6
7

PetitionPetition to recall Wesgutt as General (self.democraciv)

jcfjrCEP Chairman | English Free Press が 投稿

Hello, Democraciv. I come to you in response to recent events in the play sessions between turns 281 and 304. It saddens me to bring more conflict to democraciv, but actions that flout our constitution cannot be ignored.

It has come to my attention that General/Minister Wesgutt has time and again committed gross misconduct in his role as general. Three times in less than 25 turns he has moved troops onto the border of foreign cities. This is in clear violation of Article 3, Section 6, subsection B of the democraciv constitution, which states “The general may move units how they please and dream up strategies to defeat other civilizations all they want, but the general is not allowed to declare war or do something that could result in war (such as moving troops onto the border of another civilization) without a majority (½+1) approval from the legislature.”

First, General Wesgutt had two gatling guns idling on the border of the Babylonian city of Akkad. This is the subject of the ongoing court case, ID-23 (Legislature v Wesgutt). Evidence has been filed in this case that he was informed of the unconstitutionality of these actions and chose to leave these troops, anyway.

Next, General Wesgutt moved a Ship of the Line onto the border of German Essen, in preparation of a war that had not, at that point, even been brought to vote before the legislature. This, again, violates the constitution.

Finally, General Wesgutt chose to idle artillery on the border of Dortmund, a German settlement. The placement of artillery and a Ship of the Line on their borders resulted in an ultimatum from Germany to either declare war then or not declare war, at all.

These actions have resulted in the following reactions:

  • Germany has denounced us
  • Babylon has denounced us
  • Zulu has denounced us
  • America has denounced us
  • Russia is no longer friendly towards us
  • Our nation’s happiness is diminishing, possibly (and probably) in response to these denunciations.

As such, we submit that General Wesgutt did knowingly, purposefully, and blatantly use his position as General to violate our constitution. This gross misconduct is more than means for recall and, as such, under Article 3, Section 6, subsection E, subsubsection 1, I am starting a petition to bring about a general referendum for the recall of General Wesgutt.

I, jcfjr, hereby propose the holding of a general referendum to recall General Wesgutt for his shameless misconduct and flagrant disregard to the Democraciv Constitution.

TL;DR: General Wesgutt has knowingly violated the constitution on three separate occasions in less than 25 turns and I am calling for his recall.

EDIT: To clarify, this is a petition for the recall of Wesgutt as general, not as minister.

Signatories:

  • Jcfjr
  • Olonzac/Kickball
  • Pinkerton3
  • Jersy007
  • Revan-117
  • Sorocco
全 25 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]WesGuttSpace Communists 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

"First, General Wesgutt had two gatling guns idling on the border of the Babylonian city of Akkad. This is the subject of the ongoing court case, ID-23 (Legislature v Wesgutt). Evidence has been filed in this case that he was informed of the unconstitutionality of these actions and chose to leave these troops, anyway."

You obviously didn't pay attention to today's session, the troops have been moved, and I didn't even place those there in my term as general

"Next, General Wesgutt moved a Ship of the Line onto the border of German Essen, in preparation of a war that had not, at that point, even been brought to vote before the legislature. This, again, violates the constitution."

I recall intentionally informing the minister playing the turns to not put it directly on the border, if it was on the border it was at the fault of the minister playing not mine, I again was not general during this decision and acting on behalf of either the ministry or the general at the time (House) (proof: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nQKWVYSEN39G93t114nJnVdQK5zddJmHXYhBzDykGkY/edit This is the legislative session where I was made general, we have only played one session (the one from today) sine then)

"Finally, General Wesgutt chose to idle artillery on the border of Dortmund, a German settlement. The placement of artillery and a Ship of the Line on their borders resulted in an ultimatum from Germany to either declare war then or not declare war, at all."

I did not idle the artillery on the border intentional, I gave specific orders for no troops to be on the border, the minister playing at the time used the built in mechanic of finding the easiest path to a location, which ended the units turn on the border. Again, I was not general at the time of this action.

"These actions have resulted in the following reactions: Germany has denounced us <- These actions have had a effect on this, however it was still not my fault as general because I was not general at the time of these actions Babylon has denounced us <- These actions have not effected our standings with Babylon, if you dont remember we took their capital so they kinda dont like us Zulu has denounced us <- TBH I dont even know if they have denouced us, and if they have its probably because of our ideology America has denounced us <- American denoucnments have been going on for awhile, these actions have nothing to do with it Russia is no longer friendly towards us <- They still like us, and having German complain to us wouldnt effect our relation Our nation’s happiness is diminishing, possibly (and probably) in response to these denunciations." <- Not a thing

"As such, we submit that General Wesgutt did knowingly, purposefully, and blatantly use his position as General to violate our constitution"

Knowingly? In the case of the Gatling guns I, to be completely honest with you did not know about these. In the other 2 cases I gave orders not to put them on the borders, however they ended up there. Purposefully? Like I said I did not give orders to put them directly on the border, so no this was not on purpose. Blatantly? I guess I blatantly gave orders to not put them on the borders if that's what you mean. "use his position as General"? Wasn't General, so also wrong

In short, these claims are honestly half-assed and this truly just seems like a partisan attack.

