The Rejected Times

[Cormac A Stark]

As in, they take the survey, and they give a region 1 star in every category, or 5 stars in every category. Not 1 or 5 in variance.

I get what you're saying, but my issue is I don't think it's impossible for someone to legitimately think one of the GCRs deserves one star in every category and another deserves five -- even if I didn't vote that way. I don't think it's possible to know what they were thinking when they voted and we should just let the votes speak for themselves, rather than trying to interpret them and throwing some out.

[Unibot III]

We'll clarify later if any survey results aren't used later - I don't want to encourage people to use proxies or stuff to vote again. But I can say we've had a few people do what Klaus is saying and others too who have voted "1" for everyone, plus a few people used proxies while doing this. It's possible the 6 or so really sketchy participants who all took the survey at the same time and took about 60 seconds to do the survey, were probably one in the same individual messing about.

[Cormac A Stark]

One option is to do what Joe Bobs did with the influence survey, and release the results with such votes and the results without such votes. That way everyone can see both results. I think only releasing results with some votes excluded would be a mistake, though.

[Unibot III]

One option is to do what Joe Bobs did with the influence survey, and release the results with such votes and the results without such votes. That way everyone can see both results. I think only releasing results with some votes excluded would be a mistake, though.

I disliked that format, personally. All that says is "Oh look: ______ would be the most popular region if you included those six votes that came in all at the same time voting it as "5" and all of their enemies as "0" for everything" ... it gives credence to willful manipulation of the data and opens up a new debate about whether so and so is really such and such.

I'm not sure whether their manipulation is large enough to have even a visible effect on the data anymore. I have to wait and see. We've gotten forty votes over today - that's shifted the results majorly.

[Evil Lord Sauron]

There are far less examples of Raider on Defender, that I can recall at least, than Defender on Raider, but I'm not denying that it has happened. However, I will note that typically when a raider destroys a forum, they destroy another raider's forum.

We're sorta weird like that.

I know this debate is kind of dead and buried, thankfully, but just wanted to point out you will remember the raider victims of destruction more because it happened to your friends, allies and people you regularly interact with. Whereas defenders will remember the defender victims for the same reason. It's just the nature of the beast. We are more likely to remember something that happened to a friend than we are an enemy. It's likely there was equal amounts and though you probably registered the destruction of a defender forum at the time it was easily forgotten because it happened to someone you didn't care about or communicate with. There was a lot less blurring and interaction between sides in the past from what I remember/can gather.

What we can all agree is, forum destruction is bad. It shouldn't happen and both sides who ordered such attacks should be ashamed. Trying to argue one side is slightly worse than the other, like Klaus said is a pointless venture when both sides have blood on their hands.

[Southern Bellz]

My only retort is that it's embarrassing to defend and justify that sort of behavior in the manner you are doing.

I'm not justifying anything - I think forum destruction is awful. However, I dislike that the ghost of Red Factions is brought up every few months to cast a dark light on defenderdom as a whole when it suits invaders - especially when that era was a different era where forum destruction was a regular occurrence that was popularized by both sides.

Also, I'll add that you've once again avoided denying directly that DEN agents also destroyed defender forums. It's just not something that's ever been popularly noted whenever the old "Red Factions" narrative gets dug up and rehashed.

What does this have to do with The Bruce's causal comments of harassment? That's all I've been talking about.

I'm honestly not too interested in the forum destruction debate. I'm glad that era is over. I don't care about TRF and I'm one of his victims, and the only incident I'm aware of that the DEN did was after 2004 and I was never happy about it. If your 'source' wants to put on their big kid pants and engage in this topic than maybe we have something to talk about.

Until then, all I have to talk about is my utter disgust for how the Bruce made a causal accusation of harassment without any interest I'm backing up the claims. We can focus about what happened a decade ago or we can talk about wrong behavior people are engaging in today.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Black Mekhet]

I think this is a bad idea. For example, I ranked The Pacific consistently low on issues involving activity, but gave them five stars for stability, which is an accurate reflection of my real view of The Pacific -- should my answer be discounted too? There's no way of knowing if a vote is or isn't the person's accurate view of the GCRs, so some shouldn't be discounted on the assumption they were just trolling because they consistently gave some GCRs low rankings.

Believe it or not, some people in NationStates do believe that some of the GCRs are superior to others in regard to various matters. I'm not going to cry when Osiris receives a very low ranking on stability, and nobody in inactive GCRs should whine when they get low activity rankings either.

As in, they take the survey, and they give a region 1 star in every category, or 5 stars in every category. Not 1 or 5 in variance.

There really should of been an IDK, option in the 1-5 that doesn't count it in the totals, because all are required. Like Cormac, I ranked TP low except in stability because I really have no idea how they are doing at this point.

I gave Balder highest scores out of the categories; I put TEP, Osiris, TNP and TWP variably close in rankings. Laz and TRR got decent enough ranking despite my own "side" biases. (Note that's not the actual order of ranking, though I believe Balder leads my survey rankings and TP/TSP are in the last)

The only GCRs I'm involved in or at least can see enough about it to give them accurate enough scores; are Osiris, Balder, TWP. TEP and TNP i'm more aware of, Laz has always done well when I was there and then after I left it doesn't seem to have gone too much down in the least, I'm not very sure how TRR is doing and have absolutely no idea how TP & TSP are doing.

[Unibot III]

I think this is a bad idea. For example, I ranked The Pacific consistently low on issues involving activity, but gave them five stars for stability, which is an accurate reflection of my real view of The Pacific -- should my answer be discounted too? There's no way of knowing if a vote is or isn't the person's accurate view of the GCRs, so some shouldn't be discounted on the assumption they were just trolling because they consistently gave some GCRs low rankings.

It should be said we wouldn't discard a respondent for answering the way that Cormac has suggested. Klaus is talking about cases of obvious data manipulation.

[Ikania]

I basically did 3 stars for regions I had no idea about, and 2 in diplomacy for those without an Osirian embassy.

[Black Mekhet]

I basically did 3 stars for regions I had no idea about, and 2 in diplomacy for those without an Osirian embassy.

Osiran*

[Ikania]

I basically did 3 stars for regions I had no idea about, and 2 in diplomacy for those without an Osirian embassy.

Osiran*

Osirian sounds better. I've heard both used in variation.

[Zaolat]

Osiran*

Osirian sounds better. I've heard both used in variation.

Yeah, but sounds better does not change what the demonym actually is.

[Ikania]

Osirian sounds better. I've heard both used in variation.

Yeah, but sounds better does not change what the demonym actually is.

I've heard both used in variation.
Cormac does Osiran, I think I heard Vac do Osirian, and I hear both quite often from a number of people.

[The Rejected Times]

Issue XXVIII. September 19, 2014.

TRR Celebrates Kandarin Day
Office of IA opens a Murder Mystery into the "suspicious" Departure of the Late Kandarin
COMMENTARY | TRR STAFF

The Rejected Realms celebrates Kandarin Day today on September 19, 2014. The regional holiday, established earlier this year in the “Regional Holidays Act”, honours The Rejected Realms’ longest serving delegate. Kandarin served as the delegate of The Rejected Realms between 2003 and 2010.

To help celebrate the holiday, the World Factbook Entry reflects on Kandarin’s contributions to the region, Kandarin’s flag flies over the region and citizens have been encouraged to discuss their experiences of Kandarin on the Regional Message Board.

Unibot, current Delegate of The Rejected Realms, called Kandarin’s delegacy, “an impressive reign of stability, philosophy and friendship” – one which “every successor has hoped to carry forward forevermore”.

“I had the pleasure to speak with Kandarin on many occasions before and after his retirement,” says Unibot. “He was always courteous and he was always welcoming. Many considered him their confidant. He had a vision for The Rejected Realms – a region that people would enjoy being rejected to. Thank heavens that he succeeded in building that vision and establishing our region as a world power and a trusted friend abroad”.

In coordination with the Executive, The Office of Internal Affairs under Kogvuron have organized a month-long cultural event, “Who killed Kandarin?” to, in perhaps a more light-hearted fashion, celebrate Kandarin’s career and personality. The Murder Mystery follows the reopened investigation into the suspicious departure of Kandarin – “interrogating” friends, enemies and frenemies of the Late Kandarin.

CrazyGirl, one of the investigation’s primary suspects, left many in doubt whether she really did commit the crimes accused of her.

“I don't think Crazy Girl killed Kandarin,” says Ryno, long-time resident, but noting, “more information is needed though. Finding the killer is very important”.

Other citizens are less unsure.

“My feelings being all evidence points to Crazygirl,” says Wopruthien, eyeing a potential promotion in the event of his High Commander’s surprise incarceration…

The real assailant will be identified by the end of September using the (fair and balanced) Court of Public Opinion to consider a number of high-profile suspects. Kandarin Day, however, will continue through today with many streamers and an outrageously large barbecue. Happy Kandarin Day Everyone!

---

The Lazarene-Osiran War: How the GCRs Stand
COMMENTARY | TRR STAFF

We’re a week into the Lazarene-Osiran War and already it has become a challenge to follow where each Game-Created Region stands on the Lazarene-Osiran War.

Several regions have declared their support for Lazarus or Osiris, others too have claimed neutrality. The hard-working journalists and staff reporters here at The Rejected Times have delved into each Game-Created Regions’ statements to find their stance on the ongoing war effort, where they align and how they will respond to aggression towards either Lazarus or Osiris.


The Rejected Realms: A Non-Aggression Pact in Jeopardy

Background: OSI-TRR relations were reopened on June 09 2014 with the passage of a Non-Aggression Pact, while LAZ-TRR relations have been an established, timely fixture.

The Rejected Realms announced its intention to defend Lazarus, its longest standing ally, in the event of an attack. Due note: The Rejected Realms is legally obligated to provide defense to Lazarus under their Alliance with Lazarus, The Pan-Sinker Accord, The XYZ Treaty and the Constitution of the Founderless Regions Alliance.

Guy, TRR Minister of Foreign Affairs published a statement which found the war, “deeply regrettable” and hoped that a “peaceful resolution” would be struck without further hostilities. In that statement, The Rejected Realms also reaffirmed its commitment to its Non-Aggression Pact with Osiris – pledging not to engage in hostile action against Osiris.

While Pharaoh Cormac Somerset had initially posted its respect for this stance, he later cancelled Osiris’s embassy with The Rejected Realms and announced his intentions to repeal Osiris’s Non-Aggression Pact with The Rejected Realms. Despite having previously agreed to respect The Rejected Realms’ decision to attend the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference, Osiris condemned The Rejected Realms’ attendance at the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference as “war-planning” behind closed doors – a claim which The Rejected Realms (and other attendees) dispute. As it stands, the Non-Aggression Pact is still in effect and a repeal has not been motioned in the legislature.

Balder: A Loyal Ally – but how loyal?

Background: OSI-BAL relations have been a strong fixture for years, currently represented by The Treaty of the Old Gods which established the Imperial Sovereign Realms Army (ISRA) between Osiris and Balder to protect their regions and advance the cause of Imperialism. LAZ-BAL relations largely collapsed with Balder’s withdrawal of Treaty of Copenhagen in response to the rise of the People’s Republic of Lazarus (PRL) which they have since accused of being anti-imperialist.

The question left open with Balder is not whether Balder will support Osiris – Zander Cerebella’s announcement ensured there was no doubt remaining in any one’s mind in regards to whether or not Balder would stand behind its long-time ally, Osiris. However, when commentators asked whether Balder would support hostile action against Lazarus, the Statsminister skirted around providing a direct answer, noting instead that the public would have to wait for Balder to discuss the matter.

The West Pacific: A Honeymoon Over Too Soon

Background: OSI-TWP relations were closed by The Kemetic Republic’s Osiris (KRO) from 11 May 2013 onward in response to TWP’s support of Milograd’s regime in TSP. However, TWP’s support for the Exiled-KRO regime, the Empress Astarial (Detective Figs) regime and later, the Osiris Fraternal Order (OFO) went a long way towards relaxing relations.

The West Pacific released a statement declaring it would not commit aggression against either Osiris or Lazarus and hoped for a cessation of hostilities. During that statement, The West Pacific also affirmed its commitment to the values of national sovereignty and regional sovereignty. Darkesia expressed her disappointment with Osiris’s decision to withdraw relations with The West Pacific over The West Pacific’s participation in the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference.

It should also be noted, Darkesia also hinted that The West Pacific administration would be following this statement with a more extensive statement later.

The East Pacific: A Tipping of the Scales

Background: At the start of the war, TEP was the only region to boast treaties with both the OFO and the PRL. TEP relatively recently signed “The East Pacific - Osiris Treaty of Amity” and until recently maintained “The Treaty between The East Pacific and Lazarus” (as a reaffirmation of the old, pre-PRL 2009 treaty between TEP and Lazarus).

The East Pacific began the war with a statement which argued that ideology was at the heart of the war – defenderism in Lazarus and imperialism in Osiris. Ramaeus continued by pledging to defend either region in the event it was attacked and otherwise to maintain “equilibrium” between the two sides. In the controversial statement he followed by praising The East Pacific’s “ideology of neutrality” –arguing that it was central to his region’s identity and distinctiveness.

If that wasn't enough of an undisciplined juggling act… it got worse.

Later that week, in response to Pharaoh Somerset’s unilateral closure of relations with The Pacific (among other game-created regions), Ramaeus posted a second statement calling Cormac’s actions, a “worrying trend” but in the same breath suggesting that “one must consider” that Lazarus should not have added the civil war as a topic of discussion in the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference. The delegate continued by saying it was “foolish” of Lazarus not to have reduced potential “blowback” to this decision by holding the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference at a “neutral host”. Yep, you read that right: “neutral host” – The East Pacific had already declined to attend their ally’s conference because it was not being hosted elsewhere in a neutral location (for which the main suggestion was… erm, you betcha: The East Pacific!).

Shortly thereafter, in a surprise move, The East Pacific would announce its intentions to end its long-standing treaty with Lazarus – the only reason given thus far suggests The East Pacific believes this will help it maintain a “balance” during the war. Oddly enough however, The East Pacific has not closed its treaties with Osiris which begs the question of how this decision is one based on balance alone.

The Pacific: A Sleeping Giant Awakes

Background: As Douria once said: “[OFO’s] ties to The Pacific were never strong, and we never once considered them a friend”. However, NPO-LAZ relations have been a mainstay of the PRL, especially with the latest agreement outlined in “Treaty between The Pacific and Lazarus (2014)”.

After the closure of embassies between The Pacific and Osiris in response to The Pacific’s participation in the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference, The Pacific posted a statement decrying the closure of embassies as “offensive” and argued that the move went against The Pacific’s own sovereignty (which is ironic given the purpose and eponymous topic of the conference). The Pacific also pledged to stand behind its long-standing ally, Lazarus with a few veiled threats along the way (e.g., “we will deal with the conflict as it develops”, “utilize all the resources at our disposal to permanently solve this issue”).

