Advertisement
by Ballotonia » Tue May 24, 2011 8:58 am
Biyah wrote:Edit: [center] apparently does not work, edited it out.
[align=center]CENTERED[/align]
by Sedgistan » Thu May 26, 2011 4:13 pm
Anur-Sanur's citizenship has been removed for working to unseat the legitimately elected delegate of the region, and for leaking the contents of the citizens' restricted access forum. His nation is Realmmatorr II - please do not endorse him.
* @CrazyGirl smells
<@Felasia> Damn, I missed the most exciting thing that happen on NS in months...
<@Biyah> don't worry, it'll blow up in another month
<@Biyah> when TSP notices
by Sedgistan » Thu May 26, 2011 4:14 pm
I feel uncomfortable opening an embassy with The Rejected Realms at this due to the fact that I think the nation handing that went on is a underhanded technique that underminds game play. Considering my platform as delegate is a very pro-game play stance, I feel by accepting the embassy, I acknowledge this type of delegate transfer as legitimate.
by Punk Reloaded » Thu May 26, 2011 5:55 pm
by Naivetry » Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:30 pm
by Daynor » Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:20 am
Ah! Finally, new terminology. Sedge did not have native support, he had native endorsements.Naivetry wrote:We also condemn the use of outside troops on either side, and we remain disappointed that the first such troops to infringe on the sovereignty of The South Pacific were brought in to depose a delegate elected solely by native endorsements.
I personally telegramed every endorser of Sedge. As did Fudge. As did SB. Unendorsements campaigns will get us no where if anyone that removes their endorsement of Sedge while endorsing Bellz is booted. If it ever would have worked, it would have taken a long time.Naivetry wrote:We maintain that the appropriate first response to a shift in native endorsements would have been an unendorsement campaign; in that way, control over the delegacy would have remained in the hands of the natives of The South Pacific rather than in the hands of outside military forces.
While I respect that you think there is a disconnect between onsite and offsite TSP, I can't agree with that observation. Primarily, in TSP we don't even have forum elections, it is up to the WA members of the region to decide who is delegate, even if they have never logged into the forums. Our government gives more power to those not present on the forum than any I've ever seen.Naivetry wrote:By bringing in outside troops, The South Pacific's forum government chose to place their trust in foreign allies rather than in the hands of the nations they were supposed to represent. The reluctance of the government to place its fate solely in the hands of the residents of The South Pacific underlines the degree to which the forum had become disconnected from the region as a whole. That disconnection was - and remains - the only reason TRR has suspended relations with the forum government of TSP.
by Mahaj » Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:47 am
I personally telegramed every endorser of Sedge. As did Fudge. As did SB.
<Koth> I'm still going by the assumption that Mahaj is Unibot's kid brother or something
Kandarin(Naivetry): You're going to have a great NS career ahead of you if you want it, Mahaj. :)
<@Eluvatar> Why is SkyDip such a purist raiderist
<+frattastan> Because his region was never raided.
<+maxbarry> EarthAway: I guess I might dabble in raiding just to experience it better, but I would not like to raid regions of natives, so I'd probably be more interested in defense and liberations
by Cerberion » Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:13 am
To the extent that we believe those involved in events in The South Pacific have failed in their responsibilities to the community of TRR, we will pursue sanctions against them as individuals in our own region and for that reason alone.
by Ballotonia » Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:03 am
Naivetry wrote:We maintain that the appropriate first response to a shift in native endorsements would have been an unendorsement campaign; in that way, control over the delegacy would have remained in the hands of the natives of The South Pacific rather than in the hands of outside military forces.
Cerberion wrote:To the extent that we believe those involved in events in The South Pacific have failed in their responsibilities to the community of TRR, we will pursue sanctions against them as individuals in our own region and for that reason alone.
Will there be any announcement on what sanctions are taken on these individuals?
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:18 pm
Daynor wrote:Ah! Finally, new terminology. Sedge did not have native support, he had native endorsements.
I personally telegramed every endorser of Sedge. As did Fudge. As did SB. Unendorsements campaigns will get us no where if anyone that removes their endorsement of Sedge while endorsing Bellz is booted. If it ever would have worked, it would have taken a long time.
While I respect that you think there is a disconnect between onsite and offsite TSP, I can't agree with that observation. Primarily, in TSP we don't even have forum elections, it is up to the WA members of the region to decide who is delegate, even if they have never logged into the forums. Our government gives more power to those not present on the forum than any I've ever seen.
Secondly, as I said, you did not see vast amounts of TSP natives campaigning against SB. I didn't see any. The on-sight community of The South Pacific strongly supported and supports Southern Bellz. Those that supported Sedge came in after the coup.
Cerberion wrote:Will there be any announcement on what sanctions are taken on these individuals?
Ballotonia wrote:Doesn't that lofty principle die a screaming death the very moment the non-native Delegate decides to kick native nations for having an opinion (in terms of providing endorsements) which doesn't match his own (foreign) agenda?
his own (foreignindependent) agenda?
I'm interpreting the above to be code for nobody getting any kind of punishment whatsoever.
by Punk Reloaded » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:17 pm
by Southern Bellz » Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:18 pm
by Ballotonia » Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:32 pm
Naivetry wrote:Ballotonia wrote:Doesn't that lofty principle die a screaming death the very moment the non-native Delegate decides to kick native nations for having an opinion (in terms of providing endorsements) which doesn't match his own (foreign) agenda?his own (foreignindependent) agenda?
Fixed.
And no, it does not. Until a delegate decides to bring in troops from outside the region to prop up his endorsement count, how many nations he ejects and for what reasons remains a purely internal affair. Give me a choice between upholding democracy and upholding a region's sovereignty, and I'll pick sovereignty every time.
Naivetry wrote:Not to get into the whole tired debate over nativity, btw, but I think the old griefing rules got it right.
Naivetry wrote:I'm interpreting the above to be code for nobody getting any kind of punishment whatsoever.
On the contrary - it's code for "since the interregional community is already expressing its disapproval of Sedge on the world stage, how about you drop the witch hunt at our front door and give us a few weeks to sort out our internal disagreements internally?"
by Durkadurkiranistan II » Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:28 pm
by Improving Wordiness » Tue Jun 14, 2011 12:26 am
Klaus Devestatorie wrote:I'm a massive tool. ;)
by Durkadurkiranistan II » Tue Jun 14, 2011 1:15 am
by Ballotonia » Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:34 am
Durkadurkiranistan II wrote:Can you provide an estimate for the length of time required to be in a feeder before achieving native status?
by Daynor » Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:57 am
I was out of town when I found out there had been a coup, so I was gone for a significant part of the coup, but as soon as I got home that's what I did. I'd say that was our first response.Naivetry wrote:1) We are aware that unendorsement campaigns took place eventually. We believe they should have been the first response... and I believe, in the absence of outside endorsements for Devonitians, the only response. The endorsements which elected Devonitians were the endorsements of TSP natives, and that was the tragedy and the irony of this whole business. For as long as only the continued support of their endorsements was keeping him in power, the right thing to do was to ask them to remove that support, rather than asking for foreign troops to override it.
Or he'd keep banjecting WAs that endorsed Bellz so that any campaign would progress extremely slow...Naivetry wrote:2) I don't think you can claim that unendorsement campaigns alone as an initial response would have been pointless. Either Dev would have done the principled thing and left, or he would have asked for foreign troops of his own once he began bleeding endorsements, at which point TSP would have been absolutely justified in asking for assistance from the rest of the world.
We did. That statement is pure spin. We asked natives to unendorse Sedge. They found themselves in your lovely region, Nai. But the vast, vast majority of the reason we got the delegacy back was TSP nations, which simply outnumber any foreign forces we could bring in.Naivetry wrote:I know everyone's kneejerk reaction when these things happen is to get back in there and recover the delegacy ASAP... but using military force as your first response presumes that the previous delegate had the support of the region, rather than allowing the region to demonstrate their support by removing the newcomer on their own. It's a scary thing to send those telegrams and then wait for a response - to leave the fate of your region in the hands of all those hundreds of nearly anonymous WA nations - but if the forum government is unwilling to rely on the support of the nations they serve, that says to me that the forum government itself doesn't believe it can rely on the support of the nations of the region. I think you could have counted on the natives of TSP - I just wish you would have!
Naivetry wrote:3) I don't understand the argument that "it would have taken a long time" as a reason not to rely on unendorsement campaigns before calling in outside troops. The amount of time something takes has no effect on its ethical value, and TSP was not under any time constraint that would have made it impracticable. As it was, Devonitians ran out of Influence pretty quickly; and while none of us can know exactly how Influence worked into the equation, it was certainly the cost of ejecting TSP natives, not foreign troops, which prevented him from being able to eject enough nations at the end to remain in power.
Well, to be precise, the WA members of TSP are allowed to endorse whom they please from a slate of candidates who are members of the forum; but that's not the issue, here. Every region I know of in NS places some sort of restriction on who is allowed to swap endorsements for the delegacy without opposition from the offsite government. That's just sanity - the bare minimum it takes to ensure some basic continuity of governance. What I do find problematic is the assumption that any forum government has a natural right to make those rules, or to enforce them by calling in outsiders unless another group of nations has actually invaded first.1
I think it was pretty clear when nations who had never posted before to my memory were posting on the RMB asking for Dev to be removed. It seems pretty clear to me that Dev had massive opposition from TSP members on-sight, not just off.First, there's a difference between "lack of support" and "opposition" (also between "support" and "lack of opposition"); we've never said - nor meant to imply - that anyone in TSP actually opposed SB's delegacy except for Devonitians (and anyone he managed to win over to his side). But here's the point I think we all need to consider: when a government has held power in a feeder for months and/or years, does their continued presence signal the approval of the region's natives, or merely indifference - and how can we know unless we've made a point of asking them?
No problem, but, at a certain point it'll be time to move on. I don't think TSP is the kind of region that has any business harking on this for very long at all. It is over, new day. The reason I'm commenting is to let anyone who actually reads these things, which I believe is most likely not large, that there is another side. And that even disregarding my regional affiliation, I'm always concerned when views start popping up that are going to make relations between regions even less relevant.Thanks for the response, Topid. I hope we'll have an opportunity to continue this discussion.
by Ballotonia » Tue Jun 14, 2011 8:02 am
Daynor wrote:This isn't a view you have had very long and I hope it isn't permanent. Being able to help friends and get help from friends in the inter-regional community is the main point of having friends in the inter-regional community. And that is an aspect of the game we should strengthen not weaken.
by Naivetry » Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:00 am
Southern Bellz wrote:I asked Sedge. He told me that he passed the request on to the RRA (or whatever version it was called at the time before I get jumped on for a technicality) and that they decided to not get involved. As to if that request got passed on, who knows, but it was one of the main points TRR made when cutting off diplomatic ties with TSP so I am interested in the answer as well.
Ballotonia wrote:Independent. Foreign. Both are true, it's not one or the other. Devonitians wasn't a TSP native.
I find it bizarre that on one side you're talking about the will of the people (in NS: nations) versus that of those in charge (in NS: the regional Government, or the Delegate), then here you make a 180 degree turn and sell out the will of those same people by condoning a dictatorship rigging what should be a democratic vote by kicking nations out of the region.
For Freedom to exist in an NS region, Democracy has to outweigh Sovereignty. Every time.
Well, at least I'm not in TRR swapping for the delegacy, am I? If only that 'let them handle matters internally' had applied to The South Pacific. But it didn't, so Sedgistan went in to decide things for them. And then all of a sudden sovereignty was important again, while pretending Sedgistan's nation had somehow magically become native.
Daynor wrote:I was out of town when I found out there had been a coup, so I was gone for a significant part of the coup, but as soon as I got home that's what I did. I'd say that was our first response.
But the vast, vast majority of the reason we got the delegacy back was TSP nations, which simply outnumber any foreign forces we could bring in.
Also, I'm a little disappointed this is the state of foreign affairs in this game. I have said for a while I thought it was dying, now, to use a foreign relation at all is going to be spun as ignoring the members of a region? Nail in the coffin. This isn't a view you have had very long and I hope it isn't permanent. Being able to help friends and get help from friends in the inter-regional community is the main point of having friends in the inter-regional community. And that is an aspect of the game we should strengthen not weaken.
As Sedge so proudly states, he was close to turning the delegate position over to GreenGrimilins or someone else, that nation in particular having been tarting beyond the endocap for a while, and would have had significantly more influence than Sedge, and thus the ability to boot even more WAs trying to put Bellz back in the delegacy.
Yes, my point is we actually listen to the view of the WAs in the region a little bit, which is more than any other community I've ever been a part of, including every other feeder.
I think it was pretty clear when nations who had never posted before to my memory were posting on the RMB asking for Dev to be removed. It seems pretty clear to me that Dev had massive opposition from TSP members on-sight, not just off.First, there's a difference between "lack of support" and "opposition" (also between "support" and "lack of opposition"); we've never said - nor meant to imply - that anyone in TSP actually opposed SB's delegacy except for Devonitians (and anyone he managed to win over to his side). But here's the point I think we all need to consider: when a government has held power in a feeder for months and/or years, does their continued presence signal the approval of the region's natives, or merely indifference - and how can we know unless we've made a point of asking them?
And that even disregarding my regional affiliation, I'm always concerned when views start popping up that are going to make relations between regions even less relevant.
by Cerberion » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:55 am
by Sedgistan » Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:02 am
Cerberion wrote:Even more ironic considering that individual was talking to Sedge through his puppet, claiming the exact same justifications that were being used by Sedge.
by Cerberion » Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:15 am
Sedgistan wrote:Cerberion wrote:Even more ironic considering that individual was talking to Sedge through his puppet, claiming the exact same justifications that were being used by Sedge.
Except that his justifications were invalid, as TRR is one of the most active game-created-regions around, and does more than most (all?) of the others to get the nations resident in the region involved.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Angeloid Astraea
Advertisement