Recall Novare Res from the Security Council

Status
Not open for further replies.
Janus:
Roman was last present here at the forum on the 14th of this month. He maintains citizenship. This last quote was made on the 18th. He should be extended the courtesy of a counter response until the 20th of March.

He's more than earned that.​
Click to expand...

Upon the conclusion of the 28th of February, if Roman has not logged onto the forum it will have been 14 days since he logged onto the forum and will have vacated the office. At that point, this recall will be moot.
 
Then if he's gone, is this resolution even necessary? That means there's less than a week, as of today, until this resolution is moot. If he comes back in time, then that's that. If not, then it's not like there's going to be a serious security breach that IF ONLY WE HAD ANOTHER ACTIVE SCER WE COULD HAVE HANDLED within the span of six days.

The more and more I hear arguments from the pro-recall camp combined with the aforementioned small amount of time until this entire thing becomes nothing but a waste of time, the more I wonder if this is less of a resolution born out of necessity or if this is born out of some sort of anti-Roman hate boner.
 
I seriously don't believe there's any sort of "anti-Roman hate boner". Pretty much everyone here acknowledges Roman's service and dedication to the region, and if there were any ill feelings towards him, I'm sure we would be aware of them by now. If Artemis is right, then I suggest we wait until the next 28th before making any more judgements on this matter.
 
My last statement is only relevant if Roman fails to logon to the forum. If he logs on, then the time is reset to 14 days.
 
Artemis:
Upon the conclusion of the 28th of February, if Roman has not logged onto the forum it will have been 14 days since he logged onto the forum and will have vacated the office. At that point, this recall will be moot.
Click to expand...
Okay. The only reference that I can find to any 14 day limit is the time allotted to Admin and the Speaker to review citizenship applications.

The reason that I chose a 30 day allowance is that it is the allowable time frame between forum/RMB posts per the Legal Code.

Section 6.2: Administration and Loss of Citizenship
13. The Speaker will promptly remove any citizens who, for over 30 consecutive days, neither post on the regional forum, nor post on the regional message board with their registered nations.
Click to expand...
 
Janus:
Okay. The only reference that I can find to any 14 day limit is the time allotted to Admin and the Speaker to review citizenship applications.

The reason that I chose a 30 day allowance is that it is the allowable time frame between forum/RMB posts per the Legal Code.
Click to expand...

LC 4.2.9 Defines a vacancy.

9. A "vacancy" in an office occurs when the holder of it resigns, is removed, or abandons it. An office is abandoned when its holder does not log onto the regional forums for two weeks, or when an election winner or appointee fails to post the Oath of Office. Pending an election, a vacancy may be temporarily filled as provided by the Constitution, this Legal Code, or a rule adopted by the appropriate body.
Click to expand...
 
Syrixia:
Then if he's gone, is this resolution even necessary? That means there's less than a week, as of today, until this resolution is moot. If he comes back in time, then that's that. If not, then it's not like there's going to be a serious security breach that IF ONLY WE HAD ANOTHER ACTIVE SCER WE COULD HAVE HANDLED within the span of six days.

The more and more I hear arguments from the pro-recall camp combined with the aforementioned small amount of time until this entire thing becomes nothing but a waste of time, the more I wonder if this is less of a resolution born out of necessity or if this is born out of some sort of anti-Roman hate boner.
Click to expand...
I have no hatred for Roman at all. I don’t see why the recall is being viewed so personally.

But if we have to wait for someone to vacate office then what is the point at all of expecting activity from our officers?

Great Bights Mum:
I predict he will log on, see the buzz, and just let it slide.
Click to expand...

It’s unbelievable the stuff you’ve come out with in this debate. So explicitly dishonest.

Anyone with any recollection of the last time someone tried to recall Romanoffia would know this is a bold faced lie.

Either that or you’re launching a comedy career.
 
Last edited:
mcmasterdonia:
But if we have to wait for someone to vacate office then what is the point at all of expecting activity from our officers?
Click to expand...
BRB in two weeks after Bob turns the NPA into a meme army in my absence.

But seriously, the law defines the bare minimum that the RA considers for government officials - we have other options for enforcing stricter standards than that bare minimum, including recalls. And with over two years of the bare minimum of activity from an official as vitally important as a Security Councillor... I prefer the recall option over simply letting it slide and accepting this minimum standard from an official.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I have no hatred for Roman at all. I don’t see why the recall is being viewed so personally.

But if we have to wait for someone to vacate office then what is the point at all of expecting activity from our officers?



It’s unbelievable the stuff you’ve come out with in this debate. So explicitly dishonest.

