Juridistiction of Praefectus Primus

[Akar]

Suspending the election until Hader's return is absurd and unconstitutional. The election must continue un-abated.

[Gaius Baltar]

Suspending the election until Hader's return is absurd and unconstitutional. The election must continue un-abated.

As Hader is no longer absent he is the manager of the voting process. This is clearly indicated in the Constitution.

[General Brewster]

Suspending the election until Hader's return is absurd and unconstitutional. The election must continue un-abated.

As Hader is no longer absent he is the manager of the voting process. This is clearly indicated in the Constitution.

Oh please enlighten me/us to that bit. I'm very anxious to see that actually because as it stands your entire interaction in this process has been unconstitutional. Considering you are the Priumus Prraefectus and not a Censor. Your job is to moderate, nothing else. Only Censors could have done what you are doing now by way of the constitution.

When the office of the Consul is empty, the Primus Praefect will organize the election of a new Consul, and assume day-to-day administration of the Curia.

We can't really say we are without a Consul now can we? As this stipulation only applies when the consul resigned or is VonC'ed. So it is fact that your entire interaction in this process was unconstitutional, stopping the process of the election is unconstitutional and claiming you are within your rights is also not constitutional.

Now I don't really want to be a pain in the ass and I like proactive people, so I'd say continue with the vote and the first issue can be overlooked by everyone I suppose. However I cannot overlook you stopping a election from going to the voting stage when there is zero reason to do so. Especially if you're gonna claim that it's now Hader's task because he'll be back?

[Gaius Baltar]

Oh please enlighten me/us to that bit. I'm very anxious to see that actually because as it stands your entire interaction in this process has been unconstitutional. Considering you are the Priumus Prraefectus and not a Censor. Your job is to moderate, nothing else. Only Censors could have done what you are doing now by way of the constitution.



We can't really say we are without a Consul now can we? As this stipulation only applies when the consul resigned or is VonC'ed. So it is fact that your entire interaction in this process was unconstitutional, stopping the process of the election is unconstitutional and claiming you are within your rights is also not constitutional.

Now I don't really want to be a pain in the ass and I like proactive people, so I'd say continue with the vote and the first issue can be overlooked by everyone I suppose. However I cannot overlook you stopping a election from going to the voting stage when there is zero reason to do so. Especially if you're gonna claim that it's now Hader's task because he'll be back?

Hader asked me to post the election threads in his absence, as I mentioned in the application thread. Due to the circumstances he was not sure if he was going to return. The Censors have not been active and creating threads and polls is not outside the scope of the Praefects, who are full moderators of the Curia.

Hader is still Consul as he has not been removed via absence or subject to a VONC. Since he has indicated he will return and resume his responsibilities than the decisions now lay in his court.

Elections have been delayed before without much outcry. It seems unlikely that this delay will have any adverse impact on the process.

[Akar]

"The constitution has been ignored before, so I can ignore it again"

That's a very poor argument. Good job completely ignoring everyone's input, though.

[Gaius Baltar]

"The constitution has been ignored before, so I can ignore it again"

That's a very poor argument. Good job completely ignoring everyone's input, though.

That's a complete mischaracterization.

Perhaps you could cite some Constitutional text to support your argument?

[General Brewster]

If Hader asks of you to jump of a bridge, would you do it? Because basically you are saying you did it because he asked and without taking into account that it simply is unconstitutional. You being a moderator of the CURIA doesn't excuse you of this. Elections are a duty of the Consul as stipulated by the Constitution. The Censors are the only ones who have the authority to help the Consul with his duties, as stipulated by the Constitution.

There's a significant difference in something being delayed because someone cannot physically post, which I made myself guilty of many times. You however are willfully stopping an election in it's tracks. Which is, you guessed it... very unconstitutional.

For someone who has been here for as long as you have you really have a bad grasp of the Constitution. All you are doing is proving that your work was not constitutional. You would've been Vonc'ed and scourged for this in times long gone. You blindly did what someone asked you to do, without any Constitutional backing and without knowledge of your own office's limitations.

[Gaius Baltar]

If Hader asks of you to jump of a bridge, would you do it? Because basically you are saying you did it because he asked and without taking into account that it simply is unconstitutional. You being a moderator of the CURIA doesn't excuse you of this. Elections are a duty of the Consul as stipulated by the Constitution. The Censors are the only ones who have the authority to help the Consul with his duties, as stipulated by the Constitution.

There's a significant difference in something being delayed because someone cannot physically post, which I made myself guilty of many times. You however are willfully stopping an election in it's tracks. Which is, you guessed it... very unconstitutional.

For someone who has been here for as long as you have you really have a bad grasp of the Constitution. All you are doing is proving that your work was not constitutional. You would've been Vonc'ed and scourged for this in times long gone. You blindly did what someone asked you to do, without any Constitutional backing and without knowledge of your own office's limits...

None of that makes any sense. I'm surprised you don't cite Constitutional text.

[General Brewster]

It doesn't make sense because it seems you are not familiar with the document you serve.

Article II

The Consul acts as a local moderator of the Curia and is responsible for ensuring the Curia's day-to-day tasks are accomplished. Two Censors, appointed by the Consul, assist with Curial tasks and review referrals from Curial infractions.¹¹ Magistrates review Moderation actions in the Tribunal. Praefects are the full moderators of the Curia and its related fora.⁷

Stipulations of Article II

¹² If the Consul is absent (has not logged into the site) for seven days without giving a notice of absence, is absent for more than fifteen days regardless of notice, resigns, or is subject to a successful Vote of No Confidence (VoNC), they are automatically removed from office along with any appointed censors. Any decisions of the office shall be held over until a replacement is elected. When such a decision is time-limited, time from the moment the office is empty does not count towards the limit until a new Consul is elected. When the office of the Consul is empty, the Primus Praefect will organize the election of a new Consul, and assume day-to-day administration of the Curia.

