NATION

PASSWORD

The Rejected Realms Embassy

Talk about regional management and politics, raider/defender gameplay, and other game-related matters.
Not a roleplaying forum.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
The Murtunian Tribes
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6919
Founded: Oct 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Murtunian Tribes » Tue May 24, 2011 7:11 am

:lol: Excellent work.

User avatar
Ballotonia
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5452
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Ballotonia » Tue May 24, 2011 8:58 am

Biyah wrote:Edit: [center] apparently does not work, edited it out.


Try:
Code: Select all
[align=center]CENTERED[/align]


Example:
CENTERED


Ballotonia
"Een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen, dan dooft het licht…" -- H.M. van Randwijk

User avatar
Sedgistan
Senior Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 31920
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Thu May 26, 2011 4:13 pm

Image

Update No. 7, May 2011

Statement on events within The South Pacific

(Please see next post)

Assembly Assembles

The Assembly of the Rejected Realms has been incredibly busy over the last month. First off, the alliance with Lazarus was modified to reflect changes within the region and NationStates over the last few years. It has now been passed by both sides, and we hope to maintain our friendship with our sister Sinker region for many more years. Following the conclusion of that debate, membership of the FRA was debated (more below), and the Assembly is currently considering such issues as votes of no confidence, introducing a Speaker to the Assembly, and allowing citizenship applications to be approved, minus voting powers, whilst elections/key legislative debates are ongoing. We will let you know the result of these discussions in our next update.

FRA membership debated

As part of the review of TRR's Foreign Affairs commitments, we held a noisy debate on retaining membership of the Founderless Regions Alliance. The Rejected Realms has been a member of the FRA since August 2007, but due to the change in membership and government, it was felt appropriate for the region to vote again on whether it wanted to retain membership. After two weeks of argument, the vote eventually finished in favour of retaining membership.

However, following this debate, the controversial actions of the FRA in The South Pacific, as well as the undiplomatic behaviour of FRA Arch Chancellor, Unibot, have led to TRR pushing for Unibot's impeachment in the FRA Regional Assembly.

Anur-Sanur revelations

The following announcement was made earlier today:
Anur-Sanur's citizenship has been removed for working to unseat the legitimately elected delegate of the region, and for leaking the contents of the citizens' restricted access forum. His nation is Realmmatorr II - please do not endorse him.

Evidence for this was provided by former TSP delegate, Devonitians, who was contacted by Anur-Sanur about unseating Kandarin (Naivetry) from the delegate position. The full statement with copies of the telegrams can be found here.

Unibot resigns, Earth challenges

Following several weeks of inactivity as Officer of Mobilisation, Unibot was challenged by new citizen (and former Europeia President) Earth22. Unibot swiftly resigned from the seat, acknowledging that he did not have time for the position. Earth22 is currently running unopposed, and has put forward several exciting plans to further increase activity within the region. It is particularly hoped that these will help to engage newer members of NationStates within the region.

Tags tags tags

Following the introduction of tags to NationStates, the Rejected Realms has been tagging itself. As well as holding the exclusive 'Sinker' tag, and the not-so-exclusive 'Founderless' and "Gargantuan" ones, we have declared ourselves as Democratic, Offsite Forums, Neutral, Game Player, Regional Government, and World Assembly. Debate is currently taking place on adding more (such as Security Council), although regional despot Naivetry is refusing to tag the region as 'Totalitarian', claiming it would reflect badly on her benevolent rule.

Media and Information department gets busy

Officer Dalimbar has appointed Oliver Dion-Grey as Moderator of NS:Crossfire and Deputy Officer of Media and Information. He will be working with Dali on planning all media releases, as well as helping to get the NS:Crossfire debates going again. Following a test run, the first proper debate was held on the events in The South Pacific, and can be read here. Ollie has already demonstrated his talent for the job by threatening to set a hamster on anyone who doesn't help out. In the meantime, the team have written well-received articles on the happenings in TSP, and the current crisis in Europeia.

TRR Roleplay commences

Biyah has been getting TRR's "1984" roleplay going, with several people having posted their nation's RP information and joining in the roleplay. Earth22 was announced as Deputy RP Mod, and is expected to get to work shortly.

Monthly IRC Highlights

* @CrazyGirl smells

<@Felasia> Damn, I missed the most exciting thing that happen on NS in months...
<@Biyah> don't worry, it'll blow up in another month
<@Biyah> when TSP notices


Other news

  • TRR now has 40 citizens, a record level, with activity at an all-time high.
  • Sedge is looking for a Deputy Foreign Affairs Officer. I'm not actually advertising this to people in other regions who read this update - I'm just hoping that one of my ambassadors reads this and thinks "ooh, I could do that!"
Last edited by Sedgistan on Thu May 26, 2011 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sedgistan
Senior Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 31920
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Thu May 26, 2011 4:14 pm

Statement on events within The South Pacific


The Rejected Realms decided not to intervene during Devonitian's recent coup in The South Pacific, believing that the people of The South Pacific should have the right to choose their own delegate. We were deeply disturbed to find that the ousted government of The South Pacific did not share our conviction. Instead of relying upon the endorsements of TSP natives, Southern Bellz and other members of TSP's forums called on their personal friends from outside regions such as Qwendra and on the assistance of the FRA in their attempt to regain power.

While we do not approve of Devonitian's use of post suppression and banjection to silence opposition, neither can we excuse the sense of entitlement to power demonstrated by Southern Bellz and her government. Tradition alone does not give any group of nations the right to control the delegacy of a feeder. That right - that privilege - belong only to those communities who actively work to foster growth in NationStates.

