Hello [formal, greeting between two parties of unknown status, signalling interest in conversation as equals]. 

question: Exist any important [high priority, high urgency] norms who precede [take precedence over, in this context temporally; implying they must happen first] discussion of relations between our polities [power blocks, power-monopoly holders, treaty enforcers]?

[acknowledgement of interest in conversation]

[interest reciprocated]

[polite imperative indicating to proceed with the conversation] [Those] things-and-similar-things [are at the present time but this could change depending on circumstances] not required.

[translators note: decreasing potentially unneeded annotations as NLP-implants collect/process more data.  thank you for your patience]

Question: Exist there measures being taken by those with [power to act] and [stability to be trusted with the opportunity to profitably burn the commons] (TL note: the previous two phrases can perhaps be idiomatically translated as "the accepted guardians of weapons of mass destruction") to avoid and mitigate global catastropic risks?

Question: Please describe measures taken by [those who meet constraints already mentioned] to ensure freedom of exit for all people who can meaningfully use it?

Question: Exist there measures to ensure that all [peoples/nations/self-governance capable groups] (lit:adult-communities) have the [ability to act on right] to [self-governance/independence/secession]?

Request: We would like to provide the people of your world with access to our internet and global meta-economy.  Statement1: We expect you will want to negotiate terms or a reciprocity agreement. Question1: Does economic entanglement take place on a per adult-community level, at the union level, or the world-government level.  Question2: exist there constraints on what market-makers (TL note: this phrase literally translates as "money pipes" but in this case is also a pun that can mean "honest-bandits") are treaty-permitted?

Statement: we look forward to diplomatic and trade relations, and hope to derive much mutual comparative advantage.
May none of us(inclusive of listener) become martyrs before finding a [truly worthy cause / something to protect / god worthy of worship].

[Translator's note: In GenPSLang (Generalized Phonemic Symbol Language), attitudinals expressing desirability of an outcome are most accurately translated as normative statements about a hypothetical person martyring themself to achieve said outcome.]

Answer 1: Obviously this [has persistently existed throughout the speaker's lifetime] [elaboration available after sufficient proof of good faith].

Answer 2: Obviously [competent minds] can by self-procured-means [of transit] [go] from-wherever. Obviously [the competent minds] ratio [is by consensus agreement] maximized [by direct government intervention] [with a priority such that martyrdom is superogatory but admirable]. Obviously barriers-to-self-procurement of means [of transit] [are by consensus agreement] minimized [by market-based incentive structures] [with a priority such that martyrdom is acceptable but would call one's priorities into question].

Answer 3: Adult-communities [respectful], yes.

Answer 4.1 & 4.2: Between universes economic entanglement is [at the present time] world-government level [but this is a newly implemented norm to address a black swan event]. [polite imperative indicating a desired course of action] From treaty-permit of any market-maker being [required to be made] explicit, all meta-economic-information-transactions are [required to be made with] the Quadrilateral Agency of Xenoeconomics.

We hope our universes [will be discovered to be] economically-memetically compatible [in a way that does not create net disutility] such that further integration becomes a priority [such that martyrdom is an obligatory action but forcing martyrdom on another isn't].

[polite request] Allow yourselves to be made pleased by us.

meta: we find ourselves confused by your responses to all but our first question.
request: please clarify what you mean by "[competent minds] ratio", and dissolve our confusion as to the seeming entanglement of martyrdom with exit.

meta: an [impulsive/straightforward/surface-level] reading of your answer would lead to concern

request: please elaborate further on answer 3. meta1: that response can be read as anywhere from permitting people having friend-groups to total fragmentation; both "Adult-communities" and "[respectful]" underconstrain readingspace.

