6

DispatchBulletinNews

by The Republic of The Liberty Gala. . 116 reads.

The Liberty Gala 2020: Why We Defend

[align=center][background-block=black][img]https://i.imgur.com/FCIp1vK.png[/img]
[url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1445610][b][color=C0C0C0]Main Schedule[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1448303][b][color=cba135]Character Contest[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1448109][b][color=C0C0C0]Nation Creation Contest[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color]  [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1448304][b][color=cba135]Defender Values in the Security Council[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1448291][b][color=C0C0C0]Defender Games[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1444726][b][color=cba135]Card Collecting[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1448116][b][color=C0C0C0]Defender History[/color][/b][/url]
[color=black]|[/color][/background-block][/align]

[floatright][box][size=110][b]Panelists:[/b][/size]
Your host: Phoenix, aka [nation]FiHami[/nation]
- [nation]HumanSanity[/nation]
- [nation]Roavin[/nation]
- [nation]Tim[/nation]
- Matthew, aka [nation]The United Vex Imperium[/nation]
- Ananke, aka [nation]Ananke II[/nation]
- [nation]Benevolent Thomas[/nation]
- Numero, aka [nation]Numero Capitan[/nation]
- Karp, aka [nation]Karputsk[/nation]
- Prarie, aka [nation]North Prarie[/nation]
- transcript compiled by: [nation]Grea Kriopia[/nation]
[/box][/floatright]
[box]
[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
Welcome to the Liberty Gala, and to this panel that will center on this one question: [b]Why do we defend?[/b]

I have a few questions, but hopefully conversation will mostly flow. Towards the end I also plan to take questions from the audience, so please feel free to ask questions by either DMing me or asking in #the-gala!

[i][General greetings and welcomes][/i]

[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
So, uh, let's cut to the chase now, but start easy.  Everyone had to start somewhere.  [b]What got you into R/D?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
The invasion of RORMS
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
TSP going defender and myself deciding I needed to walk the walk and not just talk the talk
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
My home region of New Sorvun was invaded by the Genesis Federation and after that the FRA became a natural fit for us, which is where I got my start.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Mmm... I started R/D in early 2011 after I joined 10000 Islands (the first time). I was involved in defending at that point mostly because TITO was a prominent regional institution, not really because I had super strong motivation about defending and I didn't really update or try that hard back then. I probably got into update-time defending in 2013 when Shiz got me in the RIASF, and then I've done that on and off since then.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
When you're in a founderless RP region and witness another founderless RP region being griefed, you want to be able to do something about it. That kicked off a chain of events that lead to me joining defending via TITO.
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
I was a pretty hardcore native who viewed military gameplay as stuff for nerds. I was couped out of my first real home region so I floated around until I reconnected with Zazumo, an old RP buddy who at the time was TNP's Minister of Defense. He basically recruited me into the NPA.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
I created Numero Capitan as an Armed Republic and 00000 A World Power was one of the few recruiting regions advertising a regional military. They were a defender military after a former rogue delegate had near destroyed the region
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
I joined TNP back when it was pretty defender oriented and everyone was trying to get rid of Francos Spain in the Pacific. My first real gameplay action was one of the big liberation attempts, so that got me hooked on gameplay. After that defending was a pretty natural path.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
What inspired me is a bit complicated and I can't really point to one specific thing. I saw the very first few The Order of the Grey Wardens gloatposts in mid-2016, I got inspired by several defender-minded individuals in my home region of TSP, and I generally had a morbid curiosity and a feeling of wanting to do right.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Were those ones I wrote? Or the ones that were actually entertaining?
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Ananke wins the "I got here first" award by some distance
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
BT, I legitimately don't remember. One of yours was probably among the ones, and probably the ones I preferred (ironically, I didn't like the really gloaty ones in the beginning)
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
"What got you into R/D?"

So my RL friend had me join NS and we made a region, and then without knowing R/D was a thing started raiding within like a week because we wanted to and figured out how to do it, and then like started meeting other GPers and s**t. After NWO fell apart later in 2010, I joined TBH/TBR and spent my time getting Unibot to break his keyboard. Then I grew up a little bit, realized what a toxic community the raiders had at the time and switched sides. Got handed a lot of power, ran with it, 8 years later here we are.

Oh also Sedgistan trained me on R/D so I basically have the best pedigree
[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
I'm curious.  What is RORMS, BT? I don't know that region
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Region of Reunited Muslim States.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Was that the BoM/TBR invasion that we managed to liberate?
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
It was the Iran before Iran when it came to raiders' concentrated attacks. Region of Reunited Muslim States and their successor region RORMS worth both eventually griefed IIRC. But I was not a participant in that battle, so I'd have to lean on your memory there, Karp.