The government of TSP cannot claim to be such a community. On Oct. 29, 2010, The Rejected Realms requested an embassy with The South Pacific. Our request was approved on Feb. 7, 2011 after numerous inquiries from our officials; but in the months since we have heard nothing from The South Pacific either in our embassy or theirs - no acknowledgment of our updates, and not even a request for aid during Devonitian's coup.

This silence is only one example of basic dysfunction within the putative government of TSP. Southern Bellz's loss of the delegacy was not the failure of an individual, but of a government system fatally disconnected from the region it was meant to serve. Instead of directing their energies towards caring for and connecting with the nations of their region or even with other regions in NationStates, members of The South Pacific's forum turned inward, enjoying the prestige and publicity of controlling a feeder without exerting any effort to nurture community in that feeder in return. Instead of reaching out to nations in The South Pacific, forum members expected activity to come to them; it should not have come as a shock that Devonitians was happy to oblige.

When Kandarin handed over his nation to Naivetry in October 2010, TSP's delegate Southern Bellz refused to exchange embassies with The Rejected Realms (in contradiction of standing TSP policy) on the following grounds:
I feel uncomfortable opening an embassy with The Rejected Realms at this due to the fact that I think the nation handing that went on is a underhanded technique that underminds game play. Considering my platform as delegate is a very pro-game play stance, I feel by accepting the embassy, I acknowledge this type of delegate transfer as legitimate.

In relying on outside forces to prop up a delegacy lost to a native-endorsed challenger, Southern Bellz and the government she represents used an underhanded technique to ensure their continued hegemony over ordinary nations in The South Pacific, undermining gameplay and its requirements of continued activity from the delegate. By maintaining the embassy, we would be acknowledging this type of delegacy monopoly - one predicated on a refusal to engage with the natives of the region - as legitimate.

In light of recent events, therefore, The Rejected Realms has no choice but to suspend diplomatic relations with The South Pacific. Additionally, we do not at this time recognize Southern Bellz as the legitimate delegate of The South Pacific.

If the forum-based community of The South Pacific wishes to be recognized as the legitimate government of TSP, they must legitimize themselves not only to each other or to outside kingmakers such as the FRA, but to the people they claim to represent: the nations of The South Pacific. Until we are satisfied that the regional forum is no longer held aloof and isolated from the region itself, The Rejected Realms cannot recognize the forum government of TSP as the legitimate voice of the region.

We will continue to monitor the situation, and when we are satisfied that the sitting delegate, whoever that may be, has been legitimized by the community within the region itself, we will reconsider this decision. Until then, our thoughts and best wishes are with all the nations of The South Pacific.

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Thu May 26, 2011 5:55 pm

Who knew I'd ever applaud a Sedge post, but I guess pigs are flying:

:clap:
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
The Murtunian Tribes
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6919
Founded: Oct 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Murtunian Tribes » Thu May 26, 2011 7:00 pm

:blink: Yea me neither.

User avatar
Naivetry
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1285
Founded: Aug 02, 2006
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Naivetry » Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:30 pm

Statement on the identity of Devonitians


In the days since the revelation of Devonitians' identity, we in The Rejected Realms have spent many hours discussing the events surrounding his coup of The South Pacific. We make this statement now as a region, recognizing that while the views of our individual members vary, we stand united in affirming the truth of the following statements.

While serving as Foreign Affairs Officer in The Rejected Realms, Sedge took control of the delegacy of The South Pacific under the nation Devonitians, using all native endorsements. Only Crazy Girl, who followed him to TSP shortly after he was elected delegate, was aware of Devonitians' identity prior to his seizure of the delegacy. Biyah and Dalimbar, also Officers of The Rejected Realms, discovered Sedge's identity and attempted to work with him to influence the outcome of the elections procedure he had begun. TRR Delegate Naivetry was informed of Sedge's identity shortly before the end of the coup, after Devonitians had forwarded correspondence to her concerning another nation's attempt to overthrow TRR, but was not privy to any other discussions which took place during the event.

During the coup and its aftermath, Sedge neither asked for nor received any help from The Rejected Realms. Biyah and Dali secretly assisted him in pursuit of their own private agenda. Crazy Girl's involvement was limited to chatting on the RMB and endorsing Devonitians (in compliance with his rules for election) shortly before he was forcibly removed from the delegacy. Contrary to the statement issued by Biyah, neither Crazy Girl nor Sedge "used their positions to push TRR into neutrality". In fact, no citizen of TRR ever proposed, either in public or in private, that The Rejected Realms should intervene. Our neutrality as a region was consistent and complete, based on the understanding - prior to any of our citizens' discovery of Sedge's identity - that we had no right to involve ourselves in the internal operations of another region.

Following the return of the delegacy to Southern Bellz, The Rejected Realms issued a statement criticizing TSP's regional government for a lack of engagement with the region, and suspending diplomatic relations. While Sedge as Foreign Affairs Officer initiated the embassy closure, the content of TRR's statement was not impacted by the knowledge of who Devonitians had been. Rather, it outlined a theory of government predicated on the responsibility of a feeder government to all of its residents. We continue to assert that the legitimacy of a government in the feeders depends not on the opinion of a subset of nations on offsite forums, but on the degree to which that offsite government works to represent all of the nations it serves.