Anyone with any recollection of the last time someone tried to recall Romanoffia would know this is a bold faced lie.

Either that or you’re launching a comedy career.
Click to expand...

I guess I should have used the sarcasm emoji. My previous remark was most assuredly tongue-in-cheek.

Now, whenever someone says something wasn't "personal," I'm reminded of Nora Ephron's glorious character of Kathleen Kelly in "You've Got Mail." After Joe Fox puts her bookstore out of business he says "It wasn't personal." And Kathleen replies, "What is that supposed to mean? I am so sick of that. All that means is that it wasn't personal to you. But it was personal to me. It's personal to a lot of people. And what's so wrong with being personal, anyway? Whatever else anything is, it ought to begin by being personal."

There are better ways to handle it if there is an issue with an official's performance. A recall would be appropriate if other avenues have been unsuccessful. But one cannot begin with a recall motion and not expect it to be taken personally.
 
McM, it's six days. If it was longer, I wouldn't have said that. At this point this is unnecessary red tape accompanied by useless arguing.
 
Great Bights Mum:
I guess I should have used the sarcasm emoji. My previous remark was most assuredly tongue-in-cheek.

Now, whenever someone says something wasn't "personal," I'm reminded of Nora Ephron's glorious character of Kathleen Kelly in "You've Got Mail." After Joe Fox puts her bookstore out of business he says "It wasn't personal." And Kathleen replies, "What is that supposed to mean? I am so sick of that. All that means is that it wasn't personal to you. But it was personal to me. It's personal to a lot of people. And what's so wrong with being personal, anyway? Whatever else anything is, it ought to begin by being personal."

There are better ways to handle it if there is an issue with an official's performance. A recall would be appropriate if other avenues have been unsuccessful. But one cannot begin with a recall motion and not expect it to be taken personally.
Click to expand...

Am I speaking to the Minister for Propaganda or a Security Councillor? I am not sure.

And you continue to refer to these other ways to deal with this, that allegedly have not been pursued :rofl:

I am serious - you should consider a comedy career or perhaps a career as a Dick Cheney impersonator.

We both know how many times there have been attempts to get Romanoffia to either a) tart b) participate in a debate c) actually vote or d) participate in an emergency drill. All of those attempts did address his lack of performance.

You were well placed to personally attempted to address his inactivity, as myself, Pallaith, Siwale, and Sil (I assume) and others have done. Just because you have not personally attempted to do so, or apparently, even noticed his inactivity, does not mean others have similarly been bone idle.

A recall is appropriate precisely because all of these other avenues have been unsuccessful.

If you are not willing to be honest about the inner workings of the Security Council, and the lengths that our Vice Delegates have gone to, to get all members including Romanoffia to be active, then you ought to reconsider your position on the Council. The picture you've painted is a rich tapestry of alternative facts and misconceptions. Given that most of the inner-workings are hidden, people rely on you to be honest.

You can recognise that someone is not doing their job. That they are inactive. That they have been for three years. Without making it about personal animosity or "hate-boners". That's childish and not relevant to the matter at hand.

Syrixia:
McM, it's six days. If it was longer, I wouldn't have said that. At this point this is unnecessary red tape accompanied by useless arguing.
Click to expand...

The only red-tape is insisting that someone must be given an opportunity to vacate their office before a recall can proceed. Thank you, next.
 
I think I should break my silence about this truly.

Roman, while yes mostly inactive, Roman still reaches the Maximum. He does take part in SC Votes, has tons of influence, has more than 500 endorsements, votes in elections, and has logged on every once and awhile. He reaches the maximum and is a useful member. I echo GBM's messages. If a crisis were to break out, he has the influence to keep us safe. He clearly is busy. That's all. Probably the VD could reach out to Roman to start endotarting again and give him more interest again.

I honestly find this just sad. Literally sad. You, as a former SCer and former Delegate, has had your audience changed. Why are you going after Roman and Bootsie.
mcmasterdonia:
The percentage of endorsements given is some stark reading. Both Bootsie and Romanoffia are below 50% with Roman being barely above 10%. Might be time for a retirement.
Click to expand...
You're calling for two SCer to retire and frankly in my opinion, you say it with a mean accent.

Mcm, you have changed. A lot. Roman reaches the maximum. Period. He's not a Dero. Dero wasn't even a member of the Security Council. Only as its head.
I once again call for @Romanoffia to address this issue and I openly show my support for Roman.
 
I feel the 28th is fair. One, as you point out, he needs to log in in order to avoid the vacancy clause, which if he doesn’t, then he’ll lose the seat and this recall will be moot.

