Essay: The Polysemes of Nativeness

[Unibot III]

Additionally, there are many many nations in 10ki, but only some of them have the right to vote in their elections for example -- I believe you cannot have ties to any other region or organization if to vote. All are residents, but for the purposes of this academic study, only some of those are "natives" deserving of more rights.

That's not true. To vote in elections and on WA resolutions in 10ki you just have to have a WA nation in the region and be registered on the regional forum.

Right.

Sorry, I remember what it was.

One of my members had to resign from UDL, so he could run for a government position in 10ki. I could be wrong, but I believe the reason is because you need TITO service to qualify for a government position and TITO doesn't allow cross-over? Y/N?

[Ananke II]

You need TITO service to run for delegate of 10ki. You don't need TITO service to run for senator.

[Milograd]

I have a solid record of service to the region.

I will preface my argument with this: state your record.

Sure, mate.

I spearheaded the effort to make our infamously inactive regional IRC channel active again, and after managing it and promoting it for nearly a year I managed to help increase its average member population by nearly 700%. I also completely remade our regional map from scratch, because our old one had been neglected for quite a long time, and worked on updating it up until the end of my third term as MoRA. At the same time, I established an extensive set of protocols regarding how it would and could be edited in the future to ensure that future members of the South Pacific could easily update it. I laid the groundwork for, created, and essentially determined the duties and responsibilities of the Ministry of Regional Affairs. Along with Southernbellz and Hileville, I helped build the new regional forums for the South Pacific after the original board became inaccessible due to technical issues with the server it was hosted on. I have proposed and created the frameworks for several important laws during my time as a citizen: the most recent example of this is my proposal for the new, more inclusive, less wonky election system.

During my time in the cabinet, I assisted in at least a dozen efforts to protect the region during times in which we were facing security threats, compiled data and information about said threats for the MoS' investigations into the affairs, and manually distributed notices about regional events/to members of the region via telegram. When I first joined the region, I served as a deputy justice to D2N and participated in the liberation attempts of the region. I have also served as one of the regional forum's administrators and have performed the duties that administrators are expected to perform. Other than those things, a lot of my record, admittedly, is really just me doing what citizens are expected do: voting on regional legislation, voting on the at-vote World Assembly resolutions, helping write regional updates, providing suggestions to the assembly, commenting on regional proposals, actively participating in community events and cultural activities (albeit with windows of inactivity due to RL concerns) and contributing to the improvement of the region to the best of my ability. I should note that there are several other noteworthy things that I have done but cannot speak about, as much of my work in TSP has been done in BCD.

As for your implication that I'm not a "local" in TSP, much of the community there has been kind to me ever since I joined and they have embraced me as one of their own. When I first joined TSP, I had never been in a gameplay region before; so as far as I'm concerned, it is my home region. The FRA, who initially asked me to participate in their liberation attempt of TSP because Bel knew me from the II board and they needed more updaters, introduced me to TSP. This was probably a mistake on his part, as I was completely incompetent as a gameplayer at the time, but I enjoyed the conversations I had on TSP's RMB after the liberation had succeeded and decided to stick around because I enjoyed the company of TSP's nations. My application for citizenship was accepted well before the UDL was established, so I don't believe that it's fair to argue that I'm there as a UDL puppet. Of course, one could argue that I became acquainted with the UDL after I joined TSP and became an acting puppet of its will over time, but my well-documented disagreements with Unibot during the UDL-TSP split refute that theory.

[Galiantus]

But that is because the founder feels that others are adding some way to his vision of a region, even if all they are contribuiting is enough numbers to advertise their region. And let's be honest: any "Constitution" put in place is simply Roleplay or is part of the founder's ideal region. Most founders are not evil dictators, though, so their ideal region allows pretty much anyone who will not spam the RMB or make other members of the region uncomfortable.

Yes, as I said: founders always retain the power to influence their region -- but they may give up their right.

I agree, in a sense: founders cannot give up their right to exercise 100% control over their region unless they choose to do so at the founding of the region. In other regions, the founder may choose to limit how they use that power if it contributes to how they want their region to function. A founder who wants to have a democratic region, for example, will choose to go along with what the majority of his region wants, even if he is against it, because he would rather see a democracy in action than get his way all the time. Thus, he chooses not to exercise all his power in order to build the region the way he wants. The reasons a founder created a region are more important to a founder than getting what he wants in the short term.

I thought you were arguing for Negative Nativism. Gotta move them goalposts, eh?

I said "I believe you cannot have ties to any other region or organization if to vote" as in, I think that's the case in 10ki, I could be wrong. Their rules aren't publicly stated.

You also said: All are residents, but for the purposes of this academic study, only some of those are "natives" deserving of more rights.

Sounds like you are defining "Native" in a Positive sense.

If this is now how you define "Native", then there are vast numbers of regions without natives. "who is allowed to participate in the functioning of the government" would mean that all those dictatorial regions out there only have one or a few more natives.

In highly dictatorial regions, the distinction of native or non-native is totally pointless in regards to political power distribution. But in most "semi dictatorial" communities, there are those who are trusted insiders and those who are not.

Again, you are changing your argument. By your own definition this is something only a positive nativist would say. "There are those who are trusted insiders and those who are not" says "you have to do something for the region to be a native" which is completely against your original argument that Whamabama's definition of Nativeness, A native is “a nation which takes up residence in a region without the intention of furthering the goals and aims of a foreign force, is enough.

I thought you had something against that

I do have something against that.

Then why are you suddenly arguing that natives must have "certain powers" not afforded to other nations in the region? Are you simply saying that Natives are not the Ambassadors and Recruiters in a region? I would agree with that, except that you characterized it as though it extended further than that:

"Native" is more than just "who is allowed to reside in the region", it's who is allowed to participate in the functioning of the government and get all those rights and privileges that say an ambassadorial account (someone who moves a puppet over to a region to "represent" the other region) is not entitled to, or say, a recruiter who moves to a Recruiter-Friendly region.

This would imply that a raider puppet who had gained trust from the higher echelons of their target region's government would qualify as a native. Unfortunately, this goes against your original definition of Nativeness.

In a foundered region, everyone is a resident and a native automatically, but citizenship is exclusive. In a founderless government, nativeness is exclusively by association with the dead founder. This is to protect the region from sleepers, and does not mean that there are lower levels of regional participation. Besides which, "Native" is an entirely R/D term used to describe who has ownership in the region. It has nothing to do with citizenship.

This is not true. There are many "citizens" on paper that are still not "insiders" or adored with the same rights and privileges as others on the basis of time, political capital and legitimacy etc. I call this distinction, nativeness.

This is a prime example of your flip-flopping argument. Do you need to be told that "on the basis of time, political capital and legitimacy etc. I call this distinction, nativeness" is Positive Nativeness? By defining Nativeness as being based on time and loyalty, you are arguing for Positive Nativeness. Are you for or against Positive Nativeness?

[Unibot III]

Your problem is you keep reading my posts as though I am proscribing everything I am describing -- I am trying to describe to you how Nativeness works in the positive sense and you keep interpreting that as me proscribing it. This is not the case. I think you're incredibly confused.

This would imply that a raider puppet who had gained trust from the higher echelons of their target region's government would qualify as a native. Unfortunately, this goes against your original definition of Nativeness.

In Negative Nativeness, you would be defined as a non-native, Positive Nativeness in the traditional sense does not respond to deception beyond requiring "genuine identification" with the region.

[Galiantus]

Your problem is you keep reading my posts as though I am proscribing everything I am describing -- I am trying to describe to you how Nativeness works in the positive sense and you keep interpreting that as me proscribing it. This is not the case. I think you're incredibly confused.

This would imply that a raider puppet who had gained trust from the higher echelons of their target region's government would qualify as a native. Unfortunately, this goes against your original definition of Nativeness.

In Negative Nativeness, you would be defined as a non-native, Positive Nativeness in the traditional sense does not respond to deception beyond requiring "genuine identification" with the region.

This is the first post that has been clear about your actual thoughts.

--

My entire oppinion of military gameplay stems from the question "who owns the region?". If the region is the property of someone, then it is wrong to destroy or steal that region. In foundered regions the answer to that question is obviously the founder, who may morally do whatever he is able to do to the region.

In founderless regions, I think we can both agree it becomes sketchy which nation owns the region or not. The whole concept of the term "Native" was created in order to give a name to those within a region who own the region as an item of property. Your idea that Nativeness could be based on loyalty or simply the no-harm rule is good at identifying the extremes of identifying natives, but these extremes are both bad: positive nativeness would make it justifiable to invade relatively inactive regions, and negative nativeness can define those with no real steaks in the region as natives. Not only that, but both extremes are open to enough interpretation to make civil war within a region the equivilant of an invasion, which it is not. There is also no clarity in answering the ownership test, because until a nation's true motives are revealed they could have ownership in the region or not.

That is why I make nativeness dependant upon the founder. The founder is the original owner of a region, and always maintains more ownership in the region than any other single member, including any Regional Delegates that serve under him. Is it not so? If a founder allows his region a democratic form of government, does that change his ownership? Is there any way a founder can give away ownership of a region without giving away the password to his nation? This is all natural and right. Founders are the end-all be-all, in all cases of regional ownership, and any other philosophy runs contrary to the entire game.

How you derive nativeness from the Founder is an entirely different discussion. Here are a veriety of ways, most of which I do not prescribe to, to build Nativeness from the Founder:

• In the region before founder CTEd.
• In the region when the founder last logged on.
• A Citizen before the founder CTEd.
• A Citizen when the founder last logged on.
• Was in the region before the Founder's last RMB post.
• Was in the region before the Founder's last WFE was updated.

Whatever the case, you must base Nativeness off of the founder in some way.

[Belschaft]

I feel inclined to point out that those TSPers who Anur claims were useless UDL-stooges - myself, Topid and Carta - are the exact same TSPers who utterly crushed his repeated attempts to coup the region. If we were useless, as he claims, then what does that make him, the fool who we defeated with consummate ease?

That is all.

[Unibot III]

Your problem is you keep reading my posts as though I am proscribing everything I am describing -- I am trying to describe to you how Nativeness works in the positive sense and you keep interpreting that as me proscribing it. This is not the case. I think you're incredibly confused.



In Negative Nativeness, you would be defined as a non-native, Positive Nativeness in the traditional sense does not respond to deception beyond requiring "genuine identification" with the region.

This is the first post that has been clear about your actual thoughts.

--

My entire oppinion of military gameplay stems from the question "who owns the region?". If the region is the property of someone, then it is wrong to destroy or steal that region. In foundered regions the answer to that question is obviously the founder, who may morally do whatever he is able to do to the region.

In founderless regions, I think we can both agree it becomes sketchy which nation owns the region or not. The whole concept of the term "Native" was created in order to give a name to those within a region who own the region as an item of property. Your idea that Nativeness could be based on loyalty or simply the no-harm rule is good at identifying the extremes of identifying natives, but these extremes are both bad: positive nativeness would make it justifiable to invade relatively inactive regions, and negative nativeness can define those with no real steaks in the region as natives. Not only that, but both extremes are open to enough interpretation to make civil war within a region the equivilant of an invasion, which it is not. There is also no clarity in answering the ownership test, because until a nation's true motives are revealed they could have ownership in the region or not.

That is why I make nativeness dependant upon the founder. The founder is the original owner of a region, and always maintains more ownership in the region than any other single member, including any Regional Delegates that serve under him. Is it not so? If a founder allows his region a democratic form of government, does that change his ownership? Is there any way a founder can give away ownership of a region without giving away the password to his nation? This is all natural and right. Founders are the end-all be-all, in all cases of regional ownership, and any other philosophy runs contrary to the entire game.

How you derive nativeness from the Founder is an entirely different discussion. Here are a veriety of ways, most of which I do not prescribe to, to build Nativeness from the Founder:

• In the region before founder CTEd.
• In the region when the founder last logged on.
• A Citizen before the founder CTEd.
• A Citizen when the founder last logged on.
• Was in the region before the Founder's last RMB post.
• Was in the region before the Founder's last WFE was updated.

Whatever the case, you must base Nativeness off of the founder in some way.

This isn't relevant to the essay, however what happens when nobody was around when the founder existed? What about regions that are naturally founderless?

[New Rogernomics]

...if there is no way to distinguish these peoples from those who do not deserve to govern autonomously over said region then a Right of Self-Determination is ineffectual since no one claim is more valuable than any other claim over the region...

The first paragraph and I am already in disagreement, the right to self determination is not proven ineffectual simply because several groups are entitled to the same rights to a region; rather that facilitates a need for a mutually beneficial power sharing arrangement or democratic election i.e. like the one that established Osiris. I won't get into the rest because I have already fallen asleep; but it wasn't as bad as a few other tomes I have read.

[Unibot III]

...if there is no way to distinguish these peoples from those who do not deserve to govern autonomously over said region then a Right of Self-Determination is ineffectual since no one claim is more valuable than any other claim over the region...

The first paragraph and I am already in disagreement, the right to self determination is not proven ineffectual simply because several groups are entitled to the same rights to a region; rather that facilitates a need for a mutually beneficial power sharing arrangement or democratic election i.e. like the one that established Osiris. I won't get into the rest because I have already fallen asleep; but it wasn't as bad as a few other tomes I have read.

The right to self-determination was proven ineffectual, that'd why they needed an election.

You would normally just go into a typical region and hold an election to see who owns it!

[New Rogernomics]

The first paragraph and I am already in disagreement, the right to self determination is not proven ineffectual simply because several groups are entitled to the same rights to a region; rather that facilitates a need for a mutually beneficial power sharing arrangement or democratic election i.e. like the one that established Osiris. I won't get into the rest because I have already fallen asleep; but it wasn't as bad as a few other tomes I have read.

The right to self-determination was proven ineffectual, that'd why they needed an election.

You would normally just go into a typical region and hold an election to see who owns it!

Figures.

[AS22]

I feel inclined to point out that those TSPers who Anur claims were useless UDL-stooges - myself, Topid and Carta - are the exact same TSPers who utterly crushed his repeated attempts to coup the region. If we were useless, as he claims, then what does that make him, the fool who we defeated with consummate ease?

That is all.

First of all the two are not mutually exclusive. One can be a stooge and a UDL tool and still prevent an outside coup, in fact you wouldn't be a very useful stooge if you could not hang onto your position.

The notion that you "defeated" me is rather questionable, unless the bar you set is simply that I never attained the delegacy. Well I'm glad you feel that constitutes some kind of victory, I guess that explains why you are still under the delusion that your delegacy was anything short of disaster.

Despite your numerous advantages enabled through no skill of your own - the game's permissibility of of automated scripts to monitor endorsements, which you did not design. The influence system which awarded you and your fellow UDL stooges significant leverage over any resistance even though we entered the South Pacific politically at the same time.

In spite of these and other benefits, I still entered into your government. Despite your opposition towards me you foolishly failed to cover your tracks and provided me internal access to not only your own decision making but your own biases. I was able to read with my own eyes the full extent of your "intelligence" capabilities, and while you are confident in retrospect, I was able to observe the complete amateurism in which you debated the identity of Frak when players of greater intelligence had already had me pinned.

In that regard, the ability of you to prevent a delegate takeover is rather mute. You disarmed a (on my part) amateur attempt at overthrow and would do my own work for me.

Weeks after my "defeat" Topid would confess to one of my alternate identities that he was nor had he ever been interested in the delegacy and was pushing through legislation simply to get a way out.

I didn't need to overthrow Topid, because he was not a feederite delegate. He was a Userite, got bored, and failed.

You were the same invention. You came into the position, and either became bored or through incompetence - left. You lobbied behind closed doors for FRA membership, and when that was rejected you did nothing. You have accomplished -zip- in every position you have ever held in the South Pacific - ever. Despite attempts to hijack the efforts of others.

The SPA under you conducted one operation involving about three people. Through my efforts and the efforts of Sheepa and Antariel, numerous warzones were captured in a single update and were contested, over thirty TSP nations were mobilized, and a record was set.

Attempts to have UDL advertising on our boards was leaked out of the UDL forums and brought to light. Region whoring was identified as a problem so that when Unibot was caught, he was forced to resign. Efforts were made to reform the voting system to prevent region-whoring, passed by the Assembly, before being repealed by Unibot - unilaterally, weeks later so that he could region whore in elections, get caught, resign, and flee the region.

Milograd, -and I will address you now - another stooge, was quite similar to you.

Regional Affairs minister, an empty record. More effort in this area was made by Hileville and others. Taking unilateral claim for IRC growth is an absolutely ludicrous assertion. Your map has been and remains irrelevant - this is not my personal judgement, it has simply just never been used or promoted in any meaningful way. I have seen the BCD threads and it is clear that your record in terms of "MoS" duties was minor relative to other players, with your greatest successes coming against the weakest threats. In terms of Vice Delegacy, Milograd is as committed to the South Pacific as Topid and Belschaft, in - out and in and out again. You are second in command of the UDL and condemning region whoring after the fact does not sever that connection. It only became a problem for you after it was proven beyond a doubt, even as you would refute allegations and resist reform designed to stop it in the first place.

From Topid to Belschaft to Unibot's stint to Milograd's on and off responsibilities we have seen what Userites have had to offer.

The current delegate and architect of the South Pacific's recovery was relentlessly impeded by all four of you along the way. Whether it is Milo running unendorsement campaigns on Hileville which basically offered the same promises without the record, or Unibot lobbying old members against Hileville and claiming constantly that the delegacy was in the pocket of myself or Antariel, to Topid running against Hileville for Chair before suddenly pulling out, or to Belschaft trying to berate a delegate and his new army into submission because he does not see enough of a defender lean.

All four of you are abject Userites that continue to strangle the region despite a minimal and counterproductive input, and who through incompetence in the field of both GP and intelligence were forced to rely on a purported Francoist to capture the boogeyman you had been peddling around for months.

In succeeding to destroy sovereignty and allow a new direction, you have gutted SPA initiatives and are turning the South Pacific back into an insular social club devoid of anyone who will challenge your view on GP. A feeder should be more than an IRC and a spamhouse, and a current decline in TSP activity is evident.

You have pushed to further alienate the TSP custom of residents as part of the electorate and are offering you scripting services to purportedly make up for this. Coincidentally as delegate procedures are being discussed, the absent Milograd returns to tart once more. Your script is predicated on national votes - without a WA requirement, highly convenient for defender and Userite armies who posses the scripts to operate - and have been for some time - armies of zombie nations, enabling massive fraud. The only safeguard is a purported IP scan (oh how will anyone ever get around that?) to be enforced by the same people that conducted region whoring and other types of election fraudulence but who now promise they have changed their ways.

This again, is why this study is crap. Because Unibot is defining "cosmopolitans" as freedom loving, meritocracy embracing good guys and the other side as insular, corrupt, and valuing only blind loyalty.

Except the only time they like freedom is when you have two choices, Userite 1 or Userite 2. It's why Milograd must run in every election to squeeze out any truly different viewpoints. It's why we must hit people up on IRC and ask for their votes when they have no real stake in the region. It's why we will harass the army and bog it down with regulation because it is not defender enough. It is why we will vote for our Userite friends despite a history of reckless abandonment for their positions. It's why we will do a number of things behind closed doors, such as using our perch in the feeders to pursue police powers across GCRs.

The funny thing is that cosmopolitans end up destroying themselves. As Belschaft foolishly claims he has "beaten me" while failing to recognize he defeated himself with his pathetic record in the delegacy. Join the UDL for a week and participate in a failed liberation and hear the constant demeaning of other defender organizations. Maybe you can catch Unibot cursing at a new recruit who has anything else to do besides detag regions. Look at my sig, taken from an IRC log in which multiple UDLers disparaged Belschaft - their supposed friend - as being an advert whore for the FRA.

Then take a look at Unibot's sig and the sig of his army of stooges.

These are our modern Userites. Lies, lies, lies, packaged in fear and promises of freedom. The feeders must be weak and not sovereign because other wise how could we control them? And could we ensure that GP sticks to a strict defenderism-raiderism paradigm? How would we ensure that -our- interests are not threatened. There are no cosmopolitans.

There are and have always been, Userites and Feederites. Some people want to exploit regions, others want to make them better for the region and all of its residents. This study, the Userites who subscribe to it, and the Userite record -especially in TSP- is an absolute joke.

[Galiantus]

This isn't relevant to the essay, however what happens when nobody was around when the founder existed?

If the founder comes back then everyone has a chance to become natives to the region, but otherwise the region is public land, and I have no problem with raiders and others refounding the region for their own use.

What about regions that are naturally founderless?

The effective founder of those regions is [Violet], since they came into existence as a direct result of Max Barry, and he is the only one who has always had absolute power over those regions. Each of the GCR's serve a different purpose, though. Feeders are places where new players can learn about Nationstates, get recruited to legitimate regions, and get help. Other GCRs have other Founder-intended purposes. But there is one undisputible fact: Max Barry made the GCRs for all nations. Thus the Feeders are public land and should not be invaded for uses other than public uses.

[Belschaft]

With every Anur-Sanur rant that goes by, as he catapults himself to new podiums and ascribes one after another success TSP achieved collectively as Herculean triumphs of his own design - whilst rewriting history to serve his own narrative of Anur as the oppressed prophet and saviour, and everyone else as Quislings serving the dictatorial will of Unibot - I ask myself the question;

"Is he just talking bollocks like usual, or is he truly delusional and come to believe his own spiel?"

I am inclined towards the second. The time has come for Anur to seek help in the mental health system.

[Belschaft]

I feel inclined to add, so as to provide context, that as Anur rants and raves here, he is at the same time in the middle of yet another pathetic little attempted putsch of TSP. We know it's you Anur as you keep referring to Milograd - the current target of one of your ill conceived and incompetent un-endorsement campaigns - as the second in command of the UDL (something you have done in this thread as well), a post he has not held for the best part of a year.

I would say get your facts right, but then for you, now and forever, facts are meaningless, mere putty to be altered, fabricated and shaped to fit your narrative, always with you as the central, messianic figure.

Do give it up. No one is amused, or entertained, in the slightest. Nor do you have any chance of success. And when you do go back to the hole you have been lurking in, stop flying NPO's flag. I doubt they appreciate you trying to claim association with them. But then, pretending to represent people you do not has always been part of your modus operandi.

[Crazy girl]

I am inclined towards the second. The time has come for Anur to seek help in the mental health system.

Knock it off.

[AS22]

The time has come for Anur to seek help in the mental health system.

Quite ironic given the fact that when you faced a scathing attack on your record, you claimed some kind of mental impairment.

Yes it is me, but as you do not know my goals it is rather foolish of you to predict success or failure. Overthrow of Hileville is both undesirable and not in the cards.

Perhaps I simply seek to punish and "not amuse" you and the other Userites who have returned to leach on the government.

Or perhaps I seek to create a residential awakening and education, something you have failed to do so in all aspects while in TSP, which is no surprise given your only initiative was FRA membership. Even your fellow defenders found your constant FRA peddling rather useless, so it is no surprise that freshly after being region-whored into power your signature initiative fell off the rails.

The only person you represent are Userites, but as they don't even really like you, you only really represent yourself.

[Cromarty]

You are second in command of the UDL

Wrong. Milograd is not second in command of the UDL.

Whether it is Milo running unendorsement campaigns on Hileville

Evidence for that one please.

Coincidentally as delegate procedures are being discussed, the absent Milograd returns to tart once more.

Milograd was absent for school reasons. As he's found a way to be online consistently again, he's now back

Join the UDL for a week and participate in a failed liberation and hear the constant demeaning of other defender organizations. Maybe you can catch Unibot cursing at a new recruit who has anything else to do besides detag regions.

Oh please do tell me what you know of the UDL channel and forums. Second or third hand bullshit? Or complete fabrications? Who knows with you.

There are and have always been, Userites and Feederites.

Francoism was flawed in 2004, flawed in 2008 and is equally flawed now.

Some people want to exploit regions, others want to make them better for the region and all of its residents.

You clearly fit into the former category. You're more concerned with your own personal judges than you will ever be for the regions you claim you're protecting.

[Milograd]

I will address you now.

Thank you.

Regional Affairs minister, an empty record.

I explained a part of my record as MoRA to you in my previous post. MoRA duties concern map management, IRC management, and IRC/RMB/Forum activity promotion. I succeeded in all of those aspects as a MoRA.

More effort in this area was made by Hileville and others.

Hileville has never been MoRA, so I don't know what you're talking about. I don't think you know, either.

Taking unilateral claim for IRC growth is an absolutely ludicrous assertion.

No, it is not. It regularly had 2 to 3 people in it, including myself, when I first started visiting it. As MoRA, I promoted it heavily and encouraged regular activity in it whenever I had the chance. Promoting IRC and RMB activity is one of the primary duties of an MoRA, and by the end of my time as MoRA the average number of people in the channel had jumped from 2 to 20. No one did this when I first arrived, and most - if not all - of TSP's citizens who were around at the time agree that I'm responsible for making it active again. It was dead. I became MoRA, promoted it, and now it isn't.

Your map has been and remains irrelevant - this is not my personal judgement, it has simply just never been used or promoted in any meaningful way.

In the past, TSP's map was used a lot. Unfortunately, recreating one took a while - I finished it near the end of my term - and we're still working on making the RP forums more active. We are making progress, though, so hopefully it will be relevant again one day. A community cannot make large, valuable changes without starting building up from the foundation.

I have seen the BCD threads and it is clear that your record in terms of "MoS" duties was minor relative to other players.

I'm fine with replying to your arguments and am actually enjoying writing this post, but for the sake of debate, can you please support your claims with evidence and facts? If not, we're pretty much shouting "no u" at each other here, and that's hardly productive.

...with your greatest successes coming against the weakest threats.

You shouldn't be so self-deprecating. It's unhealthy.

In terms of Vice Delegacy, Milograd is as committed to the South Pacific as Topid and Belschaft, in - out and in and out again.

Like a fast food restaurant, mate. I have openly acknowledged my shortcomings as a VD in the past, and I agree that I was unreliable and essentially a failure as a VD. I was on-and-off from in NS as a whole during my time as a VD due to health issues, so I am not going to pretend that I could have done a better job given the circumstances. Real life is more important than NS, and I don't regret being more committed to my health than the vice delegacy. I don't think that anyone reasonable would have acted differently than I did.

Trying to portray me as not being committed to TSP is futile insofar as I was regularly active and attentive in TSP whenever I was regularly active and attentive on NS. I wasn't neglecting my duties in TSP in favor of other activities on NS: I was neglecting NS in favor of activities in handling urgent real life issues. Life can be unpredictable and can require a lot of our time and attention, and, whether you like it or not, this is a universal truth. No one is exempt from this reality, so the argument that I am not committed to my region because I had to face something that everyone faces at some point or another is astonishingly weak. My failure as a VD has nothing to do with me being uncommitted to TSP, but rather, I failed as a VD because it was an inconvenient time for me to be a VD.