As a foreign region, The Rejected Realms has no right either to condemn or to approve of coups which involve only the endorsements of those native to a region. Accordingly, we do not, and never have, condoned Devonitians' coup of The South Pacific. Furthermore, we strongly condemn the manner in which the coup was conducted in its latter stages, as Devonitians resorted to the ejection and suppression of native opposition to maintain his control over the delegacy. We also condemn the use of outside troops on either side, and we remain disappointed that the first such troops to infringe on the sovereignty of The South Pacific were brought in to depose a delegate elected solely by native endorsements. We maintain that the appropriate first response to a shift in native endorsements would have been an unendorsement campaign; in that way, control over the delegacy would have remained in the hands of the natives of The South Pacific rather than in the hands of outside military forces. By bringing in outside troops, The South Pacific's forum government chose to place their trust in foreign allies rather than in the hands of the nations they were supposed to represent. The reluctance of the government to place its fate solely in the hands of the residents of The South Pacific underlines the degree to which the forum had become disconnected from the region as a whole. That disconnection was - and remains - the only reason TRR has suspended relations with the forum government of TSP.

The Rejected Realms is a unique community, composed not only of people who consider TRR their primary home, but also of those whose interests in NationStates extend to other regions and organizations. While we remained neutral as a region, our citizens were responsible as individuals for action on both sides of the conflict; citizens of TRR moved in to support Southern Bellz as well. In making this statement, we uphold the right of all of our citizens to take action which differs from the position of The Rejected Realms as a whole. In return, we expect them not to use their positions within TRR to further their own individual goals, but to place the well-being of TRR and its community ahead of their individual agendas.

To the extent that we believe those involved in events in The South Pacific have failed in their responsibilities to the community of TRR, we will pursue sanctions against them as individuals in our own region and for that reason alone. The Rejected Realms remains a place of refuge committed to a policy of neutrality and non-interference in the internal affairs of other sovereign regions, while the newly restarted Rejected Realms Army remains dedicated to defense and the protection of regional sovereignty across NS. We thank those in the interregional community who have given us time to respond collectively to these events for their patience, and encourage those who have additional questions to direct them to our embassy, our Delegate, or our acting Officer of Foreign Affairs, Guy.

User avatar
Daynor
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Dec 25, 2008
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Daynor » Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:20 am

Naivetry wrote:We also condemn the use of outside troops on either side, and we remain disappointed that the first such troops to infringe on the sovereignty of The South Pacific were brought in to depose a delegate elected solely by native endorsements.
Ah! Finally, new terminology. Sedge did not have native support, he had native endorsements.

The fact of the matter is Sedge lied to those who endorsed him claiming the endorsements were tokens of friendship, not support for the overthrow of our region. If there were any members of TSP's community that supported Sedge's delegacy that didn't come after he took over, they were a vast minority. I appreciate that you did not make the claim he had any native support.
Naivetry wrote:We maintain that the appropriate first response to a shift in native endorsements would have been an unendorsement campaign; in that way, control over the delegacy would have remained in the hands of the natives of The South Pacific rather than in the hands of outside military forces.
I personally telegramed every endorser of Sedge. As did Fudge. As did SB. Unendorsements campaigns will get us no where if anyone that removes their endorsement of Sedge while endorsing Bellz is booted. If it ever would have worked, it would have taken a long time.
Naivetry wrote:By bringing in outside troops, The South Pacific's forum government chose to place their trust in foreign allies rather than in the hands of the nations they were supposed to represent. The reluctance of the government to place its fate solely in the hands of the residents of The South Pacific underlines the degree to which the forum had become disconnected from the region as a whole. That disconnection was - and remains - the only reason TRR has suspended relations with the forum government of TSP.
While I respect that you think there is a disconnect between onsite and offsite TSP, I can't agree with that observation. Primarily, in TSP we don't even have forum elections, it is up to the WA members of the region to decide who is delegate, even if they have never logged into the forums. Our government gives more power to those not present on the forum than any I've ever seen.

Secondly, as I said, you did not see vast amounts of TSP natives campaigning against SB. I didn't see any. The on-sight community of The South Pacific strongly supported and supports Southern Bellz. Those that supported Sedge came in after the coup.

These three points are the only ones I felt compelled to comment on. I still hope in the future our regions can put this behind us.
Young Libertarian Conservative
Political Compass: (2.63,-1.44)
Delegate of the Conservative Coalition
Ambassador Franklin Tanner
ლ(゚д゚ლ)
Daynor

User avatar
Mahaj
Senator
 
Posts: 4110
Founded: Dec 08, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Mahaj » Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:47 am

I personally telegramed every endorser of Sedge. As did Fudge. As did SB.


Just a quick mention, Daynor, I think TCT did as well. I got a TG from TCT after I had endorsed Dev so I could stay in the region.
Aal Izz Well: UDL
<Koth> I'm still going by the assumption that Mahaj is Unibot's kid brother or something
Kandarin(Naivetry): You're going to have a great NS career ahead of you if you want it, Mahaj. :)
<@Eluvatar> Why is SkyDip such a purist raiderist
<+frattastan> Because his region was never raided.
<+maxbarry> EarthAway: I guess I might dabble in raiding just to experience it better, but I would not like to raid regions of natives, so I'd probably be more interested in defense and liberations

User avatar
Cerberion
Diplomat
 
Posts: 993
Founded: Apr 22, 2010
Corporate Police State

Postby Cerberion » Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:13 am

To the extent that we believe those involved in events in The South Pacific have failed in their responsibilities to the community of TRR, we will pursue sanctions against them as individuals in our own region and for that reason alone.



Will there be any announcement on what sanctions are taken on these individuals?

User avatar
Ballotonia
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5452
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Ballotonia » Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:03 am

Naivetry wrote:We maintain that the appropriate first response to a shift in native endorsements would have been an unendorsement campaign; in that way, control over the delegacy would have remained in the hands of the natives of The South Pacific rather than in the hands of outside military forces.


Doesn't that lofty principle die a screaming death the very moment the non-native Delegate decides to kick native nations for having an opinion (in terms of providing endorsements) which doesn't match his own (foreign) agenda?

Cerberion wrote:
To the extent that we believe those involved in events in The South Pacific have failed in their responsibilities to the community of TRR, we will pursue sanctions against them as individuals in our own region and for that reason alone.

Will there be any announcement on what sanctions are taken on these individuals?


I'm interpreting the above to be code for nobody getting any kind of punishment whatsoever.

Ballotonia
Last edited by Ballotonia on Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen, dan dooft het licht…" -- H.M. van Randwijk

User avatar
Naivetry
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1285
Founded: Aug 02, 2006
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Naivetry » Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:18 pm

Daynor wrote:Ah! Finally, new terminology. Sedge did not have native support, he had native endorsements.

Consistent terminology from us at least; I haven't had the leisure to follow the discussion in detail, but I know the arguments here have varied. "Support" is, in my opinion, a vague and ill-defined term often used to imply more about a given state of affairs than we can really know. Endorsements on the other hand, no matter under what pretense they were obtained, are indisputable. I like my terminology to be clear when I'm going to have to defend it. :P

I personally telegramed every endorser of Sedge. As did Fudge. As did SB. Unendorsements campaigns will get us no where if anyone that removes their endorsement of Sedge while endorsing Bellz is booted. If it ever would have worked, it would have taken a long time.

1) We are aware that unendorsement campaigns took place eventually. We believe they should have been the first response... and I believe, in the absence of outside endorsements for Devonitians, the only response. The endorsements which elected Devonitians were the endorsements of TSP natives, and that was the tragedy and the irony of this whole business. For as long as only the continued support of their endorsements was keeping him in power, the right thing to do was to ask them to remove that support, rather than asking for foreign troops to override it.

2) I don't think you can claim that unendorsement campaigns alone as an initial response would have been pointless. Either Dev would have done the principled thing and left, or he would have asked for foreign troops of his own once he began bleeding endorsements, at which point TSP would have been absolutely justified in asking for assistance from the rest of the world. I know everyone's kneejerk reaction when these things happen is to get back in there and recover the delegacy ASAP... but using military force as your first response presumes that the previous delegate had the support of the region, rather than allowing the region to demonstrate their support by removing the newcomer on their own. It's a scary thing to send those telegrams and then wait for a response - to leave the fate of your region in the hands of all those hundreds of nearly anonymous WA nations - but if the forum government is unwilling to rely on the support of the nations they serve, that says to me that the forum government itself doesn't believe it can rely on the support of the nations of the region. I think you could have counted on the natives of TSP - I just wish you would have!

3) I don't understand the argument that "it would have taken a long time" as a reason not to rely on unendorsement campaigns before calling in outside troops. The amount of time something takes has no effect on its ethical value, and TSP was not under any time constraint that would have made it impracticable. As it was, Devonitians ran out of Influence pretty quickly; and while none of us can know exactly how Influence worked into the equation, it was certainly the cost of ejecting TSP natives, not foreign troops, which prevented him from being able to eject enough nations at the end to remain in power.

While I respect that you think there is a disconnect between onsite and offsite TSP, I can't agree with that observation. Primarily, in TSP we don't even have forum elections, it is up to the WA members of the region to decide who is delegate, even if they have never logged into the forums. Our government gives more power to those not present on the forum than any I've ever seen.

Well, to be precise, the WA members of TSP are allowed to endorse whom they please from a slate of candidates who are members of the forum; but that's not the issue, here. Every region I know of in NS places some sort of restriction on who is allowed to swap endorsements for the delegacy without opposition from the offsite government. That's just sanity - the bare minimum it takes to ensure some basic continuity of governance. What I do find problematic is the assumption that any forum government has a natural right to make those rules, or to enforce them by calling in outsiders unless another group of nations has actually invaded first.1

Secondly, as I said, you did not see vast amounts of TSP natives campaigning against SB. I didn't see any. The on-sight community of The South Pacific strongly supported and supports Southern Bellz. Those that supported Sedge came in after the coup.

First, there's a difference between "lack of support" and "opposition" (also between "support" and "lack of opposition"); we've never said - nor meant to imply - that anyone in TSP actually opposed SB's delegacy except for Devonitians (and anyone he managed to win over to his side). :P But here's the point I think we all need to consider: when a government has held power in a feeder for months and/or years, does their continued presence signal the approval of the region's natives, or merely indifference - and how can we know unless we've made a point of asking them?

Thanks for the response, Topid. I hope we'll have an opportunity to continue this discussion.

1 - The 'group' aspect of invasions is essential, by the way. No single nation constitutes an invasion, any more than a single individual in RL does. When an individual dupes or incites others into revolt without receiving any military support from an outside entity, they're guilty of sedition, not invasion; the difference may seem pedantic in NS, but it's real and (I believe) important.

Cerberion wrote:Will there be any announcement on what sanctions are taken on these individuals?

I would assume so. If you've seen our update thread here before, you'll know we tend to report on anything of note in the region about once a month. Thanks for the question.

