Too Raider? Let's get real.

Foreword:

I apologize in advance if this is a bit too rant-like, it is likely huge rant. Anyway, I've decided to post my own views on Moderatism and the UDL, with the perspective being my own. Personally, I found it interesting to think about moderatism more in depth and hope you find it interesting as well.

Moderatism

In recent weeks, this idea of moderate has emerged. According its proponent, it’s light raiding and this idea that the removal of embassies and tags are too much let alone regional destruction. Abbey harkens back to the days when Euro did multiple raids in an update that it did raid. However, this view is inconsistent considering that one of the groups she criticizes is The Black Hawks.

The whole raiding system that Europeia had in late 2010 to mid 2011 was based on The Black Hawks raiding system. This was Halcones system, this was the way The Black Hawks raided and many of the things Abbey criticizes are in fact staples of The Black Hawks. When she states that she wouldn’t likely build ties with new groups, I highly suspect that she means The Black Hawks, a group whose members have been critical of the idea of the moderatism advanced by herself.

The strangest part for me about moderatism, is that Abbey states she has no issue with any Europeian raids and most of the raids Europeia supports. Her qualm was that she was being ordered to support those few raids. The Europeian response led by myself and then-President North East Somerset was to include Abbey within the current structure and deal with her concerns as a whole by allowing her to create her own group within the Navy. This however was rejected and subsequent offers of teamwork were also rejected. I think the trouble with Abbeys moderate movement is that it has established itself as being distinct from the current Navy and from it’s roots with The Black Hawks.

The Issue with the UDL

Our foreign policy should be based on more than simply raiding and defending. This has been consistent both in Foreign Affairs and on the military side of things. After all, our Navy was used to build ties with The South Pacific and other game created regions and the treaties we signed were with non-raider regions. This whole idea of increased militarism and move into raiderdom is not supported by the facts. In fact, it is difficult to say where this view even came into being. After all, we moved away from Halcone (The Black Hawks) flash raiding and into a more independent focus. What were our proudest achievements last term?

Military

Working with The South Pacific.

Re-Founding A United Kingdom, the descendent of a former FRA region.

Foreign Affairs

A treaty with Lazarus

Advancing our ties with independent and neutral regions

Yet, somehow it has been stated by some that opposing the UDL in foreign affairs is an example of extreme-raiderism. This is despite the fact that the reasons for advancing this view never touches upon the fact that it’s due to they’re raider. It’s due to the fact that they hold anti-Europeian policies.

Their leader, Unibot, has been willing to oppose Europeia in any spectrum due to the fact that we raid. Our values do not matter and the fact that we’re a democracy is taken a slap in the face to them. After all, how can those who impose tyranny on natives (Note: UDL rhetoric) be non-tyrannical? According to Unibot, our system is built for those tyrants and not a true democracy. Hence, according to the UDL, Europeia must be opposed and punished for its crimes. Any acceptance of Europeia on the world stage is a legitimization of its “bullying” and “intolerance”. The lengths he will go to oppose anyone associated with raiding are long and bizarre.

Recently in The South Pacific (he’s a judge there), he lobbied all the UDLers (many of them inactive) in the region to vote against the upcoming TNI treaty due to the fact that it raids. Another UDLer joined TSP simply to vote against that treaty, although the UDL claims that he did this on his own accord and wasn’t ordered to influence the regions vote. He accused former Delegate Southern Bellz (the Delegate disposed in Sedge’s coup of the region) of working for DEN. Another long time citizen, Antarial, with no ties to The New Inquisition was secretly a TNIer according to Unibot.

In Balder, similar election dirty tricks were employed to try to prevent anyone with raider ties from gaining a position. As well, his brazen recruiting of members from other regions and organizations is also a cause for concern. But my biggest qualm with Unibot is the abuse he levels at those who oppose him. It is here, that I’m likely biased towards the organization, perhaps too much so. But the stuff he says to people at times is extremely hateful. It is here that I call hypocrisy on this idea that the group was created to prevent bullying. Unibot has commented that he says what he says because “people get in the way”.

Is this really a raider/defender phenomenon as those moderates label it as?

Defender stalwarts, TITO will not work with them and refuse to have relations.

The defender org and alliance, the FRA, according to Unibot and other UDL higher-ups are utterly corrupt. (Unibot resigned from the FRA as Arch-Chancellor). The FRA is not kind to the UDL in turn.

The Rejected Realms is infamous for it’s rivalry with Unibot, stemming from Unibots accusation that they have always had it in for him and had forced him from the FRA. The issue of harassment by Unibot in TRR for example, is denounced as politics by those within the UDL.

Clearly, it is not a raider perspective to oppose Unibot and the UDL. There is a reason why people have such fervent dislike of the organization and why its members often have to state they are only with it to defend and are willing to put aside their qualm with the actions of Unibot and its leadership. Yet, there are those within the region who are willing to degrade the conversation to say that to oppose the UDL is an example of how raider we are. Does that make TRR really raider as well? It’s an untrue argument.

I realize that, I have obsession with the organization and leader stemming from my own personal dispute with Unibot. I don’t think my thought process is that of an extreme raider and in fact, never touch upon that issue. For me, I have no issues with defenders or those who defend. My issues with the UDL as an organization stem from the actions of Unibot and the UDL beyond the R/D game as well as my own personal dispute with Unibot.

It is extremely annoying to see these dismissed as simply raider and this is a large reason why I loved being a neutral, because people couldn’t bring that word in to dismiss your arguments. I’d also like to point out that the rhetoric from the UDL has been damaging to the R/D game itself and have in fact galvanized more people to fight it.

