PRG forced removal
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4335
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
PRG forced removal
Attempt 1 of ?
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4335
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
Re: PRG forced removal
There is a section of the Charter that would support a removal at this stage, despite the edit by Ric during Microvision.
AYE
As this part of the Charter states that internal development is the responsibility of representatives of that nation, I'd be in favour of a removal at this stage...Each member may have as many representatives as they wish. Representatives are responsible for submitting Claims, internal development and international collaboration.
AYE
Re: PRG forced removal
I disagree with the notion that there have been no activity for Graecia during 90 days. There has been activity, and even if it's not directly been done by Eugene, it is activity related to Graecia, and therefore it is activity that should be counted. As such, in my opinion there is no lawful reason to remove Graecia. NAY.
Re: PRG forced removal
As I said in the other thread, housekeeping is not activity. I would also say that a plain text reading of the Charter does not support your position. Graecia, i.e. Eugene, is the member and nothing for the last 90 days can be called development. It's all just housekeeping or other people's activity.
AYEThe Council can submit a Notice of Removal when a member has not developed their claim at all in at least 90 days.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21549
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: PRG forced removal
There seems to be a range of opinions on Graecia's case, but this is one point I do have to make something clear on again. Nations are members, not individuals; activity does not have to come from a nation's founder or citizens to count - like when forums were the main activity source, visitor posts were very much included.
I do think this removal was put through only slightly prematurely as I do agree with Ric that a certain article had added development to Graecia in the prior ninety day. However, the developmental part of that article in question is, as of today, now outside of the ninety days. Therefore, I believe Graecia has had no development over the requisite period. AYE...
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4335
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
Re: PRG forced removal
Just for the record, my reason for submitting the removal yesterday was not because of a belief that Eugene is an MCS member in his own right, but rather that representatives of a nation are responsible for that nation's activity. If Ric were to be counted as a representative of Graecia for making an administrative edit regarding their Microvision entry, then he would have to recuse himself from voting, which I think we can all see would be insane.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21549
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: PRG forced removal
Well, it would be insane to consider anyone that edits an article for a nation as an official representative for that nation as a result; I don't think anybody was under the impression that Ric was claiming to be Graecian with his edits...