I just remember holding discussions with my region about the invasion and debating whether or not to get involved.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
I remember liberating RORMs in 2013 so would guess its the same one, but yeah TBR had a knack for coming back to finish what they started in founderlessd regions during that period. Outright griefing was a lot more common place.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
And we decided to stay neutral to keep ourselves safe, which lead to my* seeking out of Defender regions.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
TBR being the Black Riders[/box]
[box][color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
That makes sense.  Now, I guess, since we're down this rabbithole, [b]what was a memorable event you participated in?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
There are so many, both victories and defeats, that I could write a book on them.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
I remember when the NPA helped the region the founder of DEN came from (Solarius I think it was called) after it got invaded.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
In 2014, the region 10000 Islands banned their sitting delegate on charges of treason. I had a role to play in that momentous occasion.
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
I'm a pretty new defender, but my favorite moment is probably when Haku did his oracle magic and we were able to stop like 2 or 3 occupation attempts during a single update. That was insanely fun and hype.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
This lead to Fort Triumph, which changed defending forever.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
One that sticks out for me was the liberation of Asia at the end of 2013, which all in all was a horrific year for defending. It was the beginnings of #jump and was a monumental effort that managed to pull off a tight victory against a large TBR pile and what would have likely been a full-on grief.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
For some reason I have the most vivid memories of the 2014 Milo TSP coup. I didn't do anything fancy, just a normal updater in that event, but I have good memories of working on it
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Considering my rather short R/D history, it would probably be the liberation of South Pacific this summer, which no doubt will be memorable for me even when I (hopefully) have a longer career to my name. The comradery and excitement of people who had never gotten involved in R/D before (most from TEP, but my home, TSP contributing a significant amount as well) was something I will never forget.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
The liberation of TNP in 2004 no question. We didn't know if it'd work, and if not we would've lost the region.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Wasn't the Milo TSP coup in 2013?
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Mmmm yes that makes sense because it was in the phase where I was RIA but you weren't yet RIA :P
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
I believe the operation that has come to define my place in NSGP forever was the defense of my original region, European Union and then Equestria in the summer of 2016.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
My first major event was the rogue delegacy of Lewis and Clark/Westwind in the North Pacific. It was a highly political and protracted campaign with the delegacy held by a senior figure in a (then) prominent defender region and the native and liberator resistance forced to organise in private on our regions forums. I learnt a lot about counter-coup/siege tactics and got hooked in the politics of gameplay from that point onwards
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Lewis and Clark was a big one, a defining conflict of that era in NS
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
One of the most fun defenses I've been involved in was when we decided to trick most of NS' raiders into piling for days in Imperial Europe, while we held the delegacy. They'd been raiding it for a bunch of times, so we wanted to get them all on the banlist at once.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
I've been involved in pretty much every major GCR coup since 2012, but I think my favorite was definitely 2013 Milograd. No other thing had such a massive execution and PR campaign. Had they not mismanaged influence that could've held on for a while, it was really fun to fight against. In more recent history and non-GCR stuff, it would have to be TGW's first summer when we absolutely curb stomped the Raidercon invasion attempt on European Union
[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
Something I was confused about: What is Fort Triumph?
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
It was a region I founded with Deadeye Jack and Land Filled With People. Eist and Shizensky were also on board and provided invaluable assistance.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Sort of a proto-TGW. It was BT, Land, and Jack's project following BT's departure from XKI. Really kept things going in a post-UDL pre-TGW shadow period
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Very recently we've also had the siege and eventual liberation of Smol Fur Empire which was pretty darn impressive, really. Yes I'm classing that as a lib, we literally scared the raiders away
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
I think the recent siege efforts with involvement of the more reservist militia updaters has been phenomenal yeah, SFE was memorable af
[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
SFE and SP was FUN. Also, that is pretty cool!  I am not really very knowledgeable on history yet so having you guys here and like, talk about this stuff
Pre-TGW post UDL sounds interesting.  A transitionary time.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
That period we made do with a large coalition rather than one dominant force
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
That was an incredibly fun era marked with increased cooperation between defenders and independent militaries like the EPSA. FTMS (Fort Triumph), EPSA and the FRA had created a very active group of updaters that seamlessly cooperated with one another.[/box]
[box][color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
Now, another nice lil question, that will sorta get on gear for the rest of the questions.  [b]What were the main reasons for defending in the past, speaking on the lines of when you first started R/Ding?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
The Golden Rule
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
The golden rule.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
To stop griefing. There were a lot of big griefings happening in the early days.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I'm not really sure how collective reasons for defending have changed over time, I know my reasons have changed a lot by that's mostly due to personal growth, not game growth.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Regions have a right to sovereignty just as we have the right to run our nations as we choose.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
When I started (2007) there was a real and genuine threat that each raided region would be destroyed and password-locked. The Security Council and liberation proposals changed that and allowed us to unlock some regions that had been raider trophies for years, and return them to still active, exiled regional communities
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
When I went into R/D in 2010, Defending was very morally centered. This was an XKI, FRA Old Guard, and Unibot dominated era, and they all had varying levels of beliefs. I remember in 2010 after my 2nd raid or so, XKI liberated us, Grub telegrammed me specifically to call me a bully and saying I'm not amounting to anything of value. So there were a lot of beliefs grounded in "regions have a right to sovereignty" and "raiders are bad people".

