RESULTS: Executive Council Elections

Meh Iro. You have to let people have their say, and everyone hasn't really had their say. A lot of people have though.

You all have to keep in mind that at the end of the election McMasterdonia forgot to vote and was GOING to include his vote but he listened to those around him who suggested it would be a better idea to just appoint someone instead of Govindia. You can love it or hate it but it's his prerogative to appoint his cabinet. As I said to Govindia regarding another matter, if you have a problem with the way the delegate has run things - bring it up at election time or stage a recall.

There will not be any successful court case surrounding this - even if Punk D isn't happy with the result. (Perhaps rightly so, it is a bit undemocratic but meh) If it makes any difference - I probably would have done the same thing.
 
You all have to keep in mind that at the end of the election McMasterdonia forgot to vote and was GOING to include his vote but he listened to those around him who suggested it would be a better idea to just appoint someone instead of Govindia.
Click to expand...

I also forgot to vote, and would have probably put Govindia first if I had done so. You can play the "what if" games all evening.

one interesting aspect of this, which those who do not frequent IRC might wish to take note of, is the part that "chats" on #tnp seem to have had in infuencing this sorry outcome.

It is a shame that McM listens more to the voices of those on #tnp than he does to the electorate, but take note....

Moral of this story: If you want your voice to be heard in the North Pacific, do not bother voting. Get a chat client instead.
 
flemingovia:
You all have to keep in mind that at the end of the election McMasterdonia forgot to vote and was GOING to include his vote but he listened to those around him who suggested it would be a better idea to just appoint someone instead of Govindia.
Click to expand...

I also forgot to vote, and would have probably put Govindia first if I had done so. You can play the "what if" games all evening.

one interesting aspect of this, which those who do not frequent IRC might wish to take note of, is the part that "chats" on #tnp seem to have had in infuencing this sorry outcome.

It is a shame that McM listens more to the voices of those on #tnp than he does to the electorate, but take note....

Moral of this story: If you want your voice to be heard in the North Pacific, do not bother voting. Get a chat client instead.
Click to expand...
Yes well we discussed this yesterday and I don't disagree. I will point out that you had your code PMed to you via TG but McMasterdonia did not because he could not PM himself.

I think Elu even expressed that he was unsure whether McMasterdonia even knew HOW to retrieve his voting code.

I certainly appreciate your point of view though Flem. You're not wrong.
 
I expected a negative reaction from some people for taking this decision. I also expected a negative reaction from people, as well as international ridicule had I allowed Govindia to take a Ministry position.

In my opinion, he does not have the international reputation or appropriate behaviour to take Foreign Affairs. This would have only caused strain on our international relationships due to his behaviour. He was not appropriate to put in World Assembly Affairs, as I do not feel that he has the experience required for such a position. Where Defence is concerned, I do not feel he could take that position either, we often work with our allies and his international reputation would lead to only harming the perception of the army abroad.

I could not in good faith appoint him to the Communications Ministry, once again, due to the fact that it would require involvement with foreign regions. Lastly, Culture and Entertainment provides a vital role in engaging new members in the community, as well as providing new ways to get some of the longer term residents involved. I think that while some of the things Govindia does are entertaining it is not usually intentional.

If Forum Administration would stop letting him get away with anything, he would have been banned a long time ago, and no such issue would be arising today.

In conclusion, I say that it was divided over what the electorate wanted, whether that was Elected, Appointed, or Delegates choice of the two.

To Kingborough, I say that I take your comment with a grain of salt. Given that it was your intention yesterday, to have the former Cabinet (including the defeated members) reappoint themselves to the position despite the fact that elections had just occurred. I am sorry that you were not re-elected. I believe you were the hardest working Minister in the previous cabinet, and it makes me sad to see that you were not re-elected after all your hard work.

It is my view that there were quite a few people in this election, who voted in order to demonstrate that they do not approve of Cabinet elections. Several admitted to me that they voted for Govindia "for the lulz". You also said on IRC just before Flemingovia, that if you had of voted, you would have voted for Govindia for the lulz, not because you thought he was a good candidate.