However it’s not all doom and gloom: The Pacific did also offer to serve as mediators in any future negotiations between Lazarus and Osiris.

The South Pacific: A Burning Bridge

Background: OSI-TSP relations stalled with the unraveling of the KRO by the autumn of 2013. TSP, at that time, declined to recognize the new regime (in response to its lack of a constitution) and was greeted with a slew of insults directed at them by the Imperial Council’s Cormac Somerset, including that it was an “interregional irrelevance”, “worthless”, “a rotting shell” and “a largely inactive region that has no interest in properly defending itself or providing any meaningful assistance in [Osiris’s] defense”. TSP did eventually recognize the OFO. Lazarus, meanwhile, has maintained treaties with The South Pacific for several years now with only a brief interruption when the treaty was downgraded to a Non-Aggression Pact (with much “panda diplomacy”) amidst tensions that rose with the appointment of Chairman Milograd (i.e., Former Couper of TSP).

After The South Pacific announced its intentions to attend the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference, Cormac Somerset cancelled relations between Osiris and The South Pacific. Cormac also initiated a widely criticized recall motion against Glen-Rhodes, Minister of Foreign Affairs in The South Pacific for his handling of The South Pacific’s relations with Osiris. The recall motion was rejected and Cormac was forced to his resign his citizenship following the public blowback he received for motioning the recall (given his conflict of interests in the matter).

The South Pacific recently passed an “Assembly Resolution on the Osiris-Lazarus War”, stressing The South Pacific’s wish to remain neutral in the conflict and promoting their values of peace, goodwill and the security of Game-Created Regions. As for whether The South Pacific would provide support forces to defend Lazarus, under The South Pacific’s treaty text, Lazarus can request assistance – however, the text is clear that this does “not extend to defense against attacks provoked by hostile activity on part of the requesting party”.

The North Pacific: A Silent Wildcard

Background: TNP does not have treaties with either Osiris or Lazarus. However, TNP boasts healthy relations with both regions.

The North Pacific is the only Game-Created Region to have refrained from commenting publicly on their stance regarding the Osiran-Lazarene War. Fortunately, The Rejected Times has The North Pacific’s McMasterdonia on speed-dial. McMasterdonia, The North Pacific’s Foreign Affairs Minister, spoke briefly on the war, noting that The North Pacific intended to maintain a neutral stance.

“TNP hasn't made a statement because we don't believe it is necessary at this point,” says McMasterdonia, “we have positive relations with both regions and we're committed to remaining neutral in the war”.

But would The North Pacific provide military support for the invaded side of the war? McMasterdonia was reluctant to say for certain.

“Our position is not immune to changing circumstances and may be reviewed if the Government believes our position requires re-evaluating,” explains the Foreign Minister. “At present, we are committed to neutrality given our positive relationships with both sides”.

---

A Facelift for NationStates?
COMMENTARY | UNIBOT

Out of the blue comes new speculation regarding a potential “facelift” for NationStates – at this time we can only speculate, however the redesign of the game would probably provide a new look for the site. In particular, commentators like Zocra have taken issue with NationStates’s banner and sidebar, which some have suggested has been “getting outdated”.

After Zocra’s comments, Reploid Productions, Forum Admin, made a surprise hint that a new redesign was in the works for NationStates’s look.

“No ETA on it just yet,” says Reploid, “but from what I've seen of it so far, it's looking very shiny!”

Without a date provided, we cannot confirm when the new design will be available. However, this development has excited many with the latest design (i.e., “Century”)introduced just shy of four years ago on 28 November 2010. One might wonder whether we could be in for a surprise “anniversary” gift for November 12? Oh how the mind reels with possibilities…

---

The NS Regional Influence Survey: A Comparison
COMMENTARY | JOE BOBS

As many of you will know, I recently conducted the Great Influence Survey, which looked at what regions and inter-regional organisations are considered most influential today and throughout history. The results were interesting, and you can read through them on the above link.

In this article, I want to look at comparing the results to the 2012 Survey conducted by Falconias.

Now, the comparison is not an exactly equal one. Falconias separated UCRs from GCRs (of course this makes more space in ones ballot for other regions) and he scored one vote per region per person, whereas I used a 1-10 scale; but let’s put those objections to one side so we can enjoy the comparison. Below are the results from Falconias’ survey and then mine, those with a score below 10 have been excluded for brevity’s sake.

2012 Results
1st Europeia -- 48
2nd 00000 A World Power -- 44
3rd Gatesville -- 43
4th 10000 Islands -- 41
5th The Black Hawks -- 39
6th (tie) Canada -- 36
7th (tie) Equinox -- 36
9th Equilism -- 35
10th (tie) Texas -- 34
10th (tie) The New Inquisition -- 34
12th Great Britain and Ireland -- 33
13th Wysteria -- 29
14th The Kodiak Republic -- 27
15th (tie) Lone Wolves United -- 25
15th (tie) Yggdrasil -- 25
17th DEN Army -- 23
18th Absolution -- 18
19th Unknown -- 17
20th (tie) Europe -- 15
20th (tie) Hampshire -- 15
22nd (tie) Liberalia -- 13
22nd (tie) NationStates -- 13
22nd (tie) New Folsom -- 13
25th (tie) Alteran Empire – 12
25th (tie) DEN Central Command -- 12
25th (tie) Kingdom of Ireland -- 12
25th (tie) Sapientia – 12
29th Eastern Roman Empire – 11

2014 Results

[s]1 The North Pacific 112 (17)
2 The Rejected Realms 106 (14)
3 Osiris 95 (14)[/s]
4 Europeia 89 (12)
5 10000 Islands 75 (12)
6 The Land of Kings and Emperors 70 (9)
[s]7 Lazarus 69 (11)
8 The East Pacific 67 (11)[/s]
9 The New Inquisition 54 (8)
10 Albion 51 (7)
11 The Black Riders 41 (9)
[s]12 Balder 39 (8)
13 The South Pacific 37 (7)[/s]
14 Spiritus 32 (6)
[s]15 The West Pacific 31 (5)
16 The Pacific 29 (5)[/s]
17 Equilism 15 (6)
18 Capitalist Paradise 14 (3)
19 Democratic Socialist Alliance 11 (2)
20 Global Right Alliance 10 (2)
=21 The Internationale 10 (1)

So what can we see? Europeia have maintained their position as the most influential UCR in the world, whilst sadly 00000 A World Power and Gatesville no longer chart. 10000 Islands have risen from fourth to second place. The Black Hawks no longer place, but The Black Riders have come from nowhere to sixth place. Equilism have risen from ninth to eighth whilst The New Inquisition have also risen from tenth to fourth, and their UIAF partners the Land of Kings and Emperors have climbed from forty-eighth into third place and Albion from unranked to fifth. Spiritus, Capitalist Paradise, the Democratic Socialist Alliance, the Global Right Alliance and The Internationale were also unranked on the 2012 survey.

What broader conclusions can be drawn? The Black Hawks, DEN, Lone Wolves United and Unknown all ranked in the top of the 2012 survey, but only The Black Riders represent the Invader sphere in 2014. The rise of the Imperialist sphere is evident with the rankings of the UIAF members, whilst the number of Defender regions in the top is fairly constant. Interestingly, ideologically focused regions seem to be more in vogue in 2014 than they were in 2012, with the DSA, Internationale and Capitalist Paradise ranking highly, but regions themed on real world places are apparently no longer a la mode in terms of perceived influence (see Great Britain & Ireland, Kingdom of Ireland, Canada, Europe and Hampshire).

