Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 and you ignore the fact Bat broke the charter before I resigned, making MBP's reappointment of my to Trium perfectly legal as the only remaining Trium member. I ignore nothing, I am waiting for you to show me where it says that Battallion is immediately removed from gov for charter violations. Its really simple...show me and you win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Ire Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 That may well be the case, but it is certainly not a matter for someone who QUIT the alliance (Mogar) to decide. Mogars side has admitted this is a coup, so their regard, or lack thereof for IRANs charter is obvious. No, it's for the membership of the alliance to decide for themselves quietly, which is why any of them (especially within the government) discussing this whole thing in the open makes it a circus. For future reference, any charter without a clear line of leadership succession contains a fatal flaw. Had anyone in the aliance automatically assumed the role of trium upon Mogar leaving - even if that only happened temporarily - this would be a non-issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 LoL, your printed portion of the charter totally supports MY stance. YOU WERE NOT A TRIUM...You quit. Once you quit, the only way you get your spot back, is if the other 2 triums PUT you back. We know this did not happen. So explain to me how you, BY THE CHARTER...Got your position back? Did I miss the Do-Over clause? No, it supports that Bat broke the charter, and as the only remaining government member MBP was in his right to appoint replacement Triums, which he did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 No, it's for the membership of the alliance to decide for themselves quietly, which is why any of them (especially within the government) discussing this whole thing in the open makes it a circus.For future reference, any charter without a clear line of leadership succession contains a fatal flaw. Had anyone in the aliance automatically assumed the role of trium upon Mogar leaving - even if that only happened temporarily - this would be a non-issue. You sir, have my complete and total agreement. The charter is horrible written and full of holes. My stance is merely a question of legality, as all members of IRAN, by accepting membership, accept the charter defacto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) No, it's for the membership of the alliance to decide for themselves quietly, which is why any of them (especially within the government) discussing this whole thing in the open makes it a circus.For future reference, any charter without a clear line of leadership succession contains a fatal flaw. Had anyone in the aliance automatically assumed the role of trium upon Mogar leaving - even if that only happened temporarily - this would be a non-issue. Blah..double post. Edited April 30, 2009 by Rush Sykes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 No, it supports that Bat broke the charter, and as the only remaining government member MBP was in his right to appoint replacement Triums, which he did. You can continue to ignore that the charter does not declare a rule violation as immediate removal all night long. It is now clear that that is what you intend to do. There IS a provision for removing a triumvir in the charter, and it assuredly does not say that violating the charter removes someone. It says that a triumvir can only be removed by the other 2. Since there were ONLY 2, and Batt would not remove himself(although, he probably should)....he could not be removed by the charter. You see Mogar, its those bloody annoying facts again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aming Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 poor show battalion shame on you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileath Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 You can continue to ignore that the charter does not declare a rule violation as immediate removal all night long. It is now clear that that is what you intend to do. There IS a provision for removing a triumvir in the charter, and it assuredly does not say that violating the charter removes someone. It says that a triumvir can only be removed by the other 2. Since there were ONLY 2, and Batt would not remove himself(although, he probably should)....he could not be removed by the charter. You see Mogar, its those bloody annoying facts again. 1. Noone cares about the IRAN charter 2. Mogar has seized power, legal or not 3. NSO Internal Affairs recognizes Mogar as a Triumvir of IRAN, and does not so recognize Battalion 4. ??? 5. Profit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 1. Noone cares about the IRAN charter2. Mogar has seized power, legal or not 3. NSO Internal Affairs recognizes Mogar as a Triumvir of IRAN, and does not so recognize Battalion 4. ??? 5. Profit! Enjoy your opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Ire Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 You sir, have my complete and total agreement. The charter is horrible written and full of holes. My stance is merely a question of legality, as all members of IRAN, by accepting membership, accept the charter defacto. I wouldn't say the entire charter is horrible because of one flaw that happened to manifest in the worst possible way. In fact, I'd be willing to bet there are plenty of charters out there without clear lines of leadership succession. However, as the alliance leadership was deadlocked from a charter/legal standpoint, and as the deadlock must be broken for the alliance to exist as a functional entity, something outside the charter would have to happen. Mogar stated that such an event already happened in the post quoted below. As such, there's no point in attempting to e-lawyer the impossible. There are two sides to the debate over how to resolve the dispute over who holds power over that alliance, and all the rest of us can (and should) do is support the self-determination of the alliance membership and hope the two sides can come to a peaceful resolution of their differences. We admitted we couped him, whats your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shurukian Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Batallion, you disgust me as a leader. What you would do out of 'love' for your alliance is horrifying and downright dishonorable. I see nothing of any importance being lost here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOONS Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 