Back in the Moderatism

I disagree with many of the premises to the moderate movement, namely the fact that those in it seek to degrade our relationship and interaction with the UDL to simply raiding and defending. It is more than that. What is the line?

The idea of moderatism shouldn’t be one of opposition. It is not new; it is not special; it is not even deep. Similar movements have always been in Europeia, but have always been held by those who are able to look at the NS world as more than simply raiding and defending. The premise is simple: We don’t let raiding get out of hand. That is moderatism. How in the world does that deal with what I’ve stated about the world of Foreign Affairs? It is too limited. You need more. You simply can’t use it to try to advance ideas.

The Rejected Realms was brought up. So, according to moderatism, we should sign a treaty with them right and if we don’t we’re extreme raiders?

But what about the fact that long time TRR stalwart Sedge couped Southern Bellz of The South Pacific and that TRR didn’t support aiding the region? This was directly in conflict with our own support of The South Pacific.

Whoops, sorry moderatism… didn’t mean to demonstrate how limited you are.

Anyway, my main issue with how it is that it has been used. It’s not a foreign policy and it’s not effective at looking at our region whose actions are based on a complex combination of values and how we look at the world. It’s an idea for how we should raid and that’s what it should remain. Ever heard of “Honourable Raiding” moderatism? It’s the same idea, but one that didn’t decide to make itself more than it was and decided to work within our Foreign Policy. Making decisions based on our values rather than for raiding, moderate or not. This is what is happening.

It can be useful and beneficial for the region, but not in the way that it has been presented. Why not work with Honourable Raiding and push for a set of new raiding standards for Europeia? Boom! That’s how you get the changes you want by bringing those ideas to the Presidential candidates, it’s not that hard.

Next up: Part II

 

[Kylia Quilor]

I agree wholeheartedly with this article, in spirit and content. :wub:

Europeia is not less Moderate -in the sense of its in its willingess to hear from people from all sides - than it ever was, from everything I can tell. Certainly, the overall moderateness is the same as when I was hear just under a year ago, anyway.

Some people are not very accepting of defenders/the 'moderatists' (to use the language here, though my definition of Moderate raiding is differant) as the norm is, (myself, I admit). The position as laid out by the faction refered to here is blindly ignoring reality.

Hear hear.

 

[Abbey]

I’ll be honest, Rach. I’m totally sick of your lying, making things up, ignoring any apologies and explanations, taking things out of context and twisting my words. You seem to be making a determined effort to drag my name through the mud here for speaking out against changes that I don’t like in the NS region which I still call home. So, I’m going to address things you’ve said both here, and in JGlenn and Vinage’s campaign thread (because there is not the place for this), before anyone gets any ideas as to them being true. There are other things in this article that I’m not a fan of, but I’m only addressing the personal attacks.

From here: http://z6.****************/Europeia/index....post&p=22002857

There is no drifting, things have stayed the same. Our values remain the same.

They might have, but how well we stick to them hasn’t.

That is fairly insulting to say that Europeia just "blindly follow(s)" other region. You say that we have drifted, but rather what has bothered me personally is how you consistently insult the region.

I have explained this to you, now, yet you refuse to accept it. I don’t say something without justification, and without unduly disclosing the contents of a private conversation, the most recent justification for my saying that comes from the ERN’s actions in Soviet Union, where there was plainly a grief in progress yet Euro carried on anyway and then boasted about it later in the update.

Disagreeing with actions of the region does not mean that I am bashing it. I thought we were a democracy, and that freedom of speech was held dear? I’m not saying that “Europeia sucks”, I’m saying my honest opinion about recent changes, in open debates.

I feel that there is opposition due to your bashing of Europeia and other raiders rather than the fact that you're a soft raider. We have consistently had people in government who are non-raiders. It's a non-issue, what has been an issue has been your bashing of Europeia and your consistent reluctance to stand up for it.

So... I refuse to stand up for changes that I don’t like. I have not bashed Europeia. Have I bashed other raiders? Probably, but only because I don’t like their actions - and I’m not a member of their groups/regions/organisations. Within Europeia, I’m arguing and trying to stop a change which I dislike. It remains my home within NS.

For me, I'd be fine if you were a defender! What I'm not fine with is you saying that raiders act like idiots, that other raiders are extremists and that Europeia blindly follows other regions. Then you say that there is concern because your beliefs are different. It's not, that's a strawman argument. It's a rationalization that fits into your bashing of Euro.

Going through this point by point:
1. Would you? Why do I get the feeling that you would oppose a defender being appointed Vice-Minister of FA?
2. Would you drop that comment already. That is out of context, ignoring the apology. I was tired, in a hurry, and that was a bad wording that doesn’t get my true feelings across. This is precisely my point - how many times do I have to explain this to you?
3. Explained the blindly follows above.
4. When did I say that? There’s concern from a certain group of people because I’ve recently spoken out against some of the changes lately which they seem to have driven. Some people have been quite willing to accept a different point of view.
5. I’m not going to say it again. I have not bashed Euro.

You have the skills, but I think you should show Europeia more respect. We don't blindly follow anyone. Those are all conscious decisions. If you don't like the raids we do, it's alright to say so but it's not alright to say, "oh, you guys are following blindly". Show respect and there's nothing wrong with having a mature conversation on the matter.