For me, the most interesting feature comes from looking at those regions who have stayed at the top: Europeia, 10000 Islands, The New Inquisition and Equilism. Amazingly, if we look at The Mighty Pump’s 2005 survey, 10000 Islands and Equilism were in the top ten back then too.

1. Nasicournia
2. Gatesville
3. Equilism
4. 10000 Islands
5. The Proletariat Coalition
6. The New Meritocracy
7. Allied States of EuroIslanders
8. Whatever region the DEN resides in
9. Lazarus
10. The YoungWorld

The staying power of 10000 Islands and Equilism is very impressive, and also for Europeia and The New Inquisition. We can only wonder what the Influence Survey of 2016, or indeed, 2023 will show!

---

TEP Commends Xoriet for her Impressive EPSA Service
Five Days and a Hundred Detags Later...
COMMENTARY | UNIBOT

The East Pacific’s Magisterium has passed a rare resolution to comment Xoriet for her service and contributions to The East Pacific – especially for her service as The East Pacific Sovereign Army (EPSA)’s current and widely admired General.

Ramaeus, Delegate of The East Pacific had nothing but praise for General Xoriet when asked to comment on her contributions to her region.

“Xoriet has been an absolutely phenomenal General,” says Ramaeus. “She's extremely dedicated and exceptionally hardworking. Her recent flurry of detags shows both qualities extraordinarily well, and they show exactly why she's being lauded, too. Plus, she's one of the nicest people I've met!”

Severisen, Sergeant in the EPSA told The Rejected Times that her work had been instrumental in growing and advancing the army forward, despite its independentist structure.

“Since I joined EPSA on July 27th, and even before that, when she became General in March, Xoriet has done an outstanding job as the General,” says Severisen, “She's kept EPSA active, aligned to its policy of being an independent military, that has, quite frankly, become one of, if not *the* most active GCR militaries in the game. Her ability to motivate and direct people from every corner of gameplay is inspiring. We have raiders, imperialists, defenders, and people who don't align to one school of thought”.

But what’s the key to Xoriet’s success?

“Her organizational skills and leadership are what really make the organization work,” says Severisen, “I’m proud to serve as a member of EPSA”.

Very recently, the East Pacific Sovereign Army, under Xoriet’s direction, completed a high-profile mission to detag over a hundred regions in under five days. Xoriet saw the ambitious project through with hard work, dedication and interregional cooperation. EPSA has actively deployed during 76% of the days since she has been appointed General. An incredible feat even for such an venerable leader as Xoriet.

---

The Divided Defenderdom
EDITORIAL | UNIBOT

In a previous article, “The Battlefield Effect”, I proposed that commentators had been wrong in the past to assume that “defenderism” is the guiding political ideology of defenderists. Many proponents of independentism and imperialism argue that, although their ideology can guide both “the martial” and “the political” aspects of their regional life, defenderism fails to provide a cohesive response to the questions that arise in regards to how we should run our region internally. While this is true, I argue that defenderism is not, in fact, the overarching political and moral philosophy of defenders. Defenderism, as a term has arisen out of political convenience, not intellectual accuracy and within this nebulous ideological association contains many ideas and conflicting notions.

Commentators have also in the past argued that while invaders have united for a common cause, defenderdom is less politically organized and internally cooperative. This is a direct consequence, I would argue, of the lack of consensus over what defenderism entails – in fact, defenderism is just a blanket term for a group of unidentified political philosophies that govern major regions in NationStates. With issues that, in particular, stress the differences of these political philosophies, the faultlines of defenderdom become apparent – these political philosophies clash and misunderstandings produces mutual distrust between the (otherwise approachable) political factions. Turning a “divided defenderdom” into a “diplomatic defenderdom” requires an understanding of the underlying political constructs of defenderdom itself – despite crude, contrarian remarks, defenderdom is rich in political and philosophical diversity and understanding these nuances is the key to advancing its growth.

We begin our survey of the different political philosophies of defenderdom with Liberalism – the ideology of mainstream defenderism, which can be observed in The Rejected Realms, The United Defenders League, The Founderless Regions Alliance and The Alliance Defense Network among many other regions and organizations. Liberalism (Capital “L”) should not be confused with the American school of “liberalism” – nay, Liberalism is a European school of thought with roots in John Locke, a political theorist who outlined the natural rights of humanity and the notion of consented rule. Liberals can be identified as being strongly individualist – seeing the fundamental “building blocks” of a region as individuals who are entitled to a set of basic rights, including the right to equality and right to free speech. Liberals also stress moral universalism (i.e., what is wrong for one person to do is wrong for everyone to do) and the potential of humanity to progress from the status quo through social cooperation.

With international relations, Liberalism is idealistic – it advocates for institutional cooperation, interdependencies, cosmopolitanism, the tolerance of “reasonable” diversity and democratization to encourage peace. The principles of defenderism – the active respect and defense of native rights over their collective property – are derived in Liberalism from the contemporary philosophy of John Rawls (as I did in “Paradise Found”) who proposed that people agree to fairer, more just systems when they themselves are unaware if they will benefit from a less fair, less equal or unjust system. Liberal justice, in this view, is a compromise (even a consensus) reached between people, which forgoes them of some of their possible opportunities to avoid the worst of situations. For example, most of us on an individual basis would agree we would not want our region to be invaded or destroyed – now if you did know whether your region was a vulnerable founderless region or not, you would be less inclined to risk your region’s security and thus more likely to agree that people ought not to invade. This consensus serves as the basis for the notion of “native rights” and moreover, the liberal mission to protect native communities from unjust acts of aggression.

The second political philosophy that can be found in defenderdom is Neo-Conservatism. I would argue 10000 Islands is the prime example of neo-conservatism in, not just defenderdom, but all of NationStates. Internally, 10000 Islands takes the form of the neo-conservative state by promoting tradition and service to the region as a guiding force of reason and morality for regional citizens. Its neo-conservative roots are certainly also not undermined by its long-standing appreciation of democracy, constitutionalism and a strong executive. Like Liberalism, neo-conservatism is idealistic in nature: stemming from Wilsonianism, neo-conservatism is an aggressive, “heroic” ideology in the arena of international relations which sees the “hero” state as fighting a battle against the “evil” of the world. Neo-conservatism has long been criticized for being more concerned with fighting enemies than it is with making diplomatic friends and allies – this sense of initiative can be regarded as unilateralism by some, or worse, imperialism.

Neo-conservatism and Liberalism have collide before – see the controversial invasion of Marijuana militia, where 10000 Islands’ TITO invaded an invader region and the Founderless Regions Alliance deployed to defend against their follow defenders. While Liberalism promotes universalism – a right to non-subjugation which belongs to all equally, neo-conservatism sees the logic of defenderism to be a narrative between good and evil: the attack on Marijuana militia serves an “attack” in the “war on terror” (if you will) between the forces of good and those who would see to it that other’s homes be occupied, or worse, destroyed. Neither side was necessarily wrong about what it means to be a defender, because “defender” is just a label, an overarching term for different streams of idealism which often, but not always, complement one another, co-exist and otherwise, cooperate with one another.

Similarly, 10000 Islands has been known to only defend regions that fit a certain meritocratic criteria – smaller regions that do not possess a delegate are rarely exempt from this policy, whereas most mainstream defender organizations that fit into the Liberal “consensus” will defend all regions, regardless of size, because they all possess a right to such security. Without a “rights” discourse, neo-conservatism commits to defending others only when it can be justified within a “virtues” discourse – the weakest victims of invaderdom can be excused , under neo-conservatism, as victims of their own “irresponsibility” and “neglect”, while Liberalism rejects the notion that victims ought to be held responsible for the wrongdoings of others transgressed against them.

Neo-conservatism and Liberalism have also clashed over the admittance of “bi-gameplayers” in military ranks. While The United Defenders League (UDL), for a brief trial period, allowed members who wished to both invade and defend to join The United Defenders League, 10000 Islands denounced The United Defenders League as an invader army and requested the immediate resignation of Unibot as leader of The United Defenders League. This divergence of opinion is the result of the two defender parties seeing the fight in different terms – where defenders from the school of Liberalism would see the fight as a fight against injustice and the violation of native rights, defenders from the neo-conservative school see the fight as an eternal conflict against bullies and wrongdoers. When you’re fighting against, not an idea, but a swath of people, it becomes a challenge to distinguish between those who fit into this axis and those who are your friends – the neo-conservative faces the possibility that it might poison its own diplomacy in mistrust and the collective search for “defender purity”.

Finally, I also did suggest there was a third political ideology in defenderdom – Marxist theory. Honestly, I am not sure whether it really plays a role anymore. Presumably, Marxist theory would articulate defenderist ideals as a class struggle between the masses and the higher classes of gameplay which mean to oppress them on a systematized scale. Liberalism seeks the right, neo-conservatism seeks the good, Marxist theory would seek liberation. The question remains whether Lazarus will adopt a different approach to defenderism or maintain Marxism as more of a “light roleplay” face. Could defenderdom be even more divided by the introduction of a new political ideology? Or, alternatively, could old conflicts be resolved with the dialogue shifting from a bi-lateral conversation to a multi-lateral one? Certainly a new political ideology would not come without consequences for interregional diplomacy and defender cooperation but it is not clear whether it would add an element of unification or conflict or both to defenderdom.

---

Case in Point: The August Election in TRR
OPINION | CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATS

While The Rejected Realms hotly considers electoral reform, Christian Democrats analyzes the results of the most recent Officer Elections...

In one of the previous issues of the Times, I penned an article criticizing the First-Past-The-Post voting system currently used by The Rejected Realms for its elections for government officers -- recommending that this system be replaced with a preferential one. To see whether or not such a change in the region's electoral structure would work, Unibot, the WA delegate, polled citizens who had voted, asking them how they would have ranked the eight candidates (running for four positions) from first to last (participation: 86%).

Under First-Past-The-Post voting, the (real) election concluded as follows:

1. Christian Democrats
2. Guy
3. Yohannes
4. Kogvuron
4. thechurchofsatan
6. Hallowell
6. Ryno
8. Sciongrad

To break the fourth-place tie, it was necessary to hold a runoff election, which Kogvuron won.

Under the simulated preferential election conducted as a test, the candidates finished in this order (according to two methods of tabulation):

1. Christian Democrats
2. Guy
3. Yohannes
4. Kogvuron
5. Ryno
6. Sciongrad
7. Hallowell
7. thechurchofsatan

Analysis of citizens' votes using more sophisticated systems reveals two notable differences. First, Sciongrad, under preferential block voting or a Borda count, would have defeated two candidates to whom he lost in the real election. Second, thechurchofsatan, who nearly won a seat in the cabinet, was actually The Rejected Realms' least favorite candidate!

The case of Sciongrad and Satan certainly raises an important question: how many times in the past have less popular candidates defeated more popular candidates because The Rejected Realms has been using First-Past-The-Post voting?

Whatever may be said in theory, different voting systems do in fact yield different results in elections. Thus, The Rejected Realms (as well as other regions) should consider carefully what they want when they're writing their laws. Method does matter.

---

Vindication for Lord Ravenclaw
Osiris drops its "Persona Non Grata" charge against Lord Ravenclaw
INTERVIEW | UNIBOT

The Rejected Times speaks with Lord Ravenclaw (on the night of the Scottish Refenderdum) over the sounds of the BBC echoing in the distant, discussing his controversial "Persona Non Grata" status in Osiris, politics, war and even a new region...

Unibot: Thanks for meeting with The Rejected Times, Raven! Of course, as a subject to the British Crown, you're watching the Referendum closely, I imagine. Thanks for talking some time to talk to us as well. How goes the evening?

Lord Ravenclaw: It's rather quiet. I'm currently working on Alexandria and the joys of the constitution in the newly formed Ekklesia (citizens Assembly), thank you for asking. How has your evening been?

Unibot: Great. Cards against Humanity in a Faux Scottish Accent - can't beat it. Nice to hear you've been working on Alexandria - how did this project come about and what's your vision for the region?

Lord Ravenclaw: Well, Alexandria was for a very long time in Osiris the city which housed the Foreign Affairs department (Temple), and after being involved with that department for so long, I was very attached to the name, and to the symbolism of the City itself. Alexandria is said to have held a glorious library, and was a centre of knowledge and learning. Conversely "Ravenclaw", in the Harry Potter series where my name comes from is the House of Learning, and knowledge so the two appeared to go together.

When I became Pharaoh and introduced House roleplay into Osiris, I claimed Alexandria as my own city/province within the region, and I just made it independent as a Kingdom when I retired from Osiris to allow the dynamic to continue and see what I can achieve with it. My vision for Alexandria is whether a group of friends and I can create something different, that comes from a Sinker with its history but can become both a house of knowledge (there is a library project in the works), and hopefully a centre for diplomatic training (Eagleshall School of Diplomacy is very much in the works) that can draw on both the experience of our members as well as try and bring a new experience for players.

Unibot: It reminds me of Lemuria, in a way, and its relationship with The North Pacific. Sounds awesome! Of course, Alexandria is a serious departure for you from your former home in Osiris - for our readers who aren't in the know, I wonder if you could describe what happened to lead to that departure? How did you first find out?

Lord Ravenclaw: About Osiris? Well as many may already be aware I retired from Government in the dying days of May, as my health was not brilliant. Over the two years I was part of Osiris, well over 18 months of that was spent in the Government, Foreign Affairs mainly and that along with the high stress atmosphere in the region gradually got to me. What got to me at the end was I lost my focus on the game itself and when I lost that focus and separation of player and human, I realised it was time to take a break. It wasn't a pleasant realisation and it cemented to me that I cannot handle diplomacy if I am thinking of the feelings of the person behind a character, it completely ruins the dynamic and diplomatic RP Raven has. To that extent I removed "the Imperial Crown" a nation that I had used when Delegate, and it had resided virtually non-stop in Osiris since April 2012, from the region for a month or so and watched as my influence dropped - it very nearly CTE'd at one point in my puppet region, and it went from one of the highest influence nations (having spent three months at #1) to a tiny minnow once again.

More recently I returned to the region not long after Cormac was elected, but not to their forum or government, it was more on the outside of things to keep my mind clear and observe how things were going. Things were fine, I moved the Imperial Crown back into Osiris, and took up WA briefly to help the transition, it felt very symbolic to me and I was glad to be able to help one last time for a delegacy transition, it felt very end of an era for me in that regard. Past that I kept my senses alert regarding Osiran foreign policy, not being attached to the region politically gives me the ability as a neutral diplomat - which I stand by - to see other perspectives that I could not see whilst under my banner in Osiris.

I suspect though that you're asking about more recently…

Unibot: Yep!

