NationStates

Numero Capitan wrote: Anyone is welcome in TSP should they want to be a part of that great community, but current TBH members would have to choose to end their ties with TBH to do so - which is an unfortunate consequence of the actions of Black Hawks and no-one else.

I'm sure our members will be just lining up to join

Numero Capitan wrote:Raiders like Southern Bellz and Todd McCloud helped build the strong institutions that TSP benefits from today and helped expand that democracy and freedom.

Yeah, I'm sure they feel very welcome these days. And historically speaking, TSP also functioned as independent. Do you see them act like independents? No? Could it be a sign that times have changed, and that TSP has changed? Claiming "raiders are welcome because they were welcome in an almost entirely different TSP" is laughable.

What has changed is the consensus view towards the raiding sphere and raiding as a result of the actions of those within it.

"We are very inclusive of all alignments. But those darn raiders..."

The region contains plenty of raider-leaning individuals who are nothing but a positive contribution to the community.

Such as...?

TBH members will unfortunately be viewed with suspicion in TSP because of the actions of their members over the last few months as well as the held views/ambitions of their leaders/Council advisors that prompted the wider rejection of the raiding sphere in TSP in years gone by.

I'd argue it says something about the culture in TSP if all it takes for them to start distrusting an entire organisation are the actions of two puppets, actions which involved nothing more than voting on an RMB. If it takes so very little to get TSPers to view others with suspicion, it is no wonder they turned defender. As for your claim that it was the "views/ambitions of [TBH's] leaders" that led to TSP adopting the defender label, are we going with the idea that this hadn't been coming for years? Practically everyone knew that it would happen. Red Phone might have accelerated the process, but TSP already were defender-leaning before their official resolution labelling them defender, before Red Phone.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:

Unibot III wrote:Any reasonable person can draw a straight line of events from 2013 to 2020 of TBH acting against TSP’s security and integrity. That kind of pattern is how you establish grounds for proscription.

I'm chuffed but you give me too much credit. I'm just a bit confused how you can seriously argue that TBH's actions aren't grounds for proscription?

You proudly co-ran a coup in TSP. Purged TSPers. You tried to meddle in their elections, their votes, you've committed espinoge, and have continued to entertain bad coup/subversion/vexation plots against TSP like you're Wily Coyote.

This is a dumb conversation. DUMB. Dumb, dumb, dumb. There are some GP conversations that are too dumb and too disingenuous to engage with further. Of course, TBH is being proscribed by TSP. You've been screwing around with TSP for seven years!!

it doesn't matter whether or not the proscription of the Black Hawks is justified. It's blatantly illegal. the actions of individuals within the black hawks to meddle in elections are not acts of hostility. TSP's own high court already determined that the Red Phone intel wasn't evidence of hostility either. there might be some proscription of TBH that is justified, but this one definitely isn't
also, espinoge is not an act of hostility under the proscription act

Unibot III wrote:This is a dumb conversation. DUMB. Dumb, dumb, dumb. There are some GP conversations that are too dumb and too disingenuous to engage with further. Of course, TBH is being proscribed by TSP. You've been screwing around with TSP for seven years!!

If that's the case why did TSP be dumb dumb and not ya know proscribe them like about 6 and a half years ago?

The Moonstar wrote:

Unibot III wrote:This is a dumb conversation. DUMB. Dumb, dumb, dumb. There are some GP conversations that are too dumb and too disingenuous to engage with further. Of course, TBH is being proscribed by TSP. You've been screwing around with TSP for seven years!!

If that's the case why did TSP be dumb dumb and not ya know proscribe them like about 6 and a half years ago?

Is this mek? Lol.

Point in essence, though. If you're arguing that MiloCoup was justification alone (not even an argument TSP's actual government is making, whether or not you chat about it with their admins), then innit a bit overdue?

I think you're also reading me and others disingenuously Uni. We've been quite clear that the *act* is obvious, it's just that the *excuse* is horseshit, whipped up to push "TBH bad" instead of just focusing on the fact we've got diametrically opposed alignments, the end.

The Moonstar wrote:

Unibot III wrote:This is a dumb conversation. DUMB. Dumb, dumb, dumb. There are some GP conversations that are too dumb and too disingenuous to engage with further. Of course, TBH is being proscribed by TSP. You've been screwing around with TSP for seven years!!

If that's the case why did TSP be dumb dumb and not ya know proscribe them like about 6 and a half years ago?

I think the reason is because it wasn't a politically viable option in 2013 due to the politics of the Cold War.

Even though TBH co-ran the coup against TSP, you really couldn't proscribe an invader group without that decision being analyzed through the lens of what that decision would mean for TSP's independence and neutrality.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:

The Moonstar wrote:If that's the case why did TSP be dumb dumb and not ya know proscribe them like about 6 and a half years ago?

Is this mek? Lol.

Point in essence, though. If you're arguing that MiloCoup was justification alone (not even an argument TSP's actual government is making, whether or not you chat about it with their admins), then innit a bit overdue?

I think you're also reading me and others disingenuously Uni. We've been quite clear that the *act* is obvious, it's just that the *excuse* is horseshit, whipped up to push "TBH bad" instead of just focusing on the fact we've got diametrically opposed alignments, the end.

The decision is overdue. I can understand the distinction you're making between agreeing that TBH has acted against TSP's interests and believing that a proscription has been thoroughly justified. But beyond that, the proscription is justified. It was justified years ago.

I don't think this is just a matter of having different alignments: TBH has made a conscious choice to attack TSP repeatedly. In the past, internal politics actually forced TSP to turn a blind eye to these transgressions: to just absolve TBH (and others) rather than doing the more difficult thing of coming to terms realistically with how to prosecute TSP's attackers when it risked destablizing its political neutrality.

Now that TSP is no longer an independentist region, it can actually proscribe an invader organization like TBH that's continued to attack/undermine TSP, without the domestic political crisis that would have been expected in the past.

Is the choice by TSP to let Unibot provide their primary defense, without comment from them, related or unrelated to the part where the only other attempt at defense resulted in Roavin repeatedly demeaning one of your branches of government?

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:

The Moonstar wrote:If that's the case why did TSP be dumb dumb and not ya know proscribe them like about 6 and a half years ago?

Is this mek? Lol.

Are you implying all Korean female flagged nations mean it's Mek? Cause there is Tupe, and Poppy, and Community, and some others.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:Is the choice by TSP to let Unibot provide their primary defense, without comment from them, related or unrelated to the part where the only other attempt at defense resulted in Roavin repeatedly demeaning one of your branches of government?

Hahaha. Official TSP Legal Counsel: Rudy Giuliani.

I think it means they don’t care, mate!!

Comfed wrote:So basically, because some low-ranking people did stuff they weren't supposed to do and got reprimanded for it, and there was a chat log from two years ago - you proscribe them without even bothering to consult the citizens or the Assembly. Okay.

Because, what I see is not a measure to keep TSP safe but a witch hunt. You could try to at least be diplomatic with them.

There is literally nothing in the Proscription Act that says that anyone, including the Assembly, should be consulted in issuing a proscription, and there is no precedent for it, but alright. Feel free to continue making up stuff to make TSP look bad.

North Prarie wrote:

Comfed wrote:So basically, because some low-ranking people did stuff they weren't supposed to do and got reprimanded for it, and there was a chat log from two years ago - you proscribe them without even bothering to consult the citizens or the Assembly. Okay.

Because, what I see is not a measure to keep TSP safe but a witch hunt. You could try to at least be diplomatic with them.

There is literally nothing in the Proscription Act that says that anyone, including the Assembly, should be consulted in issuing a proscription, and there is no precedent for it, but alright. Feel free to continue making up stuff to make TSP look bad.

I didn’t say they had to, but it does rather look bad, especially considering that you have not presented satisfactory evidence that TBH government (i.e. the Council of Hawks) are or have recently plotted to overthrow the Coalition.

North Prarie wrote:Feel free to continue making up stuff to make TSP look bad.

Hardly necessary. They made a statement, and now seem to be unable to defend their statement. Besides, if you’re going to make a statement filled with righteous outrage, it should not come as a surprise people will disagree and, perhaps shockingly, criticise it.

Unless I am very much mistaken, the person you are responding to is, in fact, a TSPer. But I am sure his opinion matters not if he disagrees with your righteous outrage, and it immediately means he has to be making things up to make TSP look bad.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:We've been quite clear that the *act* is obvious, it's just that the *excuse* is horseshit, whipped up to push "TBH bad" instead of just focusing on the fact we've got diametrically opposed alignments, the end.

This perfectly sums up my stance on all this. TSP has a bad habit of playing politics in situations where they simply don't need to.

Somehow not surprising to see Unibot clamouring to defend one of the very few regions where his opinion's valued enough to warrant a private discord server

i imagine the lack of official tsp defense is the usual thing GCRs do where they do something dumb, hide behind the flimsiest of justifications, and then ignore any commentary until the controversy dies down because they *know* they'll still have relevancy by virtue of being large. it's as pathetic as it is predictable

Devi wrote:Somehow not surprising to see Unibot clamouring to defend one of the very few regions where his opinion's valued enough to warrant a private discord server

I ain't clamouring to do shit and I've never known G-R to value my opinion on anything.

Devi wrote:i imagine the lack of official tsp defense is the usual thing GCRs do where they do something dumb, hide behind the flimsiest of justifications, and then ignore any commentary until the controversy dies down because they *know* they'll still have relevancy by virtue of being large. it's as pathetic as it is predictable

Thats not just limited to GCR's, many notable UCR's (like TBH for instance) are guilty of the same thing. But you must realise, this is the Gameplay forum. Announcements are made but no one really cares about anyones opinion on them. We're not even a peanut gallery anymore, we're peanut shells

Drop Your Pants wrote:

Devi wrote:i imagine the lack of official tsp defense is the usual thing GCRs do where they do something dumb, hide behind the flimsiest of justifications, and then ignore any commentary until the controversy dies down because they *know* they'll still have relevancy by virtue of being large. it's as pathetic as it is predictable

Thats not just limited to GCR's, many notable UCR's (like TBH for instance) are guilty of the same thing. But you must realise, this is the Gameplay forum. Announcements are made but no one really cares about anyones opinion on them. We're not even a peanut gallery anymore, we're peanut shells

"Why is gameplay dead?"