If “more respect” was equal to “just sitting and accepting culture shifts which I don’t like” then it’s not happening. It’s not equal to it, however. I could have chosen to just leave and start badmouthing Europeia as soon as there was opposition, but I didn’t. I attempted to have a reasonable discussion, with friends, in my NS home. You’ll have to forgive me for making leaps that seemed obvious with the information I had - if conscious decisions were going precisely against old Europeian values, then that’s precisely the point that I have been making.

I’m quite willing to have a mature conversation. If you would stop throwing around lies and twisting my words etc then I’ll have one. I conceded points made well more than once in NS forums debates. I’m willing to concede points again, if I don’t have to sift through and refute personal insults and lies every time that you make a post on the subject.

From this article.

According its proponent, it’s light raiding and this idea that the removal of embassies and tags are too much let alone regional destruction.

Some truth here - I just don’t see the point. All you have to do to raid (traditionally) is to take the delegacy - it’s also fairly accepted that you change the WFE and flag. What you do beyond that is up to you, but it can have a wide variety of impacts. Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean that you should.

Abbey harkens back to the days when Euro did multiple raids in an update that it did raid.

I harken back to those days, where we wouldn’t knowingly reinforce griefs in progress, where we’d try to change the WFE back, where we’d actually stand up for our own beliefs. I don’t harken back to doing several raids in one update, I’ve never said that.

However, this view is inconsistent considering that one of the groups she criticizes is The Black Hawks.

One of, yes, but they’re hardly my main “opponent”, unlike the next paragraph seems to make out.

The whole raiding system that Europeia had in late 2010 to mid 2011 was based on The Black Hawks raiding system. This was Halcones system, this was the way The Black Hawks raided and many of the things Abbey criticizes are in fact staples of The Black Hawks. When she states that she wouldn’t likely build ties with new groups, I highly suspect that she means The Black Hawks, a group whose members have been critical of the idea of the moderatism advanced by herself.

Err, no? Just because TBH members happened to be the most vocal, I’m definitely not just fighting them specifically. Also, ERN isn’t, and should not be, TBH. This is my point. The ERN wouldn’t take over the RMB, something that’s a staple of TBH raids. There used to, at least, be a policy that the ERN wouldn’t do things like remove embassies and tags. Again, a TBH staple. Doing several raids in an update with a small number of people does not a TBH clone make.

As ever, you’ve twisted my words on that last section. I stated that I would oppose starting new ties with regions purely because of their R/D stance, I believe that there should be other links between the regions. I also wasn’t targeting specifically TBH, a long way from it. You’re putting words into my mouth and I’d like you to stop.

The strangest part for me about moderatism, is that Abbey states she has no issue with any Europeian raids and most of the raids Europeia supports.

No issue with Europeian raids, but issues on some level with -most- raids Europeia supports. Not sure where you got the latter idea from. My qualm was that I was -constantly- being asked to support raids which I did not like.

The Europeian response led by myself and then-President North East Somerset was to include Abbey within the current structure and deal with her concerns as a whole by allowing her to create her own group within the Navy.

Not only did NES ask me this at around 11pm, while I’d swapped to my phone and he -knew- I was intending on going to bed (so I was less than impressed about his choice of timing), I explained to him at the time my reasoning (as much as I could while half asleep and on my phone). I did not want to be just a “side” for the ERN. I was hardly going to be able to actively recruit, and I was going to find myself incredibly bored, as all the main ERN troops that I could possibly call on were going to be tied up reinforcing other raids a lot of the time. I wanted the ERN in its entirety to return to old values, and I felt that a side group was just going to make things worse.

This however was rejected and subsequent offers of teamwork were also rejected.

What subsequent offers? I asked you this before, but you refuse to back these claims up.

I think the trouble with Abbeys moderate movement is that it has established itself as being distinct from the current Navy and from it’s roots with The Black Hawks.

That’s the point. The -point- is that we’re distinct, and that we’ll actually stand by our values, rather than selling ourselves out just because someone asked us to.

I disagree with many of the premises to the moderate movement, namely the fact that those in it seek to degrade our relationship and interaction with the UDL to simply raiding and defending. It is more than that. What is the line?

Again, back that up. I actually seek the opposite. I don’t think that we should make relationships solely about raiding and defending.

The idea of moderatism shouldn’t be one of opposition. It is not new; it is not special; it is not even deep. Similar movements have always been in Europeia, but have always been held by those who are able to look at the NS world as more than simply raiding and defending. The premise is simple: We don’t let raiding get out of hand. That is moderatism. How in the world does that deal with what I’ve stated about the world of Foreign Affairs? It is too limited. You need more. You simply can’t use it to try to advance ideas.

It’s opposition to the status quo. I don’t think about everything as R/D, in fact, I think it should be precisely the opposite. R/D should be something for the battlefield, and then off of it, it should make little difference. That’s why I count among my friends a large number of defenders - it doesn’t matter in the slightest to me. The question ultimately comes down to what we each think “out of hand” is. I think we should play our game without trampling too much on the game that the natives play. You seem to only draw the line at destruction. It’s not totally all-encompassing, it’s not meant to be! It’s an opinion on R/D, but it doesn’t even attempt to cover other areas. Not a way of life, just an approach to raiding.

Anyway, my main issue with how it is that it has been used. It’s not a foreign policy and it’s not effective at looking at our region whose actions are based on a complex combination of values and how we look at the world. It’s an idea for how we should raid and that’s what it should remain. Ever heard of “Honourable Raiding” moderatism? It’s the same idea, but one that didn’t decide to make itself more than it was and decided to work within our Foreign Policy. Making decisions based on our values rather than for raiding, moderate or not. This is what is happening.

Of course it’s the same thing. If it’s within the policy, then follow it for once.

I don’t make decisions based solely on my raiding stance. But I’m arguing as much for Europeia to return to old values as I am for a return to more moderate raiding.

It can be useful and beneficial for the region, but not in the way that it has been presented. Why not work with Honourable Raiding and push for a set of new raiding standards for Europeia? Boom! That’s how you get the changes you want by bringing those ideas to the Presidential candidates, it’s not that hard.

Sorry, I’m confused. Isn’t this what I’m -trying- to do? Also makes no difference if those values are ignored as soon as we’re asked to support another regions’ raid.

It becomes hard when you’ve got someone lying, making things up, and putting words into your mouth whenever you try. Cerian, if you agree in spirit with lying, then I want nothing to do with you.

[hide=[b]References[/b]]

• Apology for “idiots” comment 1
• Further defence of myself (Further explanation for “idiots” comment, not just focused on R/D, request for source on “offered assistance” claim)
• Claiming that I bashed the region (additional unsubstantiated claims - that I lashed out)
• Moderate raiding views laid out

[/hide]

 

[Kylia Quilor]

The Raid in Soviet Union and the actions of TNI there were a legitamite part of TNI's war on the FRA. We're not at war with the FRA, but to act as though it was some kind of illegitamite greifing is to completely misunderstand reality.

If you don't want to be part of a particular ERN support, don't join in on it. If you're for most raids, and most supports, then I would assume you're okay with the vasy majority.

Again, though, your arguement that Europeia has changed is completely absurd. Europeia is no less accepting of differing opinions, or less moderate. I note that both candidates for the Presidency decry the Catholic raid, wave the standard of moderatism and support 'moving beyond' our current circle of allies and affiliates.

The very fact that we, as a region, voted WITH THE DEFENDERS on the 'Liberate Catholic' and the 'Repeal Liberate Catholic' resolutions is all the proof you need that Europeia's sense of moderation is alive and well, and your positions are not going to make us moderate, but rather more extreme, in the opposite direction from the one you criticize.

Disagreeing with actions of the region does not mean that I am bashing it. I thought we were a democracy, and that freedom of speech was held dear? I’m not saying that “Europeia sucks”, I’m saying my honest opinion about recent changes, in open debates.

And Rachel has every right to disagree with you, loudly and vehemently. I would fight to the death for your right to hold your opinions, which I think are dangerous and foolish. Because you can and should have that right. And then, once the fights over, I'll keep telling you what I think of those opinions.

Europeia is not less moderate, and your continued statements to the opposite paint us like some collection of griefers. That is not what Europeia is, and claiming such is fundamentally damaging to Europeia abroad.

 

[Vinage Vinage]

The very fact that we, as a region, voted WITH THE DEFENDERS on the 'Liberate Catholic'

We abstained on 'Liberate Catholic'

 

[Rach]

I have explained this to you, now, yet you refuse to accept it. I don’t say something without justification, and without unduly disclosing the contents of a private conversation, the most recent justification for my saying that comes from the ERN’s actions in Soviet Union, where there was plainly a grief in progress yet Euro carried on anyway and then boasted about it later in the update.

Disagreeing with actions of the region does not mean that I am bashing it. I thought we were a democracy, and that freedom of speech was held dear? I’m not saying that “Europeia sucks”, I’m saying my honest opinion about recent changes, in open debates.

In open debates, really? The first time you brought this up publically was not in Europeia, it was in the drama filled raider vs. defender gameplay section of the NS forums. What else is that supposed to mean? There are a ton of ways you could have put forth your views here: the Grand Hall, the Octagon and the media. But no, instead you came out on the NS forums to say that how Europeia has lost its way. I spent a good portion of my time responding and defending Europeia there.

Then we have the comments you keep making and retracting. To me, it just looks like part of a larger trend started by how you brought this whole thing up. It’s not as if Europeia has ever been hostile to those views as they are shared by a good number of the citizenry, the “Honourable Raiding” term came from Anumia.

This is the big issue for me. What was the purpose of bringing it out on the NS forums? If you have an issue with Europeia, you should be bringing it up in Europeia first. I feel that’s very reasonable.

So... I refuse to stand up for changes that I don’t like. I have not bashed Europeia. Have I bashed other raiders? Probably, but only because I don’t like their actions - and I’m not a member of their groups/regions/organisations. Within Europeia, I’m arguing and trying to stop a change which I dislike. It remains my home within NS.

That’s the thing Abbey, you’re not arguing within Europeia. You brought it up publically elsewhere and I’m not sure how long it took for you to bring it up here. This could be the very first time, because I remember discussing the NS thread with other Europeians. If it is your home Abbey, then treat it as your home.

PhDre and Jahka have also critiqued our raiding style, but here in Europeia. Is it that unreasonable to expect you to do the same?

1. Would you? Why do I get the feeling that you would oppose a defender being appointed Vice-Minister of FA?

Maybe it’s because you have consistently tried to rationalize the reaction towards yourself as being due to your beliefs? It’s not Abbey.

2. Would you drop that comment already. That is out of context, ignoring the apology. I was tired, in a hurry, and that was a bad wording that doesn’t get my true feelings across. This is precisely my point - how many times do I have to explain this to you?

It’s not ignoring the apology, but I am concerned given how it was brought up and that there have been a few of those types of comments.

4. When did I say that? There’s concern from a certain group of people because I’ve recently spoken out against some of the changes lately which they seem to have driven. Some people have been quite willing to accept a different point of view.