Secondly, March 1st starts the Judicial Cycle, which usually results in an uptick in activity, hopefully giving him a chance to log on.

My proposal is thus to wait until the 28th for Romanoffia to answer. At that point, if we have no answer, we can then proceed with moving the proposal forward.
 
bootsie:
I feel the 28th is fair. One, as you point out, he needs to log in in order to avoid the vacancy clause, which if he doesn’t, then he’ll lose the seat and this recall will be moot.

Secondly, March 1st starts the Judicial Cycle, which usually results in an uptick in activity, hopefully giving him a chance to log on.

My proposal is thus to wait until the 28th for Romanoffia to answer. At that point, if we have no answer, we can then proceed with moving the proposal forward.
Click to expand...
If there's no answer he will very likely have vacated office - he is also the longest serving Citizen at the moment by several years, so it's clear he also values keeping his Citizenship.
I still see merit in waiting until then just because, in my analysis, he will answer by then - though I doubt his answer will allay any worries.
 
The more this drags on without Roman responding to it, the more my confidence in him being able to respond to a real emergency is reduced. I hope I am wrong, but I'd rather this not go a week without a response. I'm only willing to give until Monday, after my next weekly endorsement update before I start wondering what's up with the lack of communication. I don't mind him being the silent type, but I do mind him being the inattentive type.
 
I support a recall of Roman.

While I wasn't around in his hayday, I'm sure his contributions to The North Pacific were tremendous, given the extended public support he has seen. This recall would not be a renunciation of his service, rather an honest acknowledgement that he cannot fulfill the responsibilities of the office. I'm confused and somewhat troubled by the staunch support of his continuation as an SCer throughout this process, especially given the immense scrutiny that applicants to the office undergo, and the high standards I thought the office came with. If Roman's levels of activity are acceptable, then there are a good many others who deserve places on the SC. There really seems to be a double-standard here.
 
If Roman logs in without addressing this then I will absolutely take that as tacit acceptance of the recall, as well as a black mark against continuing in the role. Even just stopping by and saying hi I still exist followed by or following actually tarting would be enough for me to not support this recall.

It is not difficult to tart. I can tart all of TNP in less than an hour. Doing it over a day or two days is easy and should be the minimum expectancy. By my count, there are 3 nations who aren't on the Security Council with more endorsements than him, and a number who are a few weeks at most of overtaking him.
 
Let me make my statement here:

I've been in The North Pacific in this and a previous nation since this region was created. Yes, for most of recent history, I have chosen to remain largely silent and avoid to engage in political rigmarole.

Let me give a little background on myself in relation to my involvement in The North Pacific going back to episodes involving UPSRail, FrancoSpain, Pixiedance, and a whole parade of assorted usurpers and invaders that I have defended against to preserve this region. And let us not forget the incident involving Gatesville in which I convinced Gates to abandon his support of Matthius (a rogue Delegate) and leave the region so that we could regain control of our region. I would wager that 99% of you here were not here for those events and would largely not even know those Nations I mentioned. In other words, I go way, way, way back in this region as do a few others here.

I am one of the major contributors to the whole concept of the Security Council and how it works. And I was the one who became a Caretaker Delegate the one time that the Security Council came into actual play. I did my job, held the Delegacy until the Rightful Delegate could gain enough endorsements to become Delegate. It went off without a hitch, and I was just as silent at that time as I am now.

In the past, I have served in virtually every elected position in this region. I have been a Caretaker Delegate (acting Delegate), Acting Vice Delegate, Minister of Defence, a General in the NPA, Minister of Communications, A Justice in the Court, Speaker of The Assembly, and been involved in the writing of several versions of the Constitution and worked in the various Intelligence agencies of this region. In other words, I have been here since the beginning in one incarnation or another. I have never been involved in any other region or any 'Duality' issues. TNP is my first and only loyalty in NationStates. Very few nations in TNP can say that. In fact, I have been involved in The North Pacific before some of you were probably even born. Any time my experience and expertise was required and asked for, I jumped into action.

Now, that being said, I have been waiting in silence for a very long time with the whole point of waiting for me to be brought up as a subject. Of course, this self imposed condition having been met, I will now (as I have been waiting for) become actively involved in the region and it's politics once again. And, I am sure, there are a few people who won't be happy about this. [/sarcasm]

Yes, I know how to endotart, and I can do it with a vengeance. In fact I have a whole new paradigm for endotarting which I will clear with the powers that be if anyone wants me to endotart up a storm.

In other words, I am back with a vengeance and a programme to really make The North Pacific rock.

MODERATOR NOTE: Merged Threads to keep relevant content together.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's all lovely to hear, and I for one am glad to see that you aren't going anywhere! Welcome back, Roman! :hug:

That being said, if anyone is allowed to motion for a resolution to be tabled, consider this that motion.





inb4 McM and Siwale: "BUT YOU HAVEN'T DONE ENOUGH SO FAR! RECALL! RECALL! REEEEEEE"
 
A lot of you have been wondering my silence for such a long period of time. I have been very busy in RL for any number of reason. That said, I have been waiting for a particular set of conditions to trigger my very active involvement in The North Pacific.

Some of the older nations here will remember that I have been in TNP since the region was brought into creation. I have occupied every elected government position there is either by direct election or by happenstance, including Acting Vice Delegate and Acting Delegate. I have always done my duty and done it well.

I have been waiting for my name to come up in this type of manner. Where did Roman go? Who is this Roman chap? Well, Roman has decided the time is right to return to visibly active service.

My goal is to become Delegate and do so on a programme that will be effective and entertaining and make things a lot more fun and less mechanical and perfunctory. I want a new Golden Age for The North Pacific that goes beyond just rolling along like a machine with too many moving parts.

We need to have fun again, and I mean fun that will draw people to participate and be recognised for their participation.

So, Roman is back. Be ready for some serious fun with a tinge of silliness sure to please.
 
Romanoffia:
In other words, I am back with a vengeance and a programme to really make The North Pacific rock.
Click to expand...

Awesome. Glad to see you back. I hope we can interact at some future point- I am very much interested in knowing your perspective on TNP's history, being that you, Flemingovia and a few others, literally embody TNP's history.
 
Romanoffia:
Let me make my statement here:

I've been in The North Pacific in this and a previous nation since this region was created. Yes, for most of recent history, I have chosen to remain largely silent and avoid to engage in political rigmarole.
Click to expand...

Welcome back Roman. It is good to see you around on the forum in a more active capacity.

Let me give a little background on myself in relation to my involvement in The North Pacific going back to episodes involving UPSRail, FrancoSpain, Pixiedance, and a whole parade of assorted usurpers and invaders that I have defended against to preserve this region. And let us not forget the incident involving Gatesville in which I convinced Gates to abandon his support of Matthius (a rogue Delegate) and leave the region so that we could regain control of our region. I would wager that 99% of you here were not here for those events and would largely not even know those Nations I mentioned. In other words, I go way, way, way back in this region as do a few others here.

I am one of the major contributors to the whole concept of the Security Council and how it works. And I was the one who became a Caretaker Delegate the one time that the Security Council came into actual play. I did my job, held the Delegacy until the Rightful Delegate could gain enough endorsements to become Delegate. It went off without a hitch, and I was just as silent at that time as I am now.

In the past, I have served in virtually every elected position in this region. I have been a Caretaker Delegate (acting Delegate), Acting Vice Delegate, Minister of Defence, a General in the NPA, Minister of Communications, A Justice in the Court, Speaker of The Assembly, and been involved in the writing of several versions of the Constitution and worked in the various Intelligence agencies of this region. In other words, I have been here since the beginning in one incarnation or another. I have never been involved in any other region or any 'Duality' issues. TNP is my first and only loyalty in NationStates. Very few nations in TNP can say that. In fact, I have been involved in The North Pacific before some of you were probably even born. Any time my experience and expertise was required and asked for, I jumped into action.
Click to expand...

Your history in the region is noted. But it is not pertinent to the reasons this recall has been presented.

Now, that being said, I have been waiting in silence for a very long time with the whole point of waiting for me to be brought up as a subject. Of course, this self imposed condition having been met, I will now (as I have been waiting for) become actively involved in the region and it's politics once again. And, I am sure, there are a few people who won't be happy about this. [/sarcasm]

Yes, I know how to endotart, and I can do it with a vengeance. In fact I have a whole new paradigm for endotarting which I will clear with the powers that be if anyone wants me to endotart up a storm.

In other words, I am back with a vengeance and a programme to really make The North Pacific rock.
Click to expand...

This part is concerning. You were inactive for three years because you were waiting for someone to call out your inactivity?

You say that you know how to endotart but as it has been pointed out, you have not tarted since 2016. I have a couple of questions:

1) Why have you not endotarted since 2016? I also note that you've not yet caught up - when will you be able to do so?
2) What is your plan to manage your inactivity moving forward - including your tarting of the region? It is very easy to fall behind.
3) Are you likely to be able to contribute to the other aspects of the Security Council role - participatiing in discussions, votes, drills etc. Why have you been unable to do this?
 
1.) I have been very busy in RL.