By the time I switched in 2012, it was less "raiders are bad people" due to a lot more community crossover, but the "regional sovereignty" angle was burning stronger than ever. The moralist hardlining ended up falling apart in 2013, primarily due to it causing us countless FA damages across the GCR sphere and failing to be viable as a recruitment angle in a more OOC GP meta.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Absolutely, NuCa. I don't think you can make a credible argument that you aren't causing harm to a region when there are obviously very distraught natives cursing out the invaders on the RMB.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Compare it to TBR, they went all out trying to destroy regionsm
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Phoe, that's because I got into R/D this year and it pretty much by definition hasn't changed. Though I suppose there has been a gradual re-emergence of moralism, especially in TSP.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
North Ustaynga is a good example from the last year. There was no threat of destruction due to some of the regions involved, but natives were still very ready to completely give up on the game following the raid and just be a Discord-side community. Without our commitment to liberation attempts and liaison with them to reassure them they could have been lost from the game entirely.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
I can't say I'm as morally inclined as I was in 2007 or 2012 so I think there is an argument to be made that some balancing to try and restore the stakes in R/D might be a good thing.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I totally agree re: regional sovereignty maintenance is a positive change in the game dynamic. 

I will say if we take that concession and give up any kind of moralist grounding for why raiding is wrong, I think that would be a dangerous mistake in terms of developing defender identity and recruiting. While the extremeness of the harms of raiding has diminished, a lot of the reasons it's fundamentally wrong remain and should be a part of how we recruit and organize.
[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
Well, a modified question for you then We're basically on the same boat LOL, this is also the next question.

[b]What do you think about the different reasons for defending now? How have your reasons changed over time?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Moralism centered around regional sovereignty rather than OOC things.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]quoting HumanSanity: "I will say if we take that concession and give up any kind of moralist grounding for why raiding is wrong, I think that would be a dangerous mistake in terms of developing defender identity and recruiting. While the extremeness of the harms of raiding has diminished, a lot of the reasons it's fundamentally wrong remain and should be a part of how we recruit and organize."[/i]

Yes and no, like at the end of the day it cannot be ignored that there are other presently-existing defender militaries who recruit pretty much entirely on the basis of "we're more fun, this is more fun, come have some fun", and consistently are regarded as the best defender military on-site. Different strokes for different folks and I think we need to have room for both in the faction, because while a moral argument helps gather naive newer players, the TGW approach works a lot better on existing GPers looking for something new
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Before I was familiar with GP and in the aftermath of my region's invasion, I did consider raiders to be bad people. That perception faded pretty quickly as I got more involved within gameplay, and instead my guiding philosophy was always about the rights of the regions and natives being raided.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
I don't think my reasons for defending have changed. It's always been about a mix of morals and interesting gameplay for me.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I mean, I didn't really start out of any particular care for defending, I started out of a care for community. Eventually, it became a part of my identity. A lot of the moral backing has developed over time and its complexity has just grown with experience.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
As I kind of touched on before, I think moralism is really making a comeback, especially in TSP. And it's moralism that is actually great for recruitment, morale, and spirit - the belief that all regions have a right to sovereignty, which, while very prevalent before, hasn't in my knowledge been as much the focus as either "raiders are bad OOC" and "it's a game to have fun". Which is largely a big reason for my transition from unaligned to hardline defender - the realization that defending is centered around the value of each and every community, and that it's an inherently noble cause.

Which is in part why we can get such great turnout for Flock Fleet libs - RMBers are very drawn to the message of "come save this region" rather than "have fun with us", since, well, they're already having fun in what they do at the moment.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
We have always been a pretty broad church of regions, and we need that dynamic mix. Different messages will appeal to different nations.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Nowadays I think some of that zeal has faded too, but I think the most inclusive brand of moralism is centered less around the character of raiders and more around the rights of regions and natives to self-determination (within reason).
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
However, I would argue that moralism that chooses to straight-up paint raiders as OOC bad people has no place in the community as that doesn't foster a healthy game environment
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
The reasons I see now are much less moralist and aiming to stop griefing. After all, raiders have been occupying the same handful of regions for years now and with the threat of raiders being decreased from all the cool new gameside things like founders, influence, etc, there's not really a real point to raid other than "we are so much cooler and better haha", at least from my own observations. My reasons have definitely changed, thanks to BT's signature I am definitely more moralist. (No, seriously. Just from BT's sig. It was a very good quote. I'd steal it, even.)
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
I've had to modify my reasons to continue to fight throughout the years to keep myself engaged and to get others engaged. Moralism was obviously how I entered the cause. I had to shed moralism and go the "its for the challenge" rout in order to rebuild our ranks after the early 2010's saw our numbers heavily depleted. I then went with an antagonistic approach because I simply do not like raiders. I've been around a long time and I remember the scandals and the way players have been hurt. I don't want to play the game with those I consider to be destructive trolls, but I do, because I don't want others to have to be at their mercy.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
There is nothing inherently OOC bad about Raiding, besides for the IC villainy of it, and pushing that angle during a time when everyone is working to reduce community toxicity and increase inclusiveness is counter-productive towards our overall efforts to create a safer and more fun game environment for everybody.

