Megalodon Mall can't beat Jason Statham
Advertisement
by Ever-Wandering Souls » Fri Sep 07, 2018 7:51 pm
1) 6 weeks ago, The South Pacific issued several proscriptions. Among those proscriptions was one aimed at me. Within that proscription, the cabinet:
>Repeats a claim they’ve made concerning an interaction I once had with Imkitopia, which Imki herself says she does not wanted used, because it is a “non-issue.” Bonus.
>Puts words into TWP’s mouth while vaguely accusing me of “ill-suited conduct.”
>Puts words into TEP’s mouth while accusing me of “blackmail,” something their criminal code solidifies as a very serious accusation, something they’ve shown no evidence for, and something which TEP confirms is nonsense.
Items 2 and 3 there have been quietly walked back to a degree in my suit on the matter in their court system (which you may find useful to read for more detail), but remain in the official Proscription, and without public withdrawal/correction.
2) Nearly 2 weeks ago, the administrative team in The South Pacific issued an administrative ban of prominent members (and political enemies of sections of the admin team) Tim and Escade, shortly after both they and several admins received a 48 hour discord posting ban. In the announcement, they are accused by a root admin of “clear and ongoing harassment,” a claim that the Prime Minister supports, and which another root admin adds a claim of “targeted bullying” to. These are very serious claims, of course, and several members of The South Pacific reasonably asked for evidence of. The admin team has, instead, refused to share evidence or even specific details of claims with the accused or anyone else outside their team, largely only saying that “various high ranking and highly respected players made complaints and, I think the responses of to this thread support the decision.” When pressed further, the only details provided are entirely to do with regional politics and not harassment, and even name a political recall process against the banned players as an example of an administrative warning. Other administrators have confirmed that no evidence has yet been forwarded to them.
This whole process, accusations of harassment without evidence or intent to provide evidence (as repeatedly stressed), is not only against TSP’s own Forum Moderation Policy which states ” Do not make false accusations in order to tarnish the reputations of other people. If you make an accusation, it is your responsibility to provide sufficient proof,” but is also against the basic standards of good moderation. For example, TSP’s most recent prior announced administrative ban in their operations center mirrored the result of a Europeian investigation which, while on the less detailed end of the spectrum for Europeia’s investigative work, still makes clear and specific accusations, explicitly mentions that they have specific and relevant evidence that *supports* personal testimony, and which presumably in line with Euro’s usual administrative processed, is available for further inquiry by other admin teams. Meanwhile, TSP makes excuses not to share evidence that include “The admins aren't going to do anything that will just give Tim and Escade ammo from wherever they plant their feet after TSP,” and (paraphrasing this time), ‘it’d be too hard to draw specific evidence out of a litany of quotes without context.’ Historically, as you surely know all to well, the spread of such unverified claims, even with expressed intent to provide verification in the near future, has been met with incredible (and rightful) backlash. In this case, the only intent shown has been to avoid going into any detail at all. Regardless of the debate as to whether or not bans were warranted, I think we can generally agree that accusations of harassment with no intent to provide proof in the present or future are not something we support.
3) In the course of this matter being brought into the public light, it’s come out that three out of the four administrators in TSP, along with the current Prime Minister, hang out with the player Unibot in a private server. As you almost certainly know, Unibot is a player that, for good reasons that cannot be discussed here, is banned from most every large region and their offsite communication areas with extreme prejudice, and who is near-universally barred from even attending public offsite Gameplay community events. The fourth, uninvolved administrator effectively confirms this, in a post mentioning the fact that Tim once brought this matter up, in a post that can best be summed up as (not an actual quote) "questioning this association is fine, but also not fine, because we're using questioning it as one of our few explicit reasons why you deserved your ban, because it's 'smearing,' and you're questioning it in bad faith because you were asked to calm down about it but did not." While policing who others associate with is not often a level to which we go as a community, there are indeed individuals whom we strive to isolate from Gameplay, and the majority of those running TSP associating closely with such an individual seems to me like cause for concern.
