[WEF 3.0] OOC

**Dan the Man** · March 20, 2014, 09:57 PM

Wait wait, hold up, isn't the VP also meant to be the pro. tem. of the senate? I guess that's not a HUGE job, but it's something...

Also, Amaz, I have seen your post in my thread and I will get to it soon, it's been a very long day at the end of a very long week.

**Amaz** · March 20, 2014, 09:59 PM

Nah, no worries bud. I know about your sinus troubles. Plus, my visit was about the Whiskey Rebellion. That's all said and done with as of today

**Dan the Man** · March 20, 2014, 10:04 PM

Heh, fortunately I'm feeling healthy again, but at the moment the problem is more in sorting out what I have to catch up on after missing classes and work due to sickness, along with an exam I had to take this morning. After I pick up my make-up shift at work tomorrow afternoon everything will be back on schedule, I promise WEF will have my fullest attention again.

And good, guess that's settled then.

**Amaz** · March 20, 2014, 10:08 PM

Awesome. Now the Poole administration can really get the ball rolling on things

**Barry Goldwater** · March 20, 2014, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Dan the Man

Wait wait, hold up, isn't the VP also meant to be the pro. tem. of the senate? I guess that's not a HUGE job, but it's something...

Also, Amaz, I have seen your post in my thread and I will get to it soon, it's been a very long day at the end of a very long week.

Naw, the VP & President pro tem are different folks. The VP is technically head of the Senate as its President, but since he's well yanno, also VP the President pro-tem functions as the Senate's de-facto leader.

Don't worry about the guy talking about Peterson's apparent hijack of the LOTUS in the Senate btw. It's OOC a totally understandable move, it just has to be addressed IC and since you won decisively they'll probably drop it real soon. I also wanted to give the Senators something new to talk about since a dead silence has been hanging there for the past two days

**EmperorBatman999** · March 23, 2014, 10:07 AM

Here comes the XYZ Affair.

**Xion** · March 26, 2014, 01:41 PM

Chesser, there's no unit in the rules that can carry 36/44 guns, the closest to those being the Frigate at a maximum of 32 and Ship of the Line at a minimum of 50. Also I think Marines come separately from the ships.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Agamemnon** · March 27, 2014, 10:14 AM

Why isn't there a second or third rate in the rules? It's odd.

**Xion** · March 27, 2014, 10:22 AM

Well, why have four different warships when players can create their own first/second/third/fourth by specifying the number of guns as either a Ship of the Line(Which covers from Fourth rate to the lowest amount on a second rate apparently) or Man-o'-War(1st and 2nd rate)? That and did the U.S. navy use the royal navy's classification system or one of it's own?

**Xion** · March 28, 2014, 06:02 PM

OOC;: guys the bill is for the whole force not just the navy, that is what i was saying with the wording. While I noted that the navy can be modified as long as it doesn't exceed the set budget, since this army detachment is part of the expeditionary force it is a package deal. Also the president is commander in chief and in the end the decision should come down to him on how to form the navy.

Yes, but the quote you have as part of your answer to a reply :

In lieu of the said ships, the President may form a combined force not exceeding, in the whole $180,000; or he may so provide any proportion thereof, which, in his discretion, he may think proper.

Mentions only ships, which could lead another player to believe that was only mentioning ships and therefore naval composition. Also, I do not believe the President's powers as C-i-C entail having the final say on recruitment of military forces.

Article II, Section II.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

This leads me to believe he is head of the army, navy, and respective militia to that any appointed general would have to answer to him at the top of the chain and any of his orders would override those given by someone lower in the command chain. I believe it is the Secretary of War that would have the power to determine the final composition of the recruitment if the bill is insufficient in his opinion for any reason. But as the House controls domestic financial matters, wouldn't a vote still be required on a Executive-branch proposal for the final recruitment? Of course, I may be completely wrong about all this.

**chesser2538** · April 07, 2014, 11:34 AM

Is it just me or does this WEF IH seem to be slowly dying away.

**Barry Goldwater** · April 07, 2014, 12:11 PM

Unfortunately this is the time of year where most of us become too busy to have much of an IH life. I, for one, have one last paper to deal with this month before I hit my various final exams in May. Hence why I'm looking to close 1792 on Friday and perhaps get the creative writing process for 1828/45 (if players would rather fight the Mex-Am War and the increasingly radicalized question over slavery than the domestically still turbulent but foreign-wise fairly calm 1820/30s) up and running this week, in conjunction with a simpler faction-based IH.

EDIT: Doesn't help that we also picked a fairly boring time period (for the US anyway) - our biggest domestic crisis in this era was the Alien & Sedition Acts, most of the explosive social issues that would tear the country apart later like slavery weren't a big deal this early, and America cannot conceivably intervene in the FRW/NW on a scale bigger than harassing Haiti/Canada with less than 10k men under arms.

**Xion** · April 07, 2014, 12:11 PM

What Barry said.

**chesser2538** · April 07, 2014, 04:52 PM

I understand, I have exams and papers also. I was just making sure this was still active. I think almost everyone here has been in the same college intensive boat these past few weeks and feels your pain. Keep pushing through man.

**chesser2538** · July 05, 2014, 02:30 PM

Aggy when do you propose to call the congress of Texas to session? We need to get things rolling.

**EmperorBatman999** · July 05, 2014, 07:26 PM

I can start the session if you want.

**Agamemnon** · July 05, 2014, 09:33 PM

Unless the Texan constitution is really bizarre, it's EB's job anyway.

**chesser2538** · July 05, 2014, 10:00 PM

http://www.tamu.edu/faculty/ccbn/dewitt/texascon.htm

for your future reference.

**Agamemnon** · July 05, 2014, 10:24 PM

It seems almost identical to the US Constitution, as I expected. A bit more concise and clear, with a couple of things spelled out exactly which I wish were spelled out in the US Constitution. Also, a couple really good ideas in there, like the "no preachers in public office" one. Real Congress could learn a lot from it. Of course, they could learn a lot from the document they swore to protect, too.

Sec. 6. The house of representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers, and shall have the sole power of impeachment.
Sec. 10. The vice-president of the republic shall be president of the senate, but shall not vote on any question, unless the senate be equally divided.

I was right, it is EB's job to start up the Senate. The House starts itself up. However, if I must I can post. My char if finally up, BTW. History will be written, but I need time, and the internet will shut off soon.