TLDR; Nope, wasn't even General

[–]kenlanePirate Party | Pirate Priest DFOH | Legislator 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You obviously didn't pay attention to today's session

to be fair the stream sucked

I did not idle the artillery on the border intentional, I gave specific orders for no troops to be on the border, the minister playing at the time used the built in mechanic of finding the easiest path to a location, which ended the units turn on the border. Again, I was not general at the time of this action.

Hold on there, are you accusing the ministry of being war hawks? I would actually agree. IDK if I care but whatevs.

[–]WesGuttSpace Communists 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

to be fair the stream sucked

Fair enough :P

Hold on there, are you accusing the ministry of being war hawks? I would actually agree. IDK if I care but whatevs.

No not at all I'm just saying the pathing was kinda overlooked

[–]Jersy007Professor, CEO, Legislator, etc 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Blaming the ministry for something that is your job is no valid defence. As general (or acting general) it is your specific responsibility to oversee the units of the nation and ensure that they do not border another civ's borders. Trying to pass this off to the ministry shows that you aren't doing your job, because you've not paid attention to your units.

[–]WesGuttSpace Communists 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Blaming the ministry for something that is your job is no valid defense

I'am not blaming the ministry, at best I would be blaming the minister running the play session

As general (or acting general) it is your specific responsibility to oversee the units of the nation and ensure that they do not border another civ's borders

It is simply mind-blowing that you are trying to recall me because I wasn't looking at the direct pathing, It's a very simple thing that is bound to happen and its not like I "knowingly, purposefully, and blatantly" did it.

[–]jcfjrCEP Chairman | English Free Press[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

To quote Emass's play session screen shot from the 1/28 play session "War is in the air for Mayor-Minister(proxy)-general(proxy) WesGutt." You were proxying for Behemoth as minister and acting as general. To blame the ministry is the same as blaming yourself for that play session. You were not the appointed general, but were acting as the general, clearly. The defense that you were not general is, therefore, invalid.

Whether the troops have been moved, now, or not is irrelevant. The fact that they were there, at all, on your orders is enough cause for a recall. It was your responsibility to ensure that these units did not end a turn on the border of other nations. They did. You were proxying for a minister, Behemoth, for both play sessions. This being the case, even if your defense of not being the General were valid (it isn't), a case could be made to recall you from your ministerial seat (since you were proxying as minister, at the time), anyway, under the Executive DoW Rights Act that states that ministers and mayors are bound to similar DoW procedures as the General.

These claims are all valid and your defense of them is blame-shifting. This is not a partisan attack, at all. This is me, and only me, calling for your recall as general because you chose to take illegal actions. I was actually surprised that there was not already a petition for your recall circulating.

[–]WesGuttSpace Communists 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

To quote Emass's play session screen shot from the 1/28 play session "War is in the air for Mayor-Minister(proxy)-general(proxy) WesGutt."

Nice quote I guess?

You were proxying for Behemoth as minister and acting as general

Yes I was.

To blame the ministry is the same as blaming yourself for that play session

Did I stutter when I said "it was at the fault of the minister playing"? Even then it was a very small oversight that I guarantee anyone could easily make and that I had no power over.

You were not the appointed general, but were acting as the general, clearly. The defense that you were not general is, therefore, invalid.

"The general may move units how they please and dream up strategies to defeat other civilizations all they want, but the general is not allowed to declare war or do something that could result in war (such as moving troops onto the border of another civilization) without a majority (½+1) approval from the legislature." <- This is what all claims against me are based off of, note "the general". So for example, a mayor could in theory move his/her garrison onto another civs border and so could the ministry with their scouting units. Now if you want a real fun fact, both the Ship of the Line and the artillery were both moved 28th, now you see as of the 28th of January I had not been nominated general yet (I can't truly 100% prove the exact date because there was no post about it and the discord channel where everything happen has since been closed by moderation, however I can prove I was not general [ https://www.reddit.com/r/DemocracivLegislature/comments/5shyt8/legislative_voting_for_the_session_of_the_6th_and/ ] ) therefore, by the Emergency Powers Act - "If a general has not been nominated yet, then the ministry will take control of the military." - Now again the lack of recordings is annoying here as well, however this was addressed during the session (as seen in emass's executive secretary notes https://docs.google.com/document/d/10jYn1wLc57TpFBpMu3kFDsl7T9JXKIjOSaGRlDv9Qc4/edit) and the ministry voted to basically have me do their decisions for them (yes, they had a veto power over me, not that they used it) therefore I wasn't even Acting General nor General General at the time but a adviser to the ministry. So you could recall all of them if you wanted by this logic.