Ballotonia wrote:Doesn't that lofty principle die a screaming death the very moment the non-native Delegate decides to kick native nations for having an opinion (in terms of providing endorsements) which doesn't match his own (foreign) agenda?

his own (foreign independent) agenda?

Fixed.

And no, it does not. Until a delegate decides to bring in troops from outside the region to prop up his endorsement count, how many nations he ejects and for what reasons remains a purely internal affair. Give me a choice between upholding democracy and upholding a region's sovereignty, and I'll pick sovereignty every time.

Not to get into the whole tired debate over nativity, btw, but I think the old griefing rules got it right.

I'm interpreting the above to be code for nobody getting any kind of punishment whatsoever.

On the contrary - it's code for "since the interregional community is already expressing its disapproval of Sedge on the world stage, how about you drop the witch hunt at our front door and give us a few weeks to sort out our internal disagreements internally?"

With apologies for the snark, Ballo, but it's been a rough week - we would appreciate your forbearance if you could leave the carefully polite, diplomatic message in its carefully polite state. Many thanks.
Last edited by Naivetry on Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:17 pm

Nai, I thought I read somewhere that TSP actually reached out to TRR for help in recapturing the delegacy. Did that happen?
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Southern Bellz
Diplomat
 
Posts: 628
Founded: Oct 04, 2008
Democratic Socialists

Postby Southern Bellz » Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:18 pm

I asked Sedge. He told me that he passed the request on to the RRA (or whatever version it was called at the time before I get jumped on for a technicality) and that they decided to not get involved. As to if that request got passed on, who knows, but it was one of the main points TRR made when cutting off diplomatic ties with TSP so I am interested in the answer as well.

I remember it distinctly because I remember saying I think the situation is odd because Sedge didn't rush to one side or the other, and someone praised Sedge for staying out of the situation.

User avatar
Ballotonia
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5452
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Ballotonia » Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:32 pm

Naivetry wrote:
Ballotonia wrote:Doesn't that lofty principle die a screaming death the very moment the non-native Delegate decides to kick native nations for having an opinion (in terms of providing endorsements) which doesn't match his own (foreign) agenda?

his own (foreign independent) agenda?

Fixed.

And no, it does not. Until a delegate decides to bring in troops from outside the region to prop up his endorsement count, how many nations he ejects and for what reasons remains a purely internal affair. Give me a choice between upholding democracy and upholding a region's sovereignty, and I'll pick sovereignty every time.


Independent. Foreign. Both are true, it's not one or the other. Devonitians wasn't a TSP native.

And since I'm a strong believer in Freedom, I'd pick Democracy over Sovereignty every time. in RL: Sovereignty is a quality a nation has, and it protects the rights of the Government. Freedom and Democracy are things which benefit the average citizen. I find it bizarre that on one side you're talking about the will of the people (in NS: nations) versus that of those in charge (in NS: the regional Government, or the Delegate), then here you make a 180 degree turn and sell out the will of those same people by condoning a dictatorship rigging what should be a democratic vote by kicking nations out of the region.

For Freedom to exist in an NS region, Democracy has to outweigh Sovereignty. Every time.

Naivetry wrote:Not to get into the whole tired debate over nativity, btw, but I think the old griefing rules got it right.


Agreed. What you seem to be missing is that the old rules distinguished between a NATION being native and a DELEGACY being native. According to the old rules, Devonitians was a non-native nation with a native Delegacy. In the same way it was also possible for a native nation to have a non-native delegacy. And that's exactly how I see things even today. Hence also why it's perfectly correct to refer to Devonitians as a nation foreign to TSP, executing a foreign agenda.

Naivetry wrote:
I'm interpreting the above to be code for nobody getting any kind of punishment whatsoever.

On the contrary - it's code for "since the interregional community is already expressing its disapproval of Sedge on the world stage, how about you drop the witch hunt at our front door and give us a few weeks to sort out our internal disagreements internally?"


Well, at least I'm not in TRR swapping for the delegacy, am I? If only that 'let them handle matters internally' had applied to The South Pacific. But it didn't, so Sedgistan went in to decide things for them. And then all of a sudden sovereignty was important again, while pretending Sedgistan's nation had somehow magically become native.

Sorry to upset your "carefully polite, diplomatic message". I won't hold that snark against you.

Ballotonia
Last edited by Ballotonia on Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen, dan dooft het licht…" -- H.M. van Randwijk

User avatar
Durkadurkiranistan II
Diplomat
 
Posts: 512
Founded: Sep 19, 2010
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Durkadurkiranistan II » Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:28 pm

The concept of sovereignty in the feeders is a murky one at best. Specifically what counts as native? How long do my soldiers have to be stationed in a feeder before they become native?
Former Delegate of the North Pacific (x2)
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Former Delegate of Osiris
Former Delegate of Lazarus

User avatar
Improving Wordiness
Diplomat
 
Posts: 641
Founded: Dec 05, 2009
Democratic Socialists

Postby Improving Wordiness » Tue Jun 14, 2011 12:26 am

How long is a piece of string Durka?
Klaus Devestatorie wrote:I'm a massive tool. ;)

User avatar
Durkadurkiranistan II
Diplomat
 
Posts: 512
Founded: Sep 19, 2010
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Durkadurkiranistan II » Tue Jun 14, 2011 1:15 am

I would say that a string should be on the order of 10 to 100 times as long as its diameter, at a minimum.

