1. You recently made quite a serious cock-up acting as deputy speaker because you acted when, as you said, you did not know the procedures. That's serious enough in the speaker's office but would be a disaster in an attorney general. You are a relatively inexperienced candidate. Can we expect more of the same?
There is a lot of discretion as far as a Speaker or a Deputy in how to handle matters in the abscense of any clear mandated procedure. 2. The issue I was having was technical with the options of the forum. 3. There were two conflicting motion one to split out percieved off topic posts and one to leave them in. 4.someone else had taken split out posts and put them with other posts and erronously moved them. 5. I agreed they should be put back and have them reevaulated. 6. With some help I got things put back to normal a. That would have been easier had 4. Not occured. 7. The speaker reevaulated and took care of it.
8. As far as following procedures in the AGs office I have been re reading up on the constibillocode, court opinions, and whatever threads are public in the AGs office to see how the layout of offical paperwork I.E. indictments are presented. 9. It would be my goal that any deputies appointed to the AGs office we would all review cases together and write up the indictments and offical paperwork together, I hope that would avoid any learning limitations someone would have and make up for any kind of real life english/writing problems they may have. And the electorate would not take enexperience or lack of writing syntax due to RL learning issues and hold it against them.
2. I look for a certain integrity, honesty and openness in the judicial department. How well does that describe you?
I also believe in those things, all good AGs should be trustworthy honest and have integrity. An AG should be honest not only is this a gimme it is also in our legal codes fraud and gross misconduct for lying while in offical capacity, in the courts, or withholding information. Though an AG is chief Prosecuter and should take alleged violations of the criminal code seriously they should remember the addage of 'innocent until proven guilty' and if they recieved evidence that suggested an accused indivdual was innocent they should immediately turn it over to defense counsel and the court. Also, in case of COI or maybe even a percieved one where no actual one may or may not exist it would probably be prudent to recuse oneself and allow an alternate to step in.
Don't you have enough positions?
As I said in my OP. I would resign from any other appointed positions and solely concentrate on the Attorney Generals Office. However I find it funny, that it does seem certain "veteran players" can hold multiple positions in character government as well as outside of gameplay I.E. forum moderation and Administration. But if a newer player wishes to get as involved as they wish then suddenly it is "whoa wait a minute, don't you have enough' it could be argued the same argument should be applied to older players alike. However what is good for the goose seems to not always be good for the gander around here. Anyway, this appears to be blurring OOC and running for an IC position to defend the criminal code of our game play.
As far as a newspaper which I also feel is off topic. I attempted to write articles for an offical government newspaper and I simply found that I personally didnt like it. It was not any fault of any setups just my personal tastes
I'm also concerned as I feel that you have been inflaming tensions on the forum recently, this wouldn't be a wise thing to do for an Attorney General. That isn't really a question, more of a general statement, but I'd like a response all the same.
This I feel is totally bringing out of game issues and opinions up and in no way is germane to someone running for an in character position of role play government.
But I will try to answer:
Whether I am wrong or right in my perceptions - from reading everything on the public areas of the forum. I feel notice I said I feel. Feelings are different from knowledge. But I perceive the Admins have difficulty from time to time seperating what is IC dissent and gameplay and their own IC gameplay goals and aims from administering users. My personal opinion - admins assure me this isnt the case. So take it FWIW.
As for the Flem/Roman thing you are reffering to. What started this was certian satire articles IC against an IC state religion. (From reading these I did not see anything personally inherently wrong with them) I was told by him he was facing admin disciplin for these articles. Which I felt was wrong. - Admin said it wasnt for the articles. Only admin and possibly Roman himself know the truth so idk. I do feel things could be handled more professionally on all sides.
As I said I may be in the minority but I feel sometimes admins may let IC or even personal bias affect admin decision making. Everyone at some point has bias. Again this is my personal opinion based on my personal perception. If this is not the case so be it take my opinion FWIW or dont. Take the critism or dont.
In the future when OOC is blurring with IC gameplay I will just shut up and not rush to defend someone who I feel is an underdog and not getting a fair deal.
All I saw were satire articles - from those satire articles I did not feel the situation warranted the response it did.
But these OOC feelings I would hope should not affect IC gameplay or an IC candidacy.
Anyway that is all I wish to say on the matter. Thank you for your questions.
