| Assembly-Cabinet discussion on conference attendance |
|
I was on board with the idea of the Lazarus conference when it was intended to be about regional sovereignty, but looking at that agenda I don't think we should participate - regardless of Europeia. I'm seeing four days scheduled for talking about the Osiris-Lazarus war - half the conference - and zero days scheduled to talk about regional sovereignty.
The Lazarus conference that TSP signed up for has been replaced by a new one, effectively about the Osi-Lazarus war. TSP is not a participant in this war so we should not be involved - I have no issues with our presence as an observer, but it should be made clear that we are not a participant. If Lazarus actually wants to hold the conference we signed up to at some point in the future that is a different matter. 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)
(08-31-2014, 08:31 PM)Unibot Wrote: @Kring: That is precisely my problem. Why isn't that information public? Surely knowing what is set to be discussed would help potential attendees decide to attend. I also have a problem with discussing the war in a conference that was not promoted as a venue to discuss the war. I did not agree to attending this conference to discuss the war plans of Lazarus, nor do I think it is appropriate to do it. I was under the impression that, regardless of accusations, the conference would focus on regional sovereignty, and thus made a good faith effort to attend. 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
If we're in agreement that we didn't agree to attend a conference about the war - and I think most of us are - why not simply make it clear to Lazarus that we're not willing to attend such a conference? The good faith Kris and the rest of the Cabinet has shown to Lazarus hasn't been reciprocated, and we've now been roped into something completely different to what we agreed to.
It's incredibly bad form on Lazarus' part to pull this kind of crap, and we shouldn't put up with it. Not only is this not what we agreed to, attending a conference on Lazarus' war plans involves us in a war that we are not involved in and which the Assembly would not vote to involve us in. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
Well -- we're involved is as much as our treaty makes us involved.
Seeing that the conference already started -- is it possible to attend as an observer for the first four days ... and really only get involved during the second part? I think it might be poor for to pull out after the conference has already begun.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
With the release of the schedule I think that we should back out of the Reg Sov conference, as we didn't join to discuss the Osi-Laz war. I also think that we should bow out of co-hosting Euro's Independence conference, as a sign that we don't accept threats and ultimatums.
We honestly shouldn't be attending either. The way in which Europeia has treated us hasn't been exemplary either.
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
Do we know who else is meant to be attending the Euro conference and what its agenda is?
I can see how dropping out of the Lazarus conference could look like bowing to Euro pressure, especially if we stay involved in their conference, but if it looks like being meaningful then I'm not sure we should avoid it just to make a statement. We can make it clear to Euro that we don't appreciate the way they handled this and would have gone to Lazarus if they hadn't pulled this crap without boycotting.... If it's going to be worth attending. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
I think we should go to both.
We are in a unique position in the NS world that allows us to be in touch and understand both sides of NS sphere's of influence. Even if we only are there mostly to listen, I think at least we will gain an understanding of how people feel. If region's do not value this, than they are not appreciating what TSP is and has to offer as an ally. I do think hosting a conference with a UCR about independence is the more important of the two and this is our opprotunity to discuss with other like minded regions how to best maintain friendships with all types of regions. But I don't really see why we can not do both.
I also appreciate the cabinet taking the time to have a dialogue with the assembly.
(09-01-2014, 10:50 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Well -- we're involved is as much as our treaty makes us involved. The treaty only involves us if we choose it to; mutual defense is voluntary on a as-requested and as-approved basis. Lazarus can ask us for help, but we have no duty to provide it. There is also a clause relating to cases where the requesting party has provoked hostile activity, which probably applies in this case. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |