Oh my! So many questions. I'll answer them all in no particular order.

Do you see your involvement in raider gameplay being a roadblock to working with defender organizations?  If so what would you do to overcome that roadblock?

For the most part, no.

I have had formal relations with Defender groups before, even gentleman's agreements, upon occasions, and that was working as a Raider, not for a Feeder region. LWU and FRA had an embassy for years, for example. Attempts and the success on Nazi Europe was a joint effort between raiders and defenders and I am proud of the role I played in it. I have represented TNP on UDL's forums before, and I worked hard on maintaining a relationship between LWU and Lazarus even after it was clear the Revolutionary government meant to make the region Defender.

So in many respects, purely as a raider representative and ignoring my involvement representing neutral or independent regions, I've had fairly good relations with most Defender groups, so that shouldn't be an issue.

Mostly. There is one notable exception, and that's XKI.

10000 Islands is a very, very extremest and purist Defender group. They do not even allow raiders to maintain an account on their forums for any reason, with any such attempts answered with the account being deleted and the IP address blocked. They even go so far as to prohibit non-TITO Knights from having any sort of contact with raiders and have, in the past, classified The North Pacific as a raider organization, despite the NPA's long history of Defender (and Raider) actions. More unfortunate still, because I would very much like TSP to sign a mutual defense agreement with them.

XKI has quite a lot of members and a fairly active update army. They have proven their worth in preventing Feeder and Sinker coups in the past, but usually refuse to get involved these days unless they have a formal agreement. Fortunately, we can easily work through an intermediate as to not sully their forums with my presence. Failing that, Texas is part of their TITO alliance and has also been able to put up numbers in the past. They are far, far more friendly and have none of the restrictions or policies XKI has. It might be of value to work with them first, and try to put XKI at ease.

XKI is, to put it mildly, a suspicious bunch.

What do you believe contributed to the downfall of the TSP-TNI relationship?  What would you have done differently if you were MoFA at that time?

Ah, I'm glad you've brought this up. I've been reading up on the matter with a keen interest.

The New Inquisition has always been a bit touchy on foreign affairs. They require a delicate touch and notification well in advance to avoid cultural issues. They have a long history of immediately ending relations in a huff if they feel they have been slighted, and their statement leaves little doubt that they felt slighted.

However, our treaty with TRR is just the tip of the iceberg, I feel. TNI might have been convinced to maintain their treaty and their relationship with The South Pacific if it had not been for the other cause that they directly cited:

"[...] it would be remiss if we neglected to note that we had previous concerns regarding the conduct of The South Pacific and some of its senior officials. In particular, while serving as Foreign Minister of TSP, Glen-Rhodes has not only criticised TNI publicly but also openly questioned the basis of TNI's alliance with TSP, using it pose aggressive questions to TNI. This conduct has been defended by TSP on the basis that Glen-Rhodes has been speaking in a solely personal capacity, but that is not the standard of behaviour which we would expect of our own Foreign Minister and other allies have responded far more appropriately to similar concerns."

Their own words, no less.

If it were me, I would have obviously not acted to alienate The New Inquisition, while still attempting to form relations with The Rejected Reams, although I would imagine I would have to consult the Cabinet and the region before conducting business that would most likely destroy relations with one region or the other. As I said, TNI are easily offended, and Glen's actions and words certainly did not help The South Pacific maintain a relationship with TNI.

1. Can you recap major recent issues in TSP FA policy?

2. Why should anyone vote for you when you don't have a history of service in TSP?

3. Based on the fact that you are a raider, how does that work with TSP's current alignment? What is TSP's current alignment according to you?

4. If you do not win this position, will you stay to assist the FA Minister or will you disappear?

5. What qualities or strength does you opponent in this election have that you would want to emulate?

Hey Escade! I'm surprised you didn't appear sooner.

1. A quick recap? I hope, otherwise we'll be here all day. Let's see, we already talked about TNI and TRR, we've got the Lampshade Accords under discussion, a strained relationship with Europeia, an alliance with PRL which is still mostly untested, and Lord Ravenclaw leaving the office of MoFA out of disgust and frustration with Feirmont being named as his replacement.

I trust I didn't miss anything too important?

