On the Proposition of Recalling Robespierre from the Office of Vice Delegate

Wonderess

Wonderess

"I will be true to you whatever comes."
-
-
-
TNP Nation
Castle in Confidence
Discord
.wonderess
I created this thread so that the notion of recalling Robespierre from the Vice Delegacy can be discussed publicly before the citizenry. As the starter of this thread, I ask that things remain civil and as objective as possible.

The motion:

The Regional Assembly hereby removes Robespierre from the Office of Vice Delegate given conduct related penalties that were imposed by moderation of the region.
Click to expand...

I was one of the opponents of Robes's original run based on character, and I think now that this has in fact become an issue in the region, we must protect the VD office and the regional government from further infractions. We cannot reward any unruly behavior with an office because TNP is worthy of better than that.

Here is the official announcement made by Moderation on the TNP Discord:

Robespierre has been banned for 7 days across all TNP servers for misleading another player about aspects of his personal life and for attempting to contact an individual after being blocked. In the interest of protecting the privacy of the involved parties, TNP moderation will not be disclosing specifics of this ban.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
As the starter of the thread, you should be proposing the motion and explaining why you are attempting a recall and not relying on a Discord conversation. Non-starter until you actually do something.
 
The discord moderation team will not be sharing any information past the public announcement we already made.

I will not be expressing an opinion for or against such a recall, and intend to Abstain should it come to a vote.
 
I will not be expressing an opinion for or against such a recall, and intend to Abstain should it come to a vote.
 
I will not be expressing an opinion for or against such a recall, and intend to Abstain should it come to a vote.
 
Eluvatar:
The discord moderation team will not be sharing any information past the public announcement we already made.

I will not be expressing an opinion for or against such a recall, and intend to Abstain should it come to a vote.
Click to expand...
Artemis:
I will not be expressing an opinion for or against such a recall, and intend to Abstain should it come to a vote.
Click to expand...
Dreadton:
I will not be expressing an opinion for or against such a recall, and intend to Abstain should it come to a vote.
Click to expand...
@Yamantau Em, @Deropia your turn to post that.
 
Let's pretend I didn't log onto Discord this morning. Based on the OP, I have no idea what happened.
 
For reference then - and hopefully @Wonderess will edit this into his op - Robespierre was banned from all TNP discords for 7 days for:
Robespierre has been banned for 7 days across all TNP servers for misleading another player about aspects of his personal life and for attempting to contact an individual after being blocked. In the interest of protecting the privacy of the involved parties, TNP moderation will not be disclosing specifics of this ban.
Click to expand...
 
Robespierre:
I, Robespierre, do hereby solemnly swear that during my term as Vice Delegate, I will uphold the ideals of Democracy, Freedom, and Justice of The Region of The North Pacific. I will use the powers and rights granted to me through The North Pacific Constitution and Legal Code in a legal, responsible, and unbiased manner, not abusing my power, committing misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance in office, in any gross or excessive manner. I will act only in the best interests of The North Pacific, not influenced by personal gain or any outside force, and within the restraints of my legally granted power. As such, I hereby take up the office of Vice Delegate, with all the powers, rights, and responsibilities held therein.
Click to expand...

With out knowing the details, and knowing that more details are not really available, my opionion at this point is based on my own faith in the Discord moderation team, and Robespierre's oath.

Seeing as a 7 day ban from all TNP servers was administered I would classify any action that resulted in that as "committing misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance in office, in any gross or excessive manner." (Whatever happened was clearly not okay.)

Again being banned from all TNP discord servers interferes with "I will act only in the best interests of The North Pacific," as Robespierre acted in a manor that was not acceptable per discord rules this does not reflect well on TNP.

Holding a position of office comes with the extra responsibility of of being extra careful with any actions because you are in the spot light and should be a role model for the rest of the region, even more so in the postion of Vice delagete.
 
I feel that I can not make an informed decision unless I hear more about what happened.

@Robespierre, if you'd be willing, I'd like to hear what you have to say regarding this matter.
 
If the offense warranted removal from office, I'm sure McM, Elu, or any of the other citizen-admins would have initiated the recall motion. We've also seen past former delegates pick up forum bans for out-of-character misconduct, and that kind of ban hasn't happened here either. Instead, it was just a discord tempban, like getting a 5-minute major for fighting in hockey rather than a game misconduct.

That being said, "attempting to contact an individual after being blocked" is, as Angshire pointed out in Discord, what Opstan did, though there were probably some aggravating circumstances in Opstan's case. Without more detail, we just don't know if the same would apply here, if they exist.


Edit: To clarify, I'm not aware of a delegate being forum banned while in office. It was a former delegate, one who was not in office at the time of the ban, that I was thinking of.
 
Last edited:
Sil Dorsett:
If the offense warranted removal from office, I'm sure McM, Elu, or any of the other citizen-admins would have initiated the recall motion. We've also seen past delegates pick up forum bans for out-of-character misconduct, and that kind of ban hasn't happened here either. Instead, it was just a discord tempban, like getting a 5-minute major for fighting in hockey rather than a game misconduct.

That being said, "attempting to contact an individual after being blocked" is, as Angshire pointed out in Discord, what Opstan did, though there were probably some aggravating circumstances in Opstan's case. Without more detail, we just don't know if the same would apply here, if they exist.
Click to expand...
In Opstan's Case, Op did it 10+ times with 6 fake Discord accounts, and had 20 beguiled people contacting me on his behalf :p

------
(Though that's not to make light of this case either though. What happened to your common sense, Robespierre D: After seeing the fate of Opstan's block evasions, common sense says that you should have known better to be careful/respectful. Hope this gets resolved.)
 
Last edited:
In my opinion precedent is not relevant. We are not the court. We are to do what is good for the region and its government. An infraction of this sort is unbecoming of a government official, an elected one at that, so we have to do our jobs as the RA and remove negative influences from positions of responsibility. This is no longer about whether Robespierre can do the job well as people love to focus on. Character matters, there has been a significant compromise of character, and now we have to deal with that as a citizenry.
 
I do not share the desire of some of my colleagues to decline to take a stance, so I'll go ahead and weigh in here: Personally, I think this recall motion is absurd, and I will vote against it if it gets that far.

Moreover, I am not sure what part of "protecting the privacy of the involved parties" some of you aren't getting, but badgering Robespierre for private information to satisfy your own curiosity and desire for juicy gossip is not acceptable. If he wants to talk about his side of things, he is at liberty to do so - but that is his choice. Not yours.

Sil Dorsett:
Instead, it was just a discord tempban, like getting a 5-minute major for fighting in hockey rather than a game misconduct.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
I absolutely support the moderation team's choice to protect the privacy of those involved, it is absolutely the right decision as I can only assume it is a sensitive issue.

I would like to echo the sentiments of Sil as well.
Sil Dorsett:
If the offense warranted removal from office, I'm sure McM, Elu, or any of the other citizen-admins would have initiated the recall motion. We've also seen past delegates pick up forum bans for out-of-character misconduct, and that kind of ban hasn't happened here either. Instead, it was just a discord tempban, like getting a 5-minute major for fighting in hockey rather than a game misconduct.
Click to expand...

Had those who are privy to the information came out and initiated this removal themselves, I may have a different opinion. But that is not what happened here. I am firmly opposed to this.
 
I don't see anyone requesting private information or for anyone's privacy to be compromised.
 
Wonderess:
In my opinion precedent is not relevant. We are not the court. We are to do what is good for the region and its government. An infraction of this sort is unbecoming of a government official, an elected one at that, so we have to do our jobs as the RA and remove negative influences from positions of responsibility. This is no longer about whether Robespierre can do the job well as people love to focus on. Character matters, there has been a significant compromise of character, and now we have to deal with that as a citizenry.
Click to expand...
I disagree with that statement. Historically, the RA recalls government officials based on shortcomings in job performance. OOC considerations are a separate matter altogether. They have to be separated. We wouldn't want the moderation team to be making decisions based on regional politics. By the same token, we do not need our assembly to concern itself with the number of warning points a particular player has. One thing has little to do with the other.
 
I'm inclined to agree with Sil and GBM on this one. I'm against this motion.
 