<fire amd forget statements>

"Gosh gameplay forums are so dead!"

---

That's a nice 'no u' but as far as I can recall going back six years or so, we reply endlessly

I think, perhaps, most of us just know that entering into a debate with you all is a fruitless endeavor, particularly when half the posts here are offering internally contradicting arguments.

I would certainly like it if we could engage in a substantive debate about why TBH as a whole is a threat. But we've had that debate before, and it just devolved into lying, bad faith, and trollish memeing. So what's the point? The questions about why TBH is a threat, why justices Kris and Belschaft were wrong, and why the CRS & Cabinet have acted now are all answered in the statement and the ancillary posts linked in it.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:"Why is gameplay dead?"
<fire amd forget statements>
"Gosh gameplay forums are so dead!"

---

That's a nice 'no u' but as far as I can recall going back six years or so, we reply endlessly

I'm not complaining that GP is dead, it's good that we're dead. We were once a very toxic community to each other a year or so ago, now it's generally moved to Discord poking.

Edited the quote to remove the spaces.

Sandaoguo wrote:I think, perhaps, most of us just know that entering into a debate with you all is a fruitless endeavor, particularly when half the posts here are offering internally contradicting arguments.

It is fruitless to defend your own statements? Well, I suppose with this particular statement it might be fruitless - but then, might I suggest you do not post such a thin excuse for a statement? In fact, if you don’t honestly expect to be able to defend your statements or even refuse to answer criticism, why post a statement at all? Could it be that the South Pacific attempted to post the statement to yell for attention, found to their unfortunate surprise that their statement was not quite as sound as they believed it to be, and now refuse to engage in a discussion they’re afraid they’ll lose?

I would certainly like it if we could engage in a substantive debate about why TBH as a whole is a threat.

Be my guest, I’d say. The Cabinet doesn’t seem to be able to properly explain their reasonings, so there’s no harm in trying.

So what's the point?

The same can be asked of the South Pacific’s decision to post a statement they are unwilling or unable to elaborate on.

The questions about why TBH is a threat, why justices Kris and Belschaft were wrong, and why the CRS & Cabinet have acted now are all answered in the statement and the ancillary posts linked in it.

“Please refer to our earlier statements which we can’t defend, thank you in advance”? Come now. If the statement was as flawless that it could address any and all concerns or questions, this thread would be a few pages shorter.

Sandaoguo wrote:I think, perhaps, most of us just know that entering into a debate with you all is a fruitless endeavor, particularly when half the posts here are offering internally contradicting arguments.

I would certainly like it if we could engage in a substantive debate about why TBH as a whole is a threat. But we've had that debate before, and it just devolved into lying, bad faith, and trollish memeing. So what's the point? The questions about why TBH is a threat, why justices Kris and Belschaft were wrong, and why the CRS & Cabinet have acted now are all answered in the statement and the ancillary posts linked in it.

TSP citing the stuff that happened during the Commend Twobagger vote as a reason behind the proscription? That's lying. That's bad faith. Do you understand why TSP tagging itself Defender was so celebrated here in this forum? It meant, conceptually, that TSP would stop doing this song and dance, and just be direct in its external policy decisions. I guess we all forgot that it would take a while before y'all in TSP realized you don't have to trot out bullshit justifications for your actions anymore. You're a Defender region. That's all the justification you need to be anti-raider.

Comfed wrote:

Lord Dominator wrote:Defender region extends ban to most raiders, world shocked.

You forgot the part where they’re a democratic region that guarantees freedom of expression and conscience.

Have your opinion on this and whatever, but this is in no way violating one's freedom of expression or conscience.

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:

Drop Your Pants wrote:Thats not just limited to GCR's, many notable UCR's (like TBH for instance) are guilty of the same thing. But you must realise, this is the Gameplay forum. Announcements are made but no one really cares about anyones opinion on them. We're not even a peanut gallery anymore, we're peanut shells

"Why is gameplay dead?"

<fire amd forget statements>

"Gosh gameplay forums are so dead!"

---

That's a nice 'no u' but as far as I can recall going back six years or so, we reply endlessly

Gameplay is dead? Great!

Honeydewistania wrote:Gameplay is dead? Great!

Oooo, can we kill the SC next?

Varanius wrote:

Honeydewistania wrote:Gameplay is dead? Great!

Oooo, can we kill the SC next?

But then Syl wouldn't have anywhere to be "cool". Lets keep SC.