2. This is essentially a rephrasing of Kris' question from the second post in the thread, but I'll humor you. I have experience, and quite a lot of it. Yes, most of it doesn't come from TSP, but there are many other Ministers of which we can say the same, and they've all done such a wonderful job.

My experience isn't an issue, and I think I've been getting along rather well here in TSP. So I guess the real question is, why shouldn't you vote for me?

3. I'd say TSP's current alignment is Independent, although I know several people who would disagree with me. However, the Minister of the Army and most of the SPSF seemingly view the region as such, and I would tend to agree. As for how that would work with me being a raider? Just fine. I've worked in independent regions before, I even re-founded TNP's Army as an Independent military. I have no problems what-so-ever in this regard.

4. I will of course stay, if Glen would have me on. Unless you want me to disappear, Escade, because that would make me very say.

5. Well Glen is very goal driven, when he sees something he wants, he pursues it at all costs, consequences be damned. His enthusiasm is unmatched in this respect.

Oh and continuing our conversation about the "Courageous Oven Alliance" of which you are a member, can you clarify the aims and goals of the political party here as well?

Oh, I wouldn't say I am a member, officially the Alliance doesn't have members. As far as the goals, however, I think I explained that in this post from the COA thread and wouldn't want to repeat myself. This post is long enough as it is.

Based on your repeated comments about security risk declarations, should  I assume that you intend to attempt to overturn the security risk declaration that the cabinet and majority of the Assembly voted for?

I want to see Belschaft on trial.

Under current TSP laws, only citizens and residents can face trial. Belschaft has repeatedly said that he will not declare a nation in TSP while his rights are stripped of him.

If overturning the declaration allows us to try Belschaft in the High Court to answer for his crimes, then so be it. After all, it would be fairly easy to have him re-declared as a Security Threat, wouldn't you agree, Escade?

Where do you stand on the cabinet's security risk declaration?

You mean regarding the recent citizenship denials or regarding Belschaft?

Why should I vote for you?

I have experience, aptitude, enthusiasm, a well laid out plan, and most importantly, fantastic abs. Seriously, you could grate cheese on them.

Reply

I will be voting for Glen-Rhodes in this election. 

In response to your responses and some further thoughts:


1. " Lord Ravenclaw leaving the office of MoFA out of disgust and frustration with Feirmont being named as his replacement."  

Since there was no formal resignation as is usual and since this would then either be privileged cabinet level information, I cannot comment on the validity of this statement but rather then ridiculous light it paints the subject in.  Also, I'm pretty sure that a person intent on leaving (therefore requiring a replacement) would not be leaving because of the choice of said replacement but anything's possible I guess. 

2. Let me be clear, I have never been in support of candidates who appear right around election time or a bit before and then apply for a cabinet position. I've always preferred that people genuinely interested in TSP serve in some way in the many avenues open to then in the government or even in a civil service. So why haven't you provided your service in any of the myriad possible ways before now?

Actually, I am heavily concerned about this and would urge all voters to please look at Wolf carefully.

Wolf states in the above post:

"I want to see Belschaft on trial.



Under current TSP laws, only citizens and residents can face trial. Belschaft has repeatedly said that he will not declare a nation in TSP while his rights are stripped of him.



If overturning the declaration allows us to try Belschaft in the High Court to answer for his crimes, then so be it. After all, it would be fairly easy to have him re-declared as a Security Threat, wouldn't you agree, Escade?"

Considering the timeline of Wolf's entry into the region and the majority of his posts, I would say that this has been the center of most of his participation in TSP so far. It concerns me greatly that he would like to overturn the cabinet and the majority of the Assembly's will. 

Why does this concern me?

If it is not abundantly clear, by those within the court system, and those without (having spent a term trying to get judicial reform on the docket in the past two years):
1. The TSP court system is dysfunctional
2. It would require a massive reform to make the court work in a way that makes it an actual branch of government
3. Wolf is proposing overturning a majority decision simply for the sake of putting a friend of his, one who threatened to blackmail our current delegate, on trial in a broken system that in fact was partially created by that friend
4. Wolf's interests so far, based on his posts and contributions to the region so far, do not seem to align with actual contribution to FA.