St George:
I don't see anyone requesting private information or for anyone's privacy to be compromised.
Click to expand...
I echo this. All I'm seeing is a request for Robes to explain himself.
Sil Dorsett:
If the offense warranted removal from office, I'm sure McM, Elu, or any of the other citizen-admins would have initiated the recall motion. We've also seen past delegates pick up forum bans for out-of-character misconduct, and that kind of ban hasn't happened here either. Instead, it was just a discord tempban, like getting a 5-minute major for fighting in hockey rather than a game misconduct.
Click to expand...
To everyone who said an admin or mod would have initiated the motion if it was serious enough, you can see that several admins/mods have already chosen to abstain from the discussion and vote. The reason's pretty obvious. They don't want to be seen as using their moderation authority to influence a political matter. They've done their job, and it's up to us to decide if has happened warrants a recall.
 
Wonderess:
I was one of the opponents of Robes's original run based on character, and I think now that this has in fact become an issue in the region, we must protect the VD office and the regional government from further infractions. We cannot reward any unruly behavior with an office because TNP is worthy of better than that.
Click to expand...
Any reason you proposed a recall for this government official who you previously opposed when I see no recall for another government official who recently received a a much more severe punishment (only banned from one server, not all servers) for a longer time period (much longer)?
 
Last edited:
Praetor:
Any reason you proposed a recall for this government official who you previously opposed when I see no recall for another government official who recently received a a much more severe punishment (only banned from one server, not all servers) for a longer time period (much longer)?
Click to expand...
Who are you referring to? Is it Bob?
 
St George:
It would be helpful if @Robespierre could make some kind of statement on the issue.
Click to expand...
Angshire:
I feel that I can not make an informed decision unless I hear more about what happened.

@Robespierre, if you'd be willing, I'd like to hear what you have to say regarding this matter.
Click to expand...
It has been requested that I deliver a statement in this thread. By popular demand, I am happy to oblige the citizenry:

In addressing you all today I hope that my message demonstrates maturity and that you find some degree of resolve. I will not be downplaying my own conduct, and more so I won’t be side-stepping the repercussions; repercussions coming in the form of the consequence I am currently serving on Discord.

The fact of the matter is that I made a mistake, had oversight in judgment, and as a result, I’ve been afforded time (courtesy of being away from all Discord servers related to the North Pacific) to properly reflect upon my actions and further assert that this will not define me as a player nor as a person. If I am banned for a week in light of that mistake, then I deserve it, and I’m quite glad that during this process I’ve been fully compliant with all questions asked of me by administrators - because that’s the type of conduct befitting of anyone who aims to be respectable: to own up to a situation and progress forwards.

That being said, not only does punishing people in-character for out-of-character offenses set a bad precedent, but I would contest that it unnecessarily creates a sort of double jeopardy situation for individuals and actively undermines the level of commitment that our region’s government officials hold to their duties whilst in office. I have full faith in the poise that our administrative team off-site has shown, and I have the utmost confidence in their discretion to act accordingly.

What you do when it comes to accountability is you remain authentic, stay within yourself and be true. You surrender the outcome as a result of your honesty and you become willing to do uncomfortable work. In today’s case, the aforementioned “uncomfortable work” is the issuing of this statement. It is a principle, and in this instance, I feel as though my punishment was fair. That is the mindset for those wondering.

I am thankful that I will still be able to serve this region and its community in my capacity as Vice Delegate, and in the meantime, I fully intend to continue performing tasks at a high level. I intend to take this in stride and use it as a teachable moment for the future.

In my view, it was a poor circumstance that was compounded upon poor decision-making on my part. Although this unfortunate occurrence is due to a culmination of factors, I will take ownership of my fair share when it comes to the blame and I’m very willing to shoulder that burden. I am of the opinion that it is best, to be honest about one’s faults, seek personal improvement, and demonstrate sincerity through action. For the remainder of the term and onwards into time, I will demonstrate the sincerity of this statement through my actions and I will continue to service a region and a community that I love.

That is the type of regional leader I want to be. One who stays the course, admits when they're wrong, and gives extra effort to continue doing good work for the region's benefit.
 
It is of my opinion that out of character actions should not come into play. This event should in no way affect Robespierre in the capacity of the performance of his duties as Vice Delegate. This motion was hastily slapped together, with limited information in an apparent effort to oust the Vice Delegate from his office over something that was done entirely out of character. The actions taken by Robespierre were in fact against the rules, but he has owned them, fully, and was fully cooperative with anything asked of him. This speaks to his character. I strongly believe this motion serves as nothing more than an attempted assassination of said character.
 