No player is immune from having to step away from the game for a while because of real life.

No defender is.

No raider is.

No feederite is.

No userite is.

And, no, not even the legendary father of the ideology that you have completely misunderstood is. He didn't vanish into thin air.

You are second in command of the UDL and condemning region whoring after the fact does not sever that connection.

I'm not Solm, who is second in command of the UDL. You're mixing up people left and right!

Which is actually a bit disappointing, because I can remember all of your names.

It only became a problem for you after it was proven beyond a doubt, even as you would refute allegations and resist reform designed to stop it in the first place.

Can you please clarify what you are trying to say here? The sentence currently doesn't make any sense because you haven't clarified what the subject of your statement ("it") is, and thus I do not know what you are accusing me of having refuted and resisted. If "region whoring" is the subject, then I must note that TSP regularly prunes inactive citizens who contribute nothing to the region from its membership. The only examples of proposed legislation that TSP discussed that would have addressed "region whoring" had inherent faults that inspired me to vote against it: establishing a crowded, inefficient, activity-killing "waiting list" for citizenship is not desirable if it is preventing people who would genuinely contribute to the region from joining us. Our current situation, admittedly, is not ideal, but it isn't as black as white as you perceive it to be: TSP, and I, would prefer to prune inactive "region whores" on a regular basis as a solution to the issue in question rather than completely stopping incoming growth. The latter proposal would prevent "region whores" from joining but would do so at the cost of preventing active natives with good intentions from joining the region too.

The only other proposal about "region whoring" that comes to my mind is the proposal that was submitted a few months ago that would have barred any players who have citizenship in one or more other regions from participating in TSP. This, while it would have addressed concerns about players who fall under the aforementioned category, would have also prevented plenty of skilled, loyal players from participating in our community. Hileville, our delegate, is a citizen of multiple regions and is active in all of them, and his accomplishments as our delegate are unquestionably commendable. The proposals that you say I fought against would have fixed the issue that bothers you, yes, but it would have had far too many drawbacks to have been practical. The difference between our beliefs, Anur, is that I am against banishing people such as one of my region's most successful delegates in years while you would be in favor of it because he is in multiple regions. I agree with the sentiment that players should not be in too many regions for them to handle, nor should they be in so many regions that they have problematic conflicts of interest, but I try to handle people who do this in my region without leaning towards the counterproductive extremes that you heartily promote.

From Topid to Belschaft to Unibot's stint to Milograd's on and off responsibilities we have seen what Userites have had to offer.

I am not a userite, I am a feederite according to the definition of the term provided by PFT.

The two classes recognised by Francoist Thought are the Feederites, who are the nations of their respective Pacific and seek to harness and work with the means of production (namely the Pacific region itself), and the Userites, who seek to exploit its fruits; by exploiting both the nations of the Pacific and the political structure set up within it to further their own political, military and social power.

I have never exploited the nations of TSP or its political system to become more politically, militarily, or socially influential. I joined TSP because I enjoyed the lighthearted banter that regularly covered its RMB following the coup, and because I thought it was a fun region to be in. I have worked to protect, serve, and improve the region so that I can continue to enjoy the kind of conversation and activities that inspired me to join the region in the first place. I have never participated in a UCR that recruits from the feeders and sinkers, nor have I ever participated in a UCR that participates in gameplay. Before joining TSP, my only other regions had been, and are to this day, roleplay regions that do not participate in gameplay and do not recruit from anywhere. I do not fit the description of a userite.

The current delegate and architect of the South Pacific's recovery was relentlessly impeded by all four of you along the way. Whether it is Milo running unendorsement campaigns on Hileville which basically offered the same promises without the record, or Unibot lobbying old members against Hileville and claiming constantly that the delegacy was in the pocket of myself or Antariel, to Topid running against Hileville for Chair before suddenly pulling out, or to Belschaft trying to berate a delegate and his new army into submission because he does not see enough of a defender lean.

So, according to this suggestion, I have been a hindrance to Hileville during his delegacy and have impeded his attempts to restore the region to activity? That's odd.

I have, in the ways explained earlier in this thread, contributed to his efforts to help the region recover. Hileville, as delegate, evidently disagrees with your assessment of how I have affected his work in TSP: mere days ago, he appointed me as the region's vice delegate because I now have the chance to do the job properly. If I was a userite obstruction that was a problem in the region, he probably wouldn't have done that. It seems to me that a lot of your statements in this thread contradict one another: you praise Hileville for his work as delegate, but attack me for voting against legislation that would have forced someone like him out of the region. You say I have been a hindrance to Hileville in the region, yet he trusts me enough to appoint me as a vice delegate.

As for the un-endorsements campaign, they were a staple in TSP elections at the time I used one and I, unlike you, never tried to hide my intent in my un-endorsement campaign. Every single one of my telegrams clearly stated that endorsing me and unendorsing Hileville was a vote in favor of me, and against him, for the delegacy. "Un-endorsement campaign" is a term that has negative connotations that I know you are well aware of, but the context of the situation matters. Hileville won the election and his endorsement count returned to its regular total shortly after I lost. That is how elections work, and elections are a vital part of the democratic institution that we in TSP have dedicated ourselves to protecting.

I think Hileville's opinion of my contributions to TSP carry more weight, and hold more truth, than that of a banished security threat: with that said, his opinion of my work in TSP is crystal clear.

A feeder should be more than an IRC and a spamhouse, and a current decline in TSP activity is evident.

School is back in session and I know that several of our citizens are preparing for exams, so a drop in activity is to be expected at this time of the year. Feeder activity fluctuates from time to time, as it has several times during Hileville's term, and our activity is already starting to rebound. We are currently holding judiciary discussions and review sessions, voting on several new laws, enjoying our regular forum activities, working on forum recruitment, and we just finished a cultural event with Europeia. We're more than just an IRC and a spamhouse. I'm also quite sure that the SPA has something in the works, but I'm not at liberty to discuss any specifics.

Ultimately, the quantity of the attacks you have against me is impressive, Anur, but the quality of all of them leaves much to be desired.

[Cinistra]

As a defender, I know from experience there is a great intellectual urgency to be able to distinguish between natives and non-natives. Without this distinction being clear and resolute, the distribution of the Right of Self-Determination in any given founderless region becomes a very difficult and arduous process, since to assert a Right of Self-Determination assumes there is a community of peoples that ought to be able to govern autonomously over a region – if there is no way to distinguish these peoples from those who do not deserve to govern autonomously over said region then a Right of Self-Determination is ineffectual since no one claim is more valuable than any other claim over the region. When there is pure equality of legitimacy among property claims, this identifies a founderless region as public property, which, for all intended purposes, would be decivilianized chaos between competing regimes for governance.

