Chief Justice confirmation poll

[Chillaxation]

I vote to confirm. I feel Curufinwe will make an excellent Chief Justice.

 

[donsig]

He resigned, stood down, whatever terminology you wish to use.

If you wish to present evidence that he resigned, stood down or what ever, it needs to be presented as part of the judicial review. You are quite welcome to do that but if you do AND you act as CJ then you will be presenting evidence to yourself (or making arguments to yourself as I stated earlier in this thread). Anyone can present an argument to himself and rule that it makes sense. Since the argument you intend to present to yourself has a bearing on whether you are entitled to the office you were appointed to makes it a conflict of interest which bt definition means you cannot be impartial in this JR.

Please place Nobody's judicial review first on the docket and recuse yourself from the case.

EDIT: I see that while you haven't directly placed Nobody's JR first on the docket you have given the JR on the SoS's assumption of presidentail powers (and hence CT's appointment of Nobody as CJ) first priority on the docket. One more step and you've got a yes vote from me in this poll: Recuse yourself from the case and let a pro tempore justice hear it.

 

[Curufinwe]

First off lets just make one thing clear. I stood Down from the office. So if i was legally appionted or not i stood down therefore it was Vacant and Curufinwe was appionted.

I am confident that he has resigned and does not want to be CJ, and see no reason to stand aside. Go ahead and attempt to stonewall, that is your right, but I see no reason to refuse to go ahead, seeing as I can't find, and nobody has shown me, anythign that I'm doing wrong.

 

[Swissempire]

COuld a MOD please change the poll to a 48 hour one?

 

[donsig]

COuld a MOD please change the poll to a 48 hour one?

I respectfully request that moderators not change this poll. As it breaks no forum rules there is no need for moderator intervention. This is purely about demogame rules and therefore should be handled according to the rules we have established for this game.

I am confident that he has resigned and does not want to be CJ, and see no reason to stand aside. Go ahead and attempt to stonewall, that is your right, but I see no reason to refuse to go ahead, seeing as I can't find, and nobody has shown me, anythign that I'm doing wrong.

The only thing you are doing wrong is refusing to accept the conflict of interest inherent in a sitting justice making a ruling on whether or not his (or her) appointment is legal. I am sorry you choose to think of this as stonewalling. I am merely standing up for what I think is right. If you are really so confident that you are right I do not understand why you will not recuse yourself and let someone else hear this case in your stead. Is it because you are afraid someone else will not see things your way?

 

[Curufinwe]

I am not ruling on whether or not my appointment was legal. If such a case comes up, I will duly stand aside, so, if you wish to bring up a case on the legality of MY appointment, not Nobody's, than feel free to do so, and I WILL stand aside on that one, as that would be a conflict of interest. Arguing over the past which has no relevance to current day situations is not a conflict of interest.

 

[DaveShack]

I respectfully request that moderators not change this poll. As it breaks no forum rules there is no need for moderator intervention. This is purely about demogame rules and therefore should be handled according to the rules we have established for this game.

Actually we do have a rule for confirmation polls.

VIA. Any citizen may post a confirmation poll for an appointment to a Vacant office. This is a private poll, asking the question "Should <citizen name> serve as <office>?", with the options Yes, No and Abstain. This poll should last for 48 hours. If a majority of citizens who vote, excluding abstain, vote no, the appointment is reversed. This citizen may not be appointed to that office again that term.

 

[Nobody]

It is possible that Nobody's appointment was valid which would make your appointment invalid.

DONSIG!!!! Stop and read. I Resigned the position if it was legal or not. SO even if i was legally the Chief Justice i resigned and Rapmasta-C was legally appionted. What ever the outcome of the JR he is the CJ, It will either be that the title went Donsig-Nobody-Curfewin or Donsig-Curfewin. Therefore he will be the cheif justice at end of Review (assuming he is confirmed) No matter what so there is no point in him recusing himself.

Please reply to this before contintuing the discussion.

 

[Swissempire]

Like i have been saying and multiple people such as daveshack have been saying, the rule for confirmation polls is 48 HOURS. Again could a MOD please have this poll end in 48 hours.

 

[donsig]

I am not ruling on whether or not my appointment was legal. If such a case comes up, I will duly stand aside, so, if you wish to bring up a case on the legality of MY appointment, not Nobody's, than feel free to do so, and I WILL stand aside on that one, as that would be a conflict of interest. Arguing over the past which has no relevance to current day situations is not a conflict of interest.

You've got a deal if you will put this case first on the docket.

You do understand though that this is the JR I would bring:

In light of Chieftess's appointment of Nobody at the start of term two, is Chillaxation's appointment of Curufinwe valid?

Like i have been saying and multiple people such as daveshack have been saying, the rule for confirmation polls is 48 HOURS. Again could a MOD please have this poll end in 48 hours.

I've already quoted the polling standards clause of the CoL. When two clauses of the CoL are in conflict who is to say which should prevail? The judiciary, but until it is resolved who is the valid CJ then such cases are on hold. If Curufinwe would only recuse himself from that case we could get on with this business rather than watch it drag on interminably. So, once again I ask the moderators not to change the length of this poll. If the Censor wants to declare this poll invalid that is his choice.

 

[donsig]

DONSIG!!!! Stop and read. I Resigned the position if it was legal or not. SO even if i was legally the Chief Justice i resigned and Rapmasta-C was legally appionted. What ever the outcome of the JR he is the CJ, It will either be that the title went Donsig-Nobody-Curfewin or Donsig-Curfewin. Therefore he will be the cheif justice at end of Review (assuming he is confirmed) No matter what so there is no point in him recusing himself.

Please reply to this before contintuing the discussion.

There is precedent for this in this very term. When Strider withdrew from the run-off we still waited for the election to finish. It has to be official determined whether your appointment was even valid before we can consider any subsequent resignation. Also, when did you resign Nobody? You posted a judicial thread then did nothing. When the call came for CJ applicants you applied. As soon as Curufinwe opened his judicial thread you asked for a review of Chieftess's appointment. Seems to me as though you wanted this job all along but now that Chieftess has resigned and you have your eyes on the Secretary of State office you're willing to throw the judiciary to the dogs. I will have none of it. There were two appointments to CJ. That has to be sorted out and having one of the appointees doing the sorting out is a conflict of interest. I posted this confirmation poll in the hopes Curufinwe would see the light and step aside so others could validate the CJ office. Since he refuses to do so the next step I will take will be a Citizen's Complaint against Curufinwe for violating article F.3 of our constitution.

 

[Curufinwe]

Donsig, I would rule that case without merit, though, of course, the other Justices could find otherwise. Nobody's resignation is not in question. If, however, someone comes up with someting along the lines of "Were the procedures laid out for filing judicial vacancies followed in the appointment of Curufinwe" I would stand aside, as taht would be a conflict of interest. Please stop with this whole "nobody might not have resigned" he has said repeatedly in this poll that he did.

 

[Black_Hole]

Nobody never said he resigned from the Chief Justice, he said he withdrew from the Chief Justice appointment series, however if Chieftess' appointment was legal, he simply withdrew from another batch of appointments which wasn't legal.

Withdrawing from consideration is not the same thing as resigning, but we can't be sure until a judiciary rules on this, however Curufinwe would have a conflict of interest because it could mean his appointment wasn't valid.

 

[Curufinwe]

See above, he resigned, post 28 here, he confirmed that.

 

[Swissempire]

I've already quoted the polling standards clause of the CoL. When two clauses of the CoL are in conflict who is to say which should prevail? The judiciary, but until it is resolved who is the valid CJ then such cases are on hold. If Curufinwe would only recuse himself from that case we could get on with this business rather than watch it drag on interminably. So, once again I ask the moderators not to change the length of this poll. If the Censor wants to declare this poll invalid that is his choice.

Th standards for a confirmation poll ARE DFINITATVIELY STATED. The clause is again:

VIA. Any citizen may post a confirmation poll for an appointment to a Vacant office. This is a private poll, asking the question "Should <citizen name> serve as <office>?", with the options Yes, No and Abstain. This poll should last for 48 hours. If a majority of citizens who vote, excluding abstain, vote no, the appointment is reversed. This citizen may not be appointed to that office again that term.


