mad at us for making friends with your enemies!!!" is a bit overwrought. There's a balance to be had in respecting the individuality of your partners, but there may also be a logical point of no return.

You’re giving Europeia, Balder, and the rest far too much credit here. What happened back then was not Europeia being concerned or “taking their chips and going home.” Your President intimated that TSP would be attacked by Europeia’s allies for not attending your conference. I was told by Rach (though I’m sure she’ll still deny it) that Europeia, Balder, Osiris, and imperialist UCRs (ie Onder and NES) had concocted the ultimatum for TSP to abandon TRR & Lazarus or face the consequences, using the Independence Conference purposefully to manufacture a diplomatic crisis.

That was not mere “concern” that TSP was building a new alliance network. It was an active measure by your region, whether you were aware at the time or not, and your region’s allies to put TSP at gunpoint and come back into the Independent-imperialist fold, or else.

That’s the kind of “diplomacy” that Europeia stands for. For as high brow as you like to think your region is, Europeia is just another in a long line of manipulative “Independents” that will violate sovereignty and abandon treaty commitments the moment the upper echelon decides an ally is a little too independent-minded.

[Onderkelkia]

The attempt to strong-arm TSP through backchannels to disassociate itself from Lazarus and TRR

What "backchannels"? Balder did not have any "backchannels" to The South Pacific. What do you even mean by "strong-arm"?

Nor was Balder under any false illusions that TSP would entertain such a suggestion. If this has been an issue for Balder, we would have simply terminated our treaty with TSP and we would have done so much earlier than the treaty actually ended, at the same time as TNI ended ties in June 2014.

Escade's claim that Balder tried to run TSP's foreign affairs represents the latest in a long line of fabricated allegations against Balder by TSP officials.

Solorni's demonstrable and provable support for the coup government in early 2016

This ignores my entire point around this issue, which has been exaggerated out of all proportion as part of TSP's smear campaign against Balder.

You can point to a few scattered and inconsequential remarks from Solorni in a personal capacity, dating to before the coup actually happened. You can point to Solorni signing up in the immediate aftermath of the coup (which she claims she was unaware of), which was equally inconsequential. Even if we accept your interpretation of those comments for the sake of argument, how can this be the genuine explanation for ending TSP's treaty with Balder when TSP took no action against other allies who were in a very similar position? Here we have had Glen-Rhodes point out that the then Foreign Minister of Europeia - an actual executive official with power over foreign policy, unlike Solorni - was integral to Hileville's government. The foreign cheerleaders for Hileville went well beyond Solorni. To take another example, how can you point to the Jomsvikings endorsing Hileville when the troops of The North Pacific were doing exactly the same thing? The smear campaign against Balder reflects political convenience rather than a genuine response to Hileville's coup.

If this was the real reason for the treaty termination, TSP could have terminated its treaty with Balder in February 2016 - not February 2017, after a failed attempt in July. If this was the real reason for the treaty termination, TSP would have been reviewing relations with more partners than Balder. Instead, TSP in the immediate aftermath of the coup recognised that in no way were any of their allies' actions remotely a good basis for a treaty termination.

The reality is your entire interpretation of the events of January 2016 was formed in part with the benefit of hindsight and in part constitutes downright revisionism. Your understanding of what happened today runs counter to the consensus position among TSP's non-defender allies at the time. At the time, the majority of TSP officials actually recognised the grey area involved - excepting the likes of Glen-Rhodes - which is why no immediate action was taken and why no action was taken in relation to the other allies. The issue has since been weaponised by TSP's defender faction as an attack line against Balder.

Continuous slander of TSP, in particular by Solorni but also by others

First, who do you mean "by others"? Which Balder officials other than Solorni were criticising TSP publicly prior to the attempted treaty termination?

Secondly, it is risible for TSP to complain about getting a taste of their own medicine when Glen-Rhodes as Foreign Minister frequently embarked on baseless and unprovoked attacks against TSP's non-defender allies, in particular Balder and Europeia, and also TNI earlier in his first period as Foreign Minister. Glen-Rhodes poisoned the atmosphere and abrogated the usual standards of decorum and courtesy which exist between allies in public. It is hardly surprising that Solorni - not a member of the Balder executive - responded to Glen-Rhodes repeatedly criticising Balder by repeatedly criticising TSP.

[Ikania]

Roavin and Glen-Rhodes posts are perfect examples of why people do not believe they are posting on good faith. Absolutely shameless.

[Altinsane]

Did you guys see how quickly things backtracked when Glen mentioned the word "sexism"? What a powerful thing. Very interesting the fear that you can provoke in a good person when you accuse them of doing a bad thing. It doesn't matter if they're right or not anymore - it all just becomes nervous attempts at an explanation and apologies. Good way to stop an argument. It's enormously destructive to actual cases of sexism, though, and the stand that we as women can take against it. Escade doesn't get treated the way that she does because she's a woman. She gets treated the way that she does because she makes big statements, but doesn't always choose to back them. Instead she tends to choose aggression over representation with statements like "since facts are difficult for you" and insults masked in Sarcasm. Are we genuinely going to assert that people are sexist against Escade because of a "hey lady" comment directly after Escade goes mudslinging on Euro as a region and Solorni as a person with the "Mother Rach" line of thought? If GP is sexist against Escade, then she is not innocent herself.

Luckily for her, that is not true sexism. No walls have been put up against Escade because she's a woman. I would frankly be insulted if I were her at the insinuation that the attention I'd earned was due to my gender, not to the antics that I'd chosen to use. Escade likes to have fun and use gifs to communicate, and that's fine. It's considered an annoyance to some people in some circumstances in the same way that I would be annoyed if I received a business email and there was a gif at the end of it. There's a time and place for everything. Some people take these discussions.. unusually seriously, and to them this is not the time or the place for Gossip Girl gifs. That's not sexism, it's professionalism. They're allowed to play that way if they'd like, same as Escade is allowed to play whichever way she likes.

I would be casually annoyed and say nothing about this usually if not for the fact that sexism does exist on NS. Displaying things like a disagreement in gameplay style or backlash from accusations that you've made as genuine sexism cheapens actual sexism and disempowers women to stop sexism when it happens to them. You're putting us in a boy who cried wolf situation. I would say a girl who cried wolf, but this is realistically more of a boy who cried wolf on behalf of a girl thing. We have gracefully been given the power and resources that we needed to stand up for ourselves when we feel like we're being treated unfairly, same as men. Escade knows how to get herself into these situations and she knows how to see her way out of them. She's a smarter player than apparently even you see fit to give her credit for. We appreciate your sensitivity toward the gentle feelings of womankind, but we assure you we are tougher than we look. If we see any incoming wolves, we will say something. In the mean time, please try not to call out the village in fear that an ant hill might hurt us. Ant hills are not wolves. It's fine.

[RiderSyl]

Lastly, I’ll say this at NSGP in general. There has been a consistent undercurrent of sexism in how Escade has been treated for the past year and more.

There absolutely has not. I've seen males post in similar styles to her in my 4 years on this game and be treated the same, if not worse. I've been a part of other communities on other sites where males with similar posting styles are treated the same and worse. Don't use the overwhelming male-to-female ratio of NSGP to make Escade a victim when she's not.

[Malphe]

Did you guys see how quickly things backtracked when Glen mentioned the word "sexism"? What a powerful thing. Very interesting the fear that you can provoke in a good person when you accuse them of doing a bad thing. It doesn't matter if they're right or not anymore - it all just becomes nervous attempts at an explanation and apologies. Good way to stop an argument. It's enormously destructive to actual cases of sexism, though, and the stand that we as women can take against it. Escade doesn't get treated the way that she does because she's a woman. She gets treated the way that she does because she makes big statements, but doesn't always choose to back them. Instead she tends to choose aggression over representation with statements like "since facts are difficult for you" and insults masked in Sarcasm. Are we genuinely going to assert that people are sexist against Escade because of a "hey lady" comment directly after Escade goes mudslinging on Euro as a region and Solorni as a person with the "Mother Rach" line of thought? If GP is sexist against Escade, then she is not innocent herself.