That's why I think our cause should ultimately be grounded in having fun and enjoying doing this with our community because this is a game, not a job
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Re: Tim's point -- 

I agree, different flavors for different people. I'm not here to say "you can't have your reason" -- but I think a currently neglected area relative to others is meaningful moralist narrative building and there's significant RoI in that
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
I don't think the reasons for defending have changed too much for me, they've just become more refined as I have become more aware of the importance of separating how we view the game as players on a meta-level, and how the nations we control play a part in the lore of the game as we play it. 

On a meta-level: It's very fun, I very much enjoy playing with many of the people, and whilst I wouldn't say raiding is mindlessly easy (because it's not, depending on the type of operation), the full spectrum of a top tier defender requires both a deeper and broader skill set, and I enjoy the challenge. There are also legitimate arguments to be made even on this level for certain kinds of moral arguments. Isolated natives often don't understand this aspect of the game and may not realize that yes, invasions are (by decree of admin) an aspect of the game that they may be subjected to, and helping them contextualize it makes the game better for them.

But speaking as the nation that I am, it always was and remains the golden rule.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
Back when I first started to defend, a lot of invaders were jerks and griefers, who enjoyed harassing natives, so I don't think the message of 'raiders are bad people'  was very wrong.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
For sure Ananke, and I think that was even relevant into the 2010s. See: TBR and DEN
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
Yeah, I think nowadays though, what with the measures you can take to prevent griefing, that the message that raiders are bad people cus they raid isn't really factual. Now they are bad people because they did XXX or promote XXX is another thing.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
So, I do think that there are things that are OOC bad about raiding - raiding, even though they may deny it, does inherently cause damage to a community. And doing that is OOC bad, because it causes OOC harm to the natives (as you can see very clearly in native RMBs). However, just because you perform an OOC bad action doesn't make you OOC bad.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]quoting Humansanity: "I agree, different flavors for different people. I'm not here to say "you can't have your reason" -- but I think a currently neglected area relative to others is meaningful moralist narrative building and there's significant RoI in that"[/i]

There definitely is, I just think that said ROI needs to be fully recognized through a more comprehensive moralism -> actually capable and consistent update defending: something I find sometimes lacks in places, definitely lacked in the UDL when I was a Lt there, because people are too busy getting tilted by R/D or posting moralist spiels than actually improving themselves during update and getting better at beating raiders.

[i]quoting Ananke: Back when I first started to defend, a lot of invaders were jerks and griefers, who enjoyed harassing natives, so I don't think the message of 'raiders are bad people' was very wrong.[/i]

There are exceptions of course, but I don't think it does us any service to forget that invading stemmed from a desire to hurt communities for one's own entertainment. So moralism in its comeback needs to have actions behind it, not just wasteful words.[/box]
[box][color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
Next question since y'all are on it anyways: "Moralism" is a bit of a hot topic in NSGP at the moment.  [b]What are your personal thoughts on moralism?  Does it belong in NS?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
This game is at its best when it has a vibrant IC meta
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I do agree - for propaganda and PR, that's certainly the most effective. However, I do still think that there is an argument to be made that raiding is OOC bad.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Moralism is a perfectly valid "IC" ideology.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
I think we've touched upon that and were more or less in agreement that moralism definitely has a place, within reason.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Thankfully the community as a whole has done a far better job of rooting out the genuinely bad people that were getting power and influence in times gone by, and defending doesn't have to police a lot of that anymore.
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
Moralism, I think, is still mildly relevant. I think it's a bit outdated, since raiders can't do huge destructive actions without a McGuffin nowadays, but there definitely is truth to it in many regards.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
R/D grounded in moralism is a more entertaining and engaging prospect than just defending and raiding for the sake of it
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
The thing is, we can argue as much as we want about potential meta-level harm caused by invasions, but the fact is that raiding is an intrinsic (if emergent) part of the game and cannot be removed without gutting the game as it is. Therefore, our role as players who treat our fellow players with empathy is to engage on that front, explain the game, why things are as they are, and what can be done about it. That's a much more effective use of our time and everybody else's time.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
I'll take the IC moralism over the OOC moralism that is being used increasingly liberally in the public opinion wars that seems to have replaced actual on-site conflict.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I'm not going to say raiders are bad people, I think that's a reductionist interpretation of how people and their motivations operate. But I think raiding is kinda wrong as Prarie points out and that can serve as some of the basis for an IC expression of moralism. And I think this largely flows into Roavin's last comment as a sort of pathway forward: defenders need to both be operationally strong and engage natives on protecting and reassuring their communities
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
"What are your personal thoughts on moralism?  Does it belong in NS?"

I think it absolutely belongs, as an exclusively IC ideology. You have to remember I was around for the early-2010s collapse of Defender FA, and Moralism was pretty much single-handedly able to be blamed for it. Hardline stances from the UDL, in particular, attempting to push regions into narrow defender mindsets to the point of trying to force bans on longtime community members who happened to be raider, combined with generally inflexible attitudes towards independent partners, resulted in a defender faction that lost the entire GCR sphere to the at-the-time far more accommodating Raider and Imperialist community.

I think its comeback needs to be a lot more nuanced, a lot more careful, and modeled mainly on how TSP is doing it. An IC ideology grounded on democratic principles of regional sovereignty, not a hardline tool attempting to basically violate the sovereignty of non-defender regions through aggressive pressure and OOC stances.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I certainly think, as I have discussed, that moralism has a place in defending, and especially now, as I think it's what is really bringing the resurgence of the popularity of defending and the (slight) comeback of the OOC meta.

There are obviously two parts of Moralism - the belief in regional sovereignty, and the OOC aspects of things.
When we are in the IC, we need to push on the first aspect. Blurring the lines is harmful to everyone and if we push on the second that is how we lose the battle, as I think we can see with the golden age of Imperialism coming right after XKI/Unibot's prime. However, when having debates about the nature of R/D and especially moralism, we can bring up the second aspect. Which is, in my opinion, that raiding is an OOC bad action that is harmful to communities, but, even then, that raiders aren't bad people. 

You can see this pretty clearly in the varying essays in TSP about New Defender Moralism. Ultimately, if we push the OOC line, we lose the IC game. But that doesn't mean it is (to some extent) a bad line.

TL;DR "raiding is OOC bad" is a good position but we shouldn't make it our line of attack
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Disagree with the TL;DR, I think that stance harms our rather successful efforts in getting solid raiders to defect to us for a more fun and engaging community
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
I don't think there has to be a choice between morality or competence, Tim
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
It needs a diverse approach, the moral stances will drive a significant amount of initial recruitment. But we need to ensure we have a well defined 'product' for players who enter defending and they can get good training, enjoy the challenges and see what it means to be a highly talented and celebrated defender
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Prarie, I disagree. The argument by raiders is that there can be good that comes from raids as well. Those of us that have been around the block a couple of times can point at both kinds of situations, where a raid was good for a community on a meta-level, and bad for a community on a meta-level. But none of us here have the data to see if it's more one or the other and honestly, even if we did, that wouldn't change the fact of the existence of raiding. So it's a meaningless thing to think about.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Ultimately, I think moralism as an IC stance can exist -- and can have full and political elements. I think pressure, engagement, containment, etc. are all FA strategies both sides have the ability to use. 
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
We all have our roles to play. I'm actually amazed at how much TGW and our historically different stances have come out into the mainstream. We were supposed to be the non-moral or even ICly immoral fringe of the movement and yet here we are, making our cases for moralism in defending.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]Responding to Roavin:[/i] Honestly, having done both, I've definitely committed raids that left the community better off due to revitalizing them as a wake-up kick. These are however absolutely outlier token examples used by raiders to have plausible deniability over the fact that - most of the time - they do more harm than good. Though really, more often than both of those, the raid in all reality has absolutely zero impact on the region.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]Responding to Roavin: "Prarie, I disagree. The argument by raiders is that there can be good that comes from raids as well. Those of us that have been around the block a couple of times can point at both kinds of situations, where a raid was good for a community on a meta level, and bad for a community on a meta level. But none of us here have the data to see if it's more one or the other and honestly, even if we did, that wouldn't change the fact of the existance of raiding. So it's a meaningless thing to think about."[/i]

Isn't a lot of what we do ultimately meaningless? Part of the fun of this game is the role play and world that is moulded by the players. Ultimately this is a political game and those coming to the game likely have an interest in that area, so I don't think an evolving moral debate is pointless.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Karp is right, we all like winning but this is nonsensical. Additionally, we can find examples of where giving up on IC moralism probably costs some wins in the long-term. Or it costs political wins even if it doesn't affect battlefield wins. Or vice versa. It's a reason a more fully-featured strategy is best, not why one strategy > the other
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]Responding to HumanSanity[/i]: I think that's fair if it's an internal OOC stance

I'm simply arguing that it has no place being actively perpetuated on a wider community scale. If you believe it that's cool, but at the end of the day our focus should be creating a healthier and friendlier community for everyone on this game - or else we're gonna have a real s**ty toxic game - including those we see as the IC villains.

Like let's also not forget that the OOC-level motivation dominated Gameplay of the past was significantly more toxic
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
Being that I'm probably one of the more moralist defenders here (that's a label, which I mostly think is kinda useless though), I think moralism, especially in regards to natives' rights, is a good thing for defenders. It'd be sad if we came to a point where the only reason we all defend is because it's fun.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Tim, That may very well be. You could also make an argument that constantly having defenders come in uncalled for to detag a region that's not completely dead denies that community the ability to take matters into their own hands and grow as a result of it. So you can slice it either way, thinking of invasions as good or bad on a meta-level is fully irrelevant to how we should play the game. Its existence is and will remain a fact. The empathy we have to expend as players are much better spent in other ways.

And we as players should approach each other with empathy, no matter if we're defenders, raiders, imperialists, isolationists, or whatever else. We are all playing this game together, afterall.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Roavin, I do think it's occasionally true in the long run, but I think you can make an equation of sorts about it: All raids cause harm. I think that's clear. While some may be better in the long run, some aren't. Which is why it's a net negative.

I certainly understand your point, though.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
To touch on one of the tangent arguments here, moralism never lost us an ally. It was the way a certain org used the tools at their disposal that harmed our reputations internationally. They just happened to be more outspokenly moralist than most.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Roavin, agreed. I think there's no point getting pissy about invasions existing, Max ain't ever getting rid of R/D.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
I think there's plenty of space in this game for an evolving moral framework, and actual on the groundwork with communities, and other players. And allowing for the existence of both gives gameplay broader appeal to players that are interested or suited to either.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I totally agree, which is why we should def make the regional sovereignty part of moralism the main point.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
No one here is saying we need to go back to Unibot-ian moralism
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
However, there has to be some parts of "raiders are the enemy" IC, because if there's nobody to fight against IC, people won't fight. You can see this pretty clearly with newer defenders' hardline anti-TBH ness
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
At the end of the day, people on this game want to have fun and hang out with cool people. This is a social site. Build the best community, be the best faction.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
I don't think anybody here is arguing against moralism as an IC ideology. It would be a massive handicap to not use that rhetoric tool in what is, at the end of the day, a political simulator.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
My issue with IC Moralism usually is with inflexible players trying to tactlessly execute it than anything against the ideology itself.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Yeah the IC-adversary is a strong discourse, but it has to be done in a way that rings true or people will eventually grow disillusioned with it
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
What's interesting is how the game evolves. Some of the things people talk about as bad these days, I'm like, eh, worked fine for us back in the day and noone minded. Perceptions change.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim::[/b][/u][/color]
Hell, I've made IC Moralist arguments constantly. I just argue it in Regional Sovereignty terms because Moralism as a term has a bad rap and for me personally brings back bad flashbacks
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
To this day, one of the best ways to get a bunch of 'randos' for a big lib is pointing at signs that the target region may be griefed. Using that as a rhetorical tool is effective and perfectly valid.[/box]
[box][color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
It is really interesting.  And, I did see some comments here that did lead to my next question. The whole divide between the IC and OOC gameplay has been stressed a lot. How do you personally divide that?
And how can we do better?
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I think that's quite simple, really. IC is about the political game, and how we can win. OOC is the player behind the game and the emotions behind actions.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim::[/b][/u][/color]
I don't take any IC action personally unless there are OOC motivations connected to it. I think the problem is when people can't separate the character from the player.
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
100% agree with you, Tim
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I also think there's a good argument that a game focused on IC ideology is healthier than one focused on personal animosity. A concern I have about the health of the game in a "the goal is to win" framework is that everything becomes about the personal successes or failures of others, mudslinging results, etc. I think ideology cuts through that to some extent -- our goal is to win but nothing has to be about setting down others
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim::[/b][/u][/color]
I definitely go after individuals sometimes, but yeah my ultimate thing is I keep everything in the scope of the game. Attack the actions, not the player
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
It can't be done. We can do our best to limit it via emphasizing empathy at all levels of involvement in NS.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
I don't like the terms "IC" and "OOC" anymore. I prefer talking about the meta, which is us as players talking about the game, and the lore, which is the story of the canon that we are building in the NationStates universe, as leaders of one or more nations navigating this vast world. And honestly, while meta-level social aspects sometimes inform decisions made by nations within the lore (like which specific region to move toward), by and large I think we can and should be able to separate them very cleanly. Much of the bickering in NSGP in the past few years has come from not keeping that divide well (see as a perfect example the NSGP forum thread on this very event), and it behooves us to do better.

I have been thinking of ways to deliberately label which realm a statement is made in, but I have yet to figure out something that's easy, unambiguous, and has a likelihood of being widely accepted.
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
For me, I've found the divide was self evident, but apparently it does not feel the same way in regard to others. During the failed SP lib with the update bending shenanigans I was like "man, raiders are pricks" but later that week I had a very pleasant conversation with Altino and other raiders. Hate their actions, but not person.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
However, IC actions will leave me OOC distraught on occasion, because, well, I'm a competitive person, and I want to win. And when I don't, especially by more "ruthless" means, it is upsetting. But overall agreed that we need to seperate IC and OOC and blurring those lines is problematic
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Its hard to tell the natives of a destroyed region not to take GP personally.

"Why did they do this to my region"

"Sadly, its because they believe it is fun to destroy what you've worked hard for"
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Prarie, that's just exasperation as a player from the game. You can get that in any game. I feel my heart rate rising when I play tetris with good pace and see that I have a chance to beat my previous personal best. It's the same kind of thing.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I just want to reiterate my overall difficulty with the concept of X person as "OOC bad" or "OOC good". Or even "IC bad" or "IC good". 