Lord Ravenclaw: Well as I said a moment ago, as a neutral diplomat I am able to see other perspectives, and that includes speaking to various delegates or governments that as a member of Osiran society could have been difficult depending on the stance of the Government. A few examples are The West Pacific, Lazarus and the South Pacific where I still enjoy excellent relationships with their delegates and governments free of political affilations and the issues I'd have still being attached to Osiris. I do admit to finding it difficult to watch Osiran policy, as it is an alien feeling to me to not be in the -know- or at least have forewarning about the direction of regional policy in that given the fact for most of 2013 and indeed the early four months of 2014 I was one of, if not the only major diplomat running and orchestrating policy in Foreign Affairs and it will take a while longer for me to be comfortable seeing Osiris take a different turn to what I would have done, which I'm told is natural after having spent so much time focused on one role.

Cormac and I have worked together for a very long time, or at least it feels it. He joined the FA department in Osiris at the start of 2013, as an appointment by the then Pharaoh, George Holland as my deputy, and he was moderately successful, and he and I can make a very dangerous team when we're on the same wavelength on an issue and coordinating our responses. That success then allowed us to work together during 2013 when he was Pharaoh, later on through the turbulent periods and into the OFO, and we still retain that ability now. However, the downside to it is, neither of us respond to criticism very well, and I am only marginally better at taking it than he is - both of do have a tendency to lose our tempers although mine is somewhat on a firmer lead thanks to the half decade of experience or so that I have in the field. The disagreement between Cormac, now Pharaoh for the second time and I arose over my concerns on Foreign Policy; which he was aware of and I had been vocal about to him in different mediums, and he would have also had been aware most likely that I was in contact with the governments I named above in trying to even now, see if there was anything I could do to help and resolve the various problems between Osiris and themselves.

The disagreement itself came as a surprise, I was rather too careless in what I said - the logs I think have done the rounds - and I publicly commented against the policy. I have very firm views on sovereignty, and the right of a community to decide its fate, from the Osiran civil wars and turbulent periods, where there were numerous groups both within and outside the region who felt it would be better if the community that existed simply didn't, and to that effect I do not agree with, or recognise the right of one community to say that the other doesn't have a right to exist as it is down to their own community to make that decision.

The sovereignty over one’s self, is liberty, and I firmly believe - and said as such - rather foolishly that I did not believe the twelve Members of the Deshret who voted in favour of the war with Lazarus had any right to do so. The vote itself is open record on the Osiris forum so the results can be checked freely. Naturally, Cormac didn't take that very well... truthfully, I wouldn't have done either, although my reaction would have been more political than a ban from the channel and a banjection from the region. I was then alerted by a member of the forum that I had been declared as PNG for Sedition, coupling me with the members of Empire who I had sided with Malice over in December. It was a surprise, I was absolutely astounded, and I wasn't quiet about it, gradually anger set in because after everything that I'd achieved in that region it felt like a kick in the teeth. However an hour or two later members of the Deshret found out what had happened and I'm told a discussion began on the matter at once. The way the PNG system works in Osiris is the Pharaoh can declare someone PNG, and the Deshret can overrule it.

But only the Deshret can withdraw their own declarations which must be voted on by the full body, in order to prevent matters of regional security. The system is logical but doesn't always work. I do not know the specifics of the discussion in the Deshret chamber only that it resulted in Cormac reversing the status and removing me from the ban list. Severisen unbanned me from the irc channel,and things were rather tense for a while between us, as is to be expected. We've spoken extensively over the last few days and we both agree that we handled things badly - I should have known a better way to express my concern, and he should have handled it better, and we've generally discussed more conductive ways to express concern in the future in a way that doesn't jeopardise a friendship and a diplomatic partnership that is over a year old and that actually helped Osiris survive the early stages of the Osiris Fraternal Order.

I am however extraordinarily grateful to the members of the Deshret who spoke in my support, whoever they were; although I have also become aware that there are members of the body who dislike me immensely for reasons I know very little about, nor care to know more.

Unibot: You have the opportunity to serve as delegate at the beginning of the OFO - do you feel now that OFO might be making the same mistakes that the past Osiris had?

Lord Ravenclaw: Hm, well no society is perfect but I do believe that whatever faults the OFO has they are a far cry away from the divided, secretive government that ruled Osiris in the past. For the most part, my issue was with the challenge system - it is, or so I felt, a rather personal system and finding out that I was going to be challenged was a personal affront to me that wouldn't have happened under a general election format, which is what happens now.

All in all, I would say Osiris is far more open about its community, government and direction now that it has been in the past. You will always get people who seek to influence a community for their own benefit, and that isn't any different in Osiris, but looking at the foundations of the community, my own knowledge of it, and the strength of where they started minus a few hiccups along the way as all new governments/communities have, I think they'll do fine. The true test will be sticking to their beliefs and not compromising them over political differences; the second they allow factionism to take over the way it did in the KRO and in the post-KRO community is when Osiris will experience trouble. I do not think it is likely to happen, lessons have been learned since those days.

Unibot: Osiris has recently closed relations with four GCRs over the Regional Sovereignty Conference - you're a diplomat yourself, how do you feel Osiris handled the situation?

Lord Ravenclaw: That is a general point of contention at the moment, as the governments of said regions are aware and I have been approached unofficially for my views on that matter. There were points under the KRO that Osiris did close relations with a feeder, the West Pacific in this following disagreements over the South Pacific's coup by Milograd, it took many months to repair that damage and a good deal of apologies by me to All Good People. I recognise however, that Osiris has the right to maintain (or not) relations as they see fit, although from my experience I find that cross-feeder and sinker communication is vital but I recognise with great regret that for various reasons it simply isn't possible for positive communication to happen at this time.

I have heard Cormac's reasons for it, and whilst I do not entirely agree and I've registered my feelings on this with Cormac, it is ultimately their decision. As normal, though I caution against reactionary diplomacy, as something that is beneath both Cormac, and Osiris. I've also expressed the belief to Dark, Kris, Funk and Senator Elegarth that I hope that the communication can be restored between them and Osiris in the future but ultimately that I have no longer have any power to affect change regarding diplomatic status with Osiris.

Unibot: What do you think will be the outcome of the War?

Lord Ravenclaw: At this point it depends on the results of the talks happening between Lazarus and Osiris. I do not believe either side, for all of their various "responses" or "declarations" could affect serious change in the other, and that this "war", if you can call it that will end in a peace treaty. Whether it'll do anything positive for Osiris-PRL relations, I cannot say. Although I would very much like to be on that secret forum.

Unibot: Do you think Osiris has serious intentions to carry through the negotiations? I mean, I would expect a 'poison pill' to be proposed by Osiris during the negotiations - so it forces Lazarus to be the ones who drop out of the talks…

Lord Ravenclaw: Well, seeing as the root administrator of these boards is Severisen, who wouldn't create a board and set it up appropriately if he thought the talks were going to be deliberately ruined by one side. I would have to say that it appears Osiris is sincere in their agreement to discuss the matter as far as I can see.

Unibot: Are you done with Game-Created politics for good? What's one thing you'll miss from it all, if so?

Lord Ravenclaw: Hm. Am I done? That's a very good question. I've had a lot of fun over the past two years and I've met alot of very skilled people, and had the pleasure of really seeing a wide array of political systems, beliefs and contributions from dozens of people across GCRs. I don't think it's wise to write me out of the picture just yet, but I cannot see myself returning to Osiris although I would like to see what being delegate of a different GCR would be like in the future, it's not high on my to-do list.

As for what I'll miss, hm, perhaps established communities. Those communities built up over a decade in some cases were amazing places of learning.

Unibot: Hah, if you were going to be the delegate of a GCR... which one? Down the road, of course.