Following these results, there were people demanding that I throw the results out entirely. That elections for council be scrapped, or that I remove any "troll" candidates from the election(interpret that as you will). Ultimately, I believe that I have the constitutional authority to choose my own cabinet. I disagreed with the people on one of it's decisions, and given the small margin, made the decision to appoint Romanoffia instead.

Regardless, I feel that the point has been made. Council elections can go terribly wrong. From now on, appointments will be made based on merit and experience, using the constitutional authority vested in me.

If you disagree with this decision, the options available to you are clear. There is a recall mechanism in the regional assembly, the Attorney General can take me to court (I would enjoy any attempt to do so), or you may not vote for me in the next election. Ultimately that is your decision.

My decision on who will be in my cabinet, will not change. That decision is final.
 
To Kingborough, I say that I take your comment with a grain of salt. Given that it was your intention yesterday, to have the former Cabinet (including the defeated members) reappoint themselves to the position despite the fact that elections had just occurred. I am sorry that you were not re-elected. I believe you were the hardest working Minister in the previous cabinet, and it makes me sad to see that you were not re-elected after all your hard work.
Click to expand...

Uh what? I was proposing we throw out the new election results because of the lunacy of some of the results, not reappoint ourselves; I was very disappointed people were using our elections to troll. You know very well I just declined being reappointed because I believed it would be detrimental to the region to split IA and Culture & Entertainment again. I am not interested in power games.
 
It was strongly implied that the new results should be thrown out, and the new people appointed. Furthermore, a vote was held on whether the previous council could 'order' the Delegate to throw out the election results.
 
That is not the same as reappointing ourselves, not to mention that is not a double-standard of throwing out one and not another.
 
Elections for the Ministries in The North Pacific's Executive Council have now begun. These five positions are open to all Regional Assembly Members. The winners of the election will join the Delegate and Vice Delegate and form the Executive Council, responsible for the day to day running of the government and formulating Government policy.
All Regional Assembly members and registered citizens may vote. Voting will conclude on February 2nd.

The Candidates in this election are as follows:
Click to expand...

Grimalkin & Gaspo - I'd like you to conside the statement made by the delegate and what it did and did not include. It included details as to why he did not want Govindia as a Minister. I can tell you that Govindia would never have a position in my cabinet if I had the authority to appoint ministers. But I've quoted the text above from McM's factbook entry to illustrate that at no moment before or during the elections did he exclude any of the candidates. Indeed, his own factbook entry INCLUDES Govindia.

People who voted for Govindia and Govindia himself could not conclude anything but if Govindia was voted as a Minister he'd be appointed as such.

McM, I call upon you to make an apology to the region and Govindia to misleading both of us as to the finality of the election itself. I also ask that you put a disclaimer in your Directive post stating you have the final decision on candidates. Lastly, I ask that if this situation should arise again please inform a candidate that you will not seat them if they win an election. That will allow members to run in good faith and, frankly, not waste everyone's time.

I sincerely hope that you will do the above. A trial would be fun for the tabloids and a civil case would most certainly seem to be the most probable case-type, but I do not believe you have done anything 'illegal' in this situation. Is it 'immoral', I believe so and as such I hope you will address the items in the preceding paragraph.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I disagreed with the people on one of it's decisions ... Council elections can go terribly wrong. From now on, appointments will be made.
Click to expand...
I know how you feel.

You just cannot trust the bloody thick peasants to pick RIGHT. They are infuriating like that - but at least you have the comfort of knowing that you do not have to listen to the serfs if you do not want to.
 
I don't know if that is an attempt to threaten me PunkD, but I wish you the very best of luck with it.