Whether the troops have been moved, now, or not is irrelevant. The fact that they were there, at all, on your orders

Not on my orders on my lack of orders as not the general, and by this logic, a leaving general could just throw all his/her units on a enemies border and then the new general would be at fault. I think we can all agree that's not very fair. Now you are gonna say "oh but you did give the orders" but not as general and not "knowingly, purposefully, and[/or] blatantly" its a simple fucking oversight we are all just humans give it a break

It was your responsibility to ensure that these units did not end a turn on the border of other nations. They did

See the response above and I will repeat again, it is fucking ridiculous that you are gonna try to recall me for not paying attention to something I simply trusted in the hand of another minister while not acting as general nor Acting General. In my one play session as general I moved the Gatling guns away from Babylon as one of my first actions and did not "knowingly, purposefully, and[/or] blatantly" place them there in the first place, the other 2 units had been moved before hand. It's not like I maliciously and knowingly broke the law to further my own agenda

You were proxying for a minister, Behemoth, for both play sessions

Your point being?

This being the case, even if your defense of not being the General were valid (it isn't)

(it is) (enter the-wall-of-we-just-disagree here)

a case could be made to recall you from your ministerial seat (since you were proxying as minister, at the time)

lol hold up. You can't get recalled from one positions for breaking the rules as another, its simply insane if you seriously believe that.

anyway, under the Executive DoW Rights Act that states that ministers and mayors are bound to similar DoW procedures as the General.

Not sure how this is relevant considering there was no Declaring of War, no where in the bill does it state that they can't make acts of aggression (not that its relevant at all in this case)

These claims are all valid and your defense of them is blame-shifting.

No they aren't, No I'm not. We obviously have hit the-wall-of-we-just-disagree.

This is not a partisan attack, at all.

Sure as hell feels like it (enter the-wall-of-we-just-disagree here)

calling for your recall as general because you chose to take illegal actions

I did not "knowingly, purposefully, and blatantly" take those actions, in the 2 cases I did give orders, I specfically told the minister playing to not but the units on the border, they ended up there anyways. If the minsiter playing the game can just move the generals units onto another civs border (an action the general cannnot physically stop) and the general gets recalled for it, that is again truley insane.

This is me, and only me

Bit more than that m8 :P

I was actually surprised that there was not already a petition for your recall circulating.

Maybe because other people take it to court and mediate first?

TL;DR Countered every word; still not valid reasons Side-Note: Woke up and wrote this without breakfast, pardon me if I made some errors but my points still stand)

[–]LePigNexusHead Moderator 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Jeez, this guy leaves a couple units on a border and he gets a recall case, I do bloody anything and almost literally beg people to sue me and it simply can't be done. I am a saint.

EDIT: Also, you don't specify which position you're recalling him from, while it would be fairly easy to make the assumption that you are recalling him from his position as general it should be remembered he is also a minister, so it should be specified if you're trying to recall him from one position or perhaps both.

[–]WesGuttSpace Communists 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What really makes me mad is that none of them were my fault

[–]Emass100A Completely New Constitution is Necessary! 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You could also add that he deleted two good units right after they have just been built: one battleship and one Privateer.

I sign

[–]WesGuttSpace Communists 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's not a valid reason but ok I guess

[–]Pinkerton3Independent 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I sign

[–]OlonzacCommercial Expansion Party 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I sign.

[–]kenlanePirate Party | Pirate Priest DFOH | Legislator 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

“The general may move units how they please and dream up strategies to defeat other civilizations all they want, but the general is not allowed to declare war or do something that could result in war (such as moving troops onto the border of another civilization) without a majority (½+1) approval from the legislature.”

If you put units on a border the AI simply asks if you plan to declare war. You can agree not to declare war and move them away and still not violate the constitution. Nothing yet is unconstitutional.

I agree, he is playing it fast and loose, but he is not yet at the point of recall.

[–]LePigNexusHead Moderator 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

"but the general is not allowed to declare war or do something that could result in war (such as moving troops onto the border of another civilization)"

The constitution itself uses that as an example for something which could cause war. Are you arguing that that which the constitution itself uses as an example for a violation is not in fact a violation?

[–]kenlanePirate Party | Pirate Priest DFOH | Legislator 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Yes tbh. The constitution should be amended. This cannot directly lead to war.

[–]LePigNexusHead Moderator 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

That may be the case, but nevertheless that is what the constitution uses an example, that cannot be ignored simply because it should be amended.

[–]jcfjrCEP Chairman | English Free Press[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This. Exactly this.

[–]Jersy007Professor, CEO, Legislator, etc 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I sign

[–]bani724Meta-Independents 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

As a Meta Nihilist I have no recourse but to sign as well.

[–]VicotacoNDP | Mayor of London | Britannia Invicta! 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Utter bollocks! You would throw the social peace we have achieved up in the air? War is on the horizon and you would instead make us enter it without a general? Your selfishness and distinct lack of judgement appals me Jcjfr. I thought you knew better than to let petty squabbles cloud your judgement.

[–]bani724Meta-Independents 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Section 6 (c) of the Constitution clearly outlines how to proceed "[w]hen a general is needed." We needn't worry about a scenario of war and no one at the helm.

[–]serventofgabenEDU, Goongan in discord. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Popcorn tastes good.

[–]Revan-117Divided Fronts Of Housia 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I sign as well

[–]SoroccoLabour/Housian Patriot/Legislator 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I sign