Search results

To be fair to Canton, it isn't necessarily the AG Office's place to determine when this thread is relevant as it relates to THOs, who sit as de facto Justices on the Court and are inherently separate from the Attorney General.

You are correct. I would blame it on reading it on my phone but I think it was just laziness in not finishing the proposal. My mistake.

What is the definition of 'reckless endorsement gathering'? Seems ambiguous.

I actually have no wish to serve in the AG's Office. There was a lack of experience in the last vote that led me to reconsider, but I retired for a reason.

Attorney General: Darcania

Court Justice: Barbarossistan

I decline my nomination, but thank you. Time for new blood on the bench I believe.

Actually, after reading Darcania's platform, I think it would be great to have a new AG. I withdraw my acceptance.

Well, it would be good to have someone new as AG. It would be nice if you committed to letting some of the other eager nations take part. What is your position on the appointment of deputies that want to learn the job? Specifically, would you accept Lord Emmanuel as a deputy? I can...

I accept. Thanks.

Agreed.

It seems like some people really have a stick up their ass regarding the NPO. Weird. Since when did we care where nations chose to move to if they left our community? And since when did that choice indicate that their positions while here were somehow invalid? Odd.

Congratulations.

I gave you my vote but also asked that nominations be reopened since you seem to be lacking experience and some practical knowledge of our laws here in TNP.

Attorney General: Lord Emmanuel Would you like to reopen nominations? Yes

Court Justice: Abstain Would you like to reopen nominations? Yes

Delegate: Plembobria Would you like to reopen nominations? No Vice Delegate: Tomb Would you like to reopen nominations? No Speaker: Abstain Would you like to reopen nominations? Yes

Thank you to the Court for providing a full and reasonable ruling. I do understand the problematic nature of this specific case, but wonder if it would not have behooved the Court to interview the Delegate in order to ascertain condition one (as outlined above) instead of leaving it...

I have had no objections to any party as I believe all involved to be honourable and objective individuals. But I do appreciate the sentiment.

Thank you, but I must decline at this time.

Date Leave Begins: 16 December 2016 Expected Date of Return: 2 January 2017 Reason for request: I will be travelling with intermittent internet connectivity. Thanks.

Post-truth politics has been a staple of NS since 2003. It isn't really that surprising.

I agree with this. It seems to me that a lot of the naysayers on the forum are those that are traditionally against TNP maintaining influence in a large voting bloc. Regardless of the circumstances, many of those same nations would be speaking against us here.

And if that is what the Court decides so be it, but just your (or mine) opinion about it is insufficient and continuing to post the same thing over and over doesn't change that fact. It also doesn't change the fact that the situation and circumstances that exist now are different than those...

The need for clarification is the reason for the review. You seem to be arguing that the review itself is unneeded because game mechanics changed after the law was passed. The current situation allows for powers that were obviously not considered when the original law was written and debated...

No, not really. I am suggesting a body that is composed of former members of the Court, the AG's Office, and the Speaker's chair, not the current roster of Justices.

If needed, I can serve as a THO.

Apologies your honour, but to clarify a point made above, I was recused from the trial and could not in good conscience contribute to the deliberations, nor did I have access to them.

Checks OP...yep, that's me. What an odd statement. Regardless, precedent in this region has always been on the side of caution. If the Court decides that no clarification is necessary that will be a new direction. It may be the end result, but it is contrary to tradition and contrary to what...

And yet no such delegation of authority was made in this instance. And if it was then it would seem that there should be an explicit and public declaration of such beforehand. Retroactive speculation on what a Delegate could have done should not impact a ruling on whether or not actions taken...