I would have been negligent in my responsibility toward the region had I allowed Govindia to represent us in any official capacity. In conclusion, the cabinet believed, as did many others, that it would have been a mistake to accept that result, with the repercussions that would follow. His behaviour has reflected poorly on The North Pacific before, and I expect would have continued to had I named him to the cabinet. I stated in my election campaign that I planned to be an executive delegate, and to use the constitutional and legal authority granted to me. This authority includes the right to bar a member from joining my cabinet. The current cabinet agreed with this assessment, as did a number of other individuals.

It has been proposed that I should have notified Govindia prior to the vote that I would not have appointed him if he had won. However, I considered the chance of him winning low enough that it did not make sense to cause him needless upset. That his election came to pass is unfortunate, but the lack of prior notification does not remove my right to, ultimately, choose my own cabinet members. I had the option of throwing out the entire vote, and was indeed encouraged by some to do so. However, I have no issues with the rest of the elected candidates and feel that I will be able to work with all of them, that they will run their assigned departments well, and that they will be able to work together as a team. I have no reason to remove any extra names from the list.

I feel that I did make the right decision in not allowing Govindia to serve in my cabinet.

I would ask that people, including Flemingovia, stop suggesting that I would ignore the constitutional and legal provisions regarding elections, votes of the RA and recalls. You are simply stirring the pot to cause more trouble.

Feel free to use the accountability provisions open to you and vote to have me recalled by the Regional Assembly. I would accept the results of such a recall. Otherwise, I consider this matter at an end.
 
You can always tell when you strike a nerve when someone closes off debate after you make a post. The delegate shut off commentary within the Council Elections Thread so I’ll continue it in my office because the delegate holds no such authority to shut it off here.

Furthermore, I’ll direct citizens to feel free to agree, disagree, call me the man on the moon, or whatever your fancy without fear of me closing down debate because you disagree with my perspective.

For reference:

I don't know if that is an attempt to threaten me PunkD, but I wish you the very best of luck with it.

I felt that I would have been a negligent Delegate had I allowed him to represent us in an official capacity. In my opinion, as I have already stated, this would have reflected negatively on the region. In conclusion, the cabinet believed, as did many others, that it would have been a mistake to accept that result, with the repercussions that would follow. I stated in my election campaign that I planned to be an executive Delegate, and to use the executive authority granted to me.

I chose to ignore the suggestion that I should throw out the entire result, and appoint who I like after the elections had concluded. I decided that I would only remove Govindia, for the reasons stated above. Admittedly it would have been better to exclude him before hand, or at least let him know I had no intention of appointing him. I have appointed a cabinet that I can work with, and that I believe will serve the region well.

I feel that I did make the right decision in not allowing Govindia to serve in my cabinet.

I would ask that people, including Flemingovia, stop suggesting that I would ignore the constitutional and legal provisions regarding elections, votes of the RA and recalls. You are simply stirring the pot to cause more trouble.

Feel free to use the accountability provisions open to you and vote to have me recalled by the Regional Assembly. I would accept the results of such a recall. Otherwise, I consider this matter at an end.
Click to expand...

Spare us the self-martydom, McM. Not every situation calls for us to run to the courts or post a recall motion.

Your response to my calls for an apology went ignored so I’ll assume that won’t happen.

Your response to my request that you update your directive so that future candidates will understand that in the end it’s your choice – and not the people’s – also went ignored. However, it appears that you stated that in the future you will just make appointments. That’s your right and no one is arguing you do not have the right to make appointments. But I strongly urge you that if you plan to hold non-binding elections in the future you inform candidates beforehand as a matter of courtesy.

And please – this office doesn’t make “threats”. You know, I feel like people easily get defensive whenever an action they take is questioned. Come on, you’re better than that McM. You’ve been a more-than-above-average delegate, but I think in this situation you are making a mistake. I and others are entitled to that opinion and you’re entitled to disagree without saying those that don’t hold your opinion are “stirring the pot”. That’s a cop out and beneath you.

There’s also no need to say that I’m threatening you with legal action. I did as I said – reviewed the matter. I also intended to catch you on IRC and discuss it with you because holding an election and not keeping with its results is a big deal in my book. However, you’d like to imply that it is not by the fact that you made little mention of it in your original posting of the election results.

