| [DEBATING] A1906.01: Alignment Act |
|
If people want the SPSF to have a Defender military alignment that would be one thing Kris, but don't expect us all to be excited or interested in it.
If people want to go beyond the SPSF and try to redefine TSP's entire regional identity then expect people to have problems with it, especially if we're being asked to accept that the last sixteen years was some kind of aberration where we've been kept from our "natural" state of being as Defenders. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
Who ever said prior alignment decisions were aberrations? Decisions are made based on the regional community of each time. In 2013 it was decided that the NSA should be Independent. I assume the citizens who made that decision had the region’s best interests in mind when they voted, even if others may not have agreed.
In 2019 there is a chance we could decide that, based on the cultural identity we have developed, declaring a defender alignment is a natural step. I don’t think it’s reasonable to deny that same benefit of the doubt to those supporting a defender alignment, or to keep implying that “defender” is somehow a dirty word. Nobody is being forced to change their personal beliefs. We are merely discussing what’s the best course of action in view of the region’s evolving identity and values. Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
(06-13-2019, 04:00 PM)Tsunamy Wrote:(06-13-2019, 02:53 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: Creating a new language for defending is just cringe-worthy, full stop. It would get TSP made fun of and not taken seriously. It’s also a pretty big symbol that we think, “Ew defenders— we’re not like *that*...” which is just a big middle finger to the defender community we’d be trying to become good friends with. Due respect Tsu, but you did literally say you wanted us to come up with a different name than defending. We responded to that, letting you and others know that it was kind of a ridiculous suggestion that would actually harm the efforts here. We didn’t just imagine the posts saying TSP needed it’s own word for defending... I’m not really sure what else you want, at this point. I don’t say that to be hostile. But what else exactly are you asking us to come up with? Defending is defending. TSP’s motivation is our democratic ideals. There isn’t much room for innovation here— defending is a game mechanic, and admins aren’t about to revolutionize it. We’re proposing that TSP block raids and liberate, while promoting the idea of democratic government. That *is* the “why we’re doing it” part. It’s kind of like asking “how are we going to revolutionize playing football” and expecting something different from throwing and kicking a football across the field, you know? What else is needed to make you feel comfortable? Without being able to articulate that and come up with some examples, I’m kind of at a loss here. It doesn’t help that Bel’s bad faith is being amplified either. He’s gone from slime ball tactics of saying we’re working on behalf of foreign interests, to now offering up clearly bad faith ideas that would either mean the literal opposite of being defender (attacking regions and forcing them to be democracies) or water it down to the point of meaninglessness (only defending pre-existing democracies)... all of course while he’s saying he doesn’t even have time for TSP anyways. (06-14-2019, 06:50 AM)sandaoguo Wrote: [Bel's] now offering up clearly bad faith ideas that would either mean the literal opposite of being defender (attacking regions and forcing them to be democracies) or water it down to the point of meaninglessness (only defending pre-existing democracies). I think the "defender sceptics" (for lack of a better term) do have a point. Before we go about declaring ourselves defenders, can we discuss what ways the whole defender thing can look outside of the prevailing idea you and others have been pushing? Perhaps we should have a series of discussions and votes (each covering an individual principle) to produce a coherent vision on military principles within TSP. My personal take is this whole thing has moved beyond a simple label and, as such, the approach to any resolution or amendment should be collaborative rather than prescriptive.
Former Associate Justice of the High Court of the South Pacific (4 December 2019 to 5 February 2021)
How has it moved beyond a simple label? The way I see it, the argument goes as follows:
Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
I’m gonna be blunt, I don’t see “skeptics” making good points. I see things being made needlessly complicated and convoluted, and certain individuals just obstructing like they always do.
The issue I’m seeing here is just not understanding what’s actually being proposed, and asking for things that can’t actually be given. Defending is very simple: the SPSF will monitor raiders and move at the same time to block their raids. When raiders have occupied a region, the SPSF will be try to amass more numbers than the raiders to liberate it. When none of that is going on, the SPSF will spend its time cleaning up RMBs and WFEs from old raids, also known as detagging. And in between all of that, the SPSF will do things like antifa missions against Nazi and fascist regions. If you object to any of that, you’re objecting to being defender and there isn’t much to do on either of our ends. That’s what it means for TSP to be a defender region when it comes to the practicalities. If you don’t think TSP should do the above, vote against the laws that are being proposed, and the chips will fall where they may. This stuff about the UDL or the FRA or whatever is pointless nonsense brought up to derail debate. We all get that Belschaft doesn’t want TSP to go defender. He hates the idea because he hates Unibot and associates being defender with Unibot. That’s his issue to get over, and having dealt with Belschaft for like 5 years now, I know for a fact he’s not going to change his mind. After all, he tried to import foreigners to win an election for the explicit purpose of illegally purging defenders from TSP because he thought he was losing the debate about our alignment years ago— his position on this has been remarkably consistent. So I’m just waiting for Tsu to explain his concerns in a way we can understand. Because we’re not really getting what the issue or the ask is. I think some of this is minutiae about how TSP will do X under Y circumstances, and that’s something we can sit here going over for the next year without ever getting any closer to having a “full picture” of what a defender TSP will do in all cases. We’ve come up with a broad justification for our military— democratic values — and said this is why we defend. It’s why we *currently* defend. So we’re not sure what else is needed. Because we aren’t going to be able to come up with some brand new revolutionary way to defend, as it’s a game mechanic that isn’t going to change. So we need Tsu to clarify what his request here means.
Please, continue accusing me of all sorts of nefarious intent on the basis of me expressing more or less the same views I've held about R/D for the last five years.
That makes me feel like you're acting in good faith and are looking for a reasonable discussion that won't alienate half the region. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
Does anyone’s opinion besides the few of you who keep pushing this really matter? No matter what is said it doesn’t seem to make a difference to y’all so why bother asking if you’re gonna just try and do what you want anyway.
This is Penguin!!
Nothing Gold Can Stay Penguins shall one day rule the pie! And by "pie", I mean "World"!! Goddess Empress Queen Princess Lady of TSP Lilium Inter Spinas // Non timebo mala I have done a lot of things in the Region in my History. There's a list somewhere if you wanna go looking.
(06-14-2019, 03:49 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Please, continue accusing me of all sorts of nefarious intent on the basis of me expressing more or less the same views I've held about R/D for the last five years. You literally said me and Roavin were "using TSP" -- our "resources, prestige, and reputation" -- to prop up the "Defender sphere." That's the same rhetoric you used years ago to justify wanting to purge me from TSP. You forfeited the claim to be debating, let alone doing so in good faith, the moment you made that post, as far as I'm concerned. You don't make up half the region. Half the region doesn't actually oppose defending, and they don't oppose officially declaring ourselves committed to it. What you're doing here is assuming most people share your position, because that's what you've been used to for the last five years. Sometimes things change. If you wanted your opinion to have weight, maybe you shouldn't have gone to the gutter when you got frustrated. (06-14-2019, 07:11 PM)Penguin Wrote: Does anyone’s opinion besides the few of you who keep pushing this really matter? No matter what is said it doesn’t seem to make a difference to y’all so why bother asking if you’re gonna just try and do what you want anyway. Please offer some suggestions, and we can have a back and forth about it. (There's not much I can help you with if all you're going to say is you're struggling to adapt...)That's what Tsu and quite a few others are doing. Just because I don't take Bel's posts seriously, thanks to the tactics he pulled already, doesn't mean I'm not listening to others. But that also doesn't mean every single suggestion is going to be thrown into the laws we're writing, just because you made the post and it's your opinion. If you just flat out oppose it, then feel free to do so. But if that's the case, you can't expect people to bend over backwards for you. Defenders in TSP have been patiently waiting for years, putting in a lot of hard work building up our military and forging good relations, winning elections, and all that, and now we're proposing something we truly believe will help TSP grow. There's no point in watering it down to the point where the change becomes largely meaningless (or, in some cases with some of these suggestions, push us backwards from where we already are) to win the votes of people who just flat out don't want us to go defender.
I don't think much productive is going to come out of this thread.
Perhaps we should move discussion to this thread over here: https://tspforums.xyz/thread-7220.html
-tsunamy
[forum admin] |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES ![[-]](https://tspforums.xyz/images/sidr/blue/collapse.png)
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |