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.