ForestBoard

Chan island wrote:

The Forest Army sus, I saw them being a skeleton.

getoutofmyheadgetoutofmyheadstopitstopit

Jutsa wrote:

My belated acknowledgement that you were no longer in Forest.

Hahaha, easy enough to miss.

Anti-humanism wrote:

Hey guys. I withdraw my candidacy

Makes sense, wasn't not being elected actually part of your program?

Hold on... Not being voted was part of your campaign... And by withdrawing your candidacy you effectively ensured nobody can vote for you...
You clever bastard, this was your plan all along wasn't it?

Middle Barael wrote:

I always wonder how mature or immature I seem on line, considering I’m also just in HS.

Hold on, we're about the same age then? And you might be slightly younger than me? Damn, I always thought you were older than me, I'm way surprised right now.

Anti-humanism wrote:

Hey guys. I withdraw my candidacy

Duly noted. In light of your statement of intent, your name will not appear in the options for the upcoming vote.

Since you voted yes in the previous poll, however, I think you can pull a Ross Perot and re-enter, should you choose to do you. You might want to tag me in such a post, though, so that I notice it.

In any event, I hope that you remain in the region. Anyone who comes to embody the Forest Way is most welcome! :-)

After much careful deliberation, I have decided to announce my support for Lord Dominator for the position of Forest Keeper.
From my understanding, Lord Dominator has one of the most complete plataforms out of all candidates in this march's elections, and out of these plataforms they have the one I find more agreeable. Here are a list of the things that convinced me to vote in their favour:

1 The balance between experience in the forestian government and innovation in the proposed changes to the region;
2 The proposals regarding the security of Forest;
3 The experience in R/D gameplay, which gives me more trust in their capacity to ennact the necessary changes to keep Forest safe;
4 The commitment to democracy in implementing their proposals;
5 The proposals regarding regional cultural activities.

This is of course not to say that I cannot be convinced to withdraw my support of Lord Dominator's campaign, but merely to show my support for the ideas proposed by them. I originally intended to actually argue in their favour. However, I am quite dumb, and proudly so, so I decided to just just have a list of the points that convinced me to serve at least as an example of what I think are LD's strenghts in this election. I also made this cute little sticker while procrastinating an essay I need to write -> https://i.imgur.com/0WaSCRB.png
I also would like to clarify that this post was written of my own volition and I am not being held at gunpoint or otherwise being threatened in any way by LD.

Good and excellent questions have been asked from the candidates. Already, at this point, I have narrowed my options down to two veteran nations and I believe we are going to be just fine with either one of them as a Forest keeper, if votes go down that way.

Althought still keeping an open mind because of a long T-minus.

If it means anything, in the unlikely event that you get stuck with me, I worked for 20 months in retail much of which during covid. I'm good with dealing with people. :>

Just taking a moment to note the CTE of Karock :-/

With Errin's CTE, I believe Karock was the eldest tree in our forest, predating even Ransium. It was Karock's endorsement of Errinundera that made Errin our first ever UND, back before the early refounding.

Hopefully they'll be back with us, but for the moment, another sad loss.

To clarify a bit, my listed campaign stuff is what I would do if I had unilateral power to make changes and everyone agreed with me. Anything in the realm of security policy and the constitution in general would undergo appropriate public debate of course, with any that the region is generally opposed to being dropped. Additionally, while it shouldn’t need to be said, anyone who wins is free to pillage from my list as they wish and I will help them to the best of pf my ability (again, if needed).

Terrabod wrote:

I don't know much about raiding so apologies if I'm misunderstanding what this means, but it is in my eyes a weak point in your campaign. As one of the three pillars that comprise The Forest Way (along with our commitment to inclusiveness and the value we place on democratic leadership) our absolute neutrality and separation from the raider/defender aspect of NationStates is a core part of our identity as a region. Any changes to any one of those three pillars threatens our regional integrity and shared values.
I understand that raiders won't respect Forest's regional values when they attempt to invade or destroy our region, but if we forgo those values then what kind of Forest are we? Isn't it better for us to stay true to The Forest Way if changing means altering the fundamental parts of our regional identity?

The first point I wouldn’t consider a violation of The Forest Way as it is, just an enhancement of our own ability to defend ourselves and our allies. On the second, while actively working with defenders (though admittedly I believe the process is closer to them just making sure the appropriate regional authorities are aware they’ve placed them in) is perhaps against the general spirit, I believe that pre-emptive defense of the region in a non-noticeable way is worth it (and in my opinion, not a violation of the broader spirit). In short, I don’t consider enhancing our own defenses and potentially those of close allies to be a violation of the general spirit of the region.

Verdant Haven wrote:

I am not an expert, or even notably well-versed on the R/D game at all, but wouldn't these two things be counter to each-other?

If the primary source of our security is having a large number of WA nations resident here in Forest, with large endo-counts and the resulting vast piles of influence, it seems like signing defense treaties that could oblige us in a pinch to either send our WA nations elsewhere, or else transfer our WA memberships and endorsements elsewhere, would have the effect of immediately undercutting our own WA-based defense. Is there a different aspect of defense with which I'm not familiar, which doesn't involve the use of our WA nations in another region? The moment our own WA nations transfer their memberships elsewhere, does that not catastrophically undercut our own delegate, while simultaneously calling hostile attention to our suddenly-weakened region?

I don’t believe so - I find it unlikely a truly large number of our residents would join such a charge. More generally, any such invocation of a mutual defense treaty would undoubtedly a very rare event (our only existing treaty with a similar clause is to a foundered region) - as is the likelihood of there existing a group or groups capable of occupying multiple founderless regions (and we are a very large one on the UCR scale) simultaneously - certainly it’s been at least half a decade since such a thing was truly done (and then, with rather smaller regions).

Uan aa Boa wrote:

I led the Yggdrasil treaty negotiations on the Forest side and I can confidently tell you it does not include a workaround for mutual defence. If you're seeing scope for that then it's a loophole rather than a workaround. Whatever wit just created The Armed Treepublic of The Forest Army makes the point very well. Whatever individuals might opt to do by means of puppets, and whatever might be put together in response to a raid on an ally, Forest should not marshal a prepared force in the way required by a mutual defence treaty.

Forest welcomes all nations, so the presence of defender sleepers should be non-controversial.

I acknowledge that the current constitution is vague and naive in its wording on R/D matters. The Red Fleet, for example, meets Forest's twin criteria that nations in it don't take part in operations and it isn't used as a staging point. I think the underlying intention is clear though. Errinundera's interpretation of it was that operations are not planned or discussed on any platform that belongs to Forest. The use of puppets and the creation of temporary platforms makes clarity without loopholes hard, but also unnecessary because the spirit of the constitution is clear. I would certainly oppose any change to that.

Fair enough on the first bit - I must be misremembering the discussions from around then.

Jutsa wrote:

If it means anything, in the unlikely event that you get stuck with me, I worked for 20 months in retail much of which during covid. I'm good with dealing with people. :>

Wow - the most of three months I’ve spent as a cashier presently is hellish enough, I can’t imagine 17 more!

Much obliged The most serene republicans.

Ransium wrote:

I think I’m now the oldest nation to have resided in Forest that still exists :/

All hail Ransium the Ancient

Love and Nature wrote:

Confirmed, with 4,414.66 days.

That's like twelve years

Ransium wrote:

Okay, great, can’t say this is making me feel young guys!

If it's any help, I just moved one of my old nations that predates you here, to help keep you young :-)