People are sums of actions, they're not monolithically good or bad. People's actions are also influenced by a myriad of social factors.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
I've always seen gameplay as a mix of IC and OOC, which is part of what often makes for high stakes, and I don't think it's right to pressure people into only playing IC. That kind of talk has often been used to dismiss the real hurt gameplay actions can lead to. To get a free pass for your actions, so to speak. It's okay to feel angry when someone betrays you ingame.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
I try to keep my harder rhetoric focused on the NS forums, and treat people with a level playing field on Discord. And if you attack someone in particular in an in-game situation there is no reason why you can't reach out to them privately away from the game even to just be friendly, do something more light-hearted and/or make sure they don't take it personally
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]Quoting Prarie: "However, IC actions will leave me OOC distraught on occasion, because, well, I'm a competitive person, and I want to win. And I don't, especially by more "ruthless" means, it is upsetting. But overall agreed that we need to seperate IC and OOC and blurring those lines is problematic"[/i]

Prarie, yeah 100%. Your personal mental will still get affected, it's just a matter of knowing how to disconnect that, not be mad at the player across the screen in a significant manner, and knowing when to step back and breathe if needed. Because like yeah, I hate losing lmao.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I think that's largely the reason why "raiders OOC bad" moralism was so prevalent earlier in the game, Thomas - people simply did not have the experience and evolution that comes eventually. Because anyone whose region gets destroyed by raiders will probably immediately go to "raiders OOC bad", because it caused them OOC harm. Which goes away with time.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Prarie, communities were also a lot more segregated. You didn't really interact with other regional communities to the extent that we do now
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
Even being tag raided can feel super damaging to a community that isn't very knowledgeable.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
As others have said I think it's difficult to separate the two and trying to isn't necessarily the best way of looking at the problem or improving it.

Ultimately the best you can do is treat your fellow players like the human beings they are.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
I also think part of why IC and OOC are murky is that OOC things have IC implications and vice versa. I think raiding is OOC harmful, but it certainly has IC elements to make it happen, you can't deny that. And I think we're stronger if we evaluate, IC, how to be better at winning our IC battles that ultimately are entirely a part of game play.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
Also, I don't think it's fair to say to people that they should step back and calm down about all ingame actions. I don't mind saying that I really disliked Pixiedance and Insane Power when they f***ed TNP over, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Just made me fight them harder.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I think part of the equation, too, is the fact that if someone is IC ruthless/bad/mean that's an OK indication they're the same OOC. Not an exact correlation, but occasionally a clue. Occasionally.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
I think there is room for honesty and admitting that you do not like people because of the things they've chosen to do.

The holier-than-thou competition when it comes to pretending that we like each other has helped us get to this weird place we're in today.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
If you settle in this game, you're going to be forgotten within a generation of your retirement. This is just a consequence-free game, play it the way you want to and don't wait for somebody else to build what you desire to have.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
I think we also need to push that you can be friends with raiders OOC but be defender IC - I was close to the imperialist sphere earlier because a ton of Osiris people were being really nice to me. Naturally, I thought "hey, maybe I should join them, they're nice people".

And part of that is building an inclusive community as well - Phoe has done this excellently in TSP. The reason the SPSF has record numbers atm because Phoe is incredibly welcoming and kind, which, in turn, makes people inclined to get involved with the SPSF. Kindness attracts.
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
The past-era of "humble quiet janitors" is stupid

Should our wins be propaganda? Yes. Should part of that propaganda be "yeah f you we're better than you RAWR"... idk that's not tasteful to me. It's not about beating the other side, it's about being the best versions of ourselves, stacking that against the other side, and playing our best game possible; and then taking each thing and building it to be part of the narrative.

Hence, information and narrative control. Indoctrinate more people into the defender hivemind. Make them see the light. If there is one thing both RL and NS have convinced me of it's that everything is information war.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Karp, no but like I genuinely feel that said attitude even in-joke is problematic, because it leads to a lot of people just being like "Eh nah idc" where it's literally one of the easiest things someone can do to contribute to our overall PR.

If we want to really buy in to improving the faction and controlling the meta, narrative control and press releases will always be at the forefront of that. Actions speak louder than words, but nobody remembers actions if you don't put them into words
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
I think it's forgotten that NSGP fully rejected TGW in the beginning.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Yea TGW got screamed at consistently by other parts of the faction for posting defense reports in the beginning
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
We took our beliefs and put them into action and eventually won everyone over.
[color=cba135][u][b]TMatthew:[/b][/u][/color] 
[i]Quoting Prarie: "I think we also need to push that you can be friends with raiders OOC but be defender IC - I was close to the imperialist sphere earlier because a ton of Osiris people were being really nice to me. Naturally, I thought "hey, maybe I should join them, they're nice people".[i]