The entity of NS is nation, not player, people or individual. NS is an open game, and any nation can settle anywhere. To distinguish between nations is to give certain nations privileges. Thus, once a region has been created, and immigration is not hindered by a pw, any nation can settle. What influence a nation finally gets, is due to the amount of work it does towards the community. A new comer may be very active, and thus rise in influence (governmental posts etc.), while a long time resident may be dormant for most of the time, never contributing anything, being content answering the daily issues. In what grounds is the distinction between a "native" and a "non native"? Activity? Longevity?
An active nation, won't it rise in "importance" compared to an inactive one? Do we need to invent a term here?

Self-Determination isn't a right. It's something a region manage to maintain by being active. Active regions will attract more followers than inactive ones, making it's community more resilient to tampering from external forces. Inactive regions will lose nations, slowly going into extinction, either by passing silently into oblivion, or by some outside force finishing it off. In either case, it's death is no loss to NS. Just as nations become redundant and CTEs, so does regions.

[AS22]

Regional Affairs minister, an empty record.

I explained a part of my record as MoRA to you in my previous post. MoRA duties concern map management, IRC management, and IRC/RMB/Forum activity promotion. I succeeded in all of those aspects as a MoRA.

Um...no. I already addressed the map part. You don't manage IRC so I don't know what you are talking about. The channel has numerous OPs and I would say activity was motivated by the considerable amount of debate and drama rather by any singular effort, least of all your own. You are laying things out without any specificity. The region exploded with activity post-Devonitians, and this was sustained with the aforementioned drama and endless debate. The fact that you happened to be MoRA at this time does not make it your doing. That is a logical fallacy. Did you recruit? No. Did you finally establish a credible welcome committee? No. The IRC existed long before and again, only ceased to be dormant because of what was going on in the region not because you would occasionally mention it in posts. It's like a turtle on the beach taking credit for D-Day because he happened to be there.
So enough of this.

More effort in this area was made by Hileville and others.

Hileville has never been MoRA, so I don't know what you're talking about. I don't think you know, either.

Once again you present a logical fallacy. I was MoRA so obviously all activity that occurred during that time was my doing - wrong. As I recall it many of the IRC games, quizzes, putting random nations on the WFE was either Hileville's idea or came to be because of his initiative. Even if it was somehow your idea it doesn't make up for your faulty logic or his superior efforts in other areas. He allowed for Warzone operations and cleared my efforts to reach out to the region, and in doing so over 30 TSP WAs were mobilized. I believe that number alone crushes any of your results as MoRA, a post you held with the same sort of "I'm here and I'm not" as you have the VDship.

Taking unilateral claim for IRC growth is an absolutely ludicrous assertion.

No, it is not. It regularly had 2 to 3 people in it, including myself, when I first started visiting it. As MoRA, I promoted it heavily and encouraged regular activity in it whenever I had the chance. Promoting IRC and RMB activity is one of the primary duties of an MoRA, and by the end of my time as MoRA the average number of people in the channel had jumped from 2 to 20. No one did this when I first arrived, and most - if not all - of TSP's citizens who were around at the time agree that I'm responsible for making it active again. It was dead. I became MoRA, promoted it, and now it isn't.

I've already addressed your weak logic. Your promotion was weak. The region was active because of drama and debate not because of any of your brief adverts. It became active because a coup shook it up and this momentum continued to carry through.

Really your logic is incredible. "I was the MoRA so clearly this is all my doing." Utterly ridiculous. So having one coup, multiple attempts, constant questions of who is one what side, raging debates about the direction of the region, etc etc had NOTHING to do with the sudden surge of interest and activity. Oh no, it was all because you "promoted" the IRC as per your duties. Give me a break. As I say your promotion was weak, and efforts like the map fell flat because people were concerned about the debates and things I actually mentioned. I don't know who you have been talking to but it was my impression that everyone perceived MoRA as the more irrelevant cabinet position when compared to things like MoFA, MoJ, MoS, and Chair. That would be every other position, wouldn't it?

Your map has been and remains irrelevant - this is not my personal judgement, it has simply just never been used or promoted in any meaningful way.

In the past, TSP's map was used a lot. Unfortunately, recreating one took a while - I finished it near the end of my term - and we're still working on making the RP forums more active. We are making progress, though, so hopefully it will be relevant again one day. A community cannot make large, valuable changes without starting building up from the foundation.

Thank you for conceding that at present it is irrelevant. I don't know why you are debating this point when you are agreeing with me.

I have seen the BCD threads and it is clear that your record in terms of "MoS" duties was minor relative to other players.

I'm fine with replying to your arguments and am actually enjoying writing this post, but for the sake of debate, can you please support your claims with evidence and facts? If not, we're pretty much shouting "no u" at each other here, and that's hardly productive.

I am not digging through my archives to find and display those posts. They have political value and will not be dispensed to simply satisfy you in a debate in which I believe you have put up a rather poor showing. Once again, I can easily preface any argument by pressing you to stop hiding behind opaque statements. If you believe you have any kind of intelligence record than share it.

...with your greatest successes coming against the weakest threats.

You shouldn't be so self-deprecating. It's unhealthy.

Your memory is clearly impaired, I walked in BCD under your very nose. The only time your instincts proved correct was dealing with Black Pineapple, which was the weakest threat of your term.

In terms of Vice Delegacy, Milograd is as committed to the South Pacific as Topid and Belschaft, in - out and in and out again.

Like a fast food restaurant, mate. I have openly acknowledged my shortcomings as a VD in the past, and I agree that I was unreliable and essentially a failure as a VD. I was on-and-off from in NS as a whole during my time as a VD due to health issues, so I am not going to pretend that I could have done a better job given the circumstances. Real life is more important than NS, and I don't regret being more committed to my health than the vice delegacy. I don't think that anyone reasonable would have acted differently than I did.

Trying to portray me as not being committed to TSP is futile insofar as I was regularly active and attentive in TSP whenever I was regularly active and attentive on NS. I wasn't neglecting my duties in TSP in favor of other activities on NS: I was neglecting NS in favor of activities in handling urgent real life issues. Life can be unpredictable and can require a lot of our time and attention, and, whether you like it or not, this is a universal truth. No one is exempt from this reality, so the argument that I am not committed to my region because I had to face something that everyone faces at some point or another is astonishingly weak. My failure as a VD has nothing to do with me being uncommitted to TSP, but rather, I failed as a VD because it was an inconvenient time for me to be a VD.

No player is immune from having to step away from the game for a while because of real life.

No defender is.

No raider is.

No feederite is.

No userite is.

And, no, not even the legendary father of the ideology that you have completely misunderstood is. He didn't vanish into thin air.

Again thank you for agreeing with me. You are not debating here, at worse you are making excusing. If you don't think you have been a great VD or don't have the commitment than maybe you should learn to refuse a post once in a while. It is quite amazing to me that someone who can't hold down being a VD and is constantly gone would also run an unendorsement campaign against Hileville to become delegate. Your entire electoral history in terms of TSP delegacy has been to weakly contest the position through the support of region-whores, thereby limiting and narrowing the debate.

I have misunderstood nothing. A UDLer is in no place to speak to me of Francoism and you are a fool to attempt to educate me on it. I know well Francos Spain did not just "vanish" and that he has been contacted /sighted post-NS. As I will say to AMOM I have know true Francoists, Francoists who existed before you had yet to exist. The only Francoism you have known is a sick, weak, and silent Francoism of the Krulltopian fortress. It is surrender posing as victory, and you have been an enabler of Userites your entire time in NS, whether you know it or not, whether you attempt to distance yourself from it or not. Getting accepted in the Pacific doesn't make you a Francoist, and I suggest you cease pretending that it does.

You are second in command of the UDL and condemning region whoring after the fact does not sever that connection.

I'm not Solm, who is second in command of the UDL. You're mixing up people left and right!

Which is actually a bit disappointing, because I can remember all of your names.

You don't know all of my names number 1. Number 2 is you were second in command and I feel comfortable and accurate in saying you maintain that title despite what may have happened officially. You remain in contact and a friend to the UDL, and you continue to act in TSP in the same Userite-enabling manner as when you were a number 2. You having left has made no difference in your approach, so for all intents and purposes you remain a UDL stooge in the South Pacific. Just as joining TP's forum does not automatically make you a Francoist, "leaving" the UDL does not make you not a stooge.

It only became a problem for you after it was proven beyond a doubt, even as you would refute allegations and resist reform designed to stop it in the first place.

Can you please clarify what you are trying to say here? The sentence currently doesn't make any sense because you haven't clarified what the subject of your statement ("it") is, and thus I do not know what you are accusing me of having refuted and resisted. If "region whoring" is the subject, then I must note that TSP regularly prunes inactive citizens who contribute nothing to the region from its membership. The only examples of proposed legislation that TSP discussed that would have addressed "region whoring" had inherent faults that inspired me to vote against it: establishing a crowded, inefficient, activity-killing "waiting list" for citizenship is not desirable if it is preventing people who would genuinely contribute to the region from joining us. Our current situation, admittedly, is not ideal, but it isn't as black as white as you perceive it to be: TSP, and I, would prefer to prune inactive "region whores" on a regular basis as a solution to the issue in question rather than completely stopping incoming growth. The latter proposal would prevent "region whores" from joining but would do so at the cost of preventing active natives with good intentions from joining the region too.

The only other proposal about "region whoring" that comes to my mind is the proposal that was submitted a few months ago that would have barred any players who have citizenship in one or more other regions from participating in TSP. This, while it would have addressed concerns about players who fall under the aforementioned category, would have also prevented plenty of skilled, loyal players from participating in our community. Hileville, our delegate, is a citizen of multiple regions and is active in all of them, and his accomplishments as our delegate are unquestionably commendable. The proposals that you say I fought against would have fixed the issue that bothers you, yes, but it would have had far too many drawbacks to have been practical. The difference between our beliefs, Anur, is that I am against banishing people such as one of my region's most successful delegates in years while you would be in favor of it because he is in multiple regions. I agree with the sentiment that players should not be in too many regions for them to handle, nor should they be in so many regions that they have problematic conflicts of interest, but I try to handle people who do this in my region without leaning towards the counterproductive extremes that you heartily promote.

Excellent use of the straw man tactic. I see you have read the Unibot Book of Rhetoric today. Yes of course, I want to ban Hileville from the region. Precisely.

This is what I mean. You were in the UDL when region whoring was happening. Either you were ignorant of the actions of your comrades - among whom you held high office - and are therefore incompetent. Or, and most likely given you continued electoral victories absent of any record (as I have debunked your logic-deprived assertions on your record above) you too were a party of the region whore brigade. You undoubtedly got votes from people like Mahaj, Earth22, UDL stooge #5...etc to put you into position. You stood by as Unibot unilaterally overturned election reform to establish voting registration so we could see who is voting. There was no serious push of any kind of the reform you described, save for the waiting list idea in which I agree with you but for different reasons.

From Topid to Belschaft to Unibot's stint to Milograd's on and off responsibilities we have seen what Userites have had to offer.

I am not a userite, I am a feederite according to the definition of the term provided by PFT.

You are a Userite. Your record is one among Userites. You enable Userites. You act like a Userite. I don't care what you say or what forum you belong to, I know you and I know your record. Userite. I believe I have in this and my numerous other posts here explained all of these points - enabling, being among, and acting like one. So before you come back and complain I'm not giving specifics read the thread again. I've got your number Milograd, and its got Userite written all over it.

The two classes recognised by Francoist Thought are the Feederites, who are the nations of their respective Pacific and seek to harness and work with the means of production (namely the Pacific region itself), and the Userites, who seek to exploit its fruits; by exploiting both the nations of the Pacific and the political structure set up within it to further their own political, military and social power.

I have never exploited the nations of TSP or its political system to become more politically, militarily, or socially influential. I joined TSP because I enjoyed the lighthearted banter that regularly covered its RMB following the coup, and because I thought it was a fun region to be in. I have worked to protect, serve, and improve the region so that I can continue to enjoy the kind of conversation and activities that inspired me to join the region in the first place. I have never participated in a UCR that recruits from the feeders and sinkers, nor have I ever participated in a UCR that participates in gameplay. Before joining TSP, my only other regions had been, and are to this day, roleplay regions that do not participate in gameplay and do not recruit from anywhere. I do not fit the description of a userite.

Yes you have and now you are beginning to annoy me. If you are not going to read my text I'm not going to read yours. I've explained in great length the actions of the UDL -which you were party to- and you specifically. Besides you are arguing again on such a low logical bar that it is tedious to talk with you. I never said you recruited from UCRs. You are refuting things that no one has said because you are trying to distract from what it is that I am really calling you out on. Stop putting up strawmen, if you want to debate one why don't you go roleplay one? This is the problem with Userites and defenderism, they speak in idiotic propaganda of defenders being good and raiders being evil, conditioning them to think and debate in simple terms. You are not an overt Userite, but you enabled Userites. You were a UDL stand in, consuming multiple regional positions with zero is not negative contribution. I'm not going into all of it again. You came in with a defender force that was Userite. Go read my posts and stop refuting things no one is accusing you of. If you don't want to come off as a Userite I suggest you stop employing their rhetoric.