Lord Ravenclaw: Hm, that's a difficult question. I'm particularly fond of the North Pacific, I learnt alot about how a democratic region can function and despite the fact I feel an insane urge to cry every time I hear the words "request for review" when it comes to the court, I find the region absolutely amazing to spend time in, and I thoroughly enjoyed my time serving as Minister of Culture and Entertainment for Mcmasterdonia, although I'm disappointed my time was so stretched thanks to RL. Outside of Osiris, The North Pacific was where I spent the most time really, and I learnt a lot with the experience.

Unibot: Thanks so much, Raven. If you've got any final words for our readers feel free to share them. I'm so glad to hear that this ridiculous "Persona Non Grata" charge has been dropped against you.

Lord Ravenclaw: Thank you Uni, it's been fun. A few things I'd like to say: nothing that is worth it, whether in NS or real life, should be easy to attain. Challenges help you discover not just your strengths, but your weaknesses, and you should always aim to improve your skills and see new challenges to ensure that you continue to learn more.

Even veterans of ten years tell me that there's always something new for them to experience as NationStates changes constantly with its politics, so if they can find something new and exciting, I can, and hopefully the players just discovering NS can as well. Also, thank you - I'm glad that it's been dropped, and I'm relieved that my four awards for service to Osiris aren't going to be consigned to the scrap heap.

[Todd McCloud]

The piece on the Lazarus war is a rather biased interpretation that reeks of one particular person's misunderstandings in gameplay. I don't even need to wait for the author to reveal himself - it's painfully obvious.

See, this is the problem with journalism. Some issues are based solely on satire (such as Free Press News Service). Some are little short blurbs that post information (maybe dry at times) along with some fun stuff or interviews. Then there are some which attempt to be objective, but the attempt falls far too short from the goal. Good journalism (which still exists in NS) seeks to get the facts straight and saves their bias and preconceived notions (perverse as they may be) for another day. Or they do the exact opposite, but they don't come out and say their stuff is factual - it's clearly for satire, though there may be some hidden truths between the lines. Both of those schools of thought are alright so long as they're written well. But when the two are mixed, like when bias is mixed in with an attempted factual article or when serious attacks are peppered into a satire article, well, that's no good. It's just drivel fit for a tabloid.

Speaking of tabloid, I propose The Rejected Times branch off into two papers. The issues are big enough and the quality of writing is, shall we say, diverse enough to have a factual edition and a less-reliable tabloid edition. The Rejected Times should be allowed to keep its name (heck routinely there are good publications in each issue that are good reads and would be better if not clouded by bad columns. That's something that I don't say often - there are a lot of good articles in an issue, just that it sometimes has a few bad ones that are off-putting). The Rejected Tabloids would be reserved for bias reported as facts and the likes, like Elvis spotted in Europeia, or a bad, biased interpretation of an ongoing conflict. One in the same.

[Ramaeus]

-snip-

You cannot even properly interpret the meaning of a three paragraph statement. In my statement on the Osirian embassy closures, I said were Lazarus interested in ensuring their conference attendees received the maximum possible benefit while simultaneously limiting the fallout of attendance, then they should have chosen a more neutral and respected host. However, I also state that it is foolish to think of your foe's benefit during war, which the journalist who wrote the article on our stance in the Lazarus-Osiris war would have seen were they not bearing a petty grudge towards us. 'Tis a shame that TRT has lost any shred of journalistic integrity.

Moreover, you state that the only reason given for the elimination of the Lazarus-TEP treaty was that it would help maintain our balance. That is not true. In fact, I have stated in public that the tipping point in our relations was Funk's complete lack of decorum in our IRC, even going so far as to joke about couping TEP. Funk is ultimately the representative of Lazarus, and showing a complete lack of respect towards an ally is not conducive of a healthy relationship. Yet again, TRT cannot even get one point right, because it would interfere with the main point of this particular article: a failed attack on The East Pacific. I won't even bother addressing the rest of your failed hit-piece, as it is fatuous in nature. TRT doesn't have a modicum of journalistic integrity. It also seems that TRT does not even have the capacity to properly research, so here is the paragraph from my statement on the Osirian embassy closures regarding Lazarus:

However, one must consider the People's Republic of Lazarus' and its actions in further exacerbating the current political climate through use of a controversial topic of discussion at its conference on regional sovereignty. Whether Lazarus would be aware of the fallout from their decision about the initial focus of the conference is immaterial. They are at war with Osiris. That being said, were Lazarus interested in ensuring this conference reaches its maximum benefit for the attendees while simultaneously limiting the repercussions for attendance, then they would have benefited from asking a neutral respected region to host. Nevertheless, while ensuring that the conference attendees received the maximum possible advantage from attendance while simultaneously limiting backlash received from attendance would have been the most beneficent action to take, Lazarus is at war with Osiris and thinking of your foe's benefit during war is foolish.

[Todd McCloud]

And boom goes the dynamite

[PrussianEmpire]

lrn2readUni

[Cormac A Stark]

I don't even know where to begin with the problems in this edition. It's amazing to note how The Rejected Times has gone from favorable coverage, even at times praising the Osiris Fraternal Order, to devoting most of this edition to anti-OFO propaganda -- all since I informed Delegate Unibot that TRT could no longer be published in Osiris, ceased contributing to the newspaper, and asked my cabinet members not to contribute either.

Despite having previously agreed to respect The Rejected Realms’ decision to attend the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference, Osiris condemned The Rejected Realms’ attendance at the 2014 Regional Sovereignty Conference as “war-planning” behind closed doors – a claim which The Rejected Realms (and other attendees) dispute.

At the time that Osiris had no problem with The Rejected Realms attending the conference, the war was not on the conference's agenda. As the agenda changed to be more hostile toward Osiris, Osiris became uncomfortable with regions that claimed to want to maintain relations with Osiris discussing the war with our enemy behind closed doors and in our absence.

OSI-BAL relations have been a strong fixture for years,

A little over a year, actually. Prior to my first term in July 2013, relations between Osiris and Balder were icy due to the unprovoked hostility of the UDL Pharaohs toward Balder. This situation changed when Balder supported us so strongly during the July 2013 coup d'etat, while most defenders (such as The Rejected Realms) were ambivalent or even trying to use our coup as a political opportunity for themselves, and the UDL was more interested in ridiculous antics and self-promotion than in helping us restore our sovereignty.

Since then, Balder has been our closest ally, and the only ones asking "how loyal?" in regard to Balder are the ignorant staff of The Rejected Times. Osiris knows how loyal Balder is; we've seen it again and again.

LAZ-BAL relations largely collapsed with Balder’s withdrawal of Treaty of Copenhagen in response to the rise of the People’s Republic of Lazarus (PRL) which they have since accused of being anti-imperialist.

I'm fairly certain this is not accurate either, but I'll let Balder address this.

The question left open with Balder is not whether Balder will support Osiris

Again, this "question left open" seems only to be a question for The Rejected Times. I know of no one else who is wondering if Balder will support us. Balder has always supported us, as our closest ally, since July 2013.

the Osiris Fraternal Brotherhood (OFO)

<insert incoherent, completely false babbling about The East Pacific here>

Just a suggestion for the future: If The Rejected Times is going to cover The East Pacific, perhaps it would be better if someone other than your Delegate -- a fugitive in TEP, who clearly has an axe to grind -- covered TEP.

How long is the Assembly of The Rejected Realms going to allow this farce of a Delegacy to tarnish the region's otherwise respectable history and reputation? Whether it's calling your own citizens things that would get him warned on this forum and causing them to resign citizenship, spewing expletives at other regions and their officials in public, or just telling blatant lies about other regions or their officials, the Unibot Delegacy is making The Rejected Realms look ridiculous. I strongly suggest that The Rejected Realms let him go back to making just himself, or the UDL, look absurd.