meta: [acknowledging constraint] your power and [delegated-permission] to filter/constrain trade, information [should-as-heuristic] [approach-just-state-of-freedom]. meta1: of course infohazards must be contained until inoculations are developed, but those are relatively rare. meta1.1: containment relies on a [cultivated-sanity-having] and [worldgrasping] citizenry in any case -> filtering will in most cases [decrease opportunity without a worthwhile decrease in risk; implication of status quo bias and/or comparing to an ideal world rather than the world as it is], unless the filtering is unconscionably aggressive.
meta2: economic relations are by nature between individuals or abstractions over their class interests - given the lack of information about the latter, it seems strange for economic relations to be between polities; we can not know what list(our people want, what will advance The Project, or what will drive profits) in detail before experimenting.  request1: abstract over economic policy such that there is a known [method of discerning acceptability] of import goods, assets, and infotypes.

META: Even after clarification of your second-to-final statement, ( we appreciate you clearing up whether you wish to kill us by the way), we see no path-to-reasonable-interpretation of your comments on martyrdom.  If there is not some mysterious translation issue or idiom going on, "obligatory martyrdom" in this context implies a potential humanitarian crisis of cultural or political dysfunction at best.  Determining state-of-the-territory here precedes all economic negotiation, but not the second and third questions we asked.
(TL note: [acknowledgement of divergence from policy] I translated this idiomatically and left out annotation, as I felt {[flow/rhythm/uninterruption] took priority over full accuracy} with respect to accurately conveying the final meta statement.  [acceptance of responsibility/potential blame][colloquialism expressing hope that this deviation is justified despite outside view].)

[Conciliatory statement to a guest/respected person of similar status]

Clarifying statement: [Please] understand [that] First Contact with another universe is [world-historic/civilization restructuring/an x-risk]. Friendly* comparative-advantage-exchange [has capability of saving or killing/has an estimated value of/is worth sacrificing] many lives.

Answer 2': Our civilization is [by trivially obvious social norm] united [in the goal of] causing/creating more competent minds than incompetent minds, thereby maximizing [by direct government intervention] [the relative quantity of] those-meaningfully-able-to-use-exit-right [existing] and minimizing [by direct government intervention] [the relative quanitity of] those unmeaningfully-able-to-use-exit-right [existing].

Answer 3': [Conditional on] submitting [to oversight by] the Agency of Those-Necessitated-by-Treaty, those-meaningfully-able-to-use-exit-rights are [by consensus agreement] able to form polities/enclaves.

Answer 4': [Conciliatory statement requesting patience] [It has historically been the case that] Infohazards [that are] innocuous in their native ecosystem can [mindkill/brainwash] naïve [cultures/populations/egregores]. [As a phase I clinical trial] economic-memetic exchange will happen by [a nonrandom selection of] cultivated-sanity-havers [implying expansion of trials if results are promising].

*The diplomat is avoiding using any attitudinal that could be translated as pertaining to martyrdom. This causes the sentence to flow awkwardly.

after a bit of debate on the general topic of "do they use 'obligatory martyrdom' to mean 'worth dying for'? are they safe to be around?" the council representatives come to a consensus and passes the Agency representatives a short booklet.

declaration: [the Power which you represent] [to a first approximation pattern matches] [membership in / definitional affiliation with] the 3 worlds council.  [due to reasoning trivial to anyone sane] The 3 Worlds Council invites [the Power which you represent] to a probationary/partial membership preceding (TL note: not necessarily implying) full membership. Details of the treaties [binding to action and inaction] The 3 Worlds Council have been replicated and translated in this booklet.  note1: detailed definitions/translations of terms used can be found in the appendix composing the latter approx. 2/3 of the booklet. suggestion1: read the definitions related to "meaningfully able to use".

meta: We hope you accept our offer of [friendship/alliance/affiliation/war-rejection] (TL note: this carries connotation of interest in exploring the potential for a values handshake).

meta: [Concern!] wrt implication of [population control via killing of bearers of undesired traits].  request1: please clarify, justify, or cease any such policy.

while the delegates are going on about decision theoretic equivalencies or however the translator chooses to gloss it, Yi is quickly subvocalizing a report to command.
They are speaking too fast to parse even if anyone was paying attention, but their grim look, combined with their sudden failure to clearly show up on camera, stands out.

After resolving a few troubling misunderstandings, the ATNT delegation reviews the pamphlet. The definition of "meaningfully able to use" is found to be acceptable.

[expression of reciprocal good faith]

[Curiousity at encountering ideas outside one's reference frame] [It is necessary/desirable that] the agreement [will be] [merged/crossbred with] existing international law. [Request] See this translation.

[We believe it is admirable but not obligatory to die for] reconciling our values.

The document is titled "Quadrilaterally Endorsed Consensus Norms [intended to incentivise] Eudaimonia [in one's subjective judgment] Maximization." It contains fairly strong but not absolute protections of free trade and freedom of movement between the 4 major power blocs. Polities unaligned with any bloc are still subject to the aforementioned treaty. It's fairly obvious that it was hastily rewritten to change "all humans" to "humans of this universe."

Most of the section on human rights is taken up by figures giving tolerance ranges for every hormone, essential nutrient, and nonessential nutrient at every phase of development. Someone knowledgeable about endocrinology will notice that dangerously high levels of stress hormones are considered within normal range. It's really quite odd that despite the implied tech level and acceptance of a nanny state, there is a lot of low hanging fruit if their endocrine systems work at all like baseline humans'. After passing an assessment, adolescents may take drugs, get implants, or otherwise self-mod in ways not in compliance with spec, but anyone whose body isn't up to spec is entitled to treatment to bring it up to spec. The document lays out minimal and maximal requirements for assessment of competence which leave a broad acceptable range. There is a target minimum average life span which is shockingly low given the implied tech level.

There are also nonbiochemical specs for minimal amounts of emotional intimacy and skin-to-skin contact and a list of genetic disorders that are considered "wrongful births." Children have an absolute right to leave their parents but can be placed in boarding schools which have stricter exit requirements. They are guaranteed a self-directed education within a school and there are limits to how many barriers can be placed against dropping out.

The section on freedom of contract has a very detailed subsection prohibiting vivicoaction or making contracts allowing for vivicoaction without running a gantlet of gatekeepers to make sure they're ABSOLUTELY SURE THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT A BAD IDEA THAT IS. It's obvious the drafters were really really worried about anything in this section being interpreted in a way that would allow someone to consent to vivicoaction without being ABSOLUTELY SURE THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT A BAD IDEA THAT IS.

Notably absent are any provision for elections or representation.

If blocs have an irresolvable dispute, they may engage in "crystallized [war/spite/negative-sum game]." All participants agree to simulate a conflict and sacrifice an amount of value proportional to what they would have lost had the conflict happened. The maximum value destroyed may not exceed twice the annual QALYs lost to all other causes of martyrdom, or cause any belligerent's average life expectancy to fall below the minimum. There are additional specs for time span over which the maximum value is calculated and under what conditions cobelligerents can be considered to be in a bona fide alliance with loss of value calculated as one belligerent. A close reading would imply that finding less destructive war substitutes can be classified as a form of medical research. There are strong incentives for polities to incentivise participation in clinical trials.

There is a section on the ATNT. They're a jointly operated secret police tasked with "[suppressing/neutralizing/extinguishing] [posthumanism/terrorism/infohazards/blackpills] and [cults/prophecy/demotism/demagoguery]". The amount of power the blocs are willing to cede to the ATNT imply that they're either very trusting or very worried.

The last article stands out as unusually terse and lacking in clarification or carve-outs. It prohibits unilateral negotiation with extradimensional entities or unilateral distribution of any knowledge or cultural artifact directly or indirectly originating outside this universe.

It ends with a statement could be translated as "The signatories endorse forcing martyrdom on one's [polycule/neurotype/compound/affinity group] to protect this agreement" or "If this agreement is broken may I force martyrdom on my [polycule/neurotype/compound/affinity group]" or "If this agreement is broken may no one resembling me exist again."

A recording of Yi is sent directly to the translator's aural implant. They play it to themself at a comprehensible speed.

the Yi recording is primarily a report on "if there were to be a war, what would have caused it" and other such doom prophesies.  other parts are jargonized or encrypted, but seem from context to be rolling probabilities and worldmodels, as well as a heated discussion of something called 'briefcase authorization' and 'mandate inversion'.

by the end, Yi seems to have calmed down and is mostly discussing infohazard containment and something to do with 'preemptive vaccination/whitepilling'.
much of the details seem to be very ambiguous, despite the improved translation after the sidechannel-discussion between the two sides' translators.

meta: we [exclusive of listener, lit: ourselves-and-in-expectation-those-we-speak-for] rejoice [lit: are joying] that [yourselves-and-those-you-represent] are not insane [and/rather] that we [exclusive of listener, referring to people present and not to a larger group] had possessed [false-interpretations-of-true-data].

statement: The Quadrilaterally Endorsed Consensus Norms are almost entirely [equivalent-instantiations-under-different-circumstances] wrt the Core Treaties of the 3 worlds council. Statement1: a notable difference is that your[plural, inclusive of additional parties not present] infohazard/cognitohazard containment policies imply [prefix to list of hypotheses, no implication of completeness]: y'all may have much more desire/tolerance for centralization, your population may be much less sane, you lack the social technology needed to vaccinate against cognitohazards, you lack people to sacrifice themselves to death or causal-isolation[lit: worthlessness/pointlessness] to study/disarm the cognitohazards (this hypothesis is delivered in the register used for saying dubious-to-the-point-of-borderline stupidity hypotheses because one would feel like an idiot if they were true and one didn't mention them), your population has high rates of memetic/epistemic immune disorders, or you have surprisingly high rates of [malicious-and-impossible-to-sanely-offer-an-alternative-to] and competent memeticists.

statement: we would like to offer documentation and specialists in [whitepill/cognitohazard-antibody] development to you priced [charitably/such that we barely break even].  further subsidy can be negotiated later.

meta: if reciprocity is desired, we would be willing to sign off on a varient of Quadrilaterally Endorsed Consensus Norms which takes into account our preference to freedom and our superior cognitohazard handling however meta1: a higher priority would be carveouts for the fact that some of our societies, as well as our meta-society rely heavily on social tools similar to [demotism/demagoguery].

statement: we would be glad to have y'all as affiliates/members of the Three Worlds Council (although we may have to change the name).

meta: further negotiation likely-will [most effective/smooth/well-built] take place with the component groups of the Three Worlds Council.

As this last statement is made, the 3 groups making up the delegation conspicuously move apart and new translators emerge from their groups, wearing uniforms distinctive to each group.
the original translator and Yi's eyes begin glowing as they, along with a few other group-members, form their own group apart from the others.

Announcement: [Existential-risk and perpetual-suffering-timeline] concerns should be brought to the group with glowing eyes.  Concerns of [unfairness/bad-deal/exploitation] (lit: offer-which-one-regrets) [are-permitted-to] be brought to us but will likely not be prioritized at the moment.

myself-and-those-to-whom-I-am-bound-by-contract anticipate much [financial-returns/health] following relations~

as they speak, their support team sets up a few impromptu booths to show off technology and media.

we-who-are-called-by-beautiful-tomorrow hope those with the desire and ability to [help/save/free] everyone will collaborate with us and show us opportunity.

We look-to-the-future to help each other.

As they speak, their support team sets up quick (but clearly built to a standard template) booths to show off their pamphlets, books, and media about the progress they've made.

I hope [my team and I] present your people with good alternatives and [help/save/free] them from [intolerable choices/double-binds] and [having to worry about the affairs of Powers] for freedom.

they pointedly do not set up booths, but do pull out some short brochures titled "have you considered just living your life not in service of a Grand Ideal".