The people are with you, so you win. Most likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 I wouldn't say the entire charter is horrible because of one flaw that happened to manifest in the worst possible way. In fact, I'd be willing to bet there are plenty of charters out there without clear lines of leadership succession.However, as the alliance leadership was deadlocked from a charter/legal standpoint, and as the deadlock must be broken for the alliance to exist as a functional entity, something outside the charter would have to happen. Mogar stated that such an event already happened in the post quoted below. As such, there's no point in attempting to e-lawyer the impossible. There are two sides to the debate over how to resolve the dispute over who holds power over that alliance, and all the rest of us can (and should) do is support the self-determination of the alliance membership and hope the two sides can come to a peaceful resolution of their differences. This is my hope as well. However, these decisions should be played out exclusive of Mogar until they reach a resolution. What the situation needs is a good mediator. It is clear that at least 2 seperate alliances will come out of this because the internal relations are likely not salvagable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) This is my hope as well. However, these decisions should be played out exclusive of Mogar until they reach a resolution. What the situation needs is a good mediator. It is clear that at least 2 seperate alliances will come out of this because the internal relations are likely not salvagable. No, whats going to happen is Batallion will either realize he is being foolish in this course of action and stop making a scene for himself and embarrassing the alliance, help us rebuild and earn his government position back by showing he wants to do more than just have a fancy title and make decisions without consulting his fellow leaders, or he'll continue to fight me, lose, and be ZI'd after re declaring on me a few times. All the people in the PMs he posted aren't going to do anything after the situation was fully explained to them. Edited April 30, 2009 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Mccole Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 o/ battalion. good luck in putting down the usurpers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 No, whats going to happen is Batallion will either realize he is being foolish in this course of action and stop making a scene for himself and embarrassing the alliance, help us rebuild and earn his government position back by showing he wants to do more than just have a fancy title and make decisions without consulting his fellow leaders, or he'll continue to fight me, lose, and be ZI'd after re declaring on me a few times. All the people in the PMs he posted aren't going to do anything after the situation was fully explained to them. Just dont EVER forget, in the future, that you committed a coup. What goes around, comes around. Ask Pacifica. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Just dont EVER forget, in the future, that you committed a coup. What goes around, comes around. Ask Pacifica. I've been almost couped about half a dozen times, putting down coups is pretty easy for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) I've been almost couped about half a dozen times, putting down coups is pretty easy for me. Just a thought...if you are the victim of so many attempted coups....perhaps you are doing things wrong? Nah..couldn't be...Nevermind. Edited April 30, 2009 by Rush Sykes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileath Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Just dont EVER forget, in the future, that you committed a coup. What goes around, comes around. Ask Pacifica. NSO Internal Affairs does not consider this a coup, but rather Mogar's rightful action against a former Triumvir making an illegal decision. For e-lawyers, one should know that international treaties supersede national charters. The OPP did not allow IRAN to peace out that war, yet Battalion did it anyway. As soon as he did that, he lost any legal standing as a leader of IRAN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Just a thought...if you are the victim of so many attempted coups....perhaps you are doing things wrong? Nah..couldn't be...Nevermind. the majority of those were from people of the white nationalist persuasion, this is the first non WN/WS coup that's been attempting against me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 the majority of those were from people of the white nationalist persuasion, this is the first non WN/WS coup that's been attempting against me. Just for semantics....lets get this right...This is not a coup against you. This is you committing a coup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 Just for semantics....lets get this right...This is not a coup against you. This is you committing a coup. He's attempting to start a civil war, I'd consider that a counter coup, and you're correct, We(see that word, it means multiple people, not just one) removed him after we fully realized his actions, he's had a history of this, we just gave him the benefit of the doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 o/ Mogar. That is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Ire Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 NSO Internal Affairs does not consider this a coup That's a rather odd position to take considering that Mogar himself apparently considers it a successful coup. We admitted we couped him, whats your point? Not that I think it particularly matters to the outcome or to who should receive what support, I just think it's a rather odd perspective to have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted April 30, 2009 Report Share Posted April 30, 2009 NSO Internal Affairs does not consider this a coup, but rather Mogar's rightful action against a former Triumvir making an illegal decision.For e-lawyers, one should know that international treaties supersede national charters. The OPP did not allow IRAN to peace out that war, yet Battalion did it anyway. As soon as he did that, he lost any legal standing as a leader of IRAN. We do allow them to peace out, there is only so much we can expect. However this is a charlie foxtrot unrelated to our war as Mogar has stated iran would like to remain in OPP but still peace out, which was approved by us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.