The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258
Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative
by Siwale » Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:45 pm
by Klaus Devestatorie » Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:46 pm
by Cormactopia Prime » Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:47 pm
by Bowzin » Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:52 pm
by Escade » Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:52 pm
by Pergamon » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:04 pm
by Juuuuust DO IT » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:09 pm
Pergamon wrote:Is this really about St Abbaddon, or more about fighting the New Pacific Order? I wonder.
by Cormactopia Prime » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:10 pm
Pergamon wrote:Is this really about St Abbaddon, or more about fighting the New Pacific Order? I wonder.
by Flanderlion » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:11 pm
by Efrua » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:40 pm
by Topid » Tue Nov 20, 2018 11:52 pm
Being exiled until further notice or until the region of Pacific nullifies the Expulsion, or unless a new elected government overrides the treaty and you can return.
by Skallerak » Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:25 am
Topid wrote:That's stupid for anyone that doesn't just hope to sit ad delegate of a graveyard
My my, what short memories we have!
To those defenders of Topid, let's review what actually happened after Hawkswind left the game and Topid took command. (And, for the record, Topid's dubious claim that all the natives of St Abby were only there because he invited them in is false. Three years ago, on my former nation Malisin, I personally asked Hawkswind for the region's password so I could join without even knowing that Topid existed at the time.)
Here is, in my own words, a dispatch written during the immediate aftermath of the DEN invasion over a year and a half ago.
As you'll read, Topid made all sorts of promises about his intentions to rebuild St Abby, and to his credit I believe he was sincere at the time. But his real life was interfering with his ability to govern St Abby, and hey, I can understand, we've all been there.
However, after making his intention to essentially be leaving the game explicit, and despite requests from Kitsco, myself and the other natives at the time, Topid, having been granted exclusive powers of delegation not through free election by the natives but from moderator bequest (which the mods granted to him to restore the region after DEN's use of the Predator program), Topid instead lobbied to have the Liberation of St Abby repealed so that he could put a permanent password on the region while he left the game, dooming it to total inactivity for at least the foreseeable two to three years. During this time period, Topid was not only going to password protect the region permanently, he was also planning to eject every native from the region.
He waived any objections to this plan by claiming it was for the protection of the region from invaders, but, au contraire, he rejected any proposal to seek permanent protection from a larger defender region by claiming it would jeopardize St Abby's sovereignty.
The only thing Topid did right here was finally hand the delegacy over to Kitsco, who thankfully finally got protection for us and rid the region of Topid.
Relevant Topid quotes: "There will be no sleepers in St Abbaddon soon. This is really and truly the end of the St Abbaddon saga, and I know how to wrap this up." (B-but I thought Topid was gonna rebuild the region!)
"What matters isn't the endorsement cap when we start emptying the region." (Wew laddie.)
TLDR: No, Topid, you aren't St Abbaddon, (though you did nearly kill it) and you aren't its rightful ruler.
by Solorni » Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:34 am
by Topid » Wed Nov 21, 2018 7:16 pm
Skallerak wrote:Topid, YOU wanted to kill the region in a petty "if I can't have it, no one can" ploy.
I know this fact is inconvenient for you, but it never becomes less true.
by Southern Bellz » Wed Nov 21, 2018 8:15 pm
by Cormactopia Prime » Thu Nov 22, 2018 12:15 am
by Elegarth » Thu Nov 22, 2018 1:33 pm
Cormactopia Prime wrote:The idea of Topid wanting to kill St Abbaddon is pretty hilarious, especially when his record is contrasted with the current Delegate's.
by Ever-Wandering Souls » Thu Nov 22, 2018 1:45 pm
The Alicorns (Equestria) wrote:Let them stay, no need to badmouth them...From our view a bunch of nations just came in, seized the delegate position, and changed a few superficial things...we play NationStates differently...there's really no reason for us to be butthurt.
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8944227
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=8951258
Reploid Productions wrote:Raiders are endlessly creative
by Glen-Rhodes » Thu Nov 22, 2018 2:07 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement