NationStates

I feel like the point's being missed here.

XKI is only okay with WA Campaign TGs if their delegate approved it, or it is by a 'long term' WA Resident, as they appear to view unsolicited WA Campaign tgs as a violation of regional sovereignty.

ALARMED that this shortcut presents a cheap and easy way to sway the WA vote of 10000 Islands, directly presenting a threat to the sovereignty of 10000 Islands,

XKI then (presumably) approves the sending off a WA Campaign Telegram. Their delegate approved it so yes it's okay inside of XKI, but it's hypocritical because they appear to view unsolicited WA Campaign TGs as a violation of regional sovereignty, while approving the sending of one themselves.

This makes XKI hypocritical.

The argument of "but WALL did it too!" doesn't remove the hypocrisy on the part of XKI, it's just a statement of a fact - WALL also sent a WA Campaign telegram. Cool, so? As far as I can see no WALL member region has a policy as restrictive as XKI does.

The Python wrote:The PfS can't but WALL can?

My perception of the WALL telegram was it was a response. It's a bit amusing to argue that WALL can't respond to campaigning when the other party sent the first TG.
It is explicitly stated in the openly sentence of the telegram that it is a response

This statement is a response to the Partnership for Sovereignty’s mass telegram to all WA members, by the World Assembly Legislative League. Our policy is not normally to issue mass telegrams except in exceptional circumstances, or to respond to a mass telegram that has already been sent, as we do not support filling telegram inboxes with unsolicited WA campaign material

Tim-Opolis wrote:If you don’t want campaign TG’s, block them. Otherwise, I’m sure you can find a way to survive.

Tell that to XKI :^)


Was it unreasonable? No. It's to be expected that two large blocs are going to campaign when they stand on opposing sides of an issue.
Was it hypocritical? Yes. That's what's being argued here not a generic "XKI bad" or "XKI unreasonable"

It would be nice for XKI's leadership to at least acknowledge that, instead of claim that because they like this unsolicited TG it's okay and not hypocritical, even if they stand firmly against other unsolicited that they don't agree with or approve of.

Tim-Opolis wrote:

Wayneactia wrote:Hmmmmm….. A defenders only organization, with League in its name. Hopefully this one fairs better than the last.

You really do always miss don't you?

"The trick is to learn how to pick out fools. Look for those who think things simple, who abhor uncertainty, and who are incapable of setting aside their summary judgment. And above all, look for those who believe flattering things. They are the true path to wisdom. For the claims they find the most absurd or offensive will be the ones most worthy of your attention.”~R. Scott Bakker, The White Luck Warrior

The Partnership For Sovereignty has published a dispatch highlighting our new resources in the Writers Corner!

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1588626

The Partnership for Sovereignty is proud to announce the admission of Democratic Socialist Assembly as its ninth member!

An incredibly warm welcome to the Democratic Socialist Assembly!

Welcome to the PfS! Great to have y'all with us ^_^

Welcome to PfS, DSA! Looking forward to working with y'all.

:D

lol, aren't yall the ones who were yelling and screaming about a few rogue TBH members voting on an RMB? have to say, with that in mind it's an interesting choice to invite the people who blatantly committed espionage against another region (an embassy partner of TSP, the social liberal union, no less) with the goal of purging their critics.

Wascoitan wrote:lol, aren't yall the ones who were yelling and screaming about a few rogue TBH members voting on an RMB? have to say, with that in mind it's an interesting choice to invite the people who blatantly committed espionage against another region (an embassy partner of TSP, the social liberal union, no less) with the goal of purging their critics.

This is why false equivalence makes for a bad argument. Unlike DSA, TBH went so far as to manipulate the democratic voting system of another region which is in no way comparable despite your best attempts to downplay it.

Welcome to the PfS, DSA

Grea Kriopia wrote:

Wascoitan wrote:lol, aren't yall the ones who were yelling and screaming about a few rogue TBH members voting on an RMB? have to say, with that in mind it's an interesting choice to invite the people who blatantly committed espionage against another region (an embassy partner of TSP, the social liberal union, no less) with the goal of purging their critics.

This is why false equivalence makes for a bad argument. Unlike DSA, TBH went so far as to manipulate the democratic voting system of another region which is in no way comparable despite your best attempts to downplay it.

Welcome to the PfS, DSA

idk I feel like DSA spying on the people they were supposedly allies with a mere few months before that with the intent of purging people who criticized them for their actions regarding NSLeft is a bit worse than two members of TBH independently doing something like that. but nah, apparently two members of TBH independently (as in not with the consent of the council of hawks) doing something is worth a proscription while DSA actively sanctioning a spying operation on another region then continuing to defend their actions afterwards (as they did in the TLA discord server) is worth inviting them into your voting block. I also find it interesting you are trying to appeal to democracy as as I said before they were spying to fucking purge their opposition, idk seems like something that would be a bit more concerning to you if you really cared about "democracy".

Grea Kriopia wrote:

Wascoitan wrote:lol, aren't yall the ones who were yelling and screaming about a few rogue TBH members voting on an RMB? have to say, with that in mind it's an interesting choice to invite the people who blatantly committed espionage against another region (an embassy partner of TSP, the social liberal union, no less) with the goal of purging their critics.

This is why false equivalence makes for a bad argument. Unlike DSA, TBH went so far as to manipulate the democratic voting system of another region which is in no way comparable despite your best attempts to downplay it.

Welcome to the PfS, DSA

The way you put it, a few rogue TBH members were able to subvert and undermine the government of TSP with their... RMB votes. On a WA recommendation.

Comfed wrote:The way you put it, a few rogue TBH members were able to subvert and undermine the government of TSP with their... RMB votes. On a WA recommendation.

To alter a WA vote in bad faith is to subvert and undermine the process of determining that WA vote. So yes. They attempted to subvert and undermine the process of the Office of WA Legislation (a permanent executive office in TSP).

The whole TBH argument is a distraction from the fact of the matter that PfS decided DSA, a group that spied on a TSP embassy partner, was member material. Hopefully that’ll be reconsidered.

Varanius wrote:The whole TBH argument is a distraction from the fact of the matter that PfS decided DSA, a group that spied on a TSP embassy partner, was member material. Hopefully that’ll be reconsidered.

would also like to second this, I included the TBH thing more as a small little snipe, wasn't intending for it to become the main subject of discussion. but hey, if PfS wishes to defend the actions of DSA with "but TBH is worse tho, so it's totally ok what they did" then feel free.

It appears that DSA violated

I. Statement of Principles

1. Self-Determination. The Partnership for Sovereignty stands in support of the right of natives of a region to determine the status of their own region.

based on what I am reading.

*yawns*

welcome DSA.

While I don't know what happened besides the vague "DSA spied on SLU", this seems like a points-scoring attempt from raider-aligned players against the PfS.

The Python wrote:While I don't know what happened besides a blanket "DSA spied on SLU", this seems like a points-scoring attempt from raider-aligned players against the PfS.

it's the truth, they spied on SLU in order to dig up dirt (most of which just ended up being fucking normal conversation lmao) on people that dared criticize the way they handled leaving NSLeft.
https://thedsa.proboards.com/thread/654 ... ent-goncar

they even admitted to the term in their post about the situation

"I took and still take full responsibility for this action, it was my proposal after all, and I defend that act of infiltration"

like I said, feel free to dismiss this as just "raider complaining" after all it's not like I expected you to care about what people from NSLeft regions think, but it's an interesting foreign strategy for TSP to allow those who spied on their embassy partners into a pact of theirs.

So the then-President of the DSA asked the MoJ to "investigate" an issue with members that held dual citizenship between SLU and DSA. This lead to the MoJ pretending to be a noob to collect conversations from those SLU members that show them working as a group and attacking the current DSA gov't. This lead to the DSA Gov't removing those members and then the PfS brought DSA into their WA Voting Bloc?

Am I missing something? This is what I gathered from the DSA Forums.

New Scottsville wrote:So the then-President of the DSA asked the MoJ to "investigate" an issue with members that held dual citizenship between SLU and DSA. This lead to the MoJ pretending to be a noob to collect conversations from those SLU members that show them working as a group and attacking the current DSA gov't. This lead to the DSA Gov't removing those members and then the PfS brought DSA into their WA Voting Bloc?

Am I missing something? This is what I gathered from the DSA Forums.

Well, gee, I'm sure the side doing the espionage isn't biased.

Not saying that I totally think that what DSA was wrong (opinion not fully formed) but you'll have to expand your sources of information.

New Scottsville wrote:So the then-President of the DSA asked the MoJ to "investigate" an issue with members that held dual citizenship between SLU and DSA. This lead to the MoJ pretending to be a noob to collect conversations from those SLU members that show them working as a group and attacking the current DSA gov't. This lead to the DSA Gov't removing those members and then the PfS brought DSA into their WA Voting Bloc?

Am I missing something? This is what I gathered from the DSA Forums.

the "working as a group" bit is inaccurate, there wasn't some underlying plot in SLU to slander the DSA government or anything. all they were doing was talking about DSA during the events that caused them to leave NSLeft, which yeah surprise surprise SLU is going to discuss affairs that involved SLU (as this did). funny that. but beyond that that's a relatively good summary yes. essentially the DSA Gov't sent in someone to spy on SLU with the hopes of finding instances of them complaining about DSA Gov't. so like I said, a purge of political opponents, based off what pretty much everyone involved besides DSA (and even a few people in DSA who ended up leaving over the situation lol) (TCB, TLA, SLU, etc.) to be pretty dubious charges.