Luckily for her, that is not true sexism. No walls have been put up against Escade because she's a woman. I would frankly be insulted if I were her at the insinuation that the attention I'd earned was due to my gender, not to the antics that I'd chosen to use. Escade likes to have fun and use gifs to communicate, and that's fine. It's considered an annoyance to some people in some circumstances in the same way that I would be annoyed if I received a business email and there was a gif at the end of it. There's a time and place for everything. Some people take these discussions.. unusually seriously, and to them this is not the time or the place for Gossip Girl gifs. That's not sexism, it's professionalism. They're allowed to play that way if they'd like, same as Escade is allowed to play whichever way she likes.

I would be casually annoyed and say nothing about this usually if not for the fact that sexism does exist on NS. Displaying things like a disagreement in gameplay style or backlash from accusations that you've made as genuine sexism cheapens actual sexism and disempowers women to stop sexism when it happens to them. You're putting us in a boy who cried wolf situation. I would say a girl who cried wolf, but this is realistically more of a boy who cried wolf on behalf of a girl thing. We have gracefully been given the power and resources that we needed to stand up for ourselves when we feel like we're being treated unfairly, same as men. Escade knows how to get herself into these situations and she knows how to see her way out of them. She's a smarter player than apparently even you see fit to give her credit for. We appreciate your sensitivity toward the gentle feelings of womankind, but we assure you we are tougher than we look. If we see any incoming wolves, we will say something. In the mean time, please try not to call out the village in fear that an ant hill might hurt us. Ant hills are not wolves. It's fine.

^ This. That sexism comment came a little out of the blue, don't trivialize the word by using it whenever a woman gets backlash for what they say unless the backlash is based on her gender, and it doesn't look like it was in this case.

[RiderSyl]

I'm actually going to retract my statement. Glen-Rhodes, you make a lot of far-fetched claims, but this one doesn't seem to be one of them.

[Glen-Rhodes]

With all due respect, casual sexism is still sexism. There’s not a threshold where below that line it’s not “serious enough” to call out. I’m well versed in how NSGP mudslinging works, so I can recognize the ways I see my friend being treated differently. It’s not “backlash” alone that’s sexist. It’s how it’s done, what’s said, and tone that backlash is delivered with. Some of it is obvious, some of it subtle, but frankly it’s been going on for well over a year from the same group of people and this isn’t the first time they’ve been called out for it.

[Mother Rach]

Thank you, Ambrella, for preaching the ways of Mother Rach. Glory be unto the Chosen One.

Mother Rach:

[Razzle Dazzle]

Thank you, Ambrella, for preaching the ways of Mother Rach. Glory be unto the Chosen One.

Mother Rach:

Just a member of The South Pacific posting in their embassy thread. Nothing to see here, folks.

[Vincent Drake]

Soooo...which one gets impaled and turned defender? Which one brings down the WALL?

[Mother Rach]

Soooo...which one gets impaled and turned defender? Which one brings down the WALL?

I feel bad, but I can't tell which one is which here

Viserion is the one that dies. Balder is def Drogon here... but I can't tell which one of those is Viserion and which one is Rhaegal. I'm pretty certain the green one is Rhaegal, which would make Europeia Rhaegal here... and that means LKE would then be Viserion, which is the one that dies and is used to bring down the WALL...

[Consular]

Rach is not a member of the Balder Statsraadet (Cabinet), the executive body charged with running Balder under the direction of the Statsminister.

Escade is a member of the Cabinet of The South Pacific, not its figurehead delegate.

The correct comparison is between Balder and TSP cabinet members. If a member of the Balder Cabinet posted on foreign policy matters in Balder's embassy thread, and their views did not reflect Balder's position, they would almost certainly be relieved of their duties as a consequence.

Absolute nonsense. She's the Delegate and that's the only fact that matters. You don't get to simultaneously be Delegate and hold all the power in a region, while also being completely free from responsibility for your ridiculous actions and words.