I could see Wolf building up some service in the region over the next term, maybe as an ambassador to TNI or perhaps in the military. However, I do not see anything he has done in TSP that makes me feel that he is a strong candidate for MoFA or any other cabinet position. 

As for you bringing up TNI and GR. In that matter, I would have to consult others but I do not think the matter was so simple. It is concerning and if you don't offer to be an ambassador or diplomat to TNI then most likely I will do it myself since I'd like to see TSP in a healthy place.


Thank you for replying about your intentions and motivations honestly, Wolf. I hope you don't disappear. Instead I hope you become a cornerstone of service to the region

Escade

~ Positions Held in TSP ~
Delegate | Vice Delegate 
Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs
~ The Sparkly One ~

My Pinterest

 

Reply

Why join TSP now? Why get involved now? Why run for Cabinet now?

[Image: VjpdZ2V.png?1]

Reply

I will be voting for Glen-Rhodes in this election. 

And I really had my hopes up for a second.

Why join TSP now? Why get involved now? Why run for Cabinet now?

Well, this is quite an interesting time in TSP history. There is much turmoil and attention being placed on the region now, and not just because of Belschaft and the recent citizenship denials. The political climate in TSP has taken a distinct turn, and a lot more people are watching TSP because of it. Also the SPSF looks like it could use a lot of help.

As for why I'm running for Cabinet now? Well, why not? I never understand people who state that a player can't hold a high office simply because they are new. It makes as much sense as saying a 20-something year old can't run for Congress because they are too young.

In this case, I have a lot of experience, I understand the Foreign Affairs situation TSP is currently in, I have connections all over Nationstates, I have a sound game plan, and I'm more than willing to do what it takes to see it through.

I know I can deliver on what I'm promising if I am elected.

Reply

It is relevant because we don't like giving out positions to someone that may not be truly committed to TSP or who might just be here for the novelty and then leave in the middle of the term.

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

Reply

Ah, trust me, I am in it for the long term.

Reply

On the policy side of things, do you think it's actually feasible for us to maintain alliances with defenders and imperialists? Is it not far more likely that a prerequisite to more close relations with imperialists will require a denunciation of our alliances with Lazarus and The Rejected Realms?

Reply

I think not only is it feasible to maintain alliances with both defenders and imperialists, it is necessary.

The South Pacific is neither Defender, Raider, or Imperialist and it should stay that way. We need to carve out our own path. However, this does not mean that we should ignore that other sides exist in Nationstates.

It is important to maintain relations with all sides both for political and military reasons. Both the Imperialists and the Defenders have been heavily involved in feeder affairs and both sides have large independent armies. As a feeder, we are a power unto ourselves, and we have a responsibility to project that power through relations and cooperation. To ignore our role would be to invite conflict by opportunists from both sides seeking to control us.

In regard to the Imperialists, they are a large and diverse group. Not all of them have a problem with either Lazarus or The Rejected Realms. However, I know you are speaking about TNI and specifically Euro, Glen. I don't believe the negotiations, or lack thereof, with TNI went very well, in fact, I would say they went rather horribly. The fact we made a treaty with these two regions does not mean that TNI will never work with us ever again. Relations can and will be reopened, and I believe we can come to some sort of agreement with TNI once again. Will it be the same treaty as before? Most certainly not, but it will be something, and that will be a step on the road to recovery. As far as Euro relations go, they have stuck with us this far, so they have already proven they are willing to repair relations.

At the same time, we will not abandon our Defender allies. We have chosen them as our friends and we will not end that friendship simply because another region demands it. That being said, a middle road can be achieved through hard work and diplomatic means. Of this I am sure.

Diplomacy is all about finding a reasonable compromise, after all.

Reply

Why would we want to have any kind of relationship with TNI, much less an agreement?

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

Reply

I find it funny you ask that Kirs, considering we just had a treaty with them not very long ago.

Settling that minor detail aside, they are one of the many likely actors in a hypothetical Feeder/Sinker coup and could easily be on either side of the fence. I'd rather they be on our side of the grass when the day is through.

At the very least, a simple non-aggression pact wouldn't be asking for too much, would it?

Reply