After reading your latest responses, understanding the particular makeup of the court, and my legal understanding of the Constitution/Legal Code I do not believe my office would be able to prosecute you for election fraud.

The key point is that you have the right to dismiss/appoint any counselor at any time. As the Speaker correctly pointed out, you could have just dismissed Govindia after a week. Any half decent defense attorney would argue your point differently than you have by simply stating that you dismissed Govindia from the EC based upon…blah, blah, blah. It doesn’t matter what you base it on because these positions serve at your pleasure. Pretty easy case, in my opinion and not worth the time of any of the parties involved.

I’ll get off my soapbox with that and say your handling of this matter is disappointing.

The same way I began this post, I’ll also end it, for anyone who has an opinion on this feel free to comment without fear of this thread closing because I don’t agree with your opinion.
 
I did not ignore your suggestion about the Directive, and I am in the process of rewriting it. We will be holding a meeting in the next few days where we will discuss such changes.

And please – this office doesn’t make "threats". You know, I feel like people easily get defensive whenever an action they take is questioned. Come on, you’re better than that McM. You’ve been a more-than-above-average delegate, but I think in this situation you are making a mistake. I and others are entitled to that opinion and you’re entitled to disagree without saying those that don’t hold your opinion are “stirring the pot”. That’s a cop out and beneath you.
Click to expand...

You basically implied that if I did not apologize you would take me to court. If that is your plan, I encourage you to see it through to conclusion. I shall not stop you. The comment about 'stirring the pot' was in reference to claims that I would ignore any and all votes, including ones that have legal and constitutional force. Specifically claims made by Flemingovia on IRC.

The point is, if you intend to change the decision, the only means is via the court, or via a recall. I'm not going to go back on my decision to not appoint Govindia to the cabinet. That decision has been made. I closed the thread for that reason.
 
If you did not apologize, i'd take you to court. Huh?

What are we - kids at a playground?

I made strong recommendations for you - none of which I thought you'd do, but I felt compelled to make them. I'm glad you're taking steps to update the directive. That will be useful. I don't expect you to apologize to the region or Gov, but I do think it's warranted.

And as I said above, there is no legal basis for a case in this matter. I needed to review that. Having done that, I'm comfortable you followed the letter of the law.

I have no idea what Flem claimed on IRC - but I find it concerning that you cannot see that not following the election is a bad thing and why some people are very concerned about it. That's actually the most concerning part for me in this situation.
 
So sorry... as the AG you're proposing that he should have lied and said that he had accepted him... then later dismissed him? That sort of behaviour is far less becoming of the regional delegate! What's more, you have NO CLUE what the situation is. You do not actively take part in the NPA so you do not know or understand ANYTHING that has taken place nor McMasterdonia's relationship with Govindia. It would have been VERY difficult to have Govindia on the council considering Gov is banned from the cabinet channel and is on McMasterdonia's ignore list on IRC. On top of this, Gov is on PM restriction and post moderation. Any sensible citizen would agree.

And he didn't apologise because he shouldn't? If you're going to post this sort of rubbish create a poll and see how people from the RA actually feel. I'm actually the one who suggested to him that he should make a statement than close the thread.

Either people propose a recall (or start a discussion in the RA), file charges with the AG or they let the matter rest.

I consider the above to be an abuse of the office of the AG. It is VERY unethical for an officer or the court to propose that (to win a trial) the defendant should lie. Far more unethical, in fact, than what McMasterdonia himself has done. I would request that you close this thread and either open one in the RA or file an indictment accordingly.

Edit: And what's more, you seem to think that he made this decision lightly, to the contrary he consulted his previous cabinet AND everyone who was online in the #TNP channel. It's unfortunately and a bit iffy but the matter should rest.
 
I suggest you reread your previous post, Mr Attorney General.

I sincerely hope that you will do the above. A trial would be fun for the tabloids and a civil case would most certainly seem to be the most probable case-type
Click to expand...

