Grosse appeals to the Speaker about his vote

Grosseschnauzer

Grosseschnauzer

TNPer
I formally appeal the Speaker's ruling on invalidating my vote. I ask that the ayes and nays be ordered so that the Regional Assembly can decide once and for all whether such specious reasoning from the Speaker is an acceptable ground to ignore a cast vote by a legal member of the Regional Assembly.

In addition, I do not see anything showing that the Speaker has presented this bill to the Delegate for his approval or veto within a week, pursuant to the current Constitution.
 
Even if you had not disregarded the speaker's authority and your vote had been counted, the bill would have safely passed. This bill has been passed nearly a week. Let it go, already.

It has only been six days since the passing of the bill. The speaker still has one day to present it. quite how he will do that short of holding a seance is beyond me, however.
 
a) You do know the only reason the three of you could post in that thread is because your admins? Please don't do that in future, a locked thread is a locked thread and 1) I have a thread for public messages to me, 2) you can also post a new thread in the main regional assembly forum.
b) How am I supposed to give this to a delegate who has been away for nearly two weeks?
c) What do you mean about ordering the Nays and Ayes? I clearly showed the ayes and nays and even counted them for you in my post.
d) We've already gone over this and I stand by my ruling.
 
Kingborough:
a) You do know the only reason the three of you could post in that thread is because your admins? Please don't do that in future, a locked thread is a locked thread and 1) I have a thread for public messages to me, 2) you can also post a new thread in the main regional assembly forum.
b) How am I supposed to give this to a delegate who has been away for nearly two weeks?
c) What do you mean about ordering the Nays and Ayes? I clearly showed the ayes and nays and even counted them for you in my post.
d) We've already gone over this and I stand by my ruling.
Click to expand...
No, I did not know the thread had been locked. One thing about having the admin mask is that threads that have been locked do not appear as locked to the admins. So from this account I had no way of knowing that the thread had been locked. My apologies.

As far as the other problems go ... I feel your pain. I had no idea what Grosse meant about the ordering either.
 
That is a way in parliamentary parlance to ask that the R.A. itself vote on the matter and decides whether it wishes to override the Speaker's decision.

My position is was that I was stating my opposition to the bill in a very specific way, and given the directions in the opening post, that any language that could construe how a member voted was an acceptable way of expressing a vote, that is what I did. Second, I question whether restricting the manner of expressing the vote doesn't run afoul of the Bill of Rights' protection of freedom of speec

Or maybe you'd prefer 1200 point type to convey the depth of disagreement? As in

1200 point type?
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Second, I question whether restricting the manner of expressing the vote doesn't run afoul of the Bill of Rights' protection of freedom of speec
Click to expand...
This I would argue is true.

There is no limitation in the Bill of Rights; It only asks that a nation's "Rights to Free Speech" not be infringed. The right to speak in the debate thread and speak one's mind, seems to be within the scope of freedom of speech; bearing in mind the whole point of doing so would be to try to convince people who didn't bother to read the comment thread. Whereas, opposition to the freedom of speech has mostly been politically tactical: keeping dissent to the debate thread avoids casual voters educating themselves when they read the minority's disdain for the bill as they vote "Against".

TNP's RA is in essence, a legislature. You should be able to explain your vote wherever you like.
 
We can attempt to codify the rule, and then put it to a vote of the RA so that it stands.

I'm sure that the Speaker has the ability to make rules where none exist, but it might be best to have this rule approved by the RA for future reference.
 
unibot:
Grosseschnauzer:
Second, I question whether restricting the manner of expressing the vote doesn't run afoul of the Bill of Rights' protection of freedom of speec
Click to expand...
This I would argue is true.

There is no limitation in the Bill of Rights; It only asks that a nation's "Rights to Free Speech" not be infringed. The right to speak in the debate thread and speak one's mind, seems to be within the scope of freedom of speech; bearing in mind the whole point of doing so would be to try to convince people who didn't bother to read the comment thread. Whereas, opposition to the freedom of speech has mostly been politically tactical: keeping dissent to the debate thread avoids casual voters educating themselves when they read the minority's disdain for the bill as they vote "Against".

TNP's RA is in essence, a legislature. You should be able to explain your vote wherever you like.
Click to expand...
Yoi see? This is why in the flemingovian Constitution the Right to Free Speech is replaced by the fundamental human Right to Remain Silent.

Due waring: Next Time we vote I feel the urgent need to express myself by cut and pasting in the vote thread the entire of Boccaccio's "Decameron", or as much of it as will fit in one post.

Please do not be alarmed. I will use the english translation not the original Italian.


I will be urging others to express their freedom using the classic text of their choice.

After all, it is all about free speech.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I'm sure that the Speaker has the ability to make rules where none exist, but it might be best to have this rule approved by the RA for future reference.
Click to expand...
Oh gawd not another slippery legal code giving more and more power away from the Bill of Rights. >_<

The Court should be contacted first and a case should be opened to ensure that the Freedom of Speech is upheld first and foremost.
 
unibot:
mcmasterdonia:
I'm sure that the Speaker has the ability to make rules where none exist, but it might be best to have this rule approved by the RA for future reference.
Click to expand...
Oh gawd not another slippery legal code giving more and more power away from the Bill of Rights. >_<

The Court should be contacted first and a case should be opened to ensure that the Freedom of Speech is upheld first and foremost.
Click to expand...
Oh Gods, yet another occassion of running to the Bill of Rights whenever somebody does something you don't like.

Freedom of speech hasn't been restricted, you are free to comment on the topic in the discussion thread. Indeed you can speak to your hearts content - in the appropriate thread. This is no restriction to anyones freedoms, all that the Speaker has tried to do is create a bit of decorum and structure to the RA processes.
 
Haor Chall:
unibot:
mcmasterdonia:
I'm sure that the Speaker has the ability to make rules where none exist, but it might be best to have this rule approved by the RA for future reference.
Click to expand...
Oh gawd not another slippery legal code giving more and more power away from the Bill of Rights. >_<

The Court should be contacted first and a case should be opened to ensure that the Freedom of Speech is upheld first and foremost.
Click to expand...
Oh Gods, yet another occassion of running to the Bill of Rights whenever somebody does something you don't like.

Freedom of speech hasn't been restricted, you are free to comment on the topic in the discussion thread. Indeed you can speak to your hearts content - in the appropriate thread. This is no restriction to anyones freedoms, all that the Speaker has tried to do is create a bit of decorum and structure to the RA processes.
Click to expand...
:agree:
 
I have not suppressed freedom of speech through my actions, you still have plenty of freedom to go discuss things in the appropriate place. I am simply installing and maintaining decorum and order, just the same as a Speaker of a real Parliament installs decorum in Parliament and ceases arguments and speaking at inappropriate time.

Additionally Grosseschnauzer's actions today in how he voted, placing his vote in extremely large purple text to antagonize this situation has convinced me of his immaturity in this matter and I will have nothing further to state. As I already outlined in the other thread where Grosse protested this, I stand by my ruling and have the full legal right to make it.
 
No, I simply followed the precedent of John Hancock when he signed the Declaration of Independence.

I blieve you are aiding a coup d'etat by your actions, and I will continue to seek to have respect given to speech or continue to challenge you illegitimate behavior untl you do.

I refuse to be bullied by your tactics Kingborough, I wonder what Tim has promised you to aid in his coup against the elected Delegate. (It's clear by who is voting and what way that this is a pre-planned manuever, and I will do everything I have to do to derail it.
 
Not content with citing the previous constitution for precedent, are we are now citing 18th Century rebels who tried to coup the legitimate delegate of the region "American Colonies"?
 
Grosseschnauzer:
I refuse to be bullied by your tactics Kingborough, I wonder what Tim has promised you to aid in his coup against the elected Delegate. (It's clear by who is voting and what way that this is a pre-planned manuever, and I will do everything I have to do to derail it.
Click to expand...
And what proof do you have that the elected Vice-Delegate is plotting to coup the government?
 
Blue Wolf II:
Grosseschnauzer:
I refuse to be bullied by your tactics Kingborough, I wonder what Tim has promised you to aid in his coup against the elected Delegate. (It's clear by who is voting and what way that this is a pre-planned manuever, and I will do everything I have to do to derail it.
Click to expand...
And what proof do you have that the elected Vice-Delegate is plotting to coup the government?
Click to expand...
You need proof to accuse people of treason? That is news to me.
 
What disturbs me is that Grosse isn't merely accusing Tim of couping, but is going out of his way to incriminate anyone who votes against him as a conspirator.

Ridiculous.
 
*perks up at words of a coup* Oh it is just an unfounded accusation thrown out when someone works against him *frowns and goes back to the newspaper*
 
Belschaft:
Blue Wolf II:
Grosseschnauzer:
I refuse to be bullied by your tactics Kingborough, I wonder what Tim has promised you to aid in his coup against the elected Delegate. (It's clear by who is voting and what way that this is a pre-planned manuever, and I will do everything I have to do to derail it.
Click to expand...
And what proof do you have that the elected Vice-Delegate is plotting to coup the government?
Click to expand...
You need proof to accuse people of treason? That is news to me.
Click to expand...
oh the irony....
 
No, I simply followed the precedent of John Hancock when he signed the Declaration of Independence.
Click to expand...

Just... no. No.

Hancock was the first to sign the doc, he simply signed his name, not thinking about the rest would also have to sign it. It had nothing to do with making a political point, or lobbying others.

But lets assume that your statement had any point, or basis, in reality... signing the Declaration was not a vote, it was the final result. Any voting had already been done by that point.

When voting was required, he didn't stand on top of a table and scream "AYE" at the top of his lungs, while wearing a purple wig and dancing gangham style (which is the closest RL equivalent to what you tried to pull in the voting thread). Such would have gotten him tossed out of the building.

A Vote is not the signing of a document, and some decorum is called for.

~B


Edit: Added the quote, sorry.
 
Free speech is not being infringed. You are free to go to the discussion thread, which is the appropriate area for discussion, as the name implies. I guess, we could just allow people to post anything anywhere so we can have legislature proposals in the Attorney General's office.
 
unibot:
TNP's RA is in essence, a legislature. You should be able to explain your vote wherever you like.
Click to expand...
This doesn't happen in actual legislatures. Why should it be the case here?

And if it is the case, then I demand the right to explain my vote in all the secret areas of the forum. Anything less is a violation of my free speech. :eyeroll:
 
I stand with Grosse on a few things, Eluvatar's account has not been acting with on NS but somehow his forums stuff come up?

No, just No, I stand with the Dog on this one.
 
the move by speaker to dismiss Gross vote is alarming and speaker creating code of conduct for voting with out approval of RA is outrageous!!
 
I do not think we need to worry too much about the speaker. it is that bastard deputy assistant temporary interim undersecretary to the Speaker's assistant that we need to worry about. You know who I mean - the jumped up little sh*t who is overseeing the Speaker recall vote. Little bloody hitler. You know what it is like - give the swine a modicum of power and it TOTALLY goes to his head. Bastarding bastard of a bastard.

I am outraged.
 
*giggles*
I have so much fun reading this thread and the other 'serious' ones. :P

Reminds me of one great political soap opera xD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top