The current delegate and architect of the South Pacific's recovery was relentlessly impeded by all four of you along the way. Whether it is Milo running unendorsement campaigns on Hileville which basically offered the same promises without the record, or Unibot lobbying old members against Hileville and claiming constantly that the delegacy was in the pocket of myself or Antariel, to Topid running against Hileville for Chair before suddenly pulling out, or to Belschaft trying to berate a delegate and his new army into submission because he does not see enough of a defender lean.

So, according to this suggestion, I have been a hindrance to Hileville during his delegacy and have impeded his attempts to restore the region to activity? That's odd.

I have, in the ways explained earlier in this thread, contributed to his efforts to help the region recover. Hileville, as delegate, evidently disagrees with your assessment of how I have affected his work in TSP: mere days ago, he appointed me as the region's vice delegate because I now have the chance to do the job properly. If I was a userite obstruction that was a problem in the region, he probably wouldn't have done that. It seems to me that a lot of your statements in this thread contradict one another: you praise Hileville for his work as delegate, but attack me for voting against legislation that would have forced someone like him out of the region. You say I have been a hindrance to Hileville in the region, yet he trusts me enough to appoint me as a vice delegate.

As for the un-endorsements campaign, they were a staple in TSP elections at the time I used one and I, unlike you, never tried to hide my intent in my un-endorsement campaign. Every single one of my telegrams clearly stated that endorsing me and unendorsing Hileville was a vote in favor of me, and against him, for the delegacy. "Un-endorsement campaign" is a term that has negative connotations that I know you are well aware of, but the context of the situation matters. Hileville won the election and his endorsement count returned to its regular total shortly after I lost. That is how elections work, and elections are a vital part of the democratic institution that we in TSP have dedicated ourselves to protecting.

I think Hileville's opinion of my contributions to TSP carry more weight, and hold more truth, than that of a banished security threat: with that said, his opinion of my work in TSP is crystal clear.

Again, you are repeating your arguments. I'll not repeat my retorts because unlike you I don't have to try to make up for lack of meaning with pointless repetition. Besides your unique points here are misleading. It is a negative connotation, that you for pointing that out. You know what else should be pointed out?

Your platform was vapid. And, you initiated the campaign with no warning. I don't believe that kind of direct attack had ever been done in a campaign before, so yes it was negative. Especially because you offered nothing different from Hileville but once again you ran and prosecuted an unorthodox (in this context) direct attack against him. And of course a few weeks later you would be back to being absent, after you direct attacks to become delegate. How commendable of you.

I'm going to disappear in a few days again but you know what? Why don't I run for delegate offering no real policy changes or distinction to the voters! At least we won't have to have any real debate. While I'm at it I'll tell everyone to unendorse Hileville because you know, despite my absent campaign platform I really want to win this thing. Good thing I'm going to disappear in a few days again.

^Your campaign.

I'm leaving out your last point because it is not a debate point. Good for you you'll do better as you've always been saying. Whatever.

I suggest you re-read the entire thread before replying. Your asking me to account for things I've already answered and answering non-existent accusations. Please enjoy carrying on as a Userite pawn and enabler, even if you are not as purposeful at it as Unibot and Belschaft you are still in the same pocket. Enjoy clawing towards the VDship, if your record is any indication you won't be there for long anyway. Maybe you should let someone else have a shot, but again given your record I'm sure you'll continue to run for offices beyond your capability.

[AS22]

You are second in command of the UDL

Wrong. Milograd is not second in command of the UDL.

Whether it is Milo running unendorsement campaigns on Hileville

Evidence for that one please.

Coincidentally as delegate procedures are being discussed, the absent Milograd returns to tart once more.

Milograd was absent for school reasons. As he's found a way to be online consistently again, he's now back

Join the UDL for a week and participate in a failed liberation and hear the constant demeaning of other defender organizations. Maybe you can catch Unibot cursing at a new recruit who has anything else to do besides detag regions.

Oh please do tell me what you know of the UDL channel and forums. Second or third hand bullshit? Or complete fabrications? Who knows with you.

There are and have always been, Userites and Feederites.

Francoism was flawed in 2004, flawed in 2008 and is equally flawed now.

Some people want to exploit regions, others want to make them better for the region and all of its residents.

You clearly fit into the former category. You're more concerned with your own personal judges than you will ever be for the regions you claim you're protecting.

Ah...Cromarty, you are a silly one. I don't know why you are debating in this thread when you are so pervasively ignorant of the players, issues, and history involved.

Let me just roll through your nonsense.

As I argued ^above (you can read right?) I am arguing he is effectively second in command vis-a-vis his continued maintenance of his UDL second in command outlook towards TSP.

One the second point why don't you ask Milograd, or see that he has already acknowledged it. Don't even know the facts of your own side do you? A typical Userite, coming in to region-whore or in this case argue-whore for his buddy... completely ignorant of the facts and having no true stake in the game or discussion. Thank you Cromarty for making my points about Userites and region whores for me.

Your third point is not an argument. You are simply qualifying why he was gone. Not the issue, the issue is he was

A. Gone
B. Would often be gone even after running for and attaining office.

Your fourth point again shows your ignorance of the facts which is why you should stop posting here, just as you should stop being a region whore and voting in elections whose issues you know nothing about. Second or thirdhand? LOL

I was in the UDL FIRSTHAND buddy! How about that one? Might have even been there before you. You see it was part of the whole "don't be Frak thing" that not only allowed me logs and logs and logs of #udl and other peeks at how the UDL operated, but gave me a further cover as I got into the South Pacific's cabinet and got to read your Userite friends babbling and whispering about who Frak was.

Your last point is empty rhetoric, empty because not only is it meaningless but you have already displayed such an ignorance of my own history and the actions and history of your Userite allies that I think anything coming out of your mouth is rendered kind of mute at this point. But you do make a compelling exhibit of the modern region whore.

Ignorance masquerading as virtuous justice! Look at the noble Cromarty, crusading against the evil Anur-Sanur he knows nothing about!

I heard some talk of Anur on IRC so I think I'll go argue with him now.

Just as you and other region whores will fly into elections to vote for your Userite friends when you know nothing of the region, the electoral issues, nothing, zero, zip. But you will come into these threads and argue anyway. You will vote anyway, satisfied with being ignorant because your UDL commander told you to come vote for him.

Thank you Userite Cromarty, you should be labelled as such in a museum or something. Now go fail at another liberation so you can be cut up and stuffed.

[No Cream and No Sugar]

tl;dr

щ(ﾟДﾟщ)

[Crazy girl]

Okay, boys, this isn't about your personal issues. Go back to the topic and leave the sniping and nasty comments out of it.

And yeah, I only skimmed it too. Too long. Not enough coffee in the house for it.

[Cinistra]

Okay, boys, this isn't about your personal issues. Go back to the topic and leave the sniping and nasty comments out of it.

And yeah, I only skimmed it too. Too long. Not enough coffee in the house for it.

Excellent. This debate was being clogged by personal animosities.