Yeah, 100% push that idea of separating OOC friendship with IC alignment. Newer people to r/d like to think it's all clean-cut, you're with or against us. In reality, we're all just a bunch of nerds who do bare-bones LARP on an ancient website meant to advertise an okay critique on capitalism who happen to take the game a bit more seriously.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
You have to fight for what you want and if you fight long enough, you'll become a legend for it.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
[i]Quoting Benevolent Thomas: "You have to fight for what you want and if you fight long enough, you'll become a legend for it."[/i]
a godgamer, so to speak
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Regions aren't the echo chambers they once were, and you can't control the narrative within your own bubble to the same extent that you could do. So much more is now done on-site or within accessible discord servers when in that declining period the go to were regional forums because site simply wasn't up to scratch. Anyway, I'll stop ranting about NS' glory days
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
back in my day...
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Glory days are in front of us if we don't let up. It's all in our hands.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
Nostalgia is half the reason some of us are still around. :stuck_out_tongue:[/box]
[box]Phoenix of the Sun10/22/2020
AUDIENCE QUESTION!!! [b]What leaders inspired you all?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Shizensky. Next question.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Roavin & Somyrion
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Land and Funk
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
Falconias, Numero Capitan in the early years. Wop and Fratt in the inter-twining years.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Benevolent Thomas. No contest. Also Jack.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
The Twoslit Experiment in TNP, Pope Hope and Ballotonia (Free4All at the time).
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Also in terms of inspiring me not even so much in a technical R/D sense but more in a general sense, Paffnia will always get props from me. (Although we're contemporaries more than anything)
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
Benevolent Thomas, Tim, and Roavin aka old folks. I didn't really feel like staying defender but they were super cool and stuff, both in mentoring me and also were just cool to talk and hang out with. Special shout out to Haku as well cus Haku is a legend who I aspire to be one day.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
Improving Wordiness was my inspiration, but it was Land who helped me become me.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Northern Chittowa and Sedge both really taught me how to lead in NS. Sedge often leading by example and Northern Chittowa taught me how you can manage a large organization by simply working the edges and steer the ship from your position of authority. Anime Daisuki was also inspirational just in terms of their update ability and consistency[/box]
[box][color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
Another question: [b]What has been your favorite moment in NSGP?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
when I got upcoming defender of the year for 2019 and then immediately quit the game for like 3 months–that was FUNNY–also getting active because I was nominated
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
My favourite moment is when Horse won the Sir Lans Award
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
When TSP all decided, simultaneously pretty much, that we were ready for an interregional defender alliance. That's when I really saw the Defender light, so to speak, and started to see the vision of an incredible future.
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
A defender spy getting raider of the year while a defender-turned-raider moonlighter getting defender of the year in last year's NSGP awards.
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Savaer moaning about how much of a dick Numero was when I was Crown Prince of Unknown
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
The investigation into the Predator Scandal. While the illegality of it is deservingly downplayed these days, it was fascinating to have played a role in its investigation and its fallout.
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Does N-Day Count"? If So Potato Alliance this past one. Otherwise, you're gonna hate me for this one, but couping Osiris :x[/box]
[box][color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
[b]Ask the panel how they deal with interacting with people they hate?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity:[/b][/u][/color]
Idk, how do I interact with you?
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
Smile and wave, boys, smile and wave.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolten Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
I rarely do, if ever. It works pretty well, tbh
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
I tend to avoid any people in NS I dislike.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
For people I hate, I straight up ignore them
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Infiltrate the regions they love and cherish and make subtle changes that slowly stifle every good thing it had going. Become emperor of the corpse
[color=cba135][u][b]Matthew:[/b][/u][/color]
Uhhhhhhhhhh... I don't really hate anyone and I think I'd try to stay outta their way tbh. s'all a game yknow?
I LIED, YOU FIND THEM AND THEN SAY THAT THEY ARE A PRICK AND SALT THEIR FIELDS AND BURN THEIR CITY TO THE GROUND FOR EVER SLIGHTING YOU
[color=cba135][u][b]Phoenix:[/b][/u][/color]
It's hard to hate anyone in this game that I've come across so far.  Everyone's too loveable and awesome
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
ask the panel how they deal with interacting with people they hate
Avoid them. Work with them professionally IC if I have to.[/box]
[box]Phoenix of the Sun10/22/2020
A traditional question we ask in TSP at the end of interviews, the point of many a debate.... the one war that divides us all, up down left right, possibly even more divisive than Raiders vs Defenders.........................

[b]Cake or Pie?[/b]
[color=cba135][u][b]Tim:[/b][/u][/color]
Cake
[color=cba135][u][b]HumanSanity[/b][/u][/color]
Cake
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]0
Savoury pie.
[color=cba135][u][b]Ananke:[/b][/u][/color]
Pie.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
ICE CREAM!!!
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
Cake with more icing than cake
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Pie, of course.
Cake is for raiders.
[color=cba135][u][b]Benevolent Thomas:[/b][/u][/color]
**** you if you put pie before cake.
[color=cba135][u][b]Karp:[/b][/u][/color]
can we cancel BT for picking cake
[color=cba135][u][b]Numero:[/b][/u][/color]
HMU if you want to join covert cake stealing operations
[color=cba135][u][b]Roavin:[/b][/u][/color]
Cake is OOC toxic.
[color=cba135][u][b]Prarie:[/b][/u][/color]
The Pieletariat are OOC bad.[/box]
[align=center][background-block=black][color=00000]|[/color]
[url=https://discord.gg/AGmenRg][b][color=C0C0C0]Discord Server[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=492895][b][color=cba135]Forums Announcement[/color][/b][/url] [color=white]|[/color] [url=https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1448306][b][color=C0C0C0]Attending Regions and Contributors[/color][/b][/url]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/EpDFtuP.png[/img][/background-block][/align]

Report