Article III

For every election the Consul opens a thread for applications³ to the vacant position and another one for all questions and discussion⁴. The Administration may veto any applicant.

Once applications are complete, the Consul opens a poll in the Curia Vote forum⁵. The member who receives the highest number of votes is elected to the position.⁶

Shall we get back to you being unconstitutional on multiple accounts?

[Cope]

I'm not really much involved with Curial issues, but it does seem that Brewster is correct here.

[Gaius Baltar]

It doesn't make sense because it seems you are not familiar with the document you serve.

Article II

The Consul acts as a local moderator of the Curia and is responsible for ensuring the Curia's day-to-day tasks are accomplished. Two Censors, appointed by the Consul, assist with Curial tasks and review referrals from Curial infractions.¹¹ Magistrates review Moderation actions in the Tribunal. Praefects are the full moderators of the Curia and its related fora.⁷

Stipulations of Article II

¹² If the Consul is absent (has not logged into the site) for seven days without giving a notice of absence, is absent for more than fifteen days regardless of notice, resigns, or is subject to a successful Vote of No Confidence (VoNC), they are automatically removed from office along with any appointed censors. Any decisions of the office shall be held over until a replacement is elected. When such a decision is time-limited, time from the moment the office is empty does not count towards the limit until a new Consul is elected. When the office of the Consul is empty, the Primus Praefect will organize the election of a new Consul, and assume day-to-day administration of the Curia.

Article III

For every election the Consul opens a thread for applications³ to the vacant position and another one for all questions and discussion⁴. The Administration may veto any applicant.

Once applications are complete, the Consul opens a poll in the Curia Vote forum⁵. The member who receives the highest number of votes is elected to the position.⁶

Shall we get back to you being unconstitutional on multiple accounts?

There is nothing in the indicated text that supports the idea that anything "unconstitutional" was achieved lately.

All you have done is copy and pasted text without any relevant argument to support your statements. And that is noteworthy as you served as Consul for some time.

[Akar]

The arguments were made in prior posts. You said "nuh uh, show me the constitution" and he showed it to you. Now you say "Show me the arguments" when he shows you the constitution. Where is the consistency? If you can't infer the relevance of the quoted articles to topic at hand that's on you.

Unless the article stipulates that suspension of the election is allowed, then it should be considered unconstitutional. This is basically the argument that allowed Air Bud to play in the NFL. "No where in the rules does it say a dog can't play football" vs "No where in the constitution does it say I can't suspend elections". Your argument is backed upby a reading of the lack of text in the const. while Brewster's argument is backed up by the actual text of the constitution. You can read between the lines all you want, but unless the text between the lines is ratified then it's pointless and unconstitutional. The elections must go on.

[Gaius Baltar]

The elections must go on..

And they will, when Hader returns...soon I hope.

This is all much ado about nothing.

[General Brewster]

It's good to know the Primus Praefectus doesn't know the constitution, cannot admit he is in the wrong and then proceeds to say, after willfully violating the Constitution's limitations of his own office that he cannot solve the situation he created and has the audacity, as moderator of the CVRIA to say this is "much ado about nothing." You denounce the very document that gave you the office you hold to begin with.

[Gaius Baltar]

It's good to know the Primus Praefectus doesn't know the constitution, cannot admit he is in the wrong and then proceeds to say, after willfully violating the Constitution's limitations of his own office that he cannot solve the situation he created and has the audacity, as moderator of the CVRIA to say this is "much ado about nothing." You denounce the very document that gave you the office you hold to begin with.

There is nothing sinister about posting the election thread. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits the Praefects from assisting the Consul.

Your continued protests only suggest you are not familiar with the document yourself, and only refer to it in general terms to cite unspecific statements. Using the term "Constitution" doesn't imply that you have achieved any moral high-point or made a coherent argument.

[Akar]

Once again you continue to ignore other's arguments and instead respond with appeals to your own authority and cite your "superior" understanding of the constitution.

[General Brewster]

What can you not read about Article III which specifically states that THE CONSUL posts election threads. The only variation on this is Article II, where it's specified that the CENSORS aid in the Consul's Tasks. It doesn't specify the Preafects can.

You continue to demonstrate a complete lack of familiarity of the Constitution. Falling into a repeat and failing to admit your short coming on this matter.

[Aexodus]

The moderator is not an administrator, unless the latter is in absence.

[Gaius Baltar]

What can you not read about Article III which specifically states that THE CONSUL posts election threads. The only variation on this is Article II, where it's specified that the CENSORS aid in the Consul's Tasks. It doesn't specify the Preafects can.

You continue to demonstrate a complete lack of familiarity of the Constitution. Falling into a repeat and failing to admit your short coming on this matter.

Your ideas are completely inaccurate, and you are grasping for context.

Hader has requested these actions in is anticipated absence. The Censors were not available. Since it was thought he would not return I followed the procedures and created the threads. He has since returned and will complete the process. This demeans no one and does not violate the constitution.

The only adverse outcome here is if somehow King Athelstan is not confirmed to the position. He does seem somewhat inexperienced so I am wondering if he could properly fill the position.

[General Brewster]

I have taken appropriate action in the Proth.