Again Abbey, you keep making this a personal issue. It has nothing to do with your views, except how you brought them up. No one has ever had any issues with Anumia’s idea of Honourable Raiding. So stop trying to make it seem like it’s because your views are different than others, this is not the case.

5. I’m not going to say it again. I have not bashed Euro.

Like I said before, I felt that it was fairly hostile that this was announced on the NS forums. You made no attempts to defend Europeia against people who sought to bash it there.

If “more respect” was equal to “just sitting and accepting culture shifts which I don’t like” then it’s not happening. It’s not equal to it, however. I could have chosen to just leave and start badmouthing Europeia as soon as there was opposition, but I didn’t. I attempted to have a reasonable discussion, with friends, in my NS home. You’ll have to forgive me for making leaps that seemed obvious with the information I had - if conscious decisions were going precisely against old Europeian values, then that’s precisely the point that I have been making.

I’m quite willing to have a mature conversation. If you would stop throwing around lies and twisting my words etc then I’ll have one. I conceded points made well more than once in NS forums debates. I’m willing to concede points again, if I don’t have to sift through and refute personal insults and lies every time that you make a post on the subject.

From this article.

The fact is that you went out on the NS forums and started discussing this there, making no attempts to defend against the Euro bashing. There are no personal insults Abbey towards you, but that the fact that the first time we’re discussing this (in detail perhaps) is in a campaign thread is fairly concerning.

Some truth here - I just don’t see the point. All you have to do to raid (traditionally) is to take the delegacy - it’s also fairly accepted that you change the WFE and flag. What you do beyond that is up to you, but it can have a wide variety of impacts. Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean that you should.

And I don’t see the point of you bringing up these views, calling the raids Europeia supports pointless on the NS forums before even breaching the subject here.

I’ll respond to the rest later. But I’m really curious as to why it has been brought up in the way it has been brought up.

 

[hyanygo]

---EDIT: Rachel has removed her allegations about me---

 

[Rach]

Can you support your allegation/inference with references?

... Hyanygo consistently stated that having concerns with an organization is “raider” ...

Nvm

 

[Kylia Quilor]

The very fact that we, as a region, voted WITH THE DEFENDERS on the 'Liberate Catholic'

We abstained on 'Liberate Catholic'

Which is functionally the same as supporting them, Vinage, in this context, given that virtually every other Raider Region, as far as I can tell, voted agaimst the liberate.

But I'll concede the specific point. I misremembered. But it doesn't invalidate my point.

 

[George Cromartie]

After all, how can those who impose tyranny on natives (Note: UDL rhetoric) be non-tyrannical?

Do you deny that the act of raiding isn't inherently tyrannical?

According to Unibot, our system is built for those tyrants and not a true democracy. Hence, according to the UDL,

Unibot =/= the official views of the UDL, as you have been told numerous times.

Recently in The South Pacific (he’s a judge there), he lobbied all the UDLers (many of them inactive) in the region to vote against the upcoming TNI treaty due to the fact that it raids.

Correction: he lobbied everyone to vote against the upcoming TNI treaty due to the fact it raids.

Another UDLer joined TSP simply to vote against that treaty, although the UDL claims that he did this on his own accord and wasn’t ordered to influence the regions vote

That's because he did do it of his own accord and wasn't ordered to.

In Balder, similar election dirty tricks were employed to try to prevent anyone with raider ties from gaining a position.

Prove it.

Defender stalwarts, TITO will not work with them and refuse to have relations.

Correction: TITO refused a forum embassy and won't liberate with the UDL.

The defender org and alliance, the FRA, according to Unibot and other UDL higher-ups are utterly corrupt.

Source.

The FRA is not kind to the UDL in turn.

Untrue.

Clearly, it is not a raider perspective to oppose Unibot and the UDL.

There is a difference between dislike and opposition.

I’d also like to point out that the rhetoric from the UDL has been damaging to the R/D game itself and have in fact galvanized more people to fight it.

Prove it.

The premise is simple: We don’t let raiding get out of hand. That is moderatism.

But you have and do. The Griefing of NA. The WFE Trolling of NC. These incidents occurred with Europeian backing or leading. It took an FRA member to point it out before you even withdrew from a raid that involved Nazis!

Whoops, sorry moderatism… didn’t mean to demonstrate how limited you are.

You haven't demonstrated anything but your ability to misrepresent what a movement stands for.

An article full of mistakes, misrepresentations and strawmen.

How Europeian.

 

[Abbey]

In open debates, really? The first time you brought this up publically was not in Europeia, it was in the drama filled raider vs. defender gameplay section of the NS forums. What else is that supposed to mean? There are a ton of ways you could have put forth your views here: the Grand Hall, the Octagon and the media. But no, instead you came out on the NS forums to say that how Europeia has lost its way. I spent a good portion of my time responding and defending Europeia there.

Given that that initial NS forums thread was aimed at the raider community in general rather than just Euro, and given that every Europeian was quite entitled to weigh in in that thread, yes, it was an open debate. Europeia wasn’t the centre of that thread. I’ve also not brought it up on the NS forums (or anywhere in its own right) since, although there was some discussion on it in both the announcement of CB’s first raid and in my thread (here, I might add) on the change in atmosphere.

Read that thread again, I linked it in my last post. It was aimed more generally at the raiding community.

And now the list of false claims:

Then we have the comments you keep making and retracting.

Singular. One comment, one retraction.

It’s not ignoring the apology, but I am concerned given how it was brought up and that there have been a few of those types of comments.

Link to them. Prove it.

You made no attempts to defend Europeia against people who sought to bash it there.

