Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Welcome to The Rejected Realms

Government:

Delegate: Wabbitslayah
Officer: Frattastan (Foreign Affairs)
Officer: Marilyn Manson Freaks (Outreach)
Officer: PowerPAOK (Media)
Officer: Relfa (Culture)

Other Officials:

Speaker: Vulturret
RRA High Commander: Frattastan
RRA Commander: Guy
RRA Commander: Wopruthien
Welcome to The Rejected Realms, NationStates' ejection-free zone!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you can only view some areas of the board and you can only post in the Troubleshooting and Suggestions forum. If you register an account, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customising your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Register now!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
FRA membership - debate
Topic Started: May 2 2011, 03:04 PM (819 Views)
sedge
Member Avatar
Admin Slave
As with the Lazarus treaty, I think it's only fair that with the new leadership, constitution, and (to a large extent) membership that we have here, we should look at our old Foreign Affairs commitments. Membership of the FRA was something we applied for in August 2007, when it was clear that the DSA (successor to the ADN) was on its last legs. For reference, this is the application submitted by Geo_X:
Spoiler: click to toggle

I don't know how the decision to apply was made at the time, but I guess it was led by the RRA (who later had a few members involved in the FRA Rangers), and was likely agreed to by Kandarin as well.

The key benefits of FRA membership, from my view, are:
  • Security - they have provided large numbers of WA nations to help defend us in the past
  • Intel - they have a fairly good intel department, which can get us information when we need it
  • Defender connections - which are vital for when the RRA is re-started later this month
  • Foreign Affairs boost - we have friendly relations with a number of their member regions
  • Members - FRA members have a tendency to forum-whore, and we have a number of them active here as a result


Now there are some drawbacks too, but I'm going to leave those to others to point out ;)

I'm going to suggest that for the duration of this debate, and the subsequent vote on retaining membership, we don't admit new citizens, so that we don't have a wave of foreigners trying to keep us in/get us out of the FRA. I know some advance warning has been given of this debate, which may explain some of the recent applications.

Also, I know that there are some of you with a rabid hatred of the FRA. Fair enough, but lets not have an argument about whether the ADN was better than the FRA - because that's not relevant here. The question is whether we should remain members of the FRA, or leave.

Additionally, many of us have ties to other regions/organisations. Please remember that when debating here, you are doing so as a citizen of The Rejected Realms.

Finally, I understand that at least one region wishes to make us an 'alternative offer' if we leave the FRA. Since it is relevant to this debate, I feel it is worth hearing here.
Edited by sedge, May 2 2011, 03:04 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Dalimbar
Member Avatar
Contributor
I'm not going to comment on my own misgivings about the FRA, as everyone I'm sure is aware of my viewpoints on them.

However, I do wish to start off by asking a question. Say we do leave FRA, for whatever reason. If there is another string of invasion attempts at our Delegacy, and we ask the FRA to help us either maintain control over or retake the Delegacy, will they do so, even though under this scenario we are no longer members? I know that I'm bound to hear "Well of course Dali, we are defenders", but would an invasion of TRR take a different priority for FRA if we were no longer members?
Dalimbar
Delegate (Ret.) of Osiris
Delegate (Ret.) of The North Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Oliver Dion
Member Avatar
Dedicated
I'm going to stay out of the discussion except to say that, in terms of defence, there are always other options, if you have the political and social will to seek them. Other than that, I'm just going to hush.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
unibot
Member Avatar
Chief Propagandist
Dalimbar
May 2 2011, 08:30 PM
I'm not going to comment on my own misgivings about the FRA, as everyone I'm sure is aware of my viewpoints on them.

However, I do wish to start off by asking a question. Say we do leave FRA, for whatever reason. If there is another string of invasion attempts at our Delegacy, and we ask the FRA to help us either maintain control over or retake the Delegacy, will they do so, even though under this scenario we are no longer members? I know that I'm bound to hear "Well of course Dali, we are defenders", but would an invasion of TRR take a different priority for FRA if we were no longer members?
It's difficult to say, Dali. Feeders and Sinkers are difficult situations and many defenders want to abstain from intervening in said regions to avoid ADN-esque backlash and hyperinterventionism, especially when the feeder culture is so dominated by erm, machiavellian political philosophies. I think by being FRA Members you ensure that the FRA won't back out of intervention for the above reasons -- if you weren't members I can certainly see the possibility of my prospective successor not deploying in the case of an endo-tarting bogey because "defenders have a responsibility to let native politics run their natural course". However, we have recently passed a Rogue Delegacy policy which will allow the FRA cabinet to deploy rangers in regions like TRR if there is a threat of a rouge delegate getting into power. A rogue delegate is defined as "one whose domestic regional policies and actions are characterized by a self-destructive intent in regards to a region, unless these actions or policies are sanctioned by a legitimate authority". "These policies include, but are not limited to; reduction of government, loss of political enfranchisement, denial of freedom of assembly or speech and admin masking on the forums."

However your question made it sound as though you think the FRA would seek some of reprisal by denying their defense services, which I don't think would happen at all...nevertheless, by not being members, you would be treated like other feeders and sinkers -- which have earned a more cautious and conservative judgement when it comes to intervening or not.
Edited by unibot, May 2 2011, 10:59 PM.
Posted Image
Former Delegate of The Rejected Realms
Former Editor-In-Chief, Maestro

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
frattastan
Member Avatar
Dirty Spammer
Yes, the FRA would defend, but only Rangers would deploy.
While if TRR stays as a member, the Rangers and all the other member regions would be obligated to provide WA nations for assistance.
Also, because of the nature of TRR, probably it would have a lower priority, especially if there are other regions under serious risk of griefing, whereas the defence of a member region is compulsory and has always top priority.