Can you provide an estimate for the length of time required to be in a feeder before achieving native status?
Former Delegate of the North Pacific (x2)
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Former Delegate of Osiris
Former Delegate of Lazarus

User avatar
Ballotonia
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5452
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Ballotonia » Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:34 am

Durkadurkiranistan II wrote:Can you provide an estimate for the length of time required to be in a feeder before achieving native status?


According to the pre-Influence rules: never.

According to the Influence rules: nativity isn't a yes/no thing. One become more native as one accumulates Influence. Asa result even an invader walking in and passing through one update is a tiny bit native.


My personal choice, which guides my political stances in this game, is simply "never".

Ballotonia
"Een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen, dan dooft het licht…" -- H.M. van Randwijk

User avatar
Daynor
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Dec 25, 2008
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Daynor » Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:57 am

Naivetry wrote:1) We are aware that unendorsement campaigns took place eventually. We believe they should have been the first response... and I believe, in the absence of outside endorsements for Devonitians, the only response. The endorsements which elected Devonitians were the endorsements of TSP natives, and that was the tragedy and the irony of this whole business. For as long as only the continued support of their endorsements was keeping him in power, the right thing to do was to ask them to remove that support, rather than asking for foreign troops to override it.
I was out of town when I found out there had been a coup, so I was gone for a significant part of the coup, but as soon as I got home that's what I did. I'd say that was our first response.
Naivetry wrote:2) I don't think you can claim that unendorsement campaigns alone as an initial response would have been pointless. Either Dev would have done the principled thing and left, or he would have asked for foreign troops of his own once he began bleeding endorsements, at which point TSP would have been absolutely justified in asking for assistance from the rest of the world.
Or he'd keep banjecting WAs that endorsed Bellz so that any campaign would progress extremely slow...
Naivetry wrote:I know everyone's kneejerk reaction when these things happen is to get back in there and recover the delegacy ASAP... but using military force as your first response presumes that the previous delegate had the support of the region, rather than allowing the region to demonstrate their support by removing the newcomer on their own. It's a scary thing to send those telegrams and then wait for a response - to leave the fate of your region in the hands of all those hundreds of nearly anonymous WA nations - but if the forum government is unwilling to rely on the support of the nations they serve, that says to me that the forum government itself doesn't believe it can rely on the support of the nations of the region. I think you could have counted on the natives of TSP - I just wish you would have!
We did. That statement is pure spin. We asked natives to unendorse Sedge. They found themselves in your lovely region, Nai. But the vast, vast majority of the reason we got the delegacy back was TSP nations, which simply outnumber any foreign forces we could bring in.

Also, I'm a little disappointed this is the state of foreign affairs in this game. I have said for a while I thought it was dying, now, to use a foreign relation at all is going to be spun as ignoring the members of a region? Nail in the coffin. :( This isn't a view you have had very long and I hope it isn't permanent. Being able to help friends and get help from friends in the inter-regional community is the main point of having friends in the inter-regional community. And that is an aspect of the game we should strengthen not weaken.

Naivetry wrote:3) I don't understand the argument that "it would have taken a long time" as a reason not to rely on unendorsement campaigns before calling in outside troops. The amount of time something takes has no effect on its ethical value, and TSP was not under any time constraint that would have made it impracticable. As it was, Devonitians ran out of Influence pretty quickly; and while none of us can know exactly how Influence worked into the equation, it was certainly the cost of ejecting TSP natives, not foreign troops, which prevented him from being able to eject enough nations at the end to remain in power.

As Sedge so proudly states, he was close to turning the delegate position over to GreenGrimilins or someone else, that nation in particular having been tarting beyond the endocap for a while, and would have had significantly more influence than Sedge, and thus the ability to boot even more WAs trying to put Bellz back in the delegacy.

Well, to be precise, the WA members of TSP are allowed to endorse whom they please from a slate of candidates who are members of the forum; but that's not the issue, here. Every region I know of in NS places some sort of restriction on who is allowed to swap endorsements for the delegacy without opposition from the offsite government. That's just sanity - the bare minimum it takes to ensure some basic continuity of governance. What I do find problematic is the assumption that any forum government has a natural right to make those rules, or to enforce them by calling in outsiders unless another group of nations has actually invaded first.1

Yes, my point is we actually listen to the view of the WAs in the region a little bit, which is more than any other community I've ever been a part of, including every other feeder.
First, there's a difference between "lack of support" and "opposition" (also between "support" and "lack of opposition"); we've never said - nor meant to imply - that anyone in TSP actually opposed SB's delegacy except for Devonitians (and anyone he managed to win over to his side). :P But here's the point I think we all need to consider: when a government has held power in a feeder for months and/or years, does their continued presence signal the approval of the region's natives, or merely indifference - and how can we know unless we've made a point of asking them?
I think it was pretty clear when nations who had never posted before to my memory were posting on the RMB asking for Dev to be removed. It seems pretty clear to me that Dev had massive opposition from TSP members on-sight, not just off.
Thanks for the response, Topid. I hope we'll have an opportunity to continue this discussion.
No problem, but, at a certain point it'll be time to move on. I don't think TSP is the kind of region that has any business harking on this for very long at all. It is over, new day. The reason I'm commenting is to let anyone who actually reads these things, which I believe is most likely not large, that there is another side. And that even disregarding my regional affiliation, I'm always concerned when views start popping up that are going to make relations between regions even less relevant.
Young Libertarian Conservative
Political Compass: (2.63,-1.44)
Delegate of the Conservative Coalition
Ambassador Franklin Tanner
ლ(゚д゚ლ)
Daynor

User avatar
Ballotonia
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5452
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Ballotonia » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:02 am

Daynor wrote:This isn't a view you have had very long and I hope it isn't permanent. Being able to help friends and get help from friends in the inter-regional community is the main point of having friends in the inter-regional community. And that is an aspect of the game we should strengthen not weaken.