Prove it.

And I don’t see the point of you bringing up these views, calling the raids Europeia supports pointless on the NS forums before even breaching the subject here.

Untrue. I said that I thought some of the additional actions (such as embassy and tag removal) are pointless. I brought up some point on the raiding scale on the NS forums first, because that was relevant to the wider community. I brought up the change in attitudes back here. I’ve also spoken to people in private.

There are no personal insults Abbey towards you, but that the fact that the first time we’re discussing this (in detail perhaps) is in a campaign thread is fairly concerning.

Hmmm, even if not explicitly, you’re insulting my intelligence by thinking that I let lies go unchecked. And yes, it is concerning. But that’s not my problem. I have made no attempt to directly “bash” Europeia, as opposing it in actions does not mean that I’m bashing it.

No one has ever had any issues with Anumia’s idea of Honourable Raiding. So stop trying to make it seem like it’s because your views are different than others, this is not the case.

No-one other than you and Cerian seem to have a problem with my views. I know that other people hold the same opinion. But that opinion is not the opinion that I see prevailing right now.

Stop making things up. Stop exaggerating my actions. You are digging yourself a hole and it’s not getting you anywhere. I have a copy of the logs from the IRC chat last night, so don’t try and attempt to reference anything there, because I can check them. Same goes for MSN.

I’m not stupid. When you make claims, back them up.

 

[Rach]

After all, how can those who impose tyranny on natives (Note: UDL rhetoric) be non-tyrannical?

Do you deny that the act of raiding isn't inherently tyrannical?

I do and I disagree with that assertion.

According to Unibot, our system is built for those tyrants and not a true democracy. Hence, according to the UDL,

Unibot =/= the official views of the UDL, as you have been told numerous times.

Then why does everyone take them that way? You can't really separate them.

Recently in The South Pacific (he’s a judge there), he lobbied all the UDLers (many of them inactive) in the region to vote against the upcoming TNI treaty due to the fact that it raids.

Correction: he lobbied everyone to vote against the upcoming TNI treaty due to the fact it raids.

I'm quite certain it was stated that he specifically targeted UDLers. This was part of AMOM's issue with it, that Unibot was telling the region one thing and individual UDLers another.

Another UDLer joined TSP simply to vote against that treaty, although the UDL claims that he did this on his own accord and wasn’t ordered to influence the regions vote

That's because he did do it of his own accord and wasn't ordered to.

Funny eh?

In Balder, similar election dirty tricks were employed to try to prevent anyone with raider ties from gaining a position.

Prove it.

We had a huge debate over the changing of election rules prior to the end of one of the early elections. Unibot had stated that he would do anything to make sure that person did not win and then decided to try to change the rules.

Defender stalwarts, TITO will not work with them and refuse to have relations.

Correction: TITO refused a forum embassy and won't liberate with the UDL.

How is that different?

Not having a forum embassy is equal to not having relations. Is it not? Because if it won't do that, then I'm fairly certain it won't have relation.

Does it do other military actions with the UDL then?

The defender org and alliance, the FRA, according to Unibot and other UDL higher-ups are utterly corrupt.

Source.

I thought Harmoneia stated it as well, (although looking back I find this isn't the case). Unibot however has stated on numerous occasions that the FRA is corrupt, particularly after he resigned.

The FRA is not kind to the UDL in turn.

Untrue.

Member high up in the FRA :evil:

Clearly, it is not a raider perspective to oppose Unibot and the UDL.

There is a difference between dislike and opposition

That is a good point, although I likely wouldn't dislike the UDL if Unibot wasn't in charge.

I’d also like to point out that the rhetoric from the UDL has been damaging to the R/D game itself and have in fact galvanized more people to fight it.

Prove it.

Well, the rhetorical point is more of an opinion. However, I do know that Unibot is a huge reason why many newer members raid.

The premise is simple: We don’t let raiding get out of hand. That is moderatism.

But you have and do. The Griefing of NA. The WFE Trolling of NC. These incidents occurred with Europeian backing or leading. It took an FRA member to point it out before you even withdrew from a raid that involved Nazis!

Look, the events at North Atlantic were not us. I disagree with the assertion that NC was trolled and I think we can agree that it was not the intent to troll and that it's debatable whether it was a joke in good taste or a joke in bad taste/trolling. For Anarchy, we honestly didn't know. I had been running the military with the absence of a Grand Admiral and it was something that had been missed. Everyone had a major qualm with it and right away, we said let's get out of there.

Whoops, sorry moderatism… didn’t mean to demonstrate how limited you are.

You haven't demonstrated anything but your ability to misrepresent what a movement stands for.

An article full of mistakes, misrepresentations and strawmen.

How Europeian.

I disagree and think that for many of your disagreements, that they revolve on a differences of opinion. The facts aren't in dispute, but the way that they are interpreted are.

 

[Henry]

The further away Europeia drifts from our previous stance (as evidenced perfectly by this thread), the harder I'll pull us back to where we were before.

There is no drifting, things have stayed the same. Our values remain the same.

That doesn't mean that I think that Euro shouldn't just blindly follow sometimes (Soviet Union springs to mind) but I am capable of respecting the old regional links, and I'm not going to stand in the way of that.

That is fairly insulting to say that Europeia just "blindly follow(s)" other region. You say that we have drifted, but rather what has bothered me personally is how you consistently insult the region.

The very fact that there's opposition to my own choice as Vice-Minister of FA because I'm not a hardline raider sort of says it all, I believe.