By the way, on the feeder policy, I won't apply it to sinkers too ... While the FRA never deployed in the Pacifics, it did provide a good number of WAs to defend Lazarus (a non-member) in 2008.

Ah, I love how the misspelt word 'rouge' is actually in red :P
Edited by frattastan, May 3 2011, 12:44 PM.
In this world there are two kinds of people: those with loaded guns and those who dig. I dig.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Dalimbar
Member Avatar
Contributor
For context, the term "rouge Delegate" was an accidental misspelling turned affectionate nickname for my first TNP Delegacy after I had gone "rogue" there. Though, by your definition Uni, I hardly think that I had gone "self-destructive" in my policies there, nor do I believe that many of my other colleagues who have been labeled "rogue" were also "self-destructive". I certainly was not trying to purge myself, eh?
Dalimbar
Delegate (Ret.) of Osiris
Delegate (Ret.) of The North Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Wopruthien
Member Avatar
Spammer
I believe Uni is referring to incidents like JAL/Durk.

I'm obviously in full support of remaining in FRA, but I won't be able to keep out my obvious bias, so I'll try and stay out of the debate.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sedge
Member Avatar
Admin Slave
Slight concern here. If you can't debate as an RR citizen, can you really vote as an RR citizen? I'm not talking about legality, just wondering if people can put the interests of the region first when voting, if they can't manage to debate with the interests of the region first.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sedge
Member Avatar
Admin Slave
That, by the way, is meant as an encouragement to have a go at debating this, rather than an attempt to discourage people from voting ;)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rozonia
Regular
I'm leaning towards remaining in the FRA. I don't have any first-hand experience with them, but I can see the advantages of being a member. However, I would like to hear the downsides, from anyone who knows.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Biyah
Member Avatar
High Priest of the Cult
by all means, legal and dirty - pull out of the FRA.

Of course, I could be considered biased. I hate the FRA with just about every fiber of my being. They are nothing but raiders in sheep's clothing.

~B
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Guy
Member Avatar
Old Admin Slave
What is the alternative?

If we are not FRA, what would we be? Would the RRA defend?

I don't always agree with the FRA on stuff, but I think Sedge's points in support of the continued membership were very strong.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Biyah
Member Avatar
High Priest of the Cult
Being in a defender 'organization' is not required to be a defender army. Of course we would be defenders, unless the bulk of citizens chose otherwise. The alternative is easy, what's wrong with being free agents for a while?

We will need support in the future, yes, but that is also not contingent on membership in the organization. If it were, defender orgs would not be defender orgs.

It also doesnt mean we can't cooperate in the future, if we feel the need.

~B
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Biyah
Member Avatar
High Priest of the Cult
Sorry for the double post, I didn’t think I'd get this written tonight.

Quote:
 
Security - they have provided large numbers of WA nations to help defend us in the past

We don't need to be part of the FRA to have a large pool of WA nations to draw from. If we put out a call for help, many will heed - else they are not defender organizations, and we can make them look like fools.

Between CG, Sedge and Nai alone - they are friends with over half the game.

In either case, historically, we've never had a problem getting people.

Quote:
 
Intel - they have a fairly good intel department, which can get us information when we need it

I’ll bite down my petty comments about the quality of their intel department. With that aside, If they are interested in seeing TRR stay stable, they will help anyway… such things were common place in the old days, to foster stability and good will. If not, screw em, we can get our own intel department going and ignore them as well as they ignore us.

Quote:
 
Defender connections - which are vital for when the RRA is re-started later this month

Connections =/= Membership

Quote:
 
Foreign Affairs boost - we have friendly relations with a number of their member regions

If we cease to have friendly relations with said regions because we drop out of the FRA, then we never really had friendly relations. Healthy relations should not be contingent on membership to a third party group.

Quote:
 
Members - FRA members have a tendency to forum-whore, and we have a number of them active here as a result

As I've noticed, various members of the FRA will forum-whore regardless of membership status.


... and lets throw this in for flavor.
Image: The FRA has increasingly gotten a bad image for throwing its weight around where it's not wanted. This is not exactly new, granted, but a few recentish events have really throw the spotlight on it. If we're trying to turn around our image, we don't need this.

Ego: Like the ADN before it, TRR's basic appeal to any group is that it's one of the big official regions. I very much doubt the FRA'd stay here en-force for a long period of time, if we were under sustained assault. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere above that we'd be low on the totem pole if it came down to it.

Which means the only reason we'd be worth keeping was so that they could stroke their ego and say 'TRR chose us!'. Frankly, the idea of them stroking anything with our name in mind disgusts me - we've not gotten anything out of them lately, I don't see the reason to change that now. Let them attend to their own ego.

Stability: We're trying to find our legs again, both as a region and as an army. I'd rather see us split ties to anyone or anything that could give us orders, until we once again find stable ground and can be confident that we won't be pushed around.

~B
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
frattastan
Member Avatar
Dirty Spammer
Biyah
May 4 2011, 07:38 AM
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere above that we'd be low on the totem pole if it came down to it.
Yep, I said that. Although that would happen only if TRR left FRA.
Defence of a member region is always compulsory. It's written in the Charter.
In this world there are two kinds of people: those with loaded guns and those who dig. I dig.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Assembly Archives · Next Topic »
Locked Topic