Jump to content

Yevgeni Luchenkov

Members
  • Posts

    1,468
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Yevgeni Luchenkov

  1. Where does that prove there was a different of views on the objectives the alliance would aim to? :P

    Let me show you a blunt and non-sense example.

    Imagine candidate X to MCXA High Council says, "if I am elected I will take measures so that the alliance activity raises". That's a noble goal, however there are two paths to reach it:

    -> Members are made to do daily drills

    -> Inactive members are kicked out of the alliance

    Imagine membership supports method nr 1, but the said HQ member supports nr2. They clash. Their views aren't different, they both aim for alliance activity, they just disagree on the path to reach it. Sadly, you can't ask all the questions during elections in regards to all possible situations that may be presented to government. Which makes it nearly impossible to avoid eventual clashes :(

    It's the members' duty to stop listening to feel-good but empty speeches and start asking more precise questions about what will reforms/projects be, in essence.

    Not saying that's what happened, here. Just responding to your point.

    On edit: Damn, beat up.

  2. I can only prove something that has been done. I cannot prosecute intent

    What about conspiracy? Conspiracy to commit a fraud? It seems to be the casus belli here, even if the context is somewhat lacking. If only the logs could prove he had planned on taking the aid and running away with it...

    Stiil, I've seen much worse CB's.

×
×
  • Create New...