That sounds to me like, if you do not do as is stated above, a damaging trial will follow. If not, what on earth did you mean?

I find it concerning that you cannot see that not following the election is a bad thing and why some people are very concerned about it. That's actually the most concerning part for me in this situation.
Click to expand...

I agree that not following the election is not ideal. I decided however that it was better to do so, than to risk the damage that Govindia would inflict on the regions reputation. Again, I feel that I have stated that already.

I will reopen the other thread, Kiwi is right it is inappropriate to discuss it in the Courts chambers.
 
Kiwi – Actually, my argument is that the delegate misled both the candidates and the region in that he didn’t hold to the results of the election.

Here’s why I believe that:

There was an election. There were results. The delegate did not hold to those results.

Those are the facts.

How we, as citizens, view those facts is our right. I choose to make the statement that McM misled us through this election. That we differ on our perspective and are able to conversate about it is what makes TNP great.

I believe both you and McM need to take a step back from throwing out recall motions, court cases, abuse of power, and ‘lies’ so flippantly and look at what happened here. My office needed to review this situation in order to ensure that the rights of the citizens of The North Pacific were not unlawfully abridged through McM’s actions. That is the job of my office and I will continue to serve in that capacity.

What I challenge you and McM to do is this: put yourself in Govindia’s shoes for a minute. What would be your response to finding out you’ve won an election but are not given the opportunity to serve in the position?


EDIT

McM re my comment:
A trial would be fun for the tabloids and a civil case would most certainly seem to be the most probable case-type
Click to expand...
A trial fun for the tabloids was complete sarcasm. Meaning, a trial would be fun for the tabloids but not really be based in our laws. Read that to mean, it would be a waste of time. I think you did not get my meaning in that statement and that's understandable. A trial would be more of a witch-hunt and the tabloids would have fun (a la, the recent Eternal Trial of JAL story).

A civil case is the most probably case-type in this situation because I don't believe you broke any laws. Anyone can request a civil case for whatever reason. I'm choosing not to because as disappointed as I am in your decision, you didn't break laws and i lean towards going to the courts only whenever necessary.

I hope that clears up my prior comments on the subject.

I am also glad that you are reopening the thread.
 
Thank you, Punk D, for allowing us the opportunity to continue the discussion of this issue.

I think the closing of the previous topic was premature. It had been open for less than 2 days, and I'm sure there are folks who might have wanted to congratulate the winners and did not get that opportunity.

Not to mix metaphors, but McM, if you can't stand the heat, locking the kitchen door will only create a backdraft. It just doesn't work.

I would like everyone to consider how you would feel if the same thing happened to you. Hurt? Outraged? What would you say? What would you do? Now go back and take a look at Govindia's response. If anyone ever finds himself in a similar situation, THAT is what you do.

I am not buying McM's objection that if only Admin had banned Gov, he wouldn't be in such a sticky situation. Forum moderation really strives to stay out of politics. We have a posted system of progressive discipline for members who break the forum rules. Each reported incident is discussed by the team and warnings are issued when appropriate. Despite the ill-concealed desire of many to remove Gov from the forum, he simply has not accrued the number of warnings required to warrant a ban. We are not going to ban a member for political reasons. That includes everyone. Would you really want it any other way?

One more thing for now... a number of players have alluded to conversations on IRC. So much so, that I feel like I am only getting part of the story. This is a story that is relevant to everybody, not just those who happened by a chat room at the right time. In the interest of transparency, government business needs to be made public here on the forum. Or should I start hanging out in those smoke-filled back rooms so I know what's going on, too? Fine. I'll bring the cigars.
 
Thank you for reopening the thread, McM. For the sake of visibility, I am reposting some of what I said in Punk D's thread.

I would like everyone to consider how you would feel if the same thing happened to you. Hurt? Outraged? What would you say? What would you do? Now go back and take a look at Govindia's response. If anyone ever finds himself in a similar situation, THAT is what you do.