I feel that there is opposition due to your bashing of Europeia and other raiders rather than the fact that you're a soft raider. We have consistently had people in government who are non-raiders. It's a non-issue, what has been an issue has been your bashing of Europeia and your consistent reluctance to stand up for it.

For me, I'd be fine if you were a defender! What I'm not fine with is you saying that raiders act like idiots, that other raiders are extremists and that Europeia blindly follows other regions. Then you say that there is concern because your beliefs are different. It's not, that's a strawman argument. It's a rationalization that fits into your bashing of Euro.

You have the skills, but I think you should show Europeia more respect. We don't blindly follow anyone. Those are all conscious decisions. If you don't like the raids we do, it's alright to say so but it's not alright to say, "oh, you guys are following blindly". Show respect and there's nothing wrong with having a mature conversation on the matter.

@Rachel - You say that Europeia doesn't blindly follow, yet Europeia engaged and took part in a raid that endorsed griefing.

You also say that Europeia hasn't lost a hold of its values and still stands on them as strong as ever. I remember a time when we would take a hardline stance against griefing and stand up for the friendly rivalry of the game instead of giving into lesser impulses and being unduly rude.

I personally believe that you let your personal feelings toward Unibot get in the way of and cloud your judgement.

Any person that witnessed a griefing objectively would say that 'raiders suck' or 'raiders are stupid', unless they were the type of person who was predisposed to being rude to people. Abbey has been nothing but a nice and respectful person in all avenues I've seen her in. Her reasoning is usually sound, though I respect the fact that she is still a human being and makes mistakes according to such a fact. The frustration of seeing Europeia flake away from its core values and morals to take part in griefing was probably the straw on the camels back for Abbey and she said something she shouldn't have. It happens.

I believe that Abbey has shown Europeia much more respect than it's deserved since being here; being one of our more 'quiet' players. I can honestly see that Abbey doesn't speak up unless she's certain that what she's saying is something that should be said and the level of disrespect and animosity you've shown to her for just disagreeing with how Europeia decides to do business is uncalled for and unprofessional.

The amount of word-twisting being done is making me lose a lot of respect.

@Cerian - griefing in any part; especially in a war that we did not create, yet take part in blindly as an ally to another region; is not to be accepted. We are not monsters; we are not cruel. We should have refused to take part in any griefing regardless of alliances.

The very fact that we, as a region, voted WITH THE DEFENDERS on the 'Liberate Catholic' and the 'Repeal Liberate Catholic' resolutions is all the proof you need that Europeia's sense of moderation is alive and well, and your positions are not going to make us moderate, but rather more extreme, in the opposite direction from the one you criticize.

ok, so you think that by doing one thing right, we can cancel out what was done wrong. That's not how it works. You're saying that people should accept the fact that we're moderate even though we haven't lived up to our own morals and values of what Moderate should be. I believe it was laid down quite a few terms ago, before your arrival here. It may have even been forgotten when people started using the Navy and Europeia to start hashing out personal vendettas against other corporations in NS.

Europeia is not less moderate, and your continued statements to the opposite paint us like some collection of griefers. That is not what Europeia is, and claiming such is fundamentally damaging to Europeia abroad.

All it takes is one mission where we grief natives for word to get around that we've undermined our own values and are now in the habit of griefing. One moment is all it takes to shred to pieces all that we've been working for. It IS damaging and it shows that we can't even stand on our own two feet, because if Rachel Anumia is the spokesperson of Europeia, she's already stated that our values and morals mean nothing when it comes to alliances. Which makes us whores to our friends.



@Rachel again -

In open debates, really? The first time you brought this up publically was not in Europeia, it was in the drama filled raider vs. defender gameplay section of the NS forums. What else is that supposed to mean? There are a ton of ways you could have put forth your views here: the Grand Hall, the Octagon and the media. But no, instead you came out on the NS forums to say that how Europeia has lost its way. I spent a good portion of my time responding and defending Europeia there.

Really? You just didn't want Europeia's dirty laundry aired for all to see. You would have rather covered it up than have the truth shown to people. That's what I just saw you say. If we were griefing, then there was every right for someone to come along and point it our in a public manner, since what was being pointed out was also in a public manner.

If you recall, Abbey did make quite a few attempts to talk to people here.

Honestly, most of what I see Abbey retracting is rudeness, which she has been trying very valiantly to avoid.

No one has ever had any issues with Anumia’s idea of Honourable Raiding.

There's a very good reason for that and it has nothing to do with what Abbey is saying or how she is saying it.

 

[Rach]

In open debates, really? The first time you brought this up publically was not in Europeia, it was in the drama filled raider vs. defender gameplay section of the NS forums. What else is that supposed to mean? There are a ton of ways you could have put forth your views here: the Grand Hall, the Octagon and the media. But no, instead you came out on the NS forums to say that how Europeia has lost its way. I spent a good portion of my time responding and defending Europeia there.

Given that that initial NS forums thread was aimed at the raider community in general rather than just Euro, and given that every Europeian was quite entitled to weigh in in that thread, yes, it was an open debate. Europeia wasn’t the centre of that thread. I’ve also not brought it up on the NS forums (or anywhere in its own right) since, although there was some discussion on it in both the announcement of CB’s first raid and in my thread (here, I might add) on the change in atmosphere.

This proves my point. You did not bring it up here and Europeia is it's own region. You know that Europeians don't frequent the NS forums often, I haven't been there in ages and I was generally one of the more active Europeians there!

Firstly, you claimed that you were marginalized in Euro because of the fact that you don't support all raids and that you were forced to raid. No one is forced to raid. It was ridiculous.