Ouch, painful quote there in that link!

But, please do keep in mind, Naivetry is now speaking on behalf of TRR. It is quite possible that her personal opinion is different from what TRR believes to be the truth. It is nevertheless good to keep in mind when and if such a discrepancy exists, so thank you for that link.

Ballotonia
"Een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen, dan dooft het licht…" -- H.M. van Randwijk

User avatar
Naivetry
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1285
Founded: Aug 02, 2006
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Naivetry » Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:00 am

Southern Bellz wrote:I asked Sedge. He told me that he passed the request on to the RRA (or whatever version it was called at the time before I get jumped on for a technicality) and that they decided to not get involved. As to if that request got passed on, who knows, but it was one of the main points TRR made when cutting off diplomatic ties with TSP so I am interested in the answer as well.

That's what I understand to be the case as well, which I don't think I knew at the time I wrote that statement, or I would have accounted for it. I can't find anything about a request from TSP on the forum, and I've been looking through my IRC logs for the past hour without any luck, so it looks to me like your request stopped with Sedge... unsurprisingly in retrospect. The RRA did not exist at the time, so we had no regional military at all - which Sedge presumably neglected to tell you.

Ballotonia wrote:Independent. Foreign. Both are true, it's not one or the other. Devonitians wasn't a TSP native.

The label "foreign" bothers me because it implies that Devonitians was acting on behalf of another group or region, rather than acting alone. My apologies if that's not what you intended it to mean.

I find it bizarre that on one side you're talking about the will of the people (in NS: nations) versus that of those in charge (in NS: the regional Government, or the Delegate), then here you make a 180 degree turn and sell out the will of those same people by condoning a dictatorship rigging what should be a democratic vote by kicking nations out of the region.

Regardless of how determined you are to read our statement - or any of my arguments - in that way, neither I nor TRR condones or ever has condoned Devonitians' coup. Not only that, but we condemn the use of banjections to silence native opposition, and have done so publicly ever since our first statement on the issue - and if Dev had held on long enough for me to write a statement on it (unlikely, given how long it takes me to compose a post), we would have said that directly to him.

Just because I think that TSP's government prior to Dev's coup had failed in their responsibilities to the region doesn't mean that I think Dev did any better of a job. And just because Dev was a villain, that doesn't mean the government of TSP were saints. We chose to make use of the coup to criticize TSP because, unlike Dev, they were still around to care - to do something about it. That's why I wrote that first statement - because I believed then, as I do now, that the nations of TSP deserve a government that works hard to represent them... and because, unlike some others here, I believe that the forum community of TSP can be that responsible and active government, if only they too believe there is a need for it.

For Freedom to exist in an NS region, Democracy has to outweigh Sovereignty. Every time.

I cannot disagree more strongly. For freedom to exist in an NS region, foreign regions must respect each other's sovereignty - that is, the right of the natives to decide how to run their own region - including on the question of whether or not they should be a democracy! Sovereignty in NS has nothing to do with the rights of the government as opposed to the rights of the people. In NS, to uphold sovereignty is to uphold the right of the people to establish their own government, whether or not we approve of the one they create. It is a mistake to confuse the will of the people with any governmental system. A hereditary monarchy may have as much popular support as a democracy - and no foreign power has a right to intervene to change that. Democracy provides for a more direct and formalized expression of the will of the people than other governmental systems, true; but democracy imposed by a foreign power is merely an expression of the will of the invader, not of the native population, and so a travesty of freedom. Sovereignty must come first.

Well, at least I'm not in TRR swapping for the delegacy, am I? If only that 'let them handle matters internally' had applied to The South Pacific. But it didn't, so Sedgistan went in to decide things for them. And then all of a sudden sovereignty was important again, while pretending Sedgistan's nation had somehow magically become native.

Ballo, you seem to be mistaking your interlocutor. This is the delegate of The Rejected Realms, speaking in The Rejected Realms' embassy, about a statement wherein The Rejected Realms has in no uncertain terms dissociated itself entirely from the actions which Sedgistan undertook as an individual - and condemned them too. I don't know if Sedge believes half of the things I'm saying, and that, mods bless us all, is the entire point. I believe what I'm saying, and enough of the citizens of the region I serve agreed with me to allow us to post this as the consensus opinion of the region.

Finally, neither I nor TRR have ever claimed Devonitians was a native. I quoted the griefing rules only because your phrase 'non-native Delegate' allowed for continued confusion between the nativity of the nation and the nature of its support. And the nature of its support is absolutely vital to understanding TRR's response to Devonitians' coup. If he had brought in invaders to get those last few endorsements on his way to the delegacy, TRR would have been first in line to offer TSP what help we could.

Daynor wrote:I was out of town when I found out there had been a coup, so I was gone for a significant part of the coup, but as soon as I got home that's what I did. I'd say that was our first response.

The first thing I noticed was nations moving in to endorse SB; unendorsement campaigns are not as visible from the outside, but there was certainly less than a update's delay between when Dev seized the delegacy and when outsiders began moving in. At best, the unendorsement campaigns occurred simultaneously with requests for outside aid, and I still believe that unendorsement campaigns should have been allowed to take effect first.

But the vast, vast majority of the reason we got the delegacy back was TSP nations, which simply outnumber any foreign forces we could bring in.

I'm in agreement with you there. But take that a step further - why were foreign forces needed at all before Dev had called in any of his own? (Further discussion of that question two quotes down...)

Also, I'm a little disappointed this is the state of foreign affairs in this game. I have said for a while I thought it was dying, now, to use a foreign relation at all is going to be spun as ignoring the members of a region? Nail in the coffin. :( This isn't a view you have had very long and I hope it isn't permanent. Being able to help friends and get help from friends in the inter-regional community is the main point of having friends in the inter-regional community. And that is an aspect of the game we should strengthen not weaken.

On the contrary - I agree with you entirely on the importance of foreign affairs and building interregional ties... it's long been my favorite element of NationStates. I simply believe that foreign military aid should be a region's last recourse when they lose the delegacy to all native endorsements... not their first.

Funny you should bring up that link; and I'm surprised Ballo didn't pick up on the code there. ;) It's saying, in much more diplomatic terms, "Hello, TNP, you've been couped - does anyone here still care?"

As Sedge so proudly states, he was close to turning the delegate position over to GreenGrimilins or someone else, that nation in particular having been tarting beyond the endocap for a while, and would have had significantly more influence than Sedge, and thus the ability to boot even more WAs trying to put Bellz back in the delegacy.

I'm curious about this, because I was unaware that whichever nation it was (I don't feel like wading through the other thread to find it) had been tarting above the endocap already. Had anyone contacted them about it?

If he'd been there as long as you're saying, then I could understand the worry - but within the first few hours, was it already so clear that this high Influence nation would be the one who got the delegacy?

Yes, my point is we actually listen to the view of the WAs in the region a little bit, which is more than any other community I've ever been a part of, including every other feeder.

This is a glass half full/half empty argument. Whichever one you want to emphasize, can we agree that it would be better if the glass had more in it than it does?

First, there's a difference between "lack of support" and "opposition" (also between "support" and "lack of opposition"); we've never said - nor meant to imply - that anyone in TSP actually opposed SB's delegacy except for Devonitians (and anyone he managed to win over to his side). :P But here's the point I think we all need to consider: when a government has held power in a feeder for months and/or years, does their continued presence signal the approval of the region's natives, or merely indifference - and how can we know unless we've made a point of asking them?
I think it was pretty clear when nations who had never posted before to my memory were posting on the RMB asking for Dev to be removed. It seems pretty clear to me that Dev had massive opposition from TSP members on-sight, not just off.

Leaving the whole nested quote intact, here, because I think you changed the terms of the debate in your response. Devonitians was clearly and obviously opposed by many of the natives of TSP, and I have never said otherwise - if not at the beginning, certainly by the end after banjecting all opposition and suppressing those he couldn't eject! My question was about SB and the forum government - whether, in all the months and years preceding Dev's coup, the nations of TSP actually supported them, or just didn't care. The reason certain groups of players in NS always gush about coups bringing activity is because they do - temporarily, at least - make it harder for people not to care. They do some of the forum government's work for it, by presenting natives with a choice of delegate that is so obviously worse (no offense, Sedge) that nations who wouldn't otherwise notice whose name was at the top of the page suddenly find they have strong opinions on the matter. Now we can talk about TSP's government having the support of the region - but only because Dev's behavior showed the nations of TSP that the government needed their support in order to depose an oppressive delegate.

And that even disregarding my regional affiliation, I'm always concerned when views start popping up that are going to make relations between regions even less relevant.

I think the fact that we're having this discussion here in an embassy thread would argue that relations between regions are more important than they've been in a long time - and that's something I heartily approve of. And on that note, btw, congrats on your election to the delegacy.

User avatar
Cerberion
Diplomat
 
Posts: 993
Founded: Apr 22, 2010
Corporate Police State

Postby Cerberion » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:55 am

Speaking just for myself, I can not get over the irony that while Sedge was playing his games in TSP, someone got booted from TRR for the exact same reason.

Even more ironic considering that individual was talking to Sedge through his puppet, claiming the exact same justifications that were being used by Sedge.

It's a shame that TRR has to bear the diplomatic headaches caused by one or two of it's more well known members.

User avatar
Sedgistan
Senior Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 31920
Founded: Oct 20, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Sedgistan » Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:02 am

Cerberion wrote:Even more ironic considering that individual was talking to Sedge through his puppet, claiming the exact same justifications that were being used by Sedge.

Except that his justifications were invalid, as TRR is one of the most active game-created-regions around, and does more than most (all?) of the others to get the nations resident in the region involved.

User avatar
Cerberion
Diplomat
 
Posts: 993
Founded: Apr 22, 2010
Corporate Police State

Postby Cerberion » Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:15 am

Sedgistan wrote:
Cerberion wrote:Even more ironic considering that individual was talking to Sedge through his puppet, claiming the exact same justifications that were being used by Sedge.

Except that his justifications were invalid, as TRR is one of the most active game-created-regions around, and does more than most (all?) of the others to get the nations resident in the region involved.


You'll note I didn't comment on the veracity of the claim, just the fact that it was ironic.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Gameplay

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aivintis, Big Boyz, Davidianian, Devious, Eastern Pacific News Service, Jar Wattinree, Libertanny, New Kervoskia, Reventus Koth, Saint Tomas and the Northern Ice Islands, Scottiesland, Sky Point, Zukchiva

Advertisement

Remove ads