Last edited:
@Praetor Well given that one is a Deputy Speaker who can easily be removed by the Speaker if need be, and the other basically the second most powerful role in the region who is directly elected, I'd say the RA's involvement is much more warranted in this case.

As for this in character out of character distinction people like to throw around, I find such a distinction arbitrary. TNP isnt just an RP of nations working together. I dont pretend to be Wonderess Bueche who leads the Castle Federation when I interact in TNP government. I am representing myself as a person who is then interacting with others. I have a responsibility to people here by holding myself to a standard of conduct fitting of someone who is working in the region in cooperation with others. It is very east to use IC OOC as a scapegoat so that the government isnt affected by one's actions. I have always found it a grave mistake to not take character into consideration when looking out our candidates for elected office, and I am now voicing that concern again. El Fiji Grande and myself voiced concerns about Robespierre's character. People elected not to listen to us and now here we are. If McMasterdonia was disciplined in a way such of this we would be asking a lot of question. However, the reality is that McM does wouldn't do something like that, and that is in part what makes him a good delegate, his quality of ethics and self governance. I may be considered to have a high standard for elected officials in this area but it is because TNP deserves nothing less. I think the attempts I see here to separate Robespierre's actions from his office is a mere rationalization. Moderation exists to protect the community, and the government is a central part of that community. The RA has the right to take actions necessary to defend the dignity of the elected offices. Conduct infractions are an integral standard of integrity and the citizenry most certainly can take that into consideration.
 
Last edited:
Also, to be frank, I saw no remorse or apology in Robespierre's above statement. The majority of it is spent defending the Ic OOC distinction so that he can remain in office which leads me to believe that he has yet to fully see the situation as it is. The absence of that remorse to me only reaffirms what I believe on this matter.
 
In the event of this coming to a vote, I will vote against.

Robes has been a good Vice Delegate as far as I can see, and he is serving all the punishment the mod team has seen fit to give him for OOC actions.
 
For reasons already outlined by GBM, Em and Nimarya, I will be voting against this motion if it ever proceeds to a vote.
 
Wonderess:
TNP isnt just an RP of nations working together. I dont pretend to be Wonderess Bueche who leads the Castle Federation when I interact in TNP government.
Click to expand...
Gameplay in-character and roleplay in-character are two very different things. If I were to win at Monopoly through tricky and underhanded business practices, I am an asshole in-character for that game; if I were to win at Monopoly through cheating, I am an asshole out-of-character. I don't have to be playing as Baron Floof, Lord of Land to buy into the game of Monopoly, nor must I in NationStates.
 
Last edited:
I personally believe in the separation of moderation and government affairs. As stated earlier, incorporating in-context and out-of-context actions set a bad precedent.
 
Darcania:
Gameplay in-character and roleplay in-character are two very different things. If I were to win at Monopoly through tricky and underhanded business practices, I am an asshole in-character for that game; if I were to win at Monopoly through cheating, I am an asshole out-of-character. I don't have to be playing as Baron Floof, Lord of Land to buy into the game of Monopoly, nor must I in NationStates.
Click to expand...
If you won Monopoly by being an IC asshole, people might let you play again and learn from your tactics. But if people found out you cheated in Monopoly, there's no chance they would let you join the game next time.
 
Last edited:
Gorundu:
If you won Monopoly by being an IC asshole, people might let you play again and learn from your tactics. But if people found out you cheated in Monopoly, there's no chance they would let you join the game next time.
Click to expand...
Not quite analogous to this situation. More like if people found out you, I dunno, got busted for having a one-hitter at a Rusted Root concert, are they going to let you in on their Monopoly game?
 
That's like telling someone that you don't want to play with them because they win too much. The phrase "git gud scrub" would certainly apply in that analogy. What you're trying to adjudicate for the administration team, Wonderess, is whether we even want that person in our circle of friends that plays monopoly on occasion. Again, the administration has made their stance clear with the penalties already issued.

Edit: I dunno if it's clear by what I said, but I'm with Darc's assessment on this.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top