Here is what you said:

This is why I resigned.Raiders that hold the same opinions as me appear to be in the minority, and are marginalised and alienated Most of the time you are forced to support a raid that is doing things that you wouldn't do were you leading the raid yourself. At the worst times, you're forced to support a raid that was liveable, and then turns into a raid where natives are kicked on the flimsiest of reasons (or no reason at all).

That is NOT bashing? I was utterly upset with that. Not only that, but the first time you mention this is not in Europeia but in NS gameplay. Is it better to address the raider community to say that Europeia marginalizes you and forces you to raid? It's patently untrue and damaging.

Then we have the comments you keep making and retracting.

Singular. One comment, one retraction.

The blind following one as well, although you explained that to me... it seemed more bashing of Euro on a whole when I first read it.

It’s not ignoring the apology, but I am concerned given how it was brought up and that there have been a few of those types of comments.

Link to them. Prove it.

There was Wordy saying that we no longer moderately raid and Unibot saying that raider unity was making all raider regions extreme. I feel that that is incorrect, particularly since you yourself have no issue with Euro led raids.

And I don’t see the point of you bringing up these views, calling the raids Europeia supports pointless on the NS forums before even breaching the subject here.

Untrue. I said that I thought some of the additional actions (such as embassy and tag removal) are pointless. I brought up some point on the raiding scale on the NS forums first, because that was relevant to the wider community. I brought up the change in attitudes back here. I’ve also spoken to people in private.

My apologies, supporting raids that are composed of pointless actions. I don't think you brought up in Europeia how people were being forced to raid.

There are no personal insults Abbey towards you, but that the fact that the first time we’re discussing this (in detail perhaps) is in a campaign thread is fairly concerning.

Hmmm, even if not explicitly, you’re insulting my intelligence by thinking that I let lies go unchecked. And yes, it is concerning. But that’s not my problem. I have made no attempt to directly “bash” Europeia, as opposing it in actions does not mean that I’m bashing it.

I feel that what you said about Europeia forcing people to raid and such was bashing.

No one has ever had any issues with Anumia’s idea of Honourable Raiding. So stop trying to make it seem like it’s because your views are different than others, this is not the case.

No-one other than you and Cerian seem to have a problem with my views. I know that other people hold the same opinion. But that opinion is not the opinion that I see prevailing right now.

Stop making things up. Stop exaggerating my actions. You are digging yourself a hole and it’s not getting you anywhere. I have a copy of the logs from the IRC chat last night, so don’t try and attempt to reference anything there, because I can check them. Same goes for MSN.

I’m not stupid. When you make claims, back them up.

I have no issues with moderate raiding. Like I've repeatedly stated, it's about the fact that you went out there to bash Europeia. We don't force people to raid and this zeal that people have an issue with you because you hold similar views to people like Anumia, is ridiculous.

 

[Common-Sense Politics]

How Europeian.

I was going to stay as far away form this thread as I could but this, StGeorgie, is unfair. This is Rachel's thing, has been for a long time. Direct your displeasure at her, not at my region as a whole (most of whom disagree with her).

 

[Henry]

You know, it goes without saying that people are forced to raid. Unless someone has an excuse; they are expected to be in a raid and if they miss too many raids; they are removed from the Navy.

It isn't to say that Abbey was forced to raid; she obviously did it of her own volition; yet she obviously felt forced to participate in raids where griefing was the primary modus operandi to be a part of the raids where it wasn't. To avoid confliction, she stepped down since her viewpoint seemed to be in the minority.

Obviously, for her to come to the conclusion that it was in the minority, she had to have spoken to a good number of people within the military at the time, whether privately or openly is not up for debate since both modes of conversation on the topic would be acceptable.

Having failed that, I can see where she would feel that posting on the NS Forums might shed some light on the subject for everyone and cause peoples eyes to be opened.

 

[Kylia Quilor]

How Europeian.

I was going to stay as far away form this thread as I could but this, StGeorgie, is unfair. This is Rachel's thing, has been for a long time. Direct your displeasure at her, not at my region as a whole (most of whom disagree with her).

And StGeorgie knows this full well. Its not as if he hasn't seen lots of people disagree with Rachel.

He's being deliberately obtuse on the subject because it suits the UDL.

 

[Henry]

How Europeian.

I was going to stay as far away form this thread as I could but this, StGeorgie, is unfair. This is Rachel's thing, has been for a long time. Direct your displeasure at her, not at my region as a whole (most of whom disagree with her).

And StGeorgie knows this full well. Its not as if he hasn't seen lots of people disagree with Rachel.

He's being deliberately obtuse on the subject because it suits the UDL.

So what group are you suiting by being deliberately obtuse?

 

[Kylia Quilor]

How Europeian.

I was going to stay as far away form this thread as I could but this, StGeorgie, is unfair. This is Rachel's thing, has been for a long time. Direct your displeasure at her, not at my region as a whole (most of whom disagree with her).

And StGeorgie knows this full well. Its not as if he hasn't seen lots of people disagree with Rachel.

He's being deliberately obtuse on the subject because it suits the UDL.

So what group are you suiting by being deliberately obtuse?

Myself.

Just as you suit yourself when you're deliberately obtuse about an amazing number of things.

StGeorgie has been in the threads where Rachel's opinions on the UDL get disagreed with by a number of prominent citizens, and here he goes saying Rachel's views are Europeia's. So either he's lying for the sake of it, amazingly stupid, or trying to advance a false narrative about Europeia, which would serve the UDL's views about us being a tyranny.