Cormac also initiated a widely criticized recall motion against Glen-Rhodes, Minister of Foreign Affairs in The South Pacific for his handling of The South Pacific’s relations with Osiris. The recall motion was rejected and Cormac was forced to his resign his citizenship following the public blowback he received for motioning the recall (given his conflict of interests in the matter).

This is very inaccurate. I initiated a recall against Glen-Rhodes because of his overall handling of The South Pacific's foreign affairs, not specifically because of his handling of relations with Osiris. As I made clear on numerous occasions, my concerns were more with the effect his tenure was having on TSP's treaty alliances -- specifically, the termination of the TNI and Kantrias treaties, as well as relations with other still existing alliances -- and his pursuit of stronger relations exclusively with defenders.

Secondly, while it is true the recall motion was rejected by the 3/4 margin it needed to pass, it was supported by a slim plurality (42%) of the Assembly so it wasn't nearly as unpopular as it's being described here. I left The South Pacific because I wasn't interested in receiving the verbal abuse I was receiving for speaking my mind, or the constant suggestion that I was pursuing foreign interests -- by a vocal minority of the region. I wasn't forced out. In general, I just wasn't interested in TSP's toxic political culture which was the reason I had left the region in the first place and had only returned at Belschaft's invitation.

It's interesting to me that all of this happened in the private chamber of the Assembly of The South Pacific. This is now the second major leak from that chamber in regard to this matter -- the first by Glen-Rhodes, and now this one by Unibot, Chair of the Assembly. What is the point in a private legislative chamber if your regional officials are just going to leak its contents for their own political benefit or as propaganda in The Rejected Times? And not only are they leaking it, they're leaking it inaccurately, which means that no one can see the actual posts to verify the accuracy of what they're saying.

Osiris drops its "Persona Non Grata" charge against Lord Ravenclaw

There was never a "charge," as Raven was not a citizen at the time and persona non grata declarations are not a criminal matter. Regardless, this was an unfortunate incident and as Raven says we have spoken and agreed that we both handled the matter badly. We've decided to put it behind us. I appreciate Raven's tactful, dignified responses to the questions posed, despite Unibot's continual, best efforts to bait him into saying something that could be used as an anti-OFO propaganda sound byte.

Meanwhile, Unibot, I told you earlier this week that I would let you know the fate of the non-aggression pact between Osiris and The Rejected Realms before the week ended. In light of the above hit piece and the attempts to turn your interview into a second hit piece, both of which take up the majority of space in this edition and which signal that The Rejected Realms will not only defend Lazarus but engage in propaganda warfare with Osiris to support Lazarus, I will be asking the Deshret to repeal the non-aggression pact. I look forward to deploying the Legion in support of UIAF the next time they take your Delegacy -- and next time, may they take it for good.

[Benevolent Thomas]

The Divided Defenderdom
EDITORIAL | UNIBOT

This article feels out of date to me. As if though it was written on either 2011 or 2012. While I agree that TITO and 10KI are the Neocons of defending and NS respectively, I reject the notion that the other mainstream organizations truly follow a classical liberal philosophy. In fact, I'd argue that the UDL has de-evolved more into the Marxist theory. I say this because several prominent members including yourself are more committed to liberating regions (and I'll include detags as liberating regional WFEs/RMBs) is somehow more important than preventing invasions in the first place. I will say the divide exist between the fundamentalists and the newer generation of more casual defenders. All defenders have a degree of defender moralism within themselves. All defenders have a minor dislike of invading and the effects it can have on regional communities. If they didn't, they wouldn't be defending. This dislike of invasion is not why many defenders are online during update anymore though. Defending is a fun activity! The fun we have and the interactions we have are the primary reason many, if not most, of us do it. We will not do it when it is not fun. The fundamentalists, I believe, would put defending even before their own enjoyment of the game. I've been there before and I've seen it in others.

I used to put the cause above all else. I'd be online every update defending, even if I didn't want to be. I just knew it was the right thing to do and it was my responsibility to look after founderless communities. Of course my perspective would start to change once I became delegate of 10KI. The liberation of not having to be online during update unless I wanted to be there. NS is a game and if I didn't enjoy it, why in the f*ck was I still playing it? Thankfully I remembered why I fell in love with NS in the first place. Now I'm active most, but not all, updates and I truly have a great time. I hang out with my friends like Jack, Land, Tim, Dyr, Shizensky and my new buddies Xoriet and Sev on a daily basis while at the same time as stopping invaders from realizing their goals and dreams. Invaders get a kick out of ruining the day of natives and defenders (that's the moralism that makes me a defender). I defend in order to ruin the day of invaders (this is the gameplayer in me).

That is the real split to me. The school that defends for a good time and the school that defends purely for moral reasons. Over the past year I've had the chance to work with just about every group of defenders NationStates has to offer and I must say that we are far more alike than different. I think we all need to come to the realization that this is just a game and that we shouldn't take ourselves so seriously. I think a lot of our problems could be solved if we saw each other as players of a game rather than the various strong personalities we've put on.

[Unibot III]

Just a suggestion for the future: If The Rejected Times is going to cover The East Pacific, perhaps it would be better if someone other than your Delegate -- a fugitive in TEP, who clearly has an axe to grind -- covered TEP.

I am not a "fugitive" in TEP. The case against me was closed.

It's interesting to me that all of this happened in the private chamber of the Assembly of The South Pacific. This is now the second major leak from that chamber in regard to this matter

There was no "leak". The "Equality" and the "Recall" votes are now in publicly viewable archives - and your resignation is public knowledge which spread across IRC when it happened.

I will be asking the Deshret to repeal the non-aggression pact. I look forward to deploying the Legion in support of UIAF the next time they take your Delegacy -- and next time, may they take it for good.

That's a serious threat of aggression and I hope that Osiris reconsiders this casual declaration.

[Ramaeus]

That's a serious threat of aggression and I hope that Osiris reconsiders this casual declaration.

So, when a Defender makes a coup threat, 'tis a joke. But, when someone from another ideology threatens a coup, 'tis a serious threat? That doesn't reek of hypocrisy to you, Uni?

[Unibot III]

That's a serious threat of aggression and I hope that Osiris reconsiders this casual declaration.

So, when a Defender makes a coup threat, 'tis a joke. But, when someone from another ideology threatens a coup, 'tis a serious threat? That doesn't reek of hypocrisy to you, Uni?

I don't see where Cormac was making a "joke". Seemed like a pretty careless, real threat to me.

[Alvalero]

The question left open with Balder is not whether Balder will support Osiris – Zander Cerebella’s announcement ensured there was no doubt remaining in any one’s mind in regards to whether or not Balder would stand behind its long-time ally, Osiris. However, when commentators asked whether Balder would support hostile action against Lazarus, the Statsminister skirted around providing a direct answer, noting instead that the public would have to wait for Balder to discuss the matter.

So we aren't allowed to come to an agreed consensus without being criticised?
Unlike some on NS, Balder's official views are not up to a certain person to decide.

OSI-BAL relations have been a strong fixture for years,

No they have not. Relations were bad until around summer of last year.

LAZ-BAL relations largely collapsed with Balder’s withdrawal of Treaty of Copenhagen in response to the rise of the People’s Republic of Lazarus (PRL) which they have since accused of being anti-imperialist.

That would be down to a number of our citizens being banned from the region. That would be the defining factor in relations ceasing.

[Unibot III]

OSI-BAL relations have been a strong fixture for years,

No they have not. Relations were bad until around summer of last year.

Osiris and Balder were legally treatied with one another through the Pan-Sinker Security Pact at least two years ago.