I don't know how much clearer it can get. I agree that if you disagree with C-doggs appointment then it your right as a citizien to post a confirmation poll. But this is not one if the timeframe isn't changed. I cannot force you to change it, but if it isn''t changed, then this is not a confimation poll at all. All you have to do is have the time changed Donsig. Thats all you have to do. I will not invalidate it, but it would only be a citizien opinion poll asking if we should confirm his appointment. Please just change it. I don;t want us to have to go through the process of me validating as the opinion poll it currently is, there being another argument that beings to tear apart the game agian, you eventually posting an actual confimation poll, wating another 2 days for the judiciary, then probably even more measures being taken, and in the end, nothing getting done in the term 3 judiciary. IF YOU CHANGE IT, I WILL VALIDATE IT AS A BINDING OPINION POLL. Please Donsig, i tired of fighting, not just us, it seems we cannot go a week without another large scale argument that will drive more citiziens away. PLEASE

 

[DaveShack]

Since the intent is for this to be a binding poll I choose 4 days to avoid problems.

The only possible reason that I can see for leaving the poll open longer is if you want to hold things up. Do you really want to hold up the game for this? Looking at the vote, there is no chance of the vote coming out as a no result, no matter how long the poll is left open. What keeping it open will do, without a doubt, is prevent the JR's that you want to be resolved from being heard in a timely manner, or possibly from being heard at all.

 

[Swissempire]

@Nobody, are you saying that your retroactivly deny the nomination or that you resign, leaving the post vacant. Because if you resign after assuming the nomination, then we have to muck through all of this to see if you even could resign, at least thats what i think is what they all mean here. If you retro-activly deny the appointment, then nobody(not Nobody)was CJ, so Cheiftess didn't make an appointment, ergo C-doggy is legally the CJ, therefore he doesn't have to recuse. I think you mean you retro-activly deny the nomination. but thats just me.

 

[donsig]

The only possible reason that I can see for leaving the poll open longer is if you want to hold things up. Do you really want to hold up the game for this? Looking at the vote, there is no chance of the vote coming out as a no result, no matter how long the poll is left open. What keeping it open will do, without a doubt, is prevent the JR's that you want to be resolved from being heard in a timely manner, or possibly from being heard at all.

I am holding up the game? Have the game play sessions stopped? Shame on me bringing the whole country to a screeching halt.

I have already stated the reasons for choosing a four day poll and cited the clause of our CoL that I used when choosing the time frame. We can shout CoL clauses back and forth at each other till we are blue in the face and we will get no where. The time frame I choose for this poll is consistent with my belief that we need to give citizens ample time to respond to important issues. It is the same belief that led me to fight for the upholding of the 72 hour clause. Behind this strong belief is the even stronger belief that we should adhere to the rules we have agreed on and not ignore them just because we want to press on. One of the things we agreed on in the constitution is an impartial judiciary. We should not toss that principle aside and I will not stand by while others attempt to ignore that prinicple.

I am not the one holding things up. The president held things up by discouraging applicants and thus not giving citizens a full 72 hours to respond to his call. Then, please remember, Chillaxation was sick for a time which also held things up through no fault of his own. Now it is Curufinwe who is holding things up by stubbornly refusing to recuse himself from this case. Actually, it is not just Curufinwe but others who would rather close their eyes to the conflict of interest or who would rather avoid any sort of disagreement and who therefore remain silent who are holding things up. I think if a few more citizens publicly admitted they can see the possibility of a conflict of interest here (as Black_Hole and I have done) then Curufinwe would do the right thing and recuse himself. I also want to point out that if he had done this upon being appointed the JR in question would have been settled already.

If you want to close your eyes to this DaveShack that is up to you. I will not. As I already said earlier the next step is to file a citizen complaint against Curufinwe for violating the constitution's call for an impartial judiciary. I will not stand by and watch a Chief Justice rule on the validity of his own appointment.

 

[Curufinwe]

I have seen no reason to view this case as having anything to do with my appointment, no evidence has been given (why, I could even think up arguments that Nobody could still be Chief Justice) and so see no reason to act.

Anyways, since I might as well do this, the main way (and only way I can think of) that nobody would still be chief justice is if his resignation were invalid. That would require that there be an outside authority that could either veto resignations or else a procedure that resignations have to follow. Unable to find any authority which may forbid resignations, or any procedure which would have to be followed, I see no reason why Nobody's resignation would be invalid (since it took place, which some seem ready to ignore). If there are any further arguments I will happily look at them and base my decision to stand aside on that.

 

[Strider]

Yep, we need a new code of laws.