I am not buying McM's objection that if only Admin had banned Gov, he wouldn't be in such a sticky situation. Forum moderation really strives to stay out of politics. We have a posted system of progressive discipline for members who break the forum rules. Each reported incident is discussed by the team and warnings are issued when appropriate. Despite the ill-concealed desire of many to remove Gov from the forum, he simply has not accrued the number of warnings required to warrant a ban. We are not going to ban a member for political reasons. That includes everyone. Would you really want it any other way?

One more thing for now... a number of players have alluded to conversations on IRC. So much so, that I feel like I am only getting part of the story. This is a story that is relevant to everybody, not just those who happened by a chat room at the right time. In the interest of transparency, government business needs to be made public here on the forum. Or should I start hanging out in those smoke-filled back rooms so I know what's going on, too? Fine. I'll bring the cigars.
 
As the delegate of Osiris, having Govindia as MoFA, which is what I'm led to believe he would've been... would've pretty much ensured that the close relationship between Osiris and TNP ended.
 
GBM, IRC is open to everyone. There's a link at the top here, and dozens of people have the logs from #tnp. You may choose not to participate, but the value of real-time discussion of issues in the region cannot be overstated - it is crucial. There is no back room - this conversation (for which I, among many others, was present) took place largely in #tnp. There was great discussion of the voting mechanisms, there was discussion of the relevant law, all manner of things. This isn't some secret cabal running the region from the shadows; it's TNP's citizens, speaking as face-to-face as is possible. Noone has excluded you from that; you're welcome to participate. Encouraged, even. But you don't. And that's a choice you make; it's not anything bad done by anyone else, no matter how much you may wish it to be.
 
Great Bights Mum:
I am not buying McM's objection that if only Admin had banned Gov, he wouldn't be in such a sticky situation. Forum moderation really strives to stay out of politics. We have a posted system of progressive discipline for members who break the forum rules. Each reported incident is discussed by the team and warnings are issued when appropriate. Despite the ill-concealed desire of many to remove Gov from the forum, he simply has not accrued the number of warnings required to warrant a ban. We are not going to ban a member for political reasons.
Click to expand...
How about public safety reasons?
 
There have been no reports of public safety issues occurring on this forum.

Regarding irc, my point is they are government discussions, so the logs should be posted publicly. Those who cannot be available at the time these crucial conversations happen are otherwise left in the dark.
 
Like GBM, waiting for a response on "how would you feel if this happened to you?"

and, I also concur with GBM regarding IRC. It is public but not everyone is on there all the time and logs are not all posted publicly.
 
Regarding irc, it wasn't a "government" discussion. A good portion of the people discussing things were not governmental officials. They may be citizens or RA members in TNP or (as was the case) not even a citizen in TNP. If the current governmental officials had an official discussion, it wasn't in #tnp.
 
I take issue with the Attorney General posting this here. It creates the public impression that the office of Attorney General is being exploited to provide additional credibility to the Attorney General's preferred stance on a matter entirely outside the scope of the office's duties.

You were not elected to this office to use it as a publication venue for your opinions on current political issues, and as a means for promoting them against the opinions of other citizens. Even if that was not your intention, this is how your actions are perceived; and you should have shown adequate self-restraint and care, when using your office, to avoid creating this perception.

You are welcome of course to express your opinion, as a private citizen in the Agora. You are also welcome to object to the Delegate locking a thread in the Elections forum, again as a private citizen, by voicing your disagreement in a new thread in the Agora or lodging a complaint in the administration forum. But you cannot use the latter as justification for using the Attorney General's office to promote your personal views on current affairs.
 
If people really want to elect ministers like we used to do, all you have to do is change the Constitution, 3.5 "The Delegate may appoint executive officers to assist them and may dismiss these officers freely. Executive offices may be regulated by law." Revise it and say the RA will elect ministers. Or the delegate will always appoint ministers. Or delegate appoints and then the RA ratifies.

Was the whole issue handled the absolute best that it could have been, probably not. Yes it's frustrating to go through an election only to have your viewpoint ignored. But the delegate *has* that right. I don't honestly feel that having my view ignored is grounds for recalling M&M as delegate, which is pretty much the ONLY thing that people could actually do unless M&M changes his mind about things, which from all indications is not happening.
 
madjack:
As the delegate of Osiris, having Govindia as MoFA, which is what I'm led to believe he would've been... would've pretty much ensured that the close relationship between Osiris and TNP ended.
Click to expand...
Priceless.
Gaspo:
GBM, IRC is open to everyone. There's a link at the top here, and dozens of people have the logs from #tnp. You may choose not to participate, but the value of real-time discussion of issues in the region cannot be overstated - it is crucial. There is no back room - this conversation (for which I, among many others, was present) took place largely in #tnp. There was great discussion of the voting mechanisms, there was discussion of the relevant law, all manner of things. This isn't some secret cabal running the region from the shadows; it's TNP's citizens, speaking as face-to-face as is possible. Noone has excluded you from that; you're welcome to participate. Encouraged, even. But you don't. And that's a choice you make; it's not anything bad done by anyone else, no matter how much you may wish it to be.
Click to expand...
Very amusing, but I don't think that's what she was suggesting at all.

Thank you, Punk D, for posting this thread, however, it should never have been put here it should have been put in The Agora - the designated area for free speech. Perhaps Admin could move it there now?
 
Former English Colony:
Regarding irc, it wasn't a "government" discussion. A good portion of the people discussing things were not governmental officials. They may be citizens or RA members in TNP or (as was the case) not even a citizen in TNP. If the current governmental officials had an official discussion, it wasn't in #tnp.
Click to expand...
The delegate discussing issues related to TNP government IS a government discussion, "official" or not. The conversation(s) that took place certainly influenced the decisionmaking on this issue. Now we find some participants are not even citizens of TNP? Wow.

*GBM gifts #tnp*

images


Enjoy!
 
I am fine with a global mod merging this with the council election result thread or starting a new one in any location they see fit.
 
Great Bights Mum:
Former English Colony:
Regarding irc, it wasn't a "government" discussion. A good portion of the people discussing things were not governmental officials. They may be citizens or RA members in TNP or (as was the case) not even a citizen in TNP. If the current governmental officials had an official discussion, it wasn't in #tnp.
Click to expand...
The delegate discussing issues related to TNP government IS a government discussion, "official" or not. The conversation(s) that took place certainly influenced the decisionmaking on this issue. Now we find some participants are not even citizens of TNP? Wow.

*GBM gifts #tnp*

images


Enjoy!
Click to expand...
I think that logic is taking it too far GBM. M&M solicited opinions and put forth ideas to see what people thought, but what he finally decided was still up to him. And yes #tnp has people that are not in TNP that feel quite comfortable stating their opinions (serious or not) on issues related to #tnp.

What takes place on the *forums* is official. If M&M chooses to ask people what they think about an issue (especially in this case), whether it's in #tnp or any other chat room is his prerogative. It's his decision making process. People have to trust in their elected officials to be able to make their decisions as they see fit.

Suggesting that all such discussions should only be taking place on the forum would lengthen out the process to the point of it being absurd. Sometimes things are more time urgent and you just want to know what people think *right now*.
 
Chasmanthe:
madjack:
As the delegate of Osiris, having Govindia as MoFA, which is what I'm led to believe he would've been... would've pretty much ensured that the close relationship between Osiris and TNP ended.
Click to expand...
Priceless.
Click to expand...
I'm not entirely sure what's priceless about it, but I could not and will not work with someone banned from the Osiris forums by admin for harassment.
 
madjack:
I'm not entirely sure what's priceless about it, but I could not and will not work with someone banned from the Osiris forums by admin for harassment.
Click to expand...
Probably your admittance that a player holds such power over you that it would effect inter-regional alliances. Personally I would be ashamed to admit that Govindia had any influence on my decisions as a player, but hey, to each their own.
 
Democratic Donkeys:
madjack:
I'm not entirely sure what's priceless about it, but I could not and will not work with someone banned from the Osiris forums by admin for harassment.
Click to expand...
Probably your admittance that a player holds such power over you that it would effect inter-regional alliances. Personally I would be ashamed to admit that Govindia had any influence on my decisions as a player, but hey, whatever right?
Click to expand...
I was thinking this just the other night. It is astonishing to think, but Govindia has proved to be possibly the most powerful player in TNP history.

I cannot think of a single other player who, on 100% warning and permanent mod preview, would have the power to change a whole method of Cabinet selection, cause the overturning of a democratic election result, cause emergency conversations on #tnp and force the delegate's hand, and threaten relations between TNP and Osiris, and possibly other regions too.

What is sad is that this power does not come from the strength of Govindia but from the weakness of others.

Hail Govindia, the most powerful player in TNP history. :worship:
 
Okay, a few things.

Firstly is that I find it highly inappropriate that punk d appears to be using his position as AG, and his prerogative as to whether to file charges or not, in order to achieve political aims. If there truly are legal issues, then you should file for clarification - not start going "Do this or else."

I support mcmaster's decision to do this - I don't think he's handled it perfectly, but it is a reasonable decision. How on -earth- is a minister going to function with no PM access, for crying out loud! And yes, the electorate should have thought of that (and I'll admit having not voted - RL sucks), but ultimately, it is the delegate's cabinet and they have that discretion. It would be equally inappropriate for the delegate to turn round and say "Well, it's your fault you've got a useless minister - deal with it."

With regards to election systems - just because a system isn't -instantly- comprehendable, doesn't mean that it's not fair. From the person voting's point of view, it is definitely simple - you rank candidates, and the system sorts it out so the people with the most widespread support get elected. I'd say that something saying explicitly in the directive that the delegate keeps final discretion - but I think the elections are definitely a good thing. It gets people elected who aren't always in the delegates close friendship group but go on to do great work as ministers - newer members too.
 
A few observations.

1. The Delegate did nothing illegal here. Nothing.

2. For the Attorney General to imply that the Delegate had violated the law and threaten him with legal action, then to turn around and finally admit that he had not violated the law is an extreme abuse of the Attorney General's office. Punk D, you should have done a thorough examination of the law before posting here and accusing the Delegate of legal impropriety. Instead you made accusations first and read the law later. This, combined with some of your other actions as Attorney General, makes you wholly unfit to hold the office of Attorney General. I will likely be pursuing a recall.

3. In response to those demanding to know how the Delegate and those supporting his decision would feel if in Govindia's shoes: Well, that's difficult to say. Unlike Govindia, I'm not an interregional menace banned from multiple regions for harassment and other reprehensible conduct. I think that's really the crux of the issue here. It's inexplicable to many of us that Govindia is not completely banned from this forum. For those of us who think he should be banned for his conduct here and elsewhere, it's hard for us to have anything but admiration for a Delegate who had the intestinal fortitude to save The North Pacific's reputation by refusing to let Govindia anywhere near a cabinet position.
 
If this issue happens again, rest assured you local AG will definitely make sure that all laws are properly followed.

The delegate closed debate here and not one of those who have decried my actions have considered what he did.

In my authority I wanted to ensure that this issue was not merely swept under the rug and I knew that in my office, the delegate could not do as such.

Protecting the rights of citizens, whether they are liked or not, is paramount to the nicety of not moving the conversation to an area where conversations of this type do not occur.

If you don't agree with that, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Direct question to Abbey What political gain was I hoping to enjoy in challenging the actions of a highly popular delegate and defending the pariah of The North Pacific? I'm not seeing any political points to be scored in that scenario.

- please don't take the bold as meanness or harshness, just wanted to make sure, Abbey, you saw this because I am interested in your answer.

Edit - added more color commentary.
2nd Edit - note to abbey
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top