VOX unremoval/modification
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
VOX unremoval/modification
Following the developments here, it's clear that Voxland's forced removal was entirely unwarranted, albeit that the MCS wasn't updated about their more recent political situation. As a result, this motion is for the removal be completely reverted, and to pass the following as a modification as should have happened a couple of months ago:
United State of Voxland and Westland
NB: This is not a new nation, nor a grace-period reclaim, just the righting of some inadvertent wrongs!
United State of Voxland and Westland
NB: This is not a new nation, nor a grace-period reclaim, just the righting of some inadvertent wrongs!
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4333
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
I'm not sure I'm comfortable with setting the precedent that the MCS becomes responsible for seeking out any changes rather than nations notifying us. My belief is that it's up to the claimant to keep us updated. I'll hold fire on my vote just yet to see if any other opinions weigh in, but at the minute I'm leaning towards a nay.
-
- Posts: 563
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:33 am
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
The fact that the Council was not informed of the activity of this nation, whatever its name, shows its involvement with Micras. To that end, I am inclined to NAY.
Arky
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
I'm interested in seeing how you think this would set such a precedent as that's not what's happened here - they've come to us to (belatedly, of course) inform us of the change, we didn't seek it out. The precedent we have here sits with nations like Uantir and New Riverina, whose removals were reverted after it became clear they had had activity that was overlooked - only they got lucky and managed to get the evidence in before the map was updated.
The nation was removed incorrectly, so should be returned, and has also undergone a change that in any other situation would be an automatic approval. Not accepting such a correction sets an even more uncomfortable precedent to me!
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4333
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
My understanding is that they're asking for a free pass for not keeping us updated on their changes. If we allow this, then we would also have to allow any other subsequent failures to update us on changes, which in essence gives nations the "you should have known" card to play.Craitman wrote: ↑Wed May 19, 2021 10:19 amI'm interested in seeing how you think this would set such a precedent as that's not what's happened here - they've come to us to (belatedly, of course) inform us of the change, we didn't seek it out. The precedent we have here sits with nations like Uantir and New Riverina, whose removals were reverted after it became clear they had had activity that was overlooked - only they got lucky and managed to get the evidence in before the map was updated.
The nation was removed incorrectly, so should be returned, and has also undergone a change that in any other situation would be an automatic approval. Not accepting such a correction sets an even more uncomfortable precedent to me!
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
I don't think there's any sort of suggestion they're asking for more of a free pass than Uantir were given for having activity on the wiki at a time we only checked forums; they've clearly taken the blame for not updating us and apologised. If the map hadn't been updated before they contacted us, I wouldn't have even put this to a vote, the removal would have just been cancelled and never added to the mapJoe wrote: ↑Wed May 19, 2021 10:42 amMy understanding is that they're asking for a free pass for not keeping us updated on their changes. If we allow this, then we would also have to allow any other subsequent failures to update us on changes, which in essence gives nations the "you should have known" card to play.
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4333
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
I still stand by my concerns, however, as the claim is for the exact same territory as before, and the forum they're using is clearly active enough, had this been submitted as a normal claim, I would vote AYE anyway, so that's also my vote here, however I don't want this to be the standard going forward, nations should keep us up to date as to where they keep their activity. Uantir's example was under the old Charter, so although it's still semi-relevant, the wordings that we consider are completely different now. We don't currently have any text in the Charter to clarify this as is.
-
- FMS Staff
- Posts: 21547
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:37 pm
- Location: Cherry Trees, Craitland
- Contact:
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
That's true, the Charter is somewhat different now, good point. Perhaps an addition to the section that discusses representatives, regarding their responsibility to keep the MCS in the know of any activity relocation, is fair?Joe wrote: ↑Wed May 19, 2021 11:13 amhowever I don't want this to be the standard going forward, nations should keep us up to date as to where they keep their activity. Uantir's example was under the old Charter, so although it's still semi-relevant, the wordings that we consider are completely different now. We don't currently have any text in the Charter to clarify this as is.
-
- Administrator General
- Posts: 4333
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:58 pm
- Location: Republic of Mercury
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
This is currently the closest clause that applies to this situation. I'd argue that internal development includes keeping records up to date, however that connection is fairly tenuous I appreciate.Each member may have as many representatives as they wish. Representatives are responsible for submitting Claims, internal development and international collaboration.
Re: VOX unremoval/modification
I think if a nation is removed but then can prove that it did have the justified activity in order to have kept it on the map, I don't think that it is a big issue. AYE.