2.) My plan is to move out of inactivity and run for Delegate.

3.) I intend to fully engage in every activity and duty required of me. And then get elected Delegate.
 
Technically, the Speaker can do whatever the Speaker decides to do.

Then, lacking the means to table this vote (and be sure that there are no rules, means and procedures to do so before not tabling it :D ). I move for a vote to dismiss this whole matter.
 
Romanoffia:
1.) I have been very busy in RL.

2.) My plan is to move out of inactivity and run for Delegate.

3.) I intend to fully engage in every activity and duty required of me. And then get elected Delegate.
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on your answers? These do not address the substantive parts of my questions.
 
Romanoffia:
Technically, the Speaker can do whatever the Speaker decides to do.

Then, lacking the means to table this vote (and be sure that there are no rules, means and procedures to do so before not tabling it :D ). I move for a vote to dismiss this whole matter.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Speaker may use their discretion when no rules exist. To clarify, you are making a motion to take the Recall to a vote correct?
 
1.) My father passed away at 92 years old. My brother passed away at 58 years old. Have been trying to arrange for someone to help take care of my 92 year old mother who is bat-shit crazy.

2.) I'm going to campaign and run for Delegate, and come hell or high water, I will win.

3.) Much to the dismay of some, I intend to continue doing my duty in relation to TNP regardless of whether or not I am on the SC. And I am going to get elected Delegate, by crackey. Ken oath.
 
Artemis:
Yes, the Speaker may use their discretion when no rules exist. To clarify, you are making a motion to take the Recall to a vote correct?
Click to expand...

I am making a motion to table the vote as other votes have, historically been speaking, tabled by the Regional Assembly or Speaker in the past.
 
Personally, I have had votes on bills tabled by the Speaker or RA in the past. Custom and practice. Dig though the records. Something to do with protecting Big Foot as an endangered species. That's just one instance.
 
Romanoffia:
1.) My father passed away at 92 years old. My brother passed away at 58 years old. Have been trying to arrange for someone to help take care of my 92 year old mother who is bat-shit crazy.

2.) I'm going to campaign and run for Delegate, and come hell or high water, I will win.

3.) Much to the dismay of some, I intend to continue doing my duty in relation to TNP regardless of whether or not I am on the SC. And I am going to get elected Delegate, by crackey. Ken oath.
Click to expand...

I am sorry for your loss. To clarify, I didn't expect you to expand upon your RL details.

What I was getting at was really that you are very behind on your tarting and have been for a few years. When are you going to be able to catch up on your tarting? Will you do this on an ongoing basis?

Other than run for Delegate, how are you going to effectively manage your time to meet the requirements of being an SC member?
 
I fully intend to endotard with a murderous vengeance, just to please those who want me to endotart. I may not use conventional methods, but endotart I will. :D
 
Romanoffia:
1.) My father passed away at 92 years old. My brother passed away at 58 years old. Have been trying to arrange for someone to help take care of my 92 year old mother who is bat-shit crazy.
Click to expand...
If I may, I hope you and your family are OK, and you have my condolences. As someone who has also recently had a death in the family, I know what the combination of sadness and frenzy feels like during those times. I agree with McM that you didn't have to say that, and I hope you don't feel like McM pushed you to do so. At first I felt like he was, until he made his most recent post, above, and also clarified to me as well that that was not his aim.
 
Previously there might have been rules regarding tabling a motion and discretion used by previous Speakers, the rules currently do not include tabling a motion nor do I intend to use my discretion in creating a rule at this time.

I refer you to the Rules of the Regional Assembly and the Standing Procedures.
 
St George:
A lot has changed.
Click to expand...

Too much has change. In fact, it has changed too much in favour of preventing change in and of itself.

Technically speaking, under historical precedence, a Speaker can prevent something from coming to a vote or the RA can simply table a vote by a simple vote.

And this is one of the problems of the RA which has existed for a long time - too much nebulosity in terms of the actual rules or procedures.

So, my motion stands, the vote should be tabled by the simple process of tabling a vote.

We can do this two ways.

1.) We can table the vote.

2.) We can put it to a vote and it gets voted down or up, and,

3.) Do you really want a Roman really unfettered in the ability to make rapid political change? :P


What I am saying is, it is largely immaterial if I remain or leave the SC. Either way, my political goals remain the same and either way, one way or the other makes it easier for me to do so. One way makes the Speaker look bad and the other way makes the speaker look worse. It's a gamble on the Speaker's part at this point.

Either way, it is a gamble for the Speaker, not me, because either way, I come out